Neta’s struggles in Thailand underscore a broader reshaping of the country’s electric-vehicle (EV) landscape, where ambitious market entry plans confront financial strain, shifting policy details, and growing questions about after-sales support. The experiences of individual owners, the fate of a domestic assembly partner, and the responses from insurers collectively illuminate a sector at a crossroads between aspiration and risk. This extensive analysis reexamines the Thai chapter of Neta’s story, unpacking how consumer trust, regulatory incentives, corporate governance, and market dynamics intertwine to influence the progression of Thailand’s EV ambitions.
Overview of Neta’s position in Thailand and early consumer experiences
Neta, the Chinese EV brand under Hozon New Energy Automobile Co, arrived in Thailand in 2022 with the aim of capturing a share of the burgeoning local EV market. The Thai footprint began with consumer interest boosted by low entry prices and a government push to bolster domestic EV production through incentives. Yet even as interest remained, real-world experiences for customers and the company’s ongoing operations reflected a more complicated reality.
One public-facing narrative centers on Jutamas Tadthiemrom, an employee of a Bangkok-based media corporation, who has been using a Neta electric vehicle for just over a year. The principal motivation for her purchase was cost efficiency: she wanted to curb fuel expenses after driving a car that had already served for more than twelve years. The immediate practicality of the vehicle—an experience characterized by affordable price and generally reliable quality—appeared to deliver value. She described the car’s quality as decent given the price point, noting that there had not been any major faults. This sentiment captures a common perception among early adopters who view Neta as a practical, budget-conscious option rather than a premium, luxury EV.
However, Neta’s broader narrative in Thailand quickly shifted from consumer expectations to systemic concerns. Delays in vehicle delivery created a sense of disappointment and uncertainty that extended beyond an individual buyer. As early as the delivery phase, stakeholders noted that delivery slippage had eroded confidence, even for customers who appreciated the vehicle’s baseline quality. The juxtaposition of reasonable product quality with logistical and financial instability framed a core tension in Neta’s Thai operations: a credible value proposition undermined by execution risks.
In addition to product delivery and reliability concerns, the relationship between Neta and Thailand’s insurance ecosystem emerged as a critical wrinkle. The Thai insurer- broker network associated with the company—specifically, TQM as the insurance broker for Neta and Viriyah Insurance—themselves played a pivotal role in shaping customer experiences post-purchase. In Jutamas’s case, and for many others, the issue extended into how the vehicle would be insured or reinsured as financial circumstances around the company evolved.
Before Hozon New Energy Automobile Co formally announced its bankruptcy, Jutamas encountered a specific episode: TQM initiated a process to cancel her second-class insurance policy with Viriyah Insurance. This move occurred at a moment when the parent company’s financial status was already deteriorating, suggesting the interwoven nature of corporate health with customer protections and service continuity. To mitigate potential gaps in coverage in a scenario where Neta’s Thai subsidiary might face its own bankruptcy, she elected to secure a more basic third-class policy directly with Viriyah Insurance. Her concern underscored a broader question voiced by many Neta customers—who will service and support their vehicles if the parent company fails and the Thai subsidiary cannot fulfill its obligations?
The Jutamas case illustrates a broader cluster of anxieties among Neta owners in Thailand: a combination of cautious optimism about affordable EV ownership, concern about after-sales reliability, and the fear that corporate instability could undermine long-term maintenance and compensation arrangements. These consumer tensions unfolded against a backdrop of a Thai market where policy design, dealer networks, and service infrastructure were still evolving to accommodate a growing fleet of EVs from multiple brands.
Thailand’s EV incentive framework and the production challenge context
Neta’s Thai journey occurred within a government policy environment designed to nudge automakers toward domestic BEV production while providing tariff relief to imported EVs. The policy framework included a temporary exemption from import duties in 2024, contingent on manufacturers meeting production quotas domestically to offset import volumes. This balancing act was intended to promote local manufacturing and reduce reliance on imports, thereby contributing to a longer-term domestic EV ecosystem.
Over time, the policy framework faced challenges. Occidental trends—such as decelerating EV sales and tighter credit conditions—prompted manufacturers to request policy adjustments. The 2024 production shortfall was carried over into the following year, indicating that achieving required domestic production levels remained difficult for several players, including Neta.
Neta’s parent company reportedly entered bankruptcy proceedings in China last month, a development that reverberated through its Thai subsidiary’s ability to meet local obligations. In parallel, 18 Neta dealers in Thailand filed a complaint with the Excise Department, seeking to recover more than 200 million baht in alleged unpaid debt. This debtor-creditor dynamic underscored a broader disruption in the Thai EV distribution network, complicating dealers’ cash flows and potentially impacting local consumer confidence.
Market data from Thailand’s EV sector illustrated a shift in share dynamics amid the broader market stress. In 2023, Neta’s share of Thailand’s EV market reached a peak of 12% as the industry expanded. BYD rose to a commanding position with a 49% market share in 2023, reflecting intense competition among Chinese brands and the increasing penetration of street-level EVs from a major rival. By the first five months of 2025, Neta’s new registrations had fallen by 48.5% year-on-year, and its share of EV registrations had dropped to 4%. This dramatic deceleration signaled the brand’s diminished capacity to compete within the evolving Thai EV ecosystem, while BYD and other players continued to capture more of the market’s momentum.
Neta’s representative production hub in Thailand was the Bangchan General Assembly facility in Bangkok’s Min Buri district. This plant, designed to assemble BEVs locally, represented a significant step for Neta as its first major BEV plant outside China. The plant operates with an annual production capacity of around 10,000 units. By May of the referenced year, the facility had delivered approximately 25,000 cars within the Thai market. These figures indicate a substantial domestic presence but also highlight the fragility of the supply chain given demands of production targets under the government’s EV incentive framework.
The Thai government’s EV policies included a production requirement structure that tied benefits to domestic BEV output. The EV incentive scheme imposed a domestic production obligation, with a plan to require two locally produced BEVs for every imported BEV through 2026, and a stricter ratio of three locally produced BEVs per imported unit in 2027 if targets were not met. The policy was designed to push manufacturers toward localization and to minimize reliance on imports as the EV market matured. The policy framework also entailed import duty reductions (capped at 40% for 2024-2025) and a reduction in excise tax to 2% (from 8%), reflecting a broad strategy to stimulate demand for BEVs while balancing domestic production needs.
For Neta, the policy structure created both an opportunity and risk. While the incentives could lower the effective cost of BEVs and encourage domestic assembly, the production shortfall and the parent company’s financial distress threatened Neta’s ability to meet the production targets and maintain subsidy eligibility. The Bangkok-based plant’s ability to sustain BEV output was further complicated by the parent company’s liquidity challenges, potentially undermining the Thai unit’s capacity to meet the government’s domestic production requirements and to maintain the incentive-linked benefits over time.
Financial distress, bankruptcy, and its implications for Thailand
As the Chinese parent company faced bankruptcy proceedings, the Thai arm confronted a unique set of financial and operational pressures. The parent company’s reported financial sounds, including liabilities exceeding 10 billion yuan and a creditor’s claim of roughly 5.3 million yuan (about 730,000 USD) on the Chinese side, signaled a deep-seated cash-flow crisis. These financial pressures, in turn, constrained the Thai subsidiary’s ability to procure vehicles, secure spare parts, and maintain a robust service network that customers relied upon.
The Thai unit’s prospects were further clouded by concerns over who would bear responsibility for ongoing maintenance and compensation if the parent entity could no longer support its Thai operations. This was not a mere hypothetical issue; it was a practical concern voiced by customers and dealers who depended on a stable, continuity-driven business model. The possibility of a service network shrinking or becoming unreliable could undermine consumer confidence in EV ownership and slow Thailand’s broader EV adoption.
The dealer community in Thailand also faced immediate consequences. Dealer complaints alleging unpaid debts suggest a liquidity crunch that could ripple through the distribution chain. When dealers face financial stress due to supplier bankruptcy or delayed payments, the risk is twofold: it can erode trust among customers and create a chilling effect that discourages new vehicle sales as well as timely service. The Thai EV market, particularly for new entrants like Neta, is sensitive to these dynamics because the ability to secure spare parts, obtain service expertise, and maintain a reliable after-sales network is central to long-term consumer confidence.
In parallel, the Thai Office of the Consumer Protection Board began scrutinizing Neta’s business activities in the country. This investigation followed a state-owned Chinese news agency report alleging that Neta Auto Thailand’s parent had filed for bankruptcy, a narrative that intensified concerns about consumer protection and the potential for negative impacts on Thai consumers. The regulatory scrutiny added another layer of risk for customers and partners, reinforcing the need for robust governance, clear communication, and a plan to safeguard consumer rights in a turbulent corporate environment.
Facing these pressures, Neta’s leadership faced a critical test of its ability to navigate a complex cross-border crisis while preserving Thailand’s EV momentum. The company’s executives and partners needed to articulate a coherent plan to manage production, maintain service continuity, and protect stakeholders in a market where policy incentives could change and where the financial health of the parent company could have ripple effects on the Thai operation’s viability.
After-sales service, maintenance, and spare-parts logistics
Maintaining a reliable after-sales service network is crucial for customer satisfaction, particularly in a market where EV ownership can be highly price-sensitive and where consumers rely on brand promises about maintenance and part availability. In Thailand, there were already early signs of strain in after-sales support as a result of the parent company’s financial difficulties. Neta opened a spare parts distribution center in Nakhon Pathom in May in an effort to reassure customers about maintenance and to improve service responsiveness. This move signaled recognition of the critical importance of a robust parts supply chain for customer confidence and brand credibility.
Despite this proactive step, reports surfaced of shortages in certain replacement parts, which led to delays in repairs, with some repairs reportedly taking up to 10 months. Such delays reflect structural bottlenecks that can destabilize the customer experience and threaten long-term loyalty. The ability to secure timely repairs and spare parts is central to the overall perceived reliability of an EV brand, especially in a market where the service network is still developing and where customers may have limited patience for extended downtime.
Industry observers noted that, even before the parent company’s bankruptcy news, Neta’s Thai service centers remained operational and able to handle claims and repairs under existing policies. However, the broader risk to this continuity loomed as parent-company issues intensified. Insurance providers indicated a willingness to facilitate coverage beyond the immediate service network by arranging access to alternative repair garages, thereby preserving customer protection even if Neta’s local service centers faced constraints.
From a customer standpoint, the question of who would bear responsibility for ongoing maintenance and repair if a service center closed or became scarce loomed large. Insurers communicated a willingness to support policyholders by leveraging a network of general repair garages with expertise in EV body and structural repairs. Yet the overall picture suggested potential disadvantages for customers: a more constrained network could lead to longer waiting times and a slower repair process, impacting the day-to-day practicality of owning an EV.
This dynamic underscores how a company’s ability to sustain a reliable parts supply and service ecosystem is intimately linked to customer confidence and long-term market viability. In Thailand’s evolving EV space, the case highlights the critical need for transparent communication, robust service infrastructure, and contingency planning to ensure that customers can reliably access maintenance and repairs despite corporate upheavals.
Market performance, competition, and consumer sentiment
The competitive landscape in Thailand’s EV market features a dense matrix of brands vying for consumer attention, with BYD at the forefront in terms of market share and growth momentum. Neta’s 12% market share in 2023 placed it as a meaningful participant during a period of rapid expansion in the sector. BYD held a dominant position, capturing 49% of the market in 2023, reflecting the strong brand perception, scale, and broad product lineup that BYD leveraged to achieve considerable penetration.
However, the market dynamics shifted through 2024 and into 2025. The downturn in Neta’s fortunes, coupled with broader macroeconomic headwinds, contributed to a steep drop in new registrations in the first five months of 2025—down 48.5% year-on-year. Neta’s share of EV registrations fell to 4%, signaling a significant narrowing of its competitive footprint as the market continued to evolve. This decline is a combination of factors: production challenges, a potentially constrained dealer network, customer concerns about after-sales support, and the cascading effects of the parent company’s financial distress.
Customer sentiment in Thailand toward EVs experienced a parallel shift. While interest in EV ownership remained, enthusiasm tempered by concerns about brand stability and the viability of after-sales support. The bankruptcy news and the associated regulatory scrutiny likely amplified caution among potential buyers who weigh not only the up-front cost of an EV but also ongoing maintenance, spare parts availability, and service reliability. Consumer watchdogs’ involvement in investigating Neta’s business practices further influenced public perception, prompting customers to seek reassurance that their investments would be adequately protected in the event of corporate misfortune.
On the production side, Bangchan General Assembly’s role as the assembly partner for Neta was central to the Thai EV production narrative. The plant’s capacity to deliver 10,000 BEVs annually positioned it as a crucial node in the chain of domestic BEV production. Yet, with parent-company liquidity constraints, the Thai unit faced heightened risk in meeting production targets mandated by the government’s incentive scheme. The consequences for the plant include not only potential penalties but also the reputational risk associated with being unable to fulfill contractual obligations tied to policy incentives and to the sustenance of local employment and supply chains.
This market context underscores a broader paradox: while policy measures were intended to stimulate domestic production and EV uptake, the success of these measures depended on the stability of the corporate ecosystem supporting local manufacturing, supply chains, and after-sales networks. When parent-company financial distress intersects with government targets, the risk of underproduction and reduced consumer confidence rises, potentially undermining the very policy goals that sought to accelerate the adoption of EV technologies in Thailand.
Insurance sector response and policyholder implications
The evolving corporate situation around Neta also triggered responses from the Thai insurance sector. The chairman of the motor insurance committee within the Thai General Insurance Association (TGIA) indicated that Neta’s service centers remained operational and that policyholders could still file claims and have their vehicles repaired under existing policies. This was a critical reassurance during a period of corporate uncertainty, signaling a commitment to maintaining continuity for customers who depended on insurance coverage for vehicle rehabilitation and financial protection.
However, the potential bankruptcy of Neta’s parent company raised questions about the longer-term viability of the maintenance network and spare-parts supply, which are integral to the cost and reliability of EV ownership. The TGIA emphasized that Thai insurers would continue to support Neta owners, even if the parent company’s collapse meant shifts in service arrangements. In the event that Neta service centers were to close, insurers proposed arrangements with alternative EV repair garages to ensure policyholders could still access repairs.
From an underwriting perspective, insurers indicated that premium calculations for Neta EVs would remain individualized. Risk assessments and pricing would continue to reflect the evolving risk profile of Neta and other EV brands, though terms and conditions could be adjusted as the landscape changes. Insurers acknowledged that EV insurance remains a relatively new market segment with historically high loss ratios and lower profitability. Despite these challenges, the sector continued to work toward a sustainable balance as it expanded coverage to new EV entrants, aiming to protect both consumers and the broader mobility ecosystem.
Industry leaders also projected a potential stagnation or modest growth in motor insurance for EVs in 2025, reflecting broader macroeconomic trends and consumer sentiment. The president of TGIA suggested that while EV adoption might face some headwinds, the sector could adapt through pricing strategies, risk management, and a growing base of EV policyholders whose needs extend beyond traditional auto insurance concepts. The evolving risk landscape emphasized the need for insurers to calibrate products and networks in ways that deliver reliable coverage while maintaining financial viability in a market characterized by innovation and volatility.
The insurance discourse highlighted a core tension in Thailand’s EV market: insurers want to support growth and consumer protections, but their profitability within EV lines remains uncertain. As long as consumers require coverage for new technologies with evolving maintenance realities, insurers will need to refine their models, expand networks, and negotiate partnerships that can sustain claims-processing efficiency and repairability. The ultimate outcome will depend on how well the market stabilizes post-crisis, how effectively service networks expand to meet demand, and how policy-makers balance incentives to promote domestic production with the need for resilient, consumer-facing EV ecosystems.
Corporate governance shifts, leadership, and strategic direction
Leadership transitions and structural changes within Neta’s Southeast Asia operations added another layer of complexity to an already challenging environment. Sun Baolong, who previously served as the general manager of Neta Auto Thailand, assumed a new role as head of Southeast Asia for Zhejiang Hozon New Energy Automobile. This leadership shift occurred as the company reconfigured its board of directors, bringing in representatives from the headquarters in China to join the Thai board. The changes signaled a recalibration of governance practices and strategic priorities in light of the broader corporate challenges.
In tandem with leadership changes, regulatory attention intensified. The Office of the Consumer Protection Board began investigations into Neta’s business practices in Thailand, following a report by a state-owned Chinese news agency alleging that Neta Auto Thailand’s parent company filed for bankruptcy. The regulatory scrutiny underscored a heightened emphasis on consumer protection and transparency, ensuring that Thai consumers’ interests remained at the forefront of corporate activity, even as corporate dynamics evolved in response to the financial situation in China.
These governance dynamics had a direct impact on local operations. The Thai subsidiary’s future was tethered to the broader corporate strategy developed by the new board composition, with implications for production planning, regional expansion, and the ability to secure supplier and creditor confidence. The leadership transition reflected an attempt to stabilize the business by aligning management practices with the realities of a multi-jurisdictional enterprise facing financial stress, while also seeking to reassure customers, dealers, and financial partners in Thailand of a clear path forward.
The governance narrative also intersected with operational realities at the Bangchan General Assembly facility. The plant’s performance in meeting BEV production targets under the government’s subsidy regime depended in part on the alignment between Thai leadership and the parent company’s strategic decisions. The potential penalties for missed production targets and the obligation to repay subsidies under the EV incentive framework added a layer of accountability for the Thai assembly partner. In this context, leadership and governance changes carried practical significance for the plant’s ability to navigate regulatory requirements while maintaining momentum in a challenging market.
Production targets, penalties, and the policy landscape moving forward
A central facet of Thailand’s EV policy framework was the requirement that participating manufacturers produce vehicles domestically to meet the incentives’ conditions. If the target production levels were not achieved, the rules stipulated penalties and the possibility of subsidy repayment. The EV incentive scheme included a provision for fines to be levied if manufacturers failed to meet the government’s production requirements. A representative figure cited by observers from the Electric Vehicle Association of Thailand (EVAT) indicated that fines could amount to around 400,000 baht per BEV for missed production targets, underscoring the financial risk embedded in non-compliance with the policy framework.
The policy also entailed a two-for-one domestic production-to-import ratio through 2026, with a retroactive shift to three locally produced BEVs for each imported vehicle in 2027 if targets were not met. This stepped approach was designed to progressively tilt the market toward domestic manufacturing while safeguarding the incentives’ objective of expanding Thailand’s BEV footprint. In practical terms, the policy compelled assembly partners like Bangchan General Assembly to deliver a defined mix of domestically built versus imported BEVs, tying their operations to the government’s broader suburban and urban mobility goals.
Moreover, the policy framework introduced financial obligations to return subsidies to the government if production targets were not achieved. Deputy Finance Minister Paopoom Rojanasakul noted that participants would be required to repay incentives if they could not meet the production requirements. This creates a material financial exposure for manufacturers under the EV incentive program and places greater emphasis on ensuring that local assembly lines operate at or above required capacity.
For Neta and its Thai partners, the policy’s economic signals carry dual effects. On one hand, the incentives remain a driver for local production and price competitiveness. On the other hand, the risk of penalties and subsidy repayment introduces additional financial risks that can exacerbate liquidity concerns, particularly when the parent company experiences financial distress. The Thai government’s policy adjustments, including potential changes to import duties and BEV-related tax incentives, will continue to influence the market’s trajectory as the sector stabilizes and consumer confidence evolves.
Neta’s broader strategic plan in Thailand included its continued commitment to maintaining a BEV production line in Bangkok and fulfilling its obligations under the EV incentive scheme. However, given the parent company’s financial difficulties and the Thai unit’s own operational challenges, the long-term path depended on several variables: how the Thai leadership team could prove its ability to sustain production, how quickly the service network and spare-parts supply could stabilize, and how government policy would respond to evolving market conditions, including geopolitical considerations and global trade dynamics that can influence tariff and incentive decisions.
The Thai market’s response to the policy environment and to Neta’s performance also hinged on the actions of its dealers and the broader supply chain. The alleged unpaid debts and the dealers’ calls for clarity around financial health added a dimension of risk to the policy environment. The Excise Department and other regulatory bodies would be watching the situation closely to ensure that the incentives program remains credible and sustainable, while also safeguarding consumer interests and market integrity in a period of transition.
Conclusion
The Neta episode in Thailand illustrates the complex interplay between a consumer-facing EV brand’s ambitions, the country’s evolving policy framework, the realities of a cross-border corporate structure facing financial stress, and the crucial role of after-sales support and service networks. Individual customer experiences reveal the appeal of affordable EV ownership when product quality meets expectations, but they also highlight how delivery timelines, maintenance adequacy, and protection against financial risk shape long-term trust. The Thai government’s EV incentives were designed to accelerate local production and adoption, yet their effectiveness depends on a stable, reliable ecosystem of manufacturing, distribution, and service that can withstand corporate volatility.
Insurance regulators and the broader industry are confronting the dual challenge of facilitating growth in EV adoption while maintaining financial viability in a sector with higher risk profiles and evolving repair networks. The responses from insurers—standing by policyholders, coordinating alternative repair options, and adjusting pricing based on risk—reflect a pragmatic approach to sustaining customer protection amid market turbulence.
Leadership changes, governance realignments, and the Thai unit’s ongoing dialogue with regulators underscore the importance of transparent communication and strategic clarity. The path forward requires navigating regulatory targets, managing financial risk, and ensuring that the service network and spare-parts supply can adequately support a growing BEV population in Thailand.
Ultimately, the Neta case in Thailand serves as a microcosm of a broader transition: a market eager to embrace electric mobility tempered by the realities of corporate resilience, policy design, and consumer protection. As policymakers refine incentive structures and manufacturers optimize production and service capabilities, the Thai EV landscape will continue to evolve. The lessons from Neta’s Thai journey—about consumer trust, after-sales reliability, governance, and the delicate balance between incentives and production targets—will inform how the market can mature toward a more stable, consumer-friendly, and competitively balanced EV ecosystem.
