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​ 

July 10, 2025
For companies and individuals doing business in Vietnam, a common question is whether electronic signatures (e-signatures) are legally recognized under Vietnamese law. This matter is governed by Law No. 20/2023/QH15 on Electronic Transactions issued on June 22, 2023 (ETL 2023) and its guiding legal documents such as Decree No. 23/2025/ND-CP dated February 21, 2025, and Circular 06/2024/TT-BTTTT dated July 1, 2024 (Circular 06). Recognition of Validity of E-signatures in Vietnam As a general principle, the ETL 2023 confirms that an e-signature cannot be denied legal validity solely due to its electronic form. The law categorizes e-signatures into three types: Type 1: Specialized e-signatures for organizations Type 2: Public digital signatures for individuals and organizations Type 3: Specialized digital signatures for government agencies Among these types, only secure specialized e-signatures (a secure e-signature of type 1) and digital signatures (type 2) are explicitly granted the same legal validity as handwritten (wet) signatures. This distinction is particularly important in legal disputes and for transactions with government agencies. (For more details, please refer to our previous article.) Domestic e-signatures A domestic organization can choose to use secure specialized e-signatures (type 1) and/or digital signatures (type 2) while a Vietnam-based individual can choose digital signatures (type 2) for their transactions—particularly for those involving government agencies and transactions of high value and complexity which require stronger legal protection. Specialized e-signatures (type 1) can be created by the organizations themselves, and additionally must be “secure” to be explicitly recognized as having the same legal validity as handwritten signatures. For clarity, “secure” specialized e-signatures are those certified (granted a safety certificate) by the Ministry of Science and Technology (MST). (This was formerly the responsibility of the Ministry of Information and Communications, which was merged with MST under Vietnam’s 2025 administrative restructuring.) Digital signatures (type 2) are
July 9, 2025
On June 16, 2025, the National Assembly of Vietnam adopted Law No. 75/2025/QH15 amending and supplementing a number of articles of the 2012 Advertising Law, with an effective date of January 1, 2026. The amended Advertising Law was enacted to further refine the legal framework for advertising activities in the modern era. Online Advertising Under the amended Advertising Law, “online advertising” is defined to encompass not only advertising on electronic newspapers and electronic information pages (as provided under the 2012 Advertising Law) but also advertising on other electronic venues, including social media, online applications, and digital platforms with internet connection. The amended Advertising Law also imposes new requirements for online advertising, including: Identification signs: Advertisements must have clear identifiable signs in numbers, letters, symbols, images, or sounds to distinguish them from non-advertising content. Control features: For advertisements not in fixed areas, there must be easily recognizable features and icons that allow recipients to turn off the advertisement, notify the service provider of violating advertising content, and refuse to view inappropriate advertising content. Linked content: Content in the links embedded in advertisements must comply with the law. Advertising service providers and publishers must have measures to check and monitor the linked content. Advertising on social media: Organizations and enterprises providing social media services must offer users features to distinguish advertising content from other content. Signage for sponsored content: When advertising, users of social media services must use signs to differentiate advertising or sponsored content from other content they provide. In response to the above requirements for online advertising, the amended Advertising Law sets out obligations of advertisers, advertising service providers, advertising publishers, and advertising conveyors in relation to online advertising. Among these, it is notably the responsibility of individuals and organizations engaging in online advertising to prevent and remove violating
July 1, 2025
Now halfway through 2025, Thailand continues to advance in the realm of data privacy, with the ambitious goal of achieving zero data breaches. The Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC), an independent government body established by the Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA), is taking a more proactive approach, having published several rulings and orders to enhance data protection measures and clarify compliance expectations for businesses. Here is a look back at Thailand’s data privacy developments in the first half of the year. Strengthening Law Enforcement and New Guidance for Compliance Enforcement of existing data protection laws and regulations has taken a step forward this year. Some of the specific initiatives include: Increased enforcement by the PDPC. A key trend to watch from the first half of 2025 is the PDPC’s active enforcement of the PDPA as it intensifies oversight through compliance orders and public warnings against noncompliant organizations while ramping up efforts to prevent and halt the illegal trading of personal data by actively monitoring emerging societal issues. Call center scams and cyber fraud control. Thailand published an amendment to the Emergency Decree on Measures for the Prevention and Suppression of Technological Crimes to strengthen measures against technological crimes, particularly targeting call center scams and cyber fraud. Orders from the Expert Committee. Several orders issued by the Expert Committee under the PDPA were announced in the first half of this year. These include directives for data controllers to take corrective actions to comply with the PDPA, as well as initiatives to raise awareness of data privacy within organizations, reflecting the regulator’s focus on promoting organizational awareness and compliance. A guideline report summarizing the Expert Committee’s decisions and orders was also published to serve as a reference for compliance. Public issue monitoring. The PDPC has been taking a more proactive approach
June 27, 2025
Three American giants are actively protecting their intellectual property rights against generative AI, as two legal battles commence on both sides of the Atlantic. In the UK, Seattle-based media company Getty Images accuses UK-based Stability AI of multiple IP infringements. In the US, The Walt Disney Company and Universal Studios are teaming up against Midjourney, an AI startup, with their main ground being copyright infringement. Both cases are centered around questions legal minds have been posing since the introduction of generative AI: Is the output of generative AI an infringement? And who is ultimately responsible for the output, the platform or the user? Getty Images v. Stability AI Getty initially filed a claim in the High Court in 2023, which resulted in Stability applying for reverse summary judgment on the grounds that Getty had no real prospect of success, arguing that their operations took place outside the UK. However, the High Court judge hearing the case decided that the claims brought by Getty did have a real prospect of succeeding in court. Despite this, Stability saw a small victory when the court ruled that the representative action brought by Getty would not succeed due to the difficulties in identifying who qualified for the class. The proposed class was comprised of 50,000 rightsholders who alleged their rights were also infringed. Stability was successful in arguing that identifying these individuals would be challenging due to the unclear definition of the class. This current trial is centered around four main grounds: Copyright infringement. Getty accuses Stability of using content that Getty owns or has an exclusive license for when training their model, Stable Diffusion, resulting in the generated output containing substantial parts of that content. Getty is also alleging secondary copyright infringement, arguing that Stability is importing an article into the UK