The Thai government’s initiative to deposit funds in citizens’ digital wallets is facing scrutiny and conflicting reports regarding its legal approval. The Council of State, a legal advisory body, allegedly expressed concerns about the proposed legislation to distribute 500 billion baht ($14.3 billion) to individuals above the age of 16 through a digital wallet scheme. The Council suggested that enacting a bill for such urgent economic measures would be contradictory and recommended using an executive decree for faster implementation.
Deputy Finance Minister Julapun Amornvivat contradicted these reports, claiming that the legal adviser had given the green light for Prime Minister Srettha Thavisin’s stimulus program. Julapun argued that the government has the authority to enact the bill for the cash stimulus scheme, and he expected the program to kick off on May 1.
However, Pakorn Nilprapunt, the Council of State secretary-general, rejected claims of giving a go-ahead to the legislation. Nilprapunt clarified that the Council’s response to the Finance Ministry was confidential, and it did not contain any indication of a ‘greenlight.’ The Council focused on legal technicalities, emphasizing that it provides legal considerations, not opinions on economic matters.
Critics have raised concerns about the proposed plan potentially violating Article 53 of the 2018 State Fiscal and Financial Discipline Act, which allows off-budget loans only in urgent situations. Despite conflicting statements, the government remains confident in proceeding with the scheme, and the Finance Ministry is expected to report the Council’s opinion to the Cabinet.
Senate members are gathering signatures to seek answers from the government, questioning whether the digital wallet scheme would violate the law and if an economic crisis justifies the 500 billion baht borrowing required for the initiative.
The conflicting reports and legal considerations add uncertainty to the fate of Thailand’s digital wallet stimulus program, as the government navigates legal complexities and public scrutiny.
