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, 2024

IAPP Global Legislative Predictions 2024 – Vietnam

Subscribe to Updates
International Association of Privacy Professionals

On 17 April 2023, the Vietnamese government issued the Personal Data Protection Decree, which is set to take effect 1 July 2023 without any transitional period. The PDPD is considered to be the first comprehensive document on data protection in Vietnam. Accordingly, it provides detailed regulations on the rights of data subjects, consent requirements and requirements for data processing impact assessments and outbound transfer impact assessments.

In 2024, the adoption of the Law on the Protection of Consumer Rights and the Law on Electronic Transactions will play a vital role regarding data protection. The LPCR will require traders to obtain consent to collect consumer data and establish a mechanism enabling consumers to select the information they consent to traders collecting. Consumers must also be allowed to express consent in a suitable form. For special processing purposes — such as sharing, disclosure, or transfer of personal data to third parties, and use of personal data to send advertisements and to introduce products — the LPCR requires a mechanism which enables data subjects to clearly opt in to give, or not give, their consent. This requirement is similar to procedures currently required for regulated stakeholders under the PDPD. In the same vein, the LET strictly forbids the acts of trading data to protect Vietnamese personal data.

The government is anticipated to provide more details relating to data privacy guidelines after the issuance of the Draft Law on Telecommunications. Accordingly, the draft requires enterprises to provide the requisite information — such as service user’s name and address, number and location of transmitting or receiving servers, call times, IP address and other personal information supplied by the service user when entering a contract — to the relevant authority, as per a request which is made in accordance with the law.

Amendments to Decree 72/2013/ND-CP on the management, provision and use of internet services will be adopted in 2024. A new draft provision that will be applicable to both onshore and regulated cross-border social network service providers is the requirement to authenticate social network user accounts via their mobile phone numbers in Vietnam. This regulation was proposed by the Ministry of Information and Communications in response to the growing prevalence of cybercrime and aims to enhance state management of social networks and protect personal data, while also increasing user awareness and responsibility around uploading content on the internet.

The Draft Sanction Decree is expected to be issued at the end of 2023 and adopted in 2024. Following the adoption of the PDPD, this will be a supplemental tool used to deal with PDPD violations. Violations, depending on severity, may result in warnings, discipline or administrative penalties or criminal prosecution.

Simultaneously, the Ministry of Public Security established a National Portal on Personal Data Protection to receive reports concerning PDPD violations. Once the portal officially launches, companies are likely to be more vulnerable to inspections, as it will enable data subjects — including company employees or clients — to report noncompliance or personal data breaches more easily.

Therefore, 2023 was a busy year, and 2024 will no doubt be the same.

 

Athistha (Nop) Chitranukroh and Phuc Huu Nguyen provided this update as part of the “IAPP Global Legislative Predictions 2024” from the International Association of Privacy Professionals. Tilleke & Gibbins also provided the Thailand update.

Related Professionals

Industries

Technology

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

June 23, 2026
On May 26, 2026, Thailand’s Department of Land Transport (DLT) published for public consultation a draft amendment to the Ministerial Regulation on Electronic Ride-Hailing Vehicles that would, for the first time, allow juristic persons (legal entities) to register vehicles as electronic ride-hailing cars—a right that currently belongs exclusively to natural persons, limited to one person per one vehicle. If finalized in its current form, the regulation would significantly expand the supply side of Thailand’s ride-hailing market by enabling corporate fleet operators to enter the space. The public comment period is open through June 24, 2026. Key Principles Under the Draft Regulation Under the proposed amendment, juristic persons that maintain a fleet of at least 50 vehicles will be permitted to register vehicles as electronic ride-hailing cars. This represents a fundamental shift from the current framework, which restricts registration to individual natural persons on a one-person-one-car basis. Vehicle Specifications Corporate-owned ride-hailing vehicles must meet the following requirements: Be brand new from the factory, or no more than two years old from first registration with no more than 20,000 km of use. Not be a vehicle that has been reconstructed or repaired after involvement in a serious accident affecting safety—a standard consistent with public transport vehicles (RorYor. 6). Be classified as small, medium, or large in accordance with ministerial or director-general specifications. The vehicles may be equipped with safety devices such as interior or exterior cameras (video/photo recording) and can retain the original factory color of the vehicle body (no mandatory color change is required). License Plates Corporate ride-hailing vehicles will use license plates of the same size, characteristics, and color as those for private passenger vehicles not exceeding seven seats (RorYor. 1), rather than public transport plates. Potential Impact The government has stated that the regulation is intended to: Promote
Read More
June 23, 2026
On May 14, 2026, Thailand published a ministerial regulation in the Government Gazette to prescribe measures for prevention and suppression of technology crimes. The regulation creates a comprehensive procedural framework for returning money and digital assets to victims of technology crimes. It will take effect 90 days after publication (in mid-August 2026), giving affected entities a limited window to prepare. Mandatory Reporting Obligations for Financial Institutions When a deposit account, e-money account, or digital asset wallet is frozen in connection with a technology crime, the relevant financial institution or business operator must report transaction data to the Anti-Money Laundering Office (AMLO) via AMLO’s designated electronic system. Required data elements include account numbers (sender and receiver), names, identification or passport numbers, legal entity registration numbers, phone numbers, remaining balance, damage amount, transaction reference numbers, and the bank case ID. Institutions that already share data through the information-sharing system under the emergency decree are deemed to have satisfied this reporting obligation, creating an incentive for platform participation. When the Royal Thai Police or the Department of Special Investigation seize or freeze assets related to technology crimes, they must provide AMLO with investigation reports, complaint evidence, money-trail data, and account statements. Notification and Claims Process Once the AMLO secretary-general approves verified reports of a technology crime, the account information of persons connected to the crime will be published in the Government Gazette, triggering a 90-day window for victims to file claims and for related persons to file objections. Officers will also publish details on AMLO’s electronic media and send registered mail to identified victims, which will be deemed received after 7 days domestically or 15 days internationally. Victims have 90 days from the date the crime is published in the Government Gazette to file claims through AMLO’s electronic system. Claims must include
Read More
June 15, 2026
The surge in AI development has led to a desperate demand for large, high-quality training data. However, real-world data can be expensive to collect, difficult to access, and often subject to strict privacy and regulatory constraints. Synthetic data, which consists of artificially generated records that replicate the statistical properties of real-world data without reproducing specific individuals’ information, provides an appealing solution by generating artificial datasets at scale without relying on identifiable personal information. It combines speed, cost efficiency, and regulatory compliance, making it a sensible alternative for organizations seeking to reduce risks while maintaining data utility. When properly anonymized, synthetic datasets may fall outside the scope of laws such as the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) or Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA), reducing compliance burdens while still supporting high-quality model training. However, relying on synthetic data without rigorous legal due diligence could be a strategic mistake. It replaces one set of known risks (scraping, direct privacy liability) with a new set of complex liabilities. The narrative that synthetic data is a “silver bullet” for privacy and IP compliance is dangerous and could be misleading. While synthetic data addresses data scarcity, it also introduces new legal uncertainties. Legal counsel should anticipate downstream risks arising from compromised data sources. Models trained on unlawfully obtained data may need to be decommissioned, even if their outputs appear lawful. What is synthetic data? Synthetic data refers to artificially generated information created using AI techniques such as deep learning and generative models. Instead of copying real records, it reproduces the statistical patterns and relationships found in the original dataset. Synthetic data generally falls into three categories: Fully synthetic data – Entirely new data points generated from learned patterns. The model studies the structure of the original data and produces records that resemble real-world
Read More
June 11, 2026
Thailand’s Electronic Transactions Development Agency (ETDA) has released a revised draft Electronic Transactions Act (ETA) for public hearing from May 12, 2026, to June 15, 2026. This is not merely an amendment to certain provisions of the current ETA, but a comprehensive redrafting of the entire act. The revised draft ETA introduces several significant changes from the current framework, with practical implications for businesses operating in Thailand. Unified Coverage of Public and Private Sectors The current law segregates government transactions into a separate chapter with distinct rules. The draft ETA eliminates this division, defining “transaction” to encompass civil and commercial juristic acts as well as administrative procedures, administrative contracts, and other acts of government agencies. Enhanced E-Signature Definition The definition of “electronic signature” is broadened to expressly include biometric data and refocused on identifying the signatory and demonstrating intent regarding the content of the electronic data. Shift in Burden of Proof When a party challenges the reliability of electronic data created using a “trusted electronic method” or a method prescribed by the ETDA, the burden of proof and the cost of proving unreliability shifts to the challenger. Introduction of New Digital Method Concepts The draft ETA introduces several new digital method concepts that are not currently recognized under the existing ETA framework. These include: Electronic timestamping (e-timestamp) Electronic registered delivery Electronic company seals Electronic stamp duty compliance Electronic identity authentication and verification Electronic transferable records (electronic bills of lading, promissory notes, and similar negotiable instruments) Recognition of Automated Systems and Electronic Contracting The draft ETA expressly recognizes the legal validity and enforceability of contracts formed through automated systems, including contracts concluded entirely between automated systems or between an automated system and a person. A party may not deny the binding effect of such contracts solely because no human review
Read More