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

January 24, 2025

Draft Guidance on Vietnam’s New Data Law Open for Public Consultation

Following Vietnam’s adoption of the new Law on Data (“Data Law”) on November 30, 2024, there remained uncertainty as to what impact the new framework would have on businesses in Vietnam and abroad. The government has now released a package of four draft legal documents aimed at guiding the implementation of the Data Law: (1) a decree on the National Data Development Fund (“NDDF Decree”), (2) a decree related to regulations on scientific, technological, and innovation activities and data products and services (“Decree on Specific Activities”), (3) a decree detailing a number of articles and measures to implement the Data Law (“Implementation Decree”), and (4) a decision on the lists of important data and core data. This article will provide an overview of the draft legislation.

1. NDDF Decree

The draft NDDF Decree relates to the establishment, management and use of a National Data Development Fund (“NDDF”), which is a non-profit and non-budgetary state financial fund established and managed by the Minister of the Ministry of Public Security (MPS). The NDDF has legal personality and is fully state owned, operating similarly to a single-member limited liability company. Its main objectives are to support, promote, and invest in artificial intelligence (AI), the Internet of Things (IoT), and other new technologies and innovation.

The NDDF may lend to, invest in, or otherwise support eligible organizations. The draft NDDF Decree also proposes a series of regulations on donations to the NDDF and from the NDDF (through expense support), the lending activities of the NDDF to commercial banks, which will in turn lend to eligible organizations, the investment activities in data products and services innovative start-ups, and other kinds of support.

The government commits to provide VND 1 trillion (approx. USD 40 million) to the NDDF, evidencing the importance the government places on fostering a thriving ecosystem for data product and service development, and its wish to position Vietnam as a center of innovation. However, the NDDF also intends to rely on donations. It remains to be seen whether the NDDF will operate effectively to boost the technology and data-related developments.

2. Decree on Specific Activities

The Decree on Specific Activities focuses on two main matters: regulations related to data products and services, and the creation of a regulatory sandbox to foster innovation.

Data Products and Services

The chapter on data intermediary products and services of the draft Data Law had been stripped down before enactment. The details are now prescribed in this draft decree under Chapter III, covering (i) data intermediary products and services, (ii) data analysis and aggregation services, and (iii) data marketplaces.

Data intermediary activities have now been clarified and include, among others, activities of representing data subjects and data owners to connect, share, exchange, and access data with service users; data management services; data cooperation and sharing services; etc.

Providers of data intermediary products and services between the service users and the state agencies must be fully registered and licensed, while other service providers can request the MPS to appraise them to unlock the same benefits as enterprises operating in high-tech, innovative, creative start-ups and the digital technology industry.

Further, the draft Decree on Specific Activities creates new personal data protection obligations for providers of data intermediary products and services, while personal data is not the main object of the Data Law. Among the new requirements, the obligation to limit the transfer of personal data abroad and ensure that the standard of protection is equivalent to the standard required by relevant laws has been inserted. As the government is currently developing the Personal Data Protection Law (more details here), it is unclear why it is also inserting such provision under the Data Law framework.

Businesses engaged in data intermediary products and services or data analysis and aggregation will need to take into account the personnel requirements that are reinserted in the draft Decree on Specific Activities. The head of the organization must be a Vietnamese citizen and permanent resident, with a university degree, who has directly managed a large scale data center and has at least three years of experience related to data management. This poses a significant issue for industry players, considering talent is scarce on the global scene, and in Vietnam. Further, the requirement for a minimum charter capital has been replaced by a mandatory deposit in a commercial bank operating in Vietnam of VND 5 billion (approx. USD 200,000). It is still unclear whether the cross-border provision of such products and services is possible and whether foreign businesses would be subject to the same requirements. The same requirements will apply to data marketplace service providers, but this is likely to pose lesser problems considering this business activity is restricted to non-business units or state-owned enterprises.

Data analysis and aggregation services are now categorized into four levels depending on the level of human supervision and the role of the products and services in the decision-making process. Licensing requirements will apply to automated decision-making, with or without human supervision, and to products and services using data from national databases. Here again, to unlock incentives, an organization that is not subject to the licensing requirements can request the MPS to conduct an appraisal. Biannual or annual reports on service provision must be sent to the management agency, based on a statutory form.

Data marketplace service providers include providers of data auction services, but also services to provide an environment for data trading and exchange and data-related product and services, and other services related to bidding, offering, introducing, representing, supporting and other activities related to data trading. Such data marketplace service providers must ensure that the channels to receive information and the use of the services are continuous 24/7, and publicly display service charges, prices, terms of use, and applicable conditions. They must also report biannually or annually to the management agency. All data products on the data marketplace must be authenticated with data origins. Organizations and individuals are responsible for the contents they post on data marketplaces and cannot auction at a price lower than the input fee for data products and services, ensuring fair competition. It is still unclear how private organizations will be able to leverage their data with these new marketplaces.

Regulatory Sandbox

Th draft Decree on Specific Activities also suggests the establishment of the necessary regulatory framework for a sandbox for research and application of science, technology, and innovation in the construction, development, protection, administration, processing and use of data as foreshadowed by Article 24.4 of the Data Law. This sandbox would be created to promote research and create a testing environment to assess the risks, costs and benefits of innovative products and services while limiting the risk to users of such products and services.

Participating in the sandbox is subject to being granted a certificate of testing activities – details of the application procedure being further described in the draft decree. The right to participate in the sandbox does not equal the right to provide the innovative products and services on the market. For any organization that is not allowed to participate in the sandbox, they are still encouraged to innovate but must do so within the applicable regulations at the time.

The draft Decree on Specific Activities sets out the obligations and the rights of the participating organizations, but also creates exemptions from liability with the aim to encourage innovation and creativity. The Ministry of Science and Technology is notably tasked to formulate detailed regulations on such exceptions, and other mechanisms and policies to foster innovation in Vietnam.

The government’s intention appears to be giving priority to innovative solutions in AI, cloud computing, blockchain, data communication, IoT, big data and other modern technologies. The draft decree notably suggests incentives to attract talent and FDI in these sectors.

3. Implementation Decree

The draft Implementation Decree provides clarification on many outstanding issues pursuant to the Data Law, notably (i) the mandatory provision of data to state agencies upon request, (ii) the cross-border transfer of data, and (iii) data protection measures.

Mandatory Provision of Data to State Agencies

The procedure applicable to the provision of data to state agencies upon request has been clarified to a certain extent. The draft Implementation Decree sets out that ministers, heads of ministerial level agencies, and presidents of provincial-level People’s Committees are competent to request data from organizations, ensuring such requests are emanating from a high-level rank. Such requests must be made in writing, unless it is impossible, and must specify the data requested, the purpose, the processing period, the legal basis for the request, the time limit to provide the data and the sanction for not providing such data. The data handover must be recorded in minutes. However, the organization receiving the request has the right to request amendment or withdrawal of the request. The extent of the data that can be requested has not been further limited or clarified, but the requesting agencies must respect the lawful purpose of the data manager and data owner and must protect business secrets and personal secrets.

Cross-Border Transfer of Data

With an aim to clarify what is included in the definition of “core” and “important” data, the Implementation Decree provides criteria to determine the category of the data, based on its degree of impact on a specific field, group, or region that may have an impact on national defense, security, foreign affairs, macroeconomics, social stability, or public health and safety (excluding trade secrets).

“Core data” will notably comprise some sensitive governmental information like guidelines and policies of the Vietnamese Communist Party and the state on domestic and external relations; strategies and plans to protect the fatherland; organization and operations of the armed forces; data on plans for collection, exchange, and issuance of money; data on natural resources and the environment, and newly discovered microbial strains and varieties related to human health and life; processes to produce medicinal herbs and rare biological drugs; and data on inspection, examination, denunciation and prevention of corruption.

“Important data” will notably comprise information that may affect national security, the Vietnamese Communist Party, the state and the socialist regime, major overseas projects, safety of overseas energy sources, security of international cooperation, infrastructure of important economy sectors; and the life, health, honor, dignity, property, and legitimate rights of organizations and individuals. The latter being very broad, as further discussed in section (4) regarding the Decision below. Due attention should be paid to the development of the Implementation Decree and the Decision to ensure that it does not impede the free flow of data, considering Vietnam’s commitment not to restrict data flows under numerous international treaties and agreements.

The transfer of core and important data outside of Vietnam is subject to additional requirements, notably the data owner must conduct a risk assessment and establish an impact assessment dossier. For core data, the transfer can only be made once the “satisfactory assessment results” have been obtained from the MPS or the Ministry of National Defense, as the case may be. For important data, the transfer can be made when the assessment is submitted and the transferor has not received objection from the authorities within the regulated timeline, but the MPS and the Ministry of National Defense can request the data transferor to stop the transfer if the impact assessment is not sufficiently supplemented following such request from the authorities. An important point to note is that the draft Implementation Decree also restricts the disclosure of data domestically by imposing other impact assessment requirements, with stricter regulations being proposed for the sharing of core and important data.

Further, notwithstanding the category of data being transferred abroad, the data transferor must ensure the protection of the legitimate rights and interest of the data subject, national defense and security, and national interests and public interests. It must also enter into an agreement with the recipient, in which mandatory content has finally been clarified.

Data Protection Measures

Additional guidance is also provided on the measures to implement risk management related to data processing with lists of technical and organizational measures being proposed. This has long been requested by the private sector to better understand the expectations of the authorities in terms of data protection. Consequently, core and important data are subject to additional security measures. This multi-layered approach to data protection aligns with international standards and ensures that measures are implemented in accordance with the sensitivity of the related data.

In addition, the draft Implementation Decree provides that, when the data owner needs to transfer data in the context of merger, reorganization, or bankruptcy, such data owner needs to prepare a plan for such transfer and to notify impacted users via phone call, text message, email, or notice.

It is worth noting that many of the measures being imposed are inspired by best practices in personal data protection (e.g., record of processing activities, access controls, training of employees, proper deletion and destruction procedures, etc.). Although one would understand why such measures would be relevant in the case of core and important data, the requirements would be very burdensome for “ordinary” data processing. The scope of application of the Data Law (and its future guiding decrees) will cover any organization participating in or related to digital data activities. As digital data is simply data in digital form, the application scope is very broad, and the obligations far-reaching.

4. Decision on Lists of Important Data and Core Data

The draft decision lists out types of important data and core data for the implementation of the Data Law, especially the regulations on cross-border data transfer discussed above. There are 24 types of core data and 18 types of important mentioned in the decision. Enterprises will need to pay special attention to the following types of important data, among others, to ensure future compliance:

  • Data in the field of healthcare (e.g., data on the health records and biometrics of Vietnamese citizens, if 10,000 or more people are involved);
  • Data in the field of finance and budget (e.g., data on insurance contracts, insurance amounts, insurance claim records, and insurance claim amounts for 10,000 or more customers);
  • Data in the field of information and communication (e.g., data that can be used for social mobilization, internet behavior data of more than 100,000 users, etc.);
  • Basic personal data of 1 million or more people, other sensitive personal data of 10,000 or more people.

Next Steps

The draft decrees are open for public consultation until March 17, 2025, while the timeline is unclear for the draft decision. This might be the last opportunity for the private sector to advocate for a more business-friendly regulatory framework, as the Data Law is entering into force on July 1, 2025, and the guiding decrees and decision are expected to follow the same timeline.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

March 5, 2026
Thailand’s Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has filed a criminal complaint against a licensed digital asset broker, its overseas trading platform, and its executives for allegedly operating an unlicensed digital asset exchange targeting Thai customers. The case marks an escalation in the SEC’s enforcement efforts against unlicensed offshore platforms that attempt to serve Thai users through local licensed entities. Criminal Complaint On February 20, 2026, the SEC filed a criminal complaint with the Economic Crime Suppression Division against a local licensed digital asset broker, its overseas global trading platform, and its executives. The SEC alleges that the parties violated the Digital Asset Business Emergency Decree B.E. 2561 (2018) by cooperatively operating a digital asset exchange business on a cross-border basis since 2023 without the required SEC license. According to the SEC, the local broker promoted the overseas platform’s services to the public through Thai-language posts on social media channels, with services available exclusively to customers residing in Thailand. Access to the global platform was provided through the local broker’s website and mobile application. Customers who registered for the local broker’s services were automatically granted access to the global platform without having to undergo a separate identity verification process. The SEC also found that the local broker provided back-office system support services to the global platform. The SEC considers these activities to constitute joint operation of an unlicensed digital asset exchange. The former executives of the local broker are being held liable as the responsible persons during the relevant period. The SEC emphasized that the complaint initiates the criminal process, and the decision to prosecute or convict the accused parties will ultimately be made by law enforcement authorities and the criminal courts. Platform Blocking The SEC has also coordinated with the Ministry of Digital Economy and Society to block public
February 27, 2026
The Bank of Thailand (BOT) has officially implemented a new regulatory framework supervising systemically important retail payment systems (SIRPS), effective February 21, 2026, with PromptPay being the first payment system designated as a SIRPS. Under this new set of regulations, the BOT may designate payment systems under the Payment Systems Act B.E. 2560 (2017) as SIRPSs based on quantitative and qualitative assessments. Once a system is designated as a SIRPS, the operator becomes subject to expanded supervisory obligations beyond the general requirements of the Payment Systems Act. Enhanced Supervisory Requirements SIRPS operators must comply with a heightened supervisory regime across three key areas, outlined below. 1. Governance SIRPS operators must maintain robust and transparent governance structures, including: Balanced board composition, with at least one-third of the board comprising independent directors who represent stakeholders in the system (such as payment service providers, consumers, and experts). Independent directors may serve for no more than two consecutive terms. Subcommittees to assist the board in overseeing compliance, policy implementation, and operational strategy. Clear separation between executives responsible for risk and information security and those overseeing day-to-day business operations. Risk Management and System SecuritySIRPS operators must implement comprehensive risk management frameworks, including: Clear service agreements between the SIRPS operator and its direct participants (payment service providers who connect directly to the SIRPS), defining roles and responsibilities among stakeholders. These agreements must include obligations for direct SIRPS participants to supervise any indirect participants they onboard to ensure compliance with service agreements and business rules. A business continuity plan covering both IT and non-IT aspects, with annual review. The SIRPS must target service availability comparable to international payment infrastructures, including the ability to recover operations within two hours of a disruption and to maintain scalable operational capacity. Tools and controls to monitor and manage material or
February 26, 2026
Thailand is preparing to offer new tools for intellectual property enforcement as the Electronic Transactions Development Agency (ETDA) recently released for public consultation a draft notification requiring social media platforms to verify user identities and conduct know-your-customer (KYC) checks on advertisers. The draft Notification of the Electronic Transactions Commission on Measures to Prevent Technological Crimes for Social Media Service Providers, which is to be issued under the Emergency Decree on Measures for the Prevention and Suppression of Technological Crimes B.E. 2566 (2023), as amended in 2025, primarily aims to combat online fraud and technology-related crimes. However, its new obligations also provide IP owners with valuable tools to identify anonymous infringers. Key Regulatory Mandates The draft notification imposes several verification requirements on social media platforms operating in Thailand. These requirements also strengthen IP rights holders’ ability to identify anonymous infringers, as platforms must: Verify user identities through registered phone numbers and link all accounts to verifiable identities. Conduct KYC checks on advertisers, including individuals, companies, and any third-party payers. Perform heightened identity checks for high-risk or repeat offenders before publishing advertisements. Promptly remove content flagged by the Anti-Technology Crime Division and prescreen advertisements for prohibited or high-risk content. How IP Owners Can Use This Notification for Enforcement The phone number–based verification requirement enables IP owners to work more effectively with enforcement authorities in tracing individuals or entities responsible for infringing content. The comprehensive advertiser KYC obligations, including mandatory disclosure of third-party payment sources, create a clear audit trail even when bad actors attempt to obscure their identity through intermediaries or shell accounts. This traceability is essential for pursuing damages and dismantling organized counterfeit operations. The ETDA is now considering adjustments to the draft notification after receiving comments during the public consultation period, which ended on February 2, 2026. Following finalization
February 23, 2026
On February 17, 2026, Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC) released its draft Guidelines on Personal Data Protection in the Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence. The draft guidelines, which translate data controller and data processor compliance obligations under the Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA) into measures tailored to AI development and deployment, are open for public comment until February 25, 2026. At a public hearing session on the draft guidelines held on February 19, the PDPC emphasized that its approach to AI is not to hinder innovation but to develop practical guidance supporting safe deployment while ensuring data protection. Although the guidelines are not legally binding, they indicate the regulator’s expectations and the likely direction of interpretation and enforcement. Scope of Application and Role of Stakeholders The guidelines will apply to all data controllers and data processors in Thailand, and to overseas data controllers and data processors whose data processing falls within the extraterritorial scope of the PDPA. The draft guidelines distinguish the roles of parties involved in AI deployment. Users of AI who determine the purpose of use and designate the input data, and retain outputs generated by the AI, are considered data controllers. In contrast, AI model providers or system integrators that process personal data under the instructions of the data controller are generally regarded as data processors. However, if an AI model provider utilizes user data for its own purposes, such as model fine-tuning or training, it may instead be classified as a data controller. Key Obligations for AI Data Collection and Use The basic principles of data processing under the PDPA must be maintained throughout the AI implementation lifecycle, from design to decommissioning, emphasizing accountability and privacy-by-design principles. The draft guidelines also stipulate the following: Data processing agreements (DPAs) should include model training prohibitions,