The draft Act on the Grant of Benefits in the Form of Cash-Refundable Tax Credits has been posted on the Revenue Department’s website, and the authorities have invited comments on the draft from a wide range of the public. What is of great interest is that the hearing period ran for only five days, from 6 to 10 November B.E. 2569 (2026). In other words, it was extremely short. In my view, this plainly shows how eager the authorities are to enact the QRTC regime.
In response, our firm has also submitted written comments.
As to the urgency, the authorities themselves state in their notice that “this draft Act is urgently needed, and unless the process is expedited, it may affect confidence in investment in Thailand and, in turn, the national economy.” For multinational enterprises exceeding the threshold of the global minimum tax – in particular those operating businesses that enjoy BOI tax exemptions, or those considering direct investment in Thailand – the QRTC regime is without doubt a pressing issue.
The basic framework of the draft Act does not differ significantly from the contents presented in the authorities’ public consultation that began on 6 October. It remains the same in that the regime is to be administered by the Revenue Department, and in that the fund for the QRTC imposes no new burden on taxpayers but is capped at 1% of the corporate income tax collected after deducting the amounts prepaid through the withholding tax return P.N.D.53 (in substance, the corporate income tax paid through half-year returns (P.N.D.51) and annual returns (P.N.D.50)).
That said, some points represent a step backwards: (1) the word “qualified” (ที่เป็นไปตามเกณฑ์) has been deleted from the title and the definition; (2) the reference to “expenditure or activities eligible for the benefit” has disappeared from the matters to be prescribed by Royal Decree; and (3) the transfer of the certificate has changed from a right of the recipient to a matter at the discretion of the Director-General, to be permitted by notification.
Furthermore, whether the credit is paid in cash within four years from the date on which the conditions for receiving the credit are satisfied – the most important requirement for a QRTC under the GloBE Rules – is still not expressly provided for in the Act. In my view, the provisions remain problematic, in that the date on which the conditions for receiving the credit are satisfied is not defined at all, and the QRTC benefit is instead scheduled by reference to the term “commencement date of the right” (วันที่เริ่มต้นของสิทธินั้น).
Looking at the examples of other countries, many – such as Ireland and the United Kingdom (both of which refer to the accounting period in which the expenditure is incurred) and Singapore (the date of the application to claim the credit, under the award granted, in respect of the expenditure incurred) – use a date linked to the expenditure relating to the benefit. From this perspective as well, the deletion referred to in (2) above is regrettable. The fact that the draft Act does not clearly guarantee, in its statutory text, the four-year period for cash refunds raises the major question of whether the credit will be recognised as a QRTC at all. If it is not, the effect of the benefit may be offset, in whole or in part, by Thailand’s own domestic minimum top-up tax (QDMTT). I therefore believe that the authorities need to give the matter considerable further consideration.
(Author: Katabe)