Structure comparison
| Factor | UK company only | Thai company only | UK and Thai companies |
|---|---|---|---|
| UK customers | Often commercially familiar. | May create contracting, currency and confidence issues. | UK company can retain UK contracts. |
| Thai customers | May create Thai registration, tax and licensing questions. | Local contracting and invoicing may be clearer. | Thai company can handle qualifying local activity. |
| Thai staff | Foreign employer and local employment obligations need analysis. | Local payroll and social security are generally clearer. | Employ staff through the entity directing their work. |
| Work permission | Owner still needs permission for activity performed in Thailand. | Thai entity may support an appropriate route if requirements are met. | Both roles and employers must be accurately documented. |
| Management | Thai management may create PE or residence risk. | Thai governance and filings apply. | Real authority must be divided and documented. |
| Administration | UK filings continue; Thai obligations may still arise. | Thai accounting, audit, tax and corporate administration. | Two complete systems plus intercompany controls. |
| Cash movement | Foreign earnings and remittances require evidence. | Dividends, salary and overseas payments need planning. | Intercompany charges require contracts and support. |
When keeping only the UK company may fit
This may be the simplest commercial model where customers, staff, contracts and delivery remain predominantly outside Thailand and the owner performs permitted remote work. Simplicity does not eliminate Thai personal tax or company-presence questions.
Test management location, work authorisation and any fixed place or dependent-agent activity. A UK-only invoice does not prevent Thai rules applying to activity conducted in Thailand.
When a Thai company may be needed
A Thai entity may be appropriate for local customers, staff, premises, licences, investment or a work-permit arrangement. Foreign ownership and restricted-business rules must be checked before agreeing the share structure.
Do not use nominee Thai shareholders to create an appearance of Thai ownership. Ownership, control and funding should be genuine and supported by lawful documentation.
Operating two companies
Two companies need a defensible division of functions, assets, risks and revenue. Put services, intellectual-property use, staff support, loans and cost sharing into written intercompany agreements.
Prices between connected companies should reflect the actual arrangements and applicable transfer-pricing rules. Moving profit by issuing unsupported management charges creates risk in both countries.
Questions that decide the structure
- Where are customers and contracts located?
- Where is work physically delivered?
- Will there be Thai staff, premises or regulated activity?
- Who controls pricing, finance and major contracts?
- Which entity owns intellectual property and bears commercial risk?
- How will profits and working capital move between countries?
Frequently asked questions
Do I need to close my UK company before opening a Thai company?
No. Some businesses retain both, while others use only one.
The choice should reflect customers, activity, people, licences, tax and administration rather than an assumed legal requirement to close the UK company.
Can a UK citizen own 100% of a Thai company?
It depends on the activity and available approvals or exemptions. Thailand restricts specified foreign business activities, so ownership must be checked against the Foreign Business Act, sector rules and possible BOI promotion.
Does a Thai company solve my personal tax position?
No. Your personal residence and income remain separate from the company’s obligations.
Salary, dividends and benefits from either company require personal tax analysis.