Under Thai law, money laundering is a separate offense from the underlying crime that generates the money or assets. Generally speaking, money laundering involves handling money or assets linked to a crime by transferring, converting, concealing, disguising, acquiring, possessing, or using them in circumstances prohibited by the Anti-Money Laundering Act B.E. 2542 (1999) (the “AMLA”). Our lawyers specializing in economic crimes in Thailand, at Herrera and Partners H&P, have prepared a summary of the most relevant aspects of the regulation of these financial crimes under Thai law.
It is important to understand that not every illegal transaction constitutes money laundering. The money or property must generally be connected with a criminal offence recognized as a predicate offence under the AMLA.
Predicate offences cover a wide range of serious crimes, including offences relating to narcotics, human trafficking, fraud, certain forms of embezzlement, corruption, terrorism, certain gambling offences, organized crime, receiving stolen property, certain intellectual property offences and other offences prescribed by law.
Financial crime is a broader concept than money laundering. It may include fraud, embezzlement, corruption, theft, receiving stolen property, cyber fraud, certain offences involving financial institutions, securities-related offences, illegal gambling, terrorism financing and other criminal activities involving money or property. Depending on the nature of the offence, the proceeds may subsequently become subject to the AMLA.
In practice, money laundering commonly involves several steps. Criminal proceeds may first enter the financial system through bank deposits, purchases or transfers. The funds may then be moved through multiple accounts, individuals or companies in order to make the source of the money more difficult to identify. Finally, the proceeds may be used to purchase property, invest in a business or otherwise be presented as legitimate income or assets. These stages are commonly referred to as placement, layering and integration.
One of the most common issues currently encountered is the use of third-party or “mule” bank accounts. Criminal proceeds may be transferred through accounts belonging to persons who did not commit the original crime. Similarly, companies or nominees may be used to conceal the true owner or beneficiary of the funds.
In such circumstances, the fact that a person did not commit the underlying crime does not necessarily protect that person from liability. If it can be established that the person knew that the property was connected with criminal activity and nevertheless participated in dealing with it, money laundering liability may arise.
The increasing use of online financial services has made these risks even more significant. Online fraud can generate substantial proceeds within a short period, while electronic transfers or cryptocurrency transfers allow funds to be rapidly moved through several accounts or transferred overseas. This can make it difficult to trace the original source of the money and identify the person who ultimately controls or benefits from the proceeds.
In Thailand, the Anti-Money Laundering Office (AMLO) plays an important role in investigating money laundering and assets connected with predicate offences. The legal framework allows the authorities, subject to the applicable legal requirements, to trace, freeze, seize and confiscate property connected with criminal activity.
As a result, a money laundering investigation may affect not only the person who committed the original offence but also other individuals or businesses whose assets or financial transactions become connected with the criminal proceeds.
For businesses, this creates an important practical risk. A company may receive money as part of what appears to be an ordinary commercial transaction, but the transaction may later become relevant to a money laundering investigation if the funds originate from a predicate offence. Proper due diligence, verification of counterparties, checking the source of funds and maintaining appropriate transaction records can therefore be important safeguards.
At the same time, a suspicious transaction does not automatically mean that a person has committed money laundering. The authorities and the court must consider the circumstances of the transaction and the applicable legal requirements. Factors such as the source of the money, the purpose of the transaction, the relationship between the parties, the movement of the funds and the person’s knowledge of the circumstances may all be relevant in determining potential liability.
Our view is that money laundering is no longer an issue limited to traditional criminal organizations or large-scale financial fraud. In 2026, many foreign businesspeople in Thailand are being summoned by the country’s authorities for possible money laundering offenses for using Thai nominees in limited liability companies or for land ownership. Moreover, with the increasing use of digital payments, third-party accounts, corporate structures and cross-border transactions, individuals and legitimate businesses may also face legal risks if they unknowingly become involved in transactions connected with criminal proceeds.
For this reason, individuals and businesses involved in substantial financial transactions should take appropriate precautions and seek legal advice where there are concerns regarding the source of funds, unusual payment structures, third-party transactions or assets connected with potentially unlawful activities. Early legal advice and appropriate compliance measures can help identify potential risks and prevent an otherwise legitimate transaction from developing into a serious criminal or asset-related matter under Thai law.
If you need lawyer representation for a money laundering case in Thailand, please contact our Bangkok law firm at info@herrera-partners.com
