Challenges of Anti–Tax Avoidance Measures for Thailand in the Context of the Digital Economy
Main Article Content
Abstract
The emergence of the digital economy—all the economic activities driven by digital technologies, including e-commerce, data, advertising, digital services, and the platform economy—has demonstrated that traditional measures to thwart tax avoidance under existing rules are inadequate to address complex, unpredictable types and methods of tax avoidance, thus increasing the risk that multinational enterprises will avoid tax. The growth of the digital economy has exacerbated the problem of tax avoidance, resulting in significant lost tax revenue for governments and impacting their ability to finance public services. This has led the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development to devise measures to prevent the erosion of the international tax base, specifically the Global Anti-Base Erosion Rules under Pillar II. Consequently, Thailand faces several significant challenges. The present study found that in the context of the digital economy, the country can appropriately pursue anti-avoidance measures by relying on its courts’ use and interpretation of various anti-avoidance doctrines, such as the principle of “abuse of law,” which represents a highly flexible general measure. As for specific measures, Thailand should accelerate the issuance of regulations to support and clarify the Royal Decree on Additional Taxes and either quickly enact specific legislation to collect direct tax on income from digital service provision or amend Section 76 bis or Section 70 of the Thai Revenue Code to collect income tax from multinational tech companies. The final step involves hastening the implementation of measures to ensure transparency and accountability in the domestic and international exchange of tax information by adopting blockchain technology.
Article Details

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
Arnold, B. J. (2016). International tax primer. Kluwer Law International.
Aslam, A., & Shah, A. (2021). Taxing the digital economy. In M. D. Ruud, A. Klemm, & V. Perry (Eds.), Corporate income taxes under pressure: Why reform is needed and how it could be designed (pp. 189–226). International Monetary Fund.
Bekkers, E., Koopman, R., Sabbadini, G., & The, R. (2024). The impact of digital technologies on developing countries. In WTO (Ed.), The digital trade era: Challenges and opportunities for developing countries (pp. 38–51). https://www.wto.org/english/res_e/booksp_e/05_ adtera_chapter_01_e.pdf
Brincker, E. (2014). What is simulation really? Tax Alert. https://www.cliffedekkerhofmeyr. com/export/sites/cdh/news/publications/ 2014/tax/downloads/Tax-Alert-21-November-2014.pdf
Bukht, R., & Heeks, R. (2017). Defining, conceptualizing and measuring the digital economy. International Organizations Research Journal, 13, 143–172. https://doi.org/10.17323/1996-7845-2018-02-07
Bukht, R., & Heeks, R. (2018). Defining, conceptualizing and measuring the digital economy (Development Informatics Working Paper No. 68). https://hummedia.manchester.ac.uk/institutes/gdi/publications/workingpapers/di/di_wp68.pdf
Crown, M. T. (1944). The moral obligation of paying just taxes. The Catholic University of America Press.
DiCarlo, D. P. (2010). What estate planners need to know about the step transaction doctrine. Real Property, Trust and Estate Law Journal, 45(2), 355–368. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20785705
Flynn, M. (1995). Substance versus form in tax disputes: An analysis of recent developments. Australian Tax Review, 24(3), 171–189. https://search.informit.org/doi/10.3316/agispt.19954583
Freedman, J. (2008). Is tax avoidance fair? In C. Wales (Ed.), Fair tax: Towards a modern tax system (pp. 86–95). Smith Institute.
HM Revenue & Customs. (2013). General anti-abuse rule. https://assets.publishing.service. gov.uk/media/5a7b6975e5274a34770eb850/general_anti_abuse_rule.pdf
IBFD. (2024). International tax planning and prevention of abuse: A study under domestic tax law, tax treaties and EC law in relation to conduit and base companies. https://www.bing.com/search?q=Stepping1
International Institute of Tax and Finance. (2025). Tax avoidance. https://academyoftaxlaw. com/glossary/tax-avoidance/
Ismail, Y. (2020). Digital economy: State of play and implications for developing countries. CUTS International Geneva.
Kansra, D. (2020). Rethinking the maxim ignorantia juris non excusat. Academia Letters, 1–4. https://doi.org/10.20935/AL43
Lokanan, M. (2023). The morality and tax avoidance: A sentiment and position-taking analysis. PLOS ONE, 18(7), Article e0287327. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0287327
OECD. (1987). International tax avoidance and evasion: Four related studies (Issues in International Taxation No. 1). OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/g2ghgbf6-en
OECD. (2014). Addressing the tax challenges of the digital economy: OECD/G20 base erosion and profit shifting project. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264218789-en
OECD. (2015a). Addressing the tax challenges of the digital economy, Action 1: Final report. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264241046-en
OECD. (2015b). Designing effective controlled foreign company rules, Action 3: Final report. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264 241152-en
OECD. (2020a). OECD digital economy outlook 2020. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/bb167041-en
OECD. (2020b). Tax challenges arising from digitalization: Report on Pillar Two blueprint. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/abb4c3d1-en
OECD. (2023). Minimum tax implementation handbook (Pillar Two). OECD Publishing. https://www.oecd.org/tax/beps/minimum-tax-implementation-handbook-pillar-two.pdf
OECD. (2024). Members of the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on BEPS. OECD Publishing. https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/topics/policy-issues/beps/inclusive-framework-on-beps-composition.pdf
Perillo, J. M. (1995). Abuse of rights: A pervasive legal concept. Pacific Law Journal, 27, 38–97. https://scholarlycommons.pacific.edu/mlr/vol27/iss1/6
Postlewaite, P. F. (2005). The status of the judicial sham doctrine in the United States. Revenue Law Journal, 15(1), 140–149. https://doi.org/ 10.53300/001c.6686
Revenue Department. (2024). Tax code study and development project. https://www.rd.go.th/fileadmin/download/PramualProj/cont05.html
Rohatgi, R. (2007). Basic international taxation: Volume two: Practice of international taxation. Taxmann Allied Services.
Schreiher, U. (2023). International company taxation: An introduction to the legal and economic principles. Springer.
Smith, J. D., & Herman, J. D. (2020). Developing open-source software using version control systems: An introduction to the Git language for documenting your computational research. https://core.ac.uk/download/334990832.pdf
Tapscott, D. (1997). The digital economy: Promise and peril in the age of networked intelligence. McGraw-Hill.
Thuronyi, V., Brooks, K., & Kolozs, B. (2016). Comparative tax law. Kluwer Law International.
Troup, E. (1992). Unacceptable discretion: Countering tax avoidance and preserving the rights of the individual. Fiscal Studies, 13(4), 128–138. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24437268
Vanistendael, F. (1996). Legal framework for taxation. In V. Thuronyi (Ed.), Tax law design and drafting (Vol. 1, pp. 15–70). International Monetary Fund. https://doi.org/10.5089/ 9781557755872.071
World Economic Forum. (2022). What is the digital economy and how is it transforming business? https://www.weforum.org/stories/2022/05/digital-economy-transforming-business/