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

March 31, 2026

Autonomy with Accountability: Key Changes under Vietnam’s New Higher Education Law

Against the backdrop of Vietnam’s rapid economic and technological transformation and its ambition to build a knowledge-driven economy, the National Assembly of Vietnam adopted Law on Higher Education No. 125/2025/QH15 on December 10, 2025, The new law took effect on January 1, 2026, replacing Law on Higher Education No. 08/2012/QH13 of 2012 and its subsequent amendments after more than a decade of implementation.

The new law reflects a significant policy shift toward enhancing the institutional autonomy of higher education institutions (“HEIs”)—universities and other university-level institutions. By granting broader autonomy, Vietnam aims to enable HEIs to operate more proactively, better respond to market needs, and improve the quality and efficiency of education and research activities.

Comprehensive Institutional Autonomy in HEIs

The new law marks a significant shift by granting HEIs comprehensive autonomy as a statutory right, within the bounds of the licensed scope of educational operation and the legal framework, rather than a conditional right as provided under the former law. Under the new law, HEIs are empowered to exercise autonomy over their academic expertise, training, scientific research, international cooperation, organizational structure, personnel, finance, and other higher education activities. The expansion of institutional autonomy is also accompanied by a correspondingly strengthened framework of institutional accountability.

However, Vietnam maintains a certain degree of control and imposes restrictions on institutional autonomy in sensitive and strategically important areas. These controls and restrictions include limitations on training autonomy in the majors of teacher training, national defense, and security; and restrictions on financial and personnel management autonomy for HEIs under the administration of the Ministry of National Defense and the Ministry of Public Security.

New Model for Curriculum Development

The new law removes the concept of “opening a training major” and focuses regulation on how training programs are developed and delivered. Under the previous regime, an HEI wishing to offer a new program would need to go through a procedure to open that major itself or apply for approval to open that major if the HEI did not have full institution autonomy—a process that was often administratively burdensome.

Under the new law, the Ministry of Education and Training (MOET) will issue a comprehensive list of training majors, from which HEIs must identify and register the majors they intend to offer as part of the licensing process for their educational operation permit.

At the same time, HEIs are granted autonomy to develop their programs within the registered training majors in compliance with the training program standards to be issued by MOET. In general, the principal/rector is authorized to approve the training programs of the HEI. However, certain specialized programs remain subject to approval by the competent state authority, including teacher education and health-related fields, and law-related fields.

To ensure continuity and stability during the transition, the new law establishes transitional arrangements for HEIs that either submitted applications for, or were approved to, open training majors before January 1, 2026. Specifically:

  • Valid applications submitted before January 1, 2026, will continue to be processed under the regulations that were effective at the time of submission.
  • HEIs may implement, within three years, approvals for opening of training majors issued before January 1, 2026, in compliance with the corresponding standards issued before that date.

Stakeholders should monitor forthcoming guidance from MOET regarding the consequences of failing to meet the three-year transitional deadline.

Abolition of University Councils in Public HEIs

The new law fundamentally alters institutional governance, by abolishing university councils in the governance structure of public HEIs, pursuant to the orientation of Resolution No. 71-NQ/TW dated August 22, 2025, of the Central Committee.

However, two categories of HEIs are exempt from this change. First, an HEI established pursuant to an international treaty between the Vietnamese government and a foreign government may continue to maintain the university council within its governance structure as provided under such international treaty. Second, university councils remain in place in private HEIs, where they continue to function as the governing body representing stakeholders, making decisions on development orientation, organizational structure, resource utilization, and accountability.

Foreign Branch Campuses Under Tighter Regulatory Alignment

The new law also reshapes the legal landscape for foreign branch campuses (“FBCs”) of foreign HEIs in Vietnam, moving toward governing FBCs under a legal framework that closely aligns with the regime applicable to a foreign‑invested private HEI. In particular, FBCs must now comply with the regulations applicable to foreign-invested private HEIs not only with respect to establishment and operation, as inherited from previous regulations, but also with respect to the organizational structure, as newly required under the new law.

Such changes establish a comprehensive legal framework governing FBCs in Vietnam, but also raise practical challenges in reconciling the structural and in-nature differences between FBCs and foreign-invested private HEIs, as well as navigating conflicts between Vietnamese law and the regulations of the parent university’s home jurisdiction. These challenges may persist unless the forthcoming detailed guidelines of the government provide special regulatory regimes to facilitate the adaptation of FBCs.

Classification of Training Locations

The new law introduces a formal legal definition of “training locations” for HEIs for the first time. Similar to the approach in the Law on Vocational Education passed on the same day, these include (i) headquarters, (ii) branch campuses, and (iii) the newly recognized “other training locations,” defined as places where all or part of a training program is delivered, under the management of HEIs, and in compliance with prescribed quality‑assurance conditions. “Other training locations” do not perform governance and management functions, and include premises owned by or lawfully used by the HEI, venues for joint training programs, and sites for practical training.

This change allows institutions to share facilities, such as sports fields, laboratories, and clinical training sites, and deliver training programs in a more flexible and effective manner, while maintaining compliance with prescribed quality‑assurance conditions.

Outlook

The new Law on Higher Education marks a significant shift in regulations toward modernizing Vietnam’s higher education system, bringing it closer to international standards, encouraging innovation, and promoting the sector’s sustainable development. The new framework also opens clearer and more transparent avenues for investment by introducing greater institutional autonomy and streamlining administrative procedures, reducing long‑standing regulatory bottlenecks, among other changes. At the same time, it imposes stricter quality assurance and compliance requirements. These heightened standards increase competitive pressure across the sector. Therefore, long‑term strategic planning as well as monitoring the upcoming detailed implementation guidelines from the government is essential for both existing and prospective investors.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

January 26, 2026
Myanmar’s Private Security Services Law, enacted on February 18, 2025, together with its implementing Directive on Applications for a Private Security Services License or Permit issued on June 18, 2025, establishes the country’s first comprehensive regulatory framework for both commercial private security service providers and companies that employ in-house security personnel. The framework applies to both Myanmar and foreign entities. For foreign investors and multinational operators, the new regime introduces strict licensing requirements, local content rules, and various approvals that must be carefully considered as part of business planning and compliance processes. Regulatory Authority and Structure The governing authority under the Private Security Services Law is the Private Security Services Central Supervisory Committee, formed with the minister of the Ministry of Home Affairs (MOHA) as chairperson, the chief of the Myanmar Police Force as vice-chairperson, and members from other high-ranking officials from relevant ministries, such as Transport and Communications, Defense, Planning and Finance, Investment and Foreign Economic Relations, Legal Affairs, Immigration and Population, Labor, and Commerce. This Central Committee is the highest regulatory authority and has the power to adopt policies, approve or reject applications for licenses and permits, and decide appeals against administrative actions taken by Supervisory Committees, which operate under the Central Committee at the state and regional level. They are responsible for processing applications, verifying compliance with statutory requirements, submitting applications to the Central Committee with remarks, and issuing licenses and permits once approved. Supervisory Committees also monitor compliance by license or permit holders and impose administrative penalties for noncompliance, while the Central Committee exercises final decision-making authority. License Requirements for Security Service Providers To apply for a private security services license, companies must be registered under the Myanmar Companies Law. Foreign companies may also operate a private security services business in Myanmar, subject to compliance
January 21, 2026
Spurred by global geopolitics and Canada’s Indo-Pacific Strategy, which aims to forge deeper ties with ASEAN, Canadian companies have been showing growing interest in Thailand and Southeast Asia in recent years. To understand the opportunities offered by the region, we sat down with Andrew Stoutley, a Toronto native and the chief operating officer of Tilleke & Gibbins, a leading Southeast Asian regional law firm with over 130 years of history in Thailand. Q: Why are Canadian companies looking at Thailand and Southeast Asia right now? A: Two reasons stand out. First, diversification has moved up the agenda. Many Canadian companies want options outside North America due to tariff volatility and policy uncertainty in the United States, as well as questions around the next Canada–United States–Mexico Agreement mandatory joint review. At the same time, the shift of global production from China to Southeast Asia is accelerating, driven by rising costs, geopolitics, and the need to avoid overreliance on a single market. As a result, Canadian companies are looking for a second production base or a regional hub, and Thailand and its neighbors are natural choices given their manufacturing depth, location, and established supply chains. Second, Canada’s own efforts in the region are gaining traction. The Indo-Pacific Strategy has led to more on-the-ground support, including larger trade missions, upgraded diplomatic posts, and new financing options. Export Development Canada (EDC) now has a presence in Bangkok, giving Canadian companies a direct line to financing and insurance in Thailand. There’s also steady progress on trade frameworks like the recently signed Canada–Indonesia Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (which will come into effect pending domestic procedures), ongoing negotiations of a Canada–ASEAN FTA, and the exciting announcement about the launch of negotiations of a Canada–Thailand FTA. Together, these developments have the potential to make it much easier
January 20, 2026
Thailand’s Board of Investment (BOI) has imposed new restrictions on foreign-majority shareholding and land ownership for companies in certain promoted activities. The changes took effect on September 1, 2025, but were not published in the Government Gazette until December 30, 2025, under Notification of the Board of Investment No. Sor. 7/2568 on the Amendment to List of Activities Eligible for Investment Promotion under Notification of the Board of Investment No. 9/2565, dated July 22, 2025. Foreign Land Ownership Restrictions Generally, foreign land ownership is one of the privileges granted to BOI-promoted companies, allowing them to own land to engage in the promoted activities. However, with these new restrictions, the BOI will no longer grant land-ownership privileges to foreign-majority-owned companies that conduct business activities in the following categories: Rolling, drawing, casting, or forging of nonferrous metals (category 5.4.9) Manufacturing of ferrous metal products or ferrous metal parts (category 5.4.11.2) Manufacturing of nonferrous metal products and/or nonferrous metal parts for industrial use (category 5.4.11.4) Manufacturing of other metal products, including other metal parts for industrial use (category 5.4.11.5) Manufacture of chemical products for industry (category 6.2) Manufacture of plastic products for industrial goods and parts (category 6.4.1) These restrictions do not apply to existing BOI-promoted companies that have at least three projects granted promotion under the same juristic person during the past 15 years (2011–2025) with total investment of at least THB 5 billion, excluding the cost of land and working capital. Foreign Shareholding Restrictions For companies to be eligible for BOI promotion in three other categories of business activities, at least 51% of the company’s registered capital must be held by Thai individual shareholders, unless the BOI-promoted activity is located within a special border economic zone as designated by the BOI. These three categories are: Manufacture of bags made of
January 16, 2026
Employment law specialists from Tilleke & Gibbins in Vietnam have contributed the Vietnam chapter to the Guide to Restructuring a Cross-Border Workforce from International Employment Lawyer. This comprehensive global guide, covering 50 jurisdictions worldwide, addresses the complex issue of workplace restructurings, with a particular focus on the needs of multinational companies. The Vietnam chapter was authored by partner Kien Trung Trinh, counsel Sarah Galeski, and associates Dung Thi Phuong Le and Nguyen Thi Huong Nguyen. The Q&A-style chapter provides in-depth analysis of key areas related to workplace restructuring, including: Reduction in workforce; Restructuring or reorganization of the business; Changing terms and conditions; and Areas to watch. A PDF of the Vietnam chapter can be downloaded through the button below. Tilleke & Gibbins also contributed the Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, and Thailand chapters to the Guide to Restructuring a Cross-Border Workforce 2026. To browse the full guide for all 45 jurisdictions, please visit the International Employment Lawyer website.