Southern Thailand Consumer Confidence Plunges Amid Cost Crisis

On August 1, 2025, Wiwat Chankingthong, manager of the Business Innovation Research Center at Hat Yai University's Faculty of Business Administration, released findings from a survey of consumer confidence across 14 southern provinces covering economic and social conditions. The survey found that overall consumer confidence in July declined compared to June, triggered by U.S.-Iran military tensions in July that caused global oil price volatility. Concerns about potential oil shortages from closed shipping routes, combined with sharply increased shipping costs and cargo insurance premiums, raised Thailand's oil import costs significantly.

Although the government drew on fuel fund reserves to subsidize pump prices and prevent public hardship, the fuel fund eventually ran dry, forcing multiple fuel price increases at pumps for both gasoline and diesel. Citizens have had no choice but to absorb the full weight of higher living costs. The monsoon season worsened conditions as rubber tappers could not work and fruit prices collapsed due to oversupply, causing farm incomes to shrink dramatically.

Despite the government's "Thai Help Thai (60/40)" program intended to share expenses, Wiwat explained that the funds typically last only 2–3 weeks, leaving low-to-middle income households facing the full 100 percent burden of elevated living costs. When expenses exceed income and savings run out, many resort to high-interest informal lending with seemingly no path to repayment. This financial stress has eroded family well-being, while drug abuse continues to spread widely in communities and schools. Ongoing violence in the southern border region and slow, poorly targeted government economic solutions have left the public deeply lacking confidence.

The revocation of welfare card eligibility, which affected a large number of cardholders, has directly shaken public trust in the government. The discontent stems not from rejection of screening itself, but from a mismatch between the rigid numerical criteria used by state agencies and the actual realities of people's lives. Inflexible formulas have led to eligibility cuts based on bank deposits, vehicles, or credit limits that often contradict reality—for example, elderly citizens with modest savings just over 100,000 baht but no regular income losing benefits immediately, or outdated data causing genuinely struggling people to be unfairly denied aid.

When citizens lose assistance precisely when living costs and prices are at their peak, they perceive the government as withdrawing help at the moment of greatest need. The public increasingly views government policy and operations as prioritizing "budget cuts" over "helping people." With nearly half of all 18.82 million registered cardholders—9.3 million people—losing eligibility, many now suspect the government deliberately set criteria too strict.