Crypto is doing well in Thailand...or is it?

[roadrunnerjaiv2025]

Thailand's move to exempt crypto transfers through government-approved exchanges is pretty interesting.

The government's goal is to promote cryptocurrency trade on authorized exchanges (approved and regulated by SEC).

However, this is just temporary. The tax exemption will eventually stop on Dec. 31, 2023.

I see what's happening here...

They fail to encourage traders to prefer authorized exchanges since there are cheaper alternatives. The problem is digital asset operators see this as an opportunity to provide services outside the government's surveillance and control.

It's a good thing because:

1. Government already fully acknowledges crypto trading. No more resistance.
2. They want to create a more secure environment for crypto investors. Better security = Higher confidence = More investors.
3. They don't want to control the blockchain--they can't. They only want to regulate transactions to protect investors from losing money. Of course, they want the government to make a little bit of profit, too. (As long as that profit--tax--benefits the people, that's fine)

Overall, this is good for the crypto space.

[1714955355]

1714955355

[1714955355]

1714955355

[1714955355]

1714955355

[1714955355]

1714955355

[Darker45]

I'm afraid this is coming from a limited viewpoint.

What's happening in Thailand is probably more bad than good. But not the worst, of course. I hope I'm not really updated with the current status of Bitcoin and cryptocurrency there, but it seems the ban on the use of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies as payment had just taken effect in April. That's just last month.

This is untimely. This happened just as Bitcoin and crypto have already developed a good relationship with businesses, just as Bitcoin started to fulfill its role as a currency. Now, it is relegated to just being an asset, an investment opportunity, where people can trade but not spend. So this must be a step backward rather than forward. 

[Haunebu]

What's happening in Thailand is probably more bad than good. But not the worst, of course. I hope I'm not really updated with the current status of Bitcoin and cryptocurrency there, but it seems the ban on the use of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies as payment had just taken effect in April. That's just last month.

So this must be a step backward rather than forward.  

Have traded personally several times in Thailand on P2P exchanges like LocalBitcoins where the volume is pretty high and never faced any issues despite the ban that you mentioned though I can understand why it's a step backward.

Their government banning crypto only for payments didn't really affect the market much overall, but it was still a bad decision in my opinion. It's a good thing that they didn't try to ban them completely though.

Treating cryptocurrencies as just assets(Not payment methods) won't help improve adoption in the long-term.

[P2PECS]

Thailand's move to exempt crypto transfers through government-approved exchanges is pretty interesting.

I had to look up the news because I didn't know what you were talking about. I found this, for example:

https://news.bitcoin.com/thailand-exempts-crypto-transfers-from-vat-until-end-of-2023/

What I don't understand is, in Thailand is VAT applied to transfers? There is nothing added there. VAT is supposed to be a tax that is levied when there is value added, and I am not aware of such a tax being applied elsewhere, as capital gains tax is usually applied if you earn money, but VAT as if when you buy a loaf of bread?

Well, each country may have its own rules. The doubt I have now is that I guess they apply VAT but not capital gains, no? Or do they apply both. Let's see if someone who lives in Thailand clarifies.

[davis196]

They only want to regulate transactions to protect investors from losing money.

No, the government can't protect the investors from losing money via crypto trading. The government wants to protect the investors from being scammed. Losing money is part of crypto trading. Nobody can make profits without someone else losing money, it's a zero sum game.
Anyway, I'm skeptical about the current crypto regulation in Thailand. This crypto regulation seems to be what they call "too little, too late".
Nobody could keep the investors from staying in Thailand. They could move their money at a country, where there are better crypto regulations and the crypto exchanges are offering better services.
I'm not a fan of centralized crypto exchanges and I think that the crypto world has moved into the wrong direction. We need to go back to the basics- hardware wallets an decentralized exchanges.

[kryptqnick]

Op is talking about the tax exemption. Is it a VAT exemption for crypto exchanges? Or is it that crypto businesses are currently exempt from any taxes in Thailand? If the exemption is lifted, will the taxation affect individual traders, crypto exchange companies or both?
I think it's reasonable when governments try to regulate the crypto industry, as long as the intent is to encourage the industry to come out of the shadows and flourish, not to kill it. I hope Thailand is trying the favorable approach, but banning crypto as payment is not a nice move.

[jossiel]

It's good for the crypto space there in Thailand.

They're encouraging people to trade to government registered exchanges so that they'll also have the security that everyone is on the right track of using a legal exchange.

Other than that, it has to stop and then the taxes will come. Well, not that new and basically it's going to cover everything there through this introduction as it sets and prepares everyone in accepting the crypto taxes after.

[tygeade]

They only want to regulate transactions to protect investors from losing money.

No, the government can't protect the investors from losing money via crypto trading. The government wants to protect the investors from being scammed. Losing money is part of crypto trading. Nobody can make profits without someone else losing money, it's a zero sum game.
Anyway, I'm skeptical about the current crypto regulation in Thailand. This crypto regulation seems to be what they call "too little, too late".
Nobody could keep the investors from staying in Thailand. They could move their money at a country, where there are better crypto regulations and the crypto exchanges are offering better services.
I'm not a fan of centralized crypto exchanges and I think that the crypto world has moved into the wrong direction. We need to go back to the basics- hardware wallets an decentralized exchanges.

This is mainly true, you shouldn't lose money and government should be there to protect you from scammers, not from dropping prices. If you are sending your money to someone you do not know in crypto, then consider that as a gone money and not the reality.

We need to really make sure that we shouldn't really do something that would be beneficial for it. All in all I need to make sure that things are looking great and it is not a big problem for us by keeping it hidden and not tell anyone that you have coins, even if you are rich, just make sure that nobody could ask you any money or suggest you investments because you should tell them you have none.

[gantez]

The government's goal is to promote cryptocurrency trade on authorized exchanges (approved and regulated by SEC).

This is very good. I think this is about providing security to the people and not to stop them. The youth will have more benefit in this because they have more years to stay around and can invest to hodl more cryptocurrency investment. They scare of scam exchanges will be reduced because the government making sure to secure exchanges in their country.

[Upgrade00]

They scare of scam exchanges will be reduced because the government making sure to secure exchanges in their country.

Governments do not make sure to secure exchanges, they give you the impression that you are secured by setting bogus regulations and entry barriers to certain industries. The objective of Bitcoin is to give users financial Independence rather than depending on third parties, using centralized exchanges means you are submitting your assets and personal details to a central server, from where it can be stolen or sold.

[Gyfts]

What's happening in Thailand is probably more bad than good. But not the worst, of course. I hope I'm not really updated with the current status of Bitcoin and cryptocurrency there, but it seems the ban on the use of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies as payment had just taken effect in April. That's just last month.

So this must be a step backward rather than forward.  

Have traded personally several times in Thailand on P2P exchanges like LocalBitcoins where the volume is pretty high and never faced any issues despite the ban that you mentioned though I can understand why it's a step backward.

Their government banning crypto only for payments didn't really affect the market much overall, but it was still a bad decision in my opinion. It's a good thing that they didn't try to ban them completely though.

Treating cryptocurrencies as just assets(Not payment methods) won't help improve adoption in the long-term.

I offer a more optimistic view.

Gold could be used as a currency the same way it's used as an asset. There used to be a system of currency backed by gold which acted in place of lugging around pieces of metal to trade with. Bitcoin's convenience bifurcates the utility as a currency and an asset. Whether people store their coins for long term appreciation or whether they use it as a currency, there are still funds allocated to crypto that would have otherwise been utilized for other assets or currencies. A win for crypto either way.

[CaVO32]

They scare of scam exchanges will be reduced because the government making sure to secure exchanges in their country.

Governments do not make sure to secure exchanges, they give you the impression that you are secured by setting bogus regulations and entry barriers to certain industries. The objective of Bitcoin is to give users financial Independence rather than depending on third parties, using centralized exchanges means you are submitting your assets and personal details to a central server, from where it can be stolen or sold.

But to gain the confidence of other users, we need the existence of these centralized exchanges, which are under the government regulations. We know that bitcoin should not be in any way tied to a centralized organization but we are already in the stage of massive adoption. And to welcome this adoption, government intervention is inevitable. This I believe, we can't escape from. We don't know where will our details will end up with but this is the stage where we need to accept that centralized platforms are already here to support adoption.

[KennyR]

The government's goal is to promote cryptocurrency trade on authorized exchanges (approved and regulated by SEC).

This is very good. I think this is about providing security to the people and not to stop them. The youth will have more benefit in this because they have more years to stay around and can invest to hodl more cryptocurrency investment. They scare of scam exchanges will be reduced because the government making sure to secure exchanges in their country.

Governments allowing specific exchanges to perform the trading of cryptocurrencies limit the usage. The reason for which the government have taken the decision is really appreciable and a forward thinking compared to the countries that make a direct ban of cryptocurrencies. Slowly the country needs to provide way to spending, through which the real usage of crypto can be understood. What Thailand government have done, given the access similar to digital gold.

[Upgrade00]

But to gain the confidence of other users, we need the existence of these centralized exchanges, which are under the government regulations. We know that bitcoin should not be in any way tied to a centralized organization

Anyone who needs a decentralized currency to be used on a centralized platform inorder to gain "confidence" could as well keep on using fiat.
Bitcoin is not running a marketing campaign, if you read about it and understand the concept and it interests you, then by all means buy some, of you're not as interested,  do not.

And to welcome this adoption, government intervention is inevitable. This I believe, we can't escape from. We don't know where will our details will end up with but this is the stage where we need to accept that centralized platforms are already here to support adoption.

Governments can do what they want. Individual users can choose to use Bitcoin as they wish. There are a many channels through which one can maintain pseudo anonymity.

[Dunamisx]

The government's goal is to promote cryptocurrency trade on authorized exchanges (approved and regulated by SEC).

i would have appreciate this if the link to read further on this is attached for clearer understanding because the last time i red about Thailand on cryptocurrency use for payment wasn't on a good side to favour crypto, even though the country is not against cryptocurrency in it entirety but places ban against the financial institutions to use such for payment, meaning individuals can still maintain their independent use of cryptocurrency as an asset or for trading.

i understand to an extent all that is in OP discussion about Thailand government and the digital asset providers otherwise called exchanges, but your point could have been more understandable if the link to portray this is included as you know how the community here really have interest on a reference link.

[bitgov]

The government's goal is to promote cryptocurrency trade on authorized exchanges (approved and regulated by SEC).

i would have appreciate this if the link to read further on this is attached for clearer understanding because the last time i red about Thailand on cryptocurrency use for payment wasn't on a good side to favour crypto, even though the country is not against cryptocurrency in it entirety but places ban against the financial institutions to use such for payment, meaning individuals can still maintain their independent use of cryptocurrency as an asset or for trading.

i understand to an extent all that is in OP discussion about Thailand government and the digital asset providers otherwise called exchanges, but your point could have been more understandable if the link to portray this is included as you know how the community here really have interest on a reference link.

The government  has different ways of treating bitcoins ..mostly it is in favour of them.
The info in op seems like coming from limited resources. The bitcoin condition is not very good in Thailand.

[bangjoe]

The efforts made by Thailand are a form of their government's awareness of this cryptocurrency. Because in truth, even if they strictly prohibited cryptocurrencies, this would not go so well. So they take this step for their survival too, in the sense that after this which path they will take, including taking cryptocurrency taxes after that.

[Lucius]

I'm afraid this is coming from a limited viewpoint.

What's happening in Thailand is probably more bad than good. But not the worst, of course. I hope I'm not really updated with the current status of Bitcoin and cryptocurrency there, but it seems the ban on the use of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies as payment had just taken effect in April. That's just last month.

This is untimely. This happened just as Bitcoin and crypto have already developed a good relationship with businesses, just as Bitcoin started to fulfill its role as a currency. Now, it is relegated to just being an asset, an investment opportunity, where people can trade but not spend. So this must be a step backward rather than forward. 

If Bitcoin is basically a currency, and someone says you can't use it that way, then it's actually attacking the very essence of what Bitcoin represents. This, of course, does not prevent individual transactions, but it undoubtedly sends a clear message that this is something that is forbidden in public business. If we remember that Turkey did the same thing more than a year ago, then it is very possible that some other countries will do the same in the future.

Bitcoin is obviously a problem from the perspective of most world governments only if viewed from a currency perspective, because the centralization of the monetary system is one of the cornerstones of human society’s control. So I think this is a change in tactics that once went in the direction that Bitcoin is something used by criminals to the point that mining it is a big environmental problem - and if you can't convince someone that something is bad, you simply disable it legally.

If we add to that a profit tax of say 30% as is the case in India, then we will throw a lot of small players out of the game.

[Flexystar]

Very small market for the crypto in Thailand. The problem is, they have tourist based income so its underestimated for the use of crypto currencies. How many tourists would go there and spend their crypto's? I mean look at it from the point of view of tourist who is there to chill out and relax with massage centres. Will he be waiting in the queue to open up wallet and spend bitcoins until it gets confirmed on the network? We have already seen waiting drawback in Starbucks stores (near me) and based on that in the bigger market things could be little messy.

It would be far easier for tourist to exchange the currencies locally and pay in hand cash quickly to avail the services in there. For local use case I am not sure if there is any stronger opinion.

[Dhaniii]

Very small market for the crypto in Thailand. The problem is, they have tourist based income so its underestimated for the use of crypto currencies. How many tourists would go there and spend their crypto's? I mean look at it from the point of view of tourist who is there to chill out and relax with massage centres. Will he be waiting in the queue to open up wallet and spend bitcoins until it gets confirmed on the network? We have already seen waiting drawback in Starbucks stores (near me) and based on that in the bigger market things could be little messy.

It would be far easier for tourist to exchange the currencies locally and pay in hand cash quickly to avail the services in there. For local use case I am not sure if there is any stronger opinion.

maybe it means that bitcoin runs smoothly in thailand only as an asset not a payment system with bitcoin. so everywhere now many people adopt bitcoin only for investment and not for legal tender. I think there are not so many tourists who enter Thailand, so they are forced to pay with crypto except before providing the service, they first provide an online order wallet and don't have to wait too long.