You are using an outdated browser and your browsing experience will not be optimal. Please update to the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. Install Microsoft Edge

July 26, 2021

Laos Issues E-commerce Regulations

Though online purchases of goods and services have been booming in Laos, the country’s laws and regulations have not kept pace. Providers of legal advice on these activities have therefore had to interpret laws and regulations on traditional physical retail activities instead, and apply them to online activities. However, Laos is making strides toward providing clear legal guidance for e-commerce operations by issuing legal measures to facilitate the regulation of online business activities.

For instance, on June 4, 2021, the new Decree on E-commerce No. 296/GOV (dated April 12, 2021, and published in the Lao Official Gazette on May 20) came into effect to clarify the regulatory framework for e-commerce in the country and to set requirements for electronic purchase contracts.

The decree, which applies only to operators residing or registered in Laos, regulates individuals and legal entities involved in the following activities:

  • Selling goods and services via their own electronic platform (website, program, or other instruction set);
  • Providing electronic marketplace services; and
  • Selling goods and services via electronic marketplaces.

Seller Notification Requirement

Business operators looking to sell goods or services via an electronic platform, either on their own website or application or via an electronic marketplace, must notify the relevant department of the Ministry of Industry and Commerce of their activity. (Existing operators must notify the ministry within 90 days from the decree’s effective date.) Although the chief concern of the decree is to target those whose regular activity is to sell goods and services online, the decree does not address whether those selling occasionally through an electronic marketplace still need to notify the ministry.

Documents for the notification consist primarily of the application form provided by the Ministry of Industry and Commerce, the enterprise registration certificate (i.e., proof of having registered a legal entity in Laos) or a simple ID card for individuals, a copy of the business operating license (for activities that require approval from a line ministry), and a copy of a contract with a payment service provider for payment via an electronic platform. Upon receipt of the necessary documentation, the ministry’s relevant departments or agencies will certify the notification within three working days. This certificate is valid for two years, and must be renewed thirty days before its expiry.

Electronic Marketplace Registration

Electronic marketplaces must be operated via an incorporated legal entity, which means an Enterprise Registration Certificate is a necessary prerequisite to operating an electronic marketplace in Laos. As for technical requirements, electronic marketplaces must obtain a Ministry of Technology and Communications certificate confirming their “technical conformity.” (The process and requirements for obtaining this certificate may be the subject of guidance that is yet to be issued.)

Similar to the grace period for the notification requirement mentioned above, existing electronic marketplace operators have 90 days (from June 4, 2021) to request authorization from the ministry. Upon receipt of the necessary documentation, the ministry’s relevant departments will consider and provide its authorization within five working days. This authorization is valid for three years, and must be renewed thirty days before its expiry.

Foreign Restrictions

Foreign shareholders cannot hold more than 90 percent of the shares of the legal entity operating an electronic marketplace, and the registered capital must be at least LAK 10 billion (approx. USD 1.05 million).

It is important to note that this decree does not replace existing laws and regulations that address certain types of goods or services sold, for which licensing, notification, minimum investment, and other requirements may apply. For instance, foreign participation in the provision of retail and wholesale services in Laos is limited under the Decision on Retail and Wholesale Business. Under this decision, a foreign shareholder who holds up to 50% of the shares in a retail or wholesale business must invest at least LAK 4 billion (approx. USD 423,350). Between LAK 10 billion (approx. USD 1.05 million) and less than LAK 20 billion (approx. USD 2.1 million) a foreign shareholder may hold 70% of the legal entity, while a foreign shareholder must invest at least LAK 20 billion to hold 100% of the shares of the marketplace’s legal entity conducting retail and wholesale services. Similar restrictions are likely to apply for online retail and wholesale businesses.

Transparency

The decree requires business operators of electronic platforms to disclose information on their platforms and activities, as well as on the goods and services sold. Accordingly, information on the business operator, such as its name, address, contact details, and Enterprise Registration Certificate or the relevant operating license, must be displayed on the electronic platform.

Descriptions of goods or services should note the product specifications (size, color, aspect, and so on) following the product labels as applicable, and product-related information such as origins, prices, return and warranty policies, related fees (e.g., shipment and payment methods), and terms and conditions. In addition, information on customers’ “satisfaction and opinion” concerning the goods and services must be displayed on the corresponding electronic platform. The decree also emphasizes that information on the goods or services offered must be realistic and portray products’ actual characteristics.

Product Liability

The decree also addresses liability for the goods and services sold, deeming electronic selling platforms and sellers on electronic marketplaces legally responsible for the goods and services they sell online.

The decree does not assign similar legal responsibility to entities operating electronic marketplaces on which the goods or services are sold. However, electronic marketplace operators are prohibited from authorizing or ignoring the sale of prohibited goods or services on their electronic marketplaces. Accordingly, they  must take a proactive role in the inspection of goods and services sold.

E-commerce Contracts

According to the decree, which endeavors to cover e-commerce contracts specifically (as opposed to electronic contracts more generally), there are two types of e-commerce contracts.

First, e-commerce contracts made via an “online ordering function” are defined as agreements between seller and client for the sale, purchase, or exchange of goods or services, made by electronic means via the online ordering function of an electronic platform created by the “owner of the electronic platform.” Essentially, this means e-commerce contracts that cover transactions made on electronic platforms (other than electronic marketplaces), and assumes that they use electronic means of payment.

The second type of e-commerce contract is one made “via social media,” which is a term in the decree that the regulator interprets as also covering electronic marketplace contracts for the sale, purchase, or exchange of goods or services.

The decree stipulates that the offering of either type of e-commerce contract is governed primarily by the rules provided in the electronic platform’s terms and conditions. Upon acceptance of the offer by the seller, the e-contract will be deemed formed. The offer will be nullified if the seller does not respond within 12 hours (unlike the 15 days for a traditional contract in writing), unless otherwise stipulated in the terms and conditions of the electronic platform. The client may also cancel its offer before receiving a response from the seller.

Both types of e-commerce contracts must remain accessible to clients after the transaction, (e.g. through archives and purchase histories).

For e-commerce contracts made via the online ordering function of an electronic platform (not on an electronic marketplace), the electronic platform must have a system that allows clients to review, add, amend, confirm, or cancel an offer before formally submitting it by means of the online ordering function. In case of cancellation by the client, electronic platforms must provide clients with evidence that the notification to cancel the contract was sent.

Conclusion

E-commerce activities in Laos have typically had to rely on extensive interpretation of laws that were not made to address e-commerce. The new e-commerce decree discussed in this article is an example of how the government is working to update the regulatory framework to sustain promising high-tech sectors such as e-commerce, fintech, and others. As Laos remains a relatively untapped market in these areas, the Decree on E-commerce eases both local and international investors’ concerns about launching operations by clarifying some key issues. The decree does not address sanctions for noncompliance, and questions remain regarding some of the mandatory requirements (such as the “technical requirements”) to register an electronic marketplace. Therefore, in its current state full implementation of the decree may require subsequent guidance from the authorities.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

August 4, 2026
Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019) (PDPA) could soon see some important changes, as a draft bill to amend the PDPA has been introduced in the House of Representatives. The draft amendment is currently in the public consultation phase, with comments accepted from July 16 to August 15, 2026. If enacted in its current form, the amendment would make three key changes: expanding the government exemption to cover anticorruption operations, introducing a statutory definition of “government agency,” and restructuring the lawful bases for personal data processing to align with international standards. Background The PDPA has encountered several enforcement challenges since its implementation, including three core problems identified by the bill’s sponsors: (1) the current exemptions for government agencies do not cover anticorruption and misconduct-prevention operations; (2) the PDPA lacks a clear statutory definition of “government agency,” causing legal uncertainty as to which entities are covered; and (3) the existing framework for lawful bases of data processing does not align with international standards—particularly the multiple-lawful-bases system in the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)—making compliance inflexible for both government and private sector entities. Expanded Government Exemption The current PDPA exempts government agencies performing duties related to national security (including fiscal security), public safety, anti-money laundering, forensic science, and cybersecurity. The proposed amendment adds “prevention and suppression of corruption and misconduct” to this list of exempted functions. This would allow anticorruption bodies—most notably the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC), which is identified as a directly affected party—to collect, use, and disclose personal data without being subject to PDPA requirements when carrying out their duties. New Statutory Definition of “Government Agency” Notably, while the current PDPA use the term “government agency” in several provisions, the term is not comprehensively defined, creating potential uncertainty as to its scope. The draft bill therefore
August 3, 2026
On July 23, 2026, the Bank of Thailand (BOT) released for public comment its draft Notification on Digital Channel Security, which would significantly expand the scope and stringency of Thailand’s existing mobile banking security framework. If finalized in its current form, the draft notification would extend mandatory security requirements to credit card providers and credit providers, cover internet banking in addition to mobile applications, phase out SMS one-time passwords (OTPs) for transaction authentication, and introduce biometric verification requirements for high-value transactions. The public comment period is open through August 24, 2026. Background The BOT’s existing Mobile Banking Security Notification, issued in 2024, sets minimum security standards for financial institutions, specialized financial institutions (SFIs), and e-money providers, significantly reducing “money-draining app” fraud. However, fraudsters have since shifted to nonbank providers and internet banking channels, prompting the BOT to propose broader security requirements. Expanded Scope of Regulated Entities and Channels The existing Mobile Banking Security Notification covers only financial institutions, SFIs, and e-money providers offering mobile banking services. The draft expands coverage in two key areas: entities and channels. On the entity side, it adds credit card providers and credit providers that offer fund transfers to third parties at other financial service providers or that provide cash withdrawal services to individual retail customers. On the channel side, it broadens coverage to include internet banking in addition to mobile banking. Strengthened Customer Authentication The draft introduces enhanced authentication requirements in three areas: Service enrollment and device changes. Providers must implement rigorous identity verification, notify customers of enrollment results through out-of-band communication channels, and adopt risk-mitigation measures such as cooling-off periods and temporary transaction limits. Transaction-level authentication. Providers must use two-factor authentication for fund transfers, cardless ATM withdrawals, and transaction limit increases. Secure authentication factors. Key requirements include the following: “What-you-know” factors must
July 28, 2026
Data protection officers (DPOs) have become a fixture of Thailand’s privacy compliance landscape since the Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019) (PDPA) took full effect and the Office of the Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC) began requiring certain organizations to appoint them. On July 7, 2026, the Office of the PDPC presented draft guidance on DPOs as part of a public consultation on a series of draft personal data protection manuals and recommendations. The draft offers the clearest indication yet of how the regulator expects the DPO role to work in practice, addressing recurring implementation issues under the PDPA—including when an organization must appoint a DPO, how the DPO should operate independently, how to manage conflicts of interest, and how data subjects and regulators should be able to contact the DPO. Because it remains in draft, organizations have an opportunity to weigh the practical implications now before the guidance is finalized. When a DPO Must Be Appointed The draft guidance clarifies the triggers for mandatory DPO appointment, including: Regular and systematic monitoring of personal data or systems on a large scale, such as tracking, analyzing, or predicting behavior, attitudes, or individual characteristics. Core activities involving large-scale processing of sensitive personal data, such as health data, biometric data, or criminal records. Certain foreign-organization representative arrangements. Public-sector coverage under relevant notifications identifying government entities that must appoint a DPO. Processing involving 100,000 or more data subjects may be considered large-scale. The guidance also contemplates voluntary DPO appointment for organizations that wish to raise their privacy governance standards, and such organizations should still comply with the standards applicable to DPOs under the law. Independence and Reporting Lines The draft guidance identifies lack of DPO independence as a core risk because an ineffective or constrained DPO may be unable to raise deficiencies
July 27, 2026
Vietnam’s new E-Commerce Law, which took effect on 1 July 2026 along with its implementing Decree No. 248/2026/ND-CP (Decree 248), marks a significant development in the country’s approach to online intellectual property (IP) enforcement, reflecting a clear shift from a reactive model of intermediary liability to one that expects platforms to play a more active role in preventing infringement. From notice-and-takedown to platform responsibility The most significant change introduced by the E-Commerce Law is the transformation of the legal role of e-commerce platforms. The existing safe harbor provisions under the IP Law and the copyright notice-and-takedown regime established by Decree 17/2023/ND-CP (Decree 17) largely required intermediaries to act only after receiving notice of infringement. Once infringing content had been removed, the platform’s legal obligation was generally considered fulfilled. The new legislation adopts a fundamentally different approach. Article 17 of the E-Commerce Law requires intermediary platforms to screen information relating to goods and services before publication in order to prevent listings involving counterfeit or IP-infringing goods, and goods of unknown origin. Rather than relying exclusively on complaints from rights holders, platforms are now expected to implement preventive measures before infringing listings become publicly available. Decree 248 further requires platforms to update keyword filters based on recommendations issued by competent authorities. These filtering mechanisms are intended to prevent prohibited listings from appearing on the platform and represent a further move away from a purely complaint-driven enforcement model. The legislation also introduces Vietnam’s first statutory stay-down obligation. Under the E-Commerce Law and Decree 248, major digital platforms must maintain automated systems capable of reviewing, warning against, and removing unlawful listings while also implementing measures to prevent repeat violations, defined under Decree 248 as conduct that has previously been identified and handled by the platform, but continues to recur. This obligation addresses one