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

April 22, 2026

Clearer Picture of Extended Producer Responsibility Emerges in Vietnam

Subscribe to Updates

A new decree in Vietnam brings significant implementation clarity to the country’s existing extended producer responsibility (EPR) legal framework.

An EPR mechanism was first codified in Vietnam in the 2020 Law on Environmental Protection amid ongoing challenges surrounding the collection and treatment of product and packaging waste. The mechanism was progressively detailed through Decree No. 08/2022/ND‑CP and its successive amendments, but the regulatory framework remained insufficiently developed, notably in terms of support mechanisms for waste collection, recycling, and treatment.

The newly launched regulations in Decree No. 110/2026/ND-CP (Decree 110), issued on April 1, 2026, and taking effect on May 25, 2026, stipulate fully and clearly the responsibility of manufacturers and importers to recycle products and packaging and to treat waste. Some key provisions of Decree 110 for manufacturers, importers, and related stakeholders are presented below.

Subjects of EPR

The Law on Environmental Protection assigns responsibility to manufacturers and importers for product and packaging recycling (under Article 54) or waste collection and treatment (under Article 55), depending on the type of products and packaging they produce or import. Decree 110 elaborates on these EPR provisions by specifying the responsible entities and listing out the types of products and packaging subject to recycling and waste treatment responsibilities.

Decree 110 clarifies the responsible entities in special cases, such as when products under the same brand are made by multiple manufacturers, when there is a contract manufacturing or entrusted import relationship, and when the manufacturer or importer is part of a corporate group.

Notably, exemptions may be applied in some scenarios, such as for manufacturers and importers of products and packaging exclusively for export, temporary import and re-export, or research and testing purposes, as well as for entities with annual revenue from related products not exceeding VND 30 billion.

Recycling Responsibilities

Decree 110 clearly lists different types of products and packaging subject to recycling, along with mandatory recycling rates and mandatory recycling measures. For example, for aluminum packaging for food products, the mandatory recycling rate is 22% via at least one of two measures: production of commercial aluminum billets or production of packaging or specific products.

Mandatory recycling rates will be adjusted every three years, with each adjustment capped at 10%. The first adjustment is expected in 2029. Excess recycling achieved through advanced technology may be carried forward to offset future obligations.

If recyclable materials are collected for export for recycling or refurbishment abroad, such activities must comply strictly with notification and control requirements under the Basel Convention.

Compliance may be achieved by conducting recycling activities—such as direct recycling by manufacturers or importers with existing appropriate environmental permits or through third parties such as licensed recyclers or qualified organizations authorized to take responsibility for recycling—or by making a financial contribution to the Vietnam Environmental Protection Fund (VEPF).

Information on recycling entities and authorized organizations responsible for recycling will be published by the Ministry of Agriculture and Environment on the National EPR Information System, details of which are further specified in Decree 110.

Manufacturers and importers must, on an annual basis, register recycling plans or declare financial contributions by April 1 for products and packaging placed on the market in the preceding year. Entities opting for financial contributions must complete payment to the VEPF by April 20. To facilitate the contribution value, the recycling cost norms (Fs) for each product and type of packaging are issued in other legal documents. Manufacturers and importers may apply the formula in Decree 110 to calculate the contribution value to the VEPF.

In cases where manufacturers have proactively established packaging recovery and reuse systems with a high recovery rate, the system may help to waive such recycling responsibility.

Waste Treatment Responsibilities

For six specific groups of products and packaging, instead of the recycling responsibility mentioned above, waste treatment responsibilities (via payment to the VEPF) will be imposed.

Decree 110 lists the relevant financial contribution rates to support waste treatment activities. For example, for each plastic bottle or plastic box (with a size of less than 500 ml) of finished pesticides, an amount of VND 50 (about USD 0.002) will be imposed as payment to the VEPF.

Waste treatment contribution rates will be adjusted every five years, with each adjustment capped at 15% of the rate applied in the previous period. The first adjustment is expected in 2031. Manufacturers and importers must declare waste treatment contributions annually by April 1 via the National EPR Information System and complete payment to the VEPF by April 20.

Outlook

Decree 110 consolidates Vietnam’s EPR regime into a centralized, transparent, and more coherent regulatory framework. It enhances compliance mechanisms for manufacturers and importers while strengthening the capacity of authorities to manage and supervise EPR implementation. The decree also underscores Vietnam’s strong policy commitment to sustainable development, waste reduction, recycling, and efficient resource use.

Businesses operating in Vietnam should review their EPR strategies and internal compliance processes in preparation for the decree’s entry into force on May 25, 2026.

Related Professionals

Industries

Consumer Products

Life Sciences

Practices

Corporate/M&A

Regulatory Affairs

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

March 4, 2021
E-commerce platforms have become some of the most significant marketplaces in Thailand, with millions of daily business transactions and huge numbers of online users. The increasing number of online shops operating on e-commerce platforms requires new techniques to be employed in online IP rights infringement cases. Both the private sector and the government have developed tools to enhance online IP enforcement, including ones using the latest legal technologies and artificial intelligence (AI). Many legal technologies and AI operations are still nascent and typically do not yet offer the best approach for online IP rights enforcement. For example, AI and other technologies available today are still unable to consistently differentiate between original and counterfeit products from the images and information displayed on the e-commerce platforms and the internet. Therefore, some of the most effective measures for online IP enforcement still involve manual online searches by experienced local investigators with deep understanding of the behaviors of local users (both sellers and buyers) and the ability to link relevant information across online platforms. Thailand’s Department of Intellectual Property (DIP), as the governmental office responsible for IP-related matters in Thailand, has initiated its new Memorandum of Understanding on the Protection of Intellectual Property Rights on the Internet. This memorandum of understanding (MOU) does not create additional rights for IP owners, but acts as a mechanism to gather all the relevant stakeholders to address issues related to online IP infringement in a unified, mutually agreeable manner. The signatories of the MOU fall into four categories: Governmental authorities: DIP, Department of Business Development, and Department of International Trade Promotion; E-commerce platform operators: Lazada, Shopee, and JD Central (the most popular e-commerce platforms in Thailand); IP rights holders: Particularly including trademark owners facing ongoing counterfeiting problems in Thailand; and Law firms. Although the MOU is not
Read More
March 4, 2021
Vietnam has become a big player in the global fashion industry. Garments made in Vietnam now appear all over the world, especially in the U.S. and the EU. In this value chain, however, Vietnamese companies usually play the role of garment processors, fulfilling the orders of big brands for immediate export purposes. While the goods bearing the registered marks are made in Vietnam by local companies, the brand owners are often overseas or global corporations. As a brand owner can lose protection of its mark in Vietnam due to non-use, this situation leads to the question of what constitutes “use” of a mark when the mark-bearing goods are processed for export only, and not sold in the Vietnam market. Article 124.5 of Vietnam’s IP Law provides that: Use of a mark means the performance of the following acts: Affixing the protected mark on goods, packaging, business facilities, means of service provision, or transaction documents in business activities; Circulating, offering, advertising, or stocking for sale goods bearing the protected mark; Importing goods or services bearing the protected mark. At first glance, the above provision seems quite clear. While importing goods appears on the list, exporting goods is conspicuously absent, and therefore it is not an act of use. However, it is also clear that for the purpose of exporting, a product should go through a manufacturing or processing stage in which the mark will be physically affixed to the product or its packaging. For fashion goods, this could be in the form of a removable tag or package, a tag sewn onto the item, or a fundamental part of the garment’s design (such as a T-shirt emblazoned with a brand name, or a shoe featuring a distinctive logo). Then, the question becomes whether this act of affixing the mark on
Read More
March 4, 2021
Myanmar, which is now more than halfway through the scheduled soft opening of its Intellectual Property Department (IPD) under the country’s New Trademark Law, is well on its way to the full realization of its plans for a modernized IP system operating on par with international standards. As the first of four IP-related laws passed in 2019, the ongoing implementation of the Trademark Law affects definitions of trademarks and types of trademark applications. Section 2 of the law defines a “mark” as “either a visible sign or a combination of signs, including one’s own names, alphabet letters, numbers, graphical representations, or compositions of color and tints to distinguish the goods or services of an enterprise from those of another enterprise. Within this scope, trademark, service mark, collective mark and certification mark are also included. The ‘series mark’ consists of a number of these marks, which resemble each other on the material particulars, but may differ in some aspect—for instance, a mark with different color variations. However, there is no specific definition of what makes up a series mark in the Trademark Law itself, and there has also not yet been any clear guidance on the issue. The Trademark Rules, which set the guidelines for the trademark application and registration procedures, are still in the process of being finalized, are expected to include information on the possibility of filing series marks under the soft opening period. On December 29 2020, the IPD held a workshop to clarify various issues, and informed attendees that applications containing more than one trademark in a single application are prohibited under the new system. However, this seemed to contradict the Ministry of Commerce’s Order No. 63/2020, which had declared that the refiling of old marks under the soft opening period of the new Trademark Law
Read More
March 2, 2021
The cannabis plant has fascinated many civilizations, societies, and individuals through the centuries with its unique properties, and many have learned how to benefit from these, finding a variety of therapeutic and industrial uses of the plant that, in turn, enhanced domestic economies worldwide. In Thailand, cannabis plants and their derivatives have been used since ancient times as treatment for many diseases, and the plant forms a key ingredient in many Thai traditional medicinal remedies. However, over the past few decades, cannabis usage was seen to change in a way that became incrementally more abusive, resulting in outright prohibition in almost all countries. Thailand was no exception, and in 1979 the Thai government officially enacted the Narcotics Act forbidding the use of cannabis and listing cannabis plants and their derivatives—most notably marijuana (cannabis with psychoactive properties) and hemp (cannabis with limited or no psychoactive properties)—as category 5 narcotics (i.e., prohibited substances). Despite these restrictions, many Thais continued to use cannabis illegally, and some urged the government to legalize personal and commercial use of cannabis plants and their derivatives. Eventually, some in the Thai government agreed that it was time to consider steps toward legalization, As a result, the government has been taking action to delist cannabis plants from the list of prohibited narcotics since 2018, when a regulation allowed the cultivation of hemp for industrial and non-commercial purposes, such as household cooking and research and development. The next significant step came in February 2019, when the Narcotics Act (No. 7) was amended, legalizing medical marijuana within certain limitations. In national elections the following month, the Bhumjaithai political party, whose election campaign included a pledge to decriminalize and legalize cannabis plants, won substantial support in parts of the country and chose to join the coalition government, with the Bhumjaithai party
Read More