People's Party MP Exposes 60 Solar Firms with Shared Addresses
People's Party MP Supachot Chaiyasaj revealed on Nov 1, 2026, that 60 companies in the public solar project share office addresses and 120 firms have cross-shareholding directors.
Stock photo for illustration only, not from the actual event
- People's Party MP Supachot Chaiyasaj exposes irregularities in the public solar project
- Over 60 companies participating in the project share identical office addresses
- 120 firms found with cross-holding directors, raising monopoly concerns
- 60-70% of SME operators have reportedly withdrawn from the project
On Nov 1, 2026, Mr. Supachot Chaiyasaj, a list-MP of the People's Party, disclosed in-depth findings regarding the public solar energy project. The government had previously advertised to the public that citizens would have the freedom to choose solar installation companies independently without quota locks for any specific private entity.
However, tracking and inspecting the list of private companies that passed screening criteria revealed suspicious connections and irregularities that raise serious doubts.
Stock photo for illustration only, not from the actual event
Mr. Supachot stated that deep-dive investigations into more than 60 qualified companies showed multiple entities registering at the exact same office addresses. Furthermore, inspecting board members and shareholders revealed cross-shareholdings among a network of over 120 companies.
"Even if citizens pick another company, they ultimately loop back to the exact same capital group and network."
Supachot Chaiyasaj
This business practice resembles a corporate shell game, rendering the government's claim of promoting free market competition entirely untrue. In reality, the setup serves to block small-scale providers while benefiting a single conglomerate network.
Contextual Analysis: Public solar initiatives are generally designed to promote household energy generation and distribute economic opportunities to local SMEs. However, market concentration through nominee firms or subsidiary networks often undermines fair competition in the clean energy sector, limiting true market diversity.
According to media reports, this environment has driven 60-70% of SME operators to submit formal withdrawal letters, leaving a mere 30% of companies actively operating within the project.
Source: Khaosod Politics
Found something wrong in this article? Report an issue with this article
Comments
Leave a Comment