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

December 15, 2023

Significant Aspects of Vietnam’s New Law on E-Transactions

Vietnam’s new Law on Electronic Transactions No. 20/2023/QH15 (LOET 2023) was promulgated by the National Assembly on June 22, 2023, and will replace the existing Law on Electronic Transactions No. 51/2005/QH11 (LOET 2005) when it enters into effect on July 1, 2024. The LOET 2023 is aimed at facilitating transactions carried out in an electronic environment in all sectors. Derived from the fundamental principles of the LOET 2005, the LOET 2023 is similarly considered a framework law, developed based on the Model Law on E-Commerce of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL). The main points of interest of the LOET 2023 are summarized below.

1. Scope of Application

Unlike the LOET 2005, which explicitly excludes certain areas such as the issuance of certificates of land use rights and birth certificates from the scope of application, the LOET 2023 covers all areas without exception. However, the LOET 2023 will still not interfere with the regulations of substantive laws that stipulate the content, conditions, and forms of transactions in their respective areas (Article 1.2). The LOET 2023 also provides that it will only be applicable if other laws either allow or remain silent on the electronic execution of transactions; otherwise, if another law specifically does not permit a transaction to be carried out electronically, such law shall apply (Article 1.3). This emphasizes that the applicability of the LOET 2023 depends on the electronic readiness of specific sectors.

2. Enabling E-Transactions in All Sectors

For traditional transactions or contracts to be legally valid, they typically require written documentation, the signatures of the involved parties, and the seals of organizations or companies, if required by substantive laws or common practice. Additionally, certain sectors mandate further steps like notarization or certification, such as in property transactions like house sales or inheritance documentation. The questions then arise: How are these requirements mirrored in the electronic environment, and in the event of a dispute between parties, how can electronic transactions be used to support the parties to facilitate the transaction?

2.1 Data Messages

A data message is information generated, sent, received, and stored by electronic means (Article 3.4). There are two types of data messages under the LOET 2023 (Article 7): (i) data messages in the form of electronic documents, electronic certificates, electronic records, electronic contracts, emails, telegrams, telegraphs, facsimiles, and other electronic data interchange (EDI) forms according to regulations of law; and (2) data messages that are created and generated during transactions or converted from written documents.

The LOET 2023 retains the main content of provisions under the LOET 2005 on the legal validity of data messages and the recognition of the validity of data messages as written documents, as original copies, and as evidence. Regarding the rules for sending and receiving data messages, the LOET 2023 offers more extensive regulations than the LOET 2005, such as new provisions recognizing the representative of a party as the originator of a data message (Articles 14.2(a) and 15.1). Additionally, it addresses situations where a party erroneously inputs information via an automatic information system without the opportunity to rectify the error; in this case, the party making the error is allowed to retract the entered information if it meets stipulated conditions (Article 14.3).

The LOET 2023 also provides for conversion from written documents to data messages and vice versa so that parties can use either option where appropriate or allowed by law (Article 12). Interestingly, a prerequisite for converting written documents into data messages is that the resulting data message must include a distinct indication certifying its conversion from the written document, along with details about the entity or individual making the conversion (Article 12.1(c)). It is unclear whether merely scanning a document into PDF format without additional information about the converter qualifies as a data message converted from a written document. The LOET 2023 leaves it to the government to provide further guidance on conversion issues (Article 12.4).

2.2 Electronic Contracts

An electronic contract (e-contract) is a contract that is made in the form of a data message (Article 3.16). The LOET 2023 generally retains the principles and rules on e-contracts of the LOET 2005, but adds regulations to enable the signing and performance of e-contracts through automatic information systems (Article 34), and empowers line ministries to promulgate regulations on conclusion and execution of e-contracts in their respective fields (Article 34.2).

An interesting note is that when entering into and executing e-contracts, the parties have the right to reach agreements related to those e-contracts on technical requirements, conditions to ensure integrity, and confidentiality (Article 36.2). This means the parties could agree on e-signature technology, e.g., simple or complicated, depending on the nature and free will of parties. However, this principle seems to be weakened in regard to e-signatures of individuals, as discussed below.

2.3 Electronic Signatures and Digital Signatures

An electronic signature (e-signature) is a signature created in the form of electronic data attached to or logically associated with a data message to identify the signatory and certify the signatory’s approval of the data message (Article 3.11). Electronic data is data generated, processed, and stored by electronic means (Article 3.7).

A digital signature is an e-signature using an asymmetric algorithm consisting of a private key and a public key. The private key is used for digitally signing and the public key is used to verify the digital signature. The digital signature ensures the authenticity, integrity, and non-repudiation but does not ensure the secrecy of the data message (Article 3.12). Digital signatures are generally considered more secure than other e-signatures. Digital signatures and digital signature certification services have long and commonly been used in Vietnam (and in the world) in e-transactions.

The LOET 2023 specifies three types of e-signatures:

  • Specialized e-signatures are e-signatures created and used by agencies and organizations for their particular purposes in accordance with their functions and tasks (Article 22.1(a)).
  • Public digital signatures are digital signatures used in public activities (there is no definition of what constitutes “public activities”) and secured by public digital signature certificates (Article 22.1(b)).
  • Specialized digital signatures for official use are digital signatures used in official activities and secured by e-certificates verifying them (Article 22.1(c)). Specialized e-signatures and digital signatures must meet stipulated conditions (Articles 22.2 and 22.3).

The LOET 2023 explicitly recognizes the legal validity of e-signatures by stipulating that their legal validity is not denied merely because they are in electronic form (Article 23.1). A secure specialized e-signature or a digital signature has the same legal validity as the signature of that individual on a written document (Article 23.2). A secure specialized e-signature is one that has been granted a safety certificate by the Ministry of Information and Communications (MIC) (Article 25.2). If an agency or organization uses a specialized e-signature in transactions, or seeks recognition of a secure specialized e-signature, it must register with the MIC to obtain a safety certificate for the secure specialized e-signature (Article 25.3).

Notably, the LOET 2023 lacks clear regulations regarding an individual’s e-signature. Consequently, it remains uncertain whether individuals can use self-created e-signatures in e-transactions. The combination of Article 23.2 and Article 22.1(b) suggests that individuals may be required to use a public digital signature in their e-transactions, which would significantly limit individual choice in selecting suitable technologies and potentially posing a burden on individuals engaging in e-transactions. This could be seen as a regression compared to the LOET 2005, which fully respects the parties’ freedom to choose e-signature technologies tailored to the nature of their transactions.

In addition, the LOET 2023 explicitly states that the use of other electronic confirmation methods that are not recognized as e-signatures for indicating the approval of data messages by signatories must comply with the provisions of other relevant laws (Article 22.4). This seems to exclude electronic verification methods such as one-time passwords (OTP), text messages (SMS), and biometrics, which are commonly used in banking and customs sectors, and defers regulation of such methods for substantive laws in specified sectors to regulate.

2.4 Electronic Seals

While the LOET 2005 has separate provisions on e-signatures for signatures and e-signatures for company seals, the LOET 2023 seems to merge both into a single e-signature requirement. In particular, according to the LOET 2005, where the law requires a document to be signed, such requirement with respect to a data message will be satisfied if the e-signature used to sign such data message meets stipulated conditions of security and authentication (Article 24.1 of the LOET 2005). Where the law requires a document to be affixed with the seal of an entity, such requirement with respect to a data message will be satisfied if the data message is signed with an entity’s secure e-signature which meets stipulated conditions (Article 24.2 of the LOET 2005).

The LOET 2023 does not use the word “seal” but uses “certification” instead. Article 23.3 regulates that if the law stipulates that a document must be certified by an agency or organization, such requirement with respect to a data message will be satisfied if the data message is signed by a secure specialized e-signature or digital signature of that agency or organization. Article 23.2 regulates that a secure specialized e-signature or digital signature has the same legal validity as the signature of that individual on a written document. This suggests that when a company uses its secure specialized e-signature or digital signature, this satisfies both signature and certification requirements, thus, serving both functions as a signature and a company seal at the same time.

2.5 Notarization and Certification

In certain sectors where substantive laws require documents to be notarized or certified, the requirement is fulfilled if the document is notarized according to the regulations of the laws on notarization, or certified according to regulations of the LOET 2023 and the laws on certification (Article 9.2). In other words, unless the laws on notarization explicitly prohibit notarization via electronic means, transactions which require notarization, such as sales contracts for houses, could be notarized electronically according to the rules specified in the laws on notarization.

3. Enabling Cross-Border E-Transactions

The LOET 2005 provides principles for recognition of foreign e-signatures and foreign e-signature certificates (Article 27.1 of LOET 2005). However, to date, guidance on implementation has only been provided under Decree 130/2018/ND-CP, which focuses exclusively on legal recognition for foreign digital signatures, leaving a gap in regulations for other technological aspects of foreign e-signatures. This shortcoming has hampered the advancement of cross-border e-transactions involving Vietnamese entities. The LOET 2023 is expected to deal with this deficiency.

According to the LOET 2023, subjects using recognized foreign e-signatures and recognized foreign e-signature certificates are foreign organizations and individuals, and Vietnamese organizations and individuals who transact with foreign organizations and individuals via electronic means, but whose domestically issued e-signatures and e-signature certificates have not been recognized in the other country (Article 26.3).

Conditions for foreign e-signatures and e-signature certificates to be recognized in Vietnam include (Article 26.2):

  • They must conform to the standards and technical regulations on e-signatures and e-signature certificates stipulated by Vietnamese law, or recognized international standards or international treaties to which Vietnam is a member; and
  • The foreign e-signature certificate is created based on complete and authenticated identification information of the foreign organization or individual.

Article 26.1 of the LOET 2023 also provides conditions for recognizing foreign e-signature certification service providers in Vietnam, which include the requirement of having a representative office in Vietnam (Article 26.1(dd)). It is not explicitly clear whether to be recognized in Vietnam, foreign e-signatures must be associated with foreign e-signature certificates that are issued by foreign e-signature certification service providers recognized in Vietnam. This matter will be guided further by the Minister of the MIC (Article 26.4).

4. Electronic Certificates

Electronic certificates (e-certificates) are licenses, certification papers, certificates, confirmation documents, and other approval documents issued by competent agencies and organizations in the form of electronic data (Article 3.5).

An e-certificate will be legally valid when it meets the following conditions (Article 19.1):

  • It is signed by a digital signature of a competent agency or organization;
  • The information in it can be accessed and used in a complete form; and
  • If the law requires the time relating to the e-certificate, it must be time-stamped

To be recognized and used in Vietnam, an e-certificate issued by a competent foreign agency or organization must be granted consular legalization, unless exempted as per Vietnamese law (Article 19.2).

E-certificates can be transferred if the law permits, but must meet stipulated conditions (Article 20.1). The information system to store and process e-certificates must be ensured to meet at least Level 3 of network information security in accordance with the Law on Network Information Security (Article 21.2).

The LOET 2005 uses the term “e-certificate” but denotes a different meaning, referring to the verification of a signing person or organization, similar to the concept of e-signature certificates under the LOET 2023.

5. Trust Services

Trust services include (i) timestamp services, (ii) data message certification services, and (iii) public digital signature certification services (Article 28.1). Timestamp services are services for attaching time information to data messages (Article 31.1). Data message certification services include services of storing and verifying the integrity of data messages and services of sending and receiving secure data messages (Article 32). Public digital signature certification services are services of certifying digital signatures in public activities (Article 33.1).

Although these trust services are new content compared to the LOET 2005, timestamp services and public digital signature certification services are not new services, and have been regulated under Decree No. 130/2018/ND-CP. The LOET 2023 retains and incorporates certain framework regulations of state management of timestamp services and digital signature services regulated in this decree. In particular, the LOET 2023 provides that these trust services are conditional business services and subject to licensing with a license duration of 10 years (Articles 28.2, 28.3).

6. Information Systems Serving E-Transactions

The LOET 2023 adds a new chapter (Chapter VI) on information systems serving e-transactions, which are defined as a combination of hardware, software, and databases established with the main purpose of serving e-transactions and ensuring the authenticity and reliability of e-transactions (Article 45.1). A digital platform serving e-transactions is an information system that creates an electronic environment allowing parties to conduct transactions, provide and use products and services, or develop products and services (Article 45.2). An intermediary digital platform serving e-transactions is a digital platform whose administrator is independent of the parties performing the transaction (Article 45.3).

E-transaction accounts are used to conduct e-transactions, store transaction history, and ensure the accuracy of the order/process of transactions of the account holder, and as evidence of the transaction history of the parties to e-transactions (Article 46.2). Agencies, organizations and individuals can choose to use e-transaction accounts based on their needs, unless otherwise provided for by law (Article 46.3). The transaction history of an e-transaction account will have legal validity for proving the transaction if it fulfills stipulated conditions (Article 46.4).

Administrators of information systems serving e-transactions are required to, among other things, provide information by electronic means for inspection purposes; report at the request of state management agencies in charge of e-transactions; and share data to serve state management of e-transactions (Article 47.1). Large intermediary digital platforms are required to, among other things, publish the mechanism to handle problems or content violating Vietnamese law arising in e-transactions and annually report to the MIC on incidents of taking advantage of the information system to violate Vietnamese law (Article 47.2). Extremely large intermediary digital platforms are required to, among other things, publish the basis used to make recommendations to users and allow users to opt out of such recommendations and uninstall any applications without affecting basic technical features of the system (Article 47.3). The government is to provide further guidance on the responsibilities of administrators of large and extremely large intermediary digital platforms based on the scale, number of users in Vietnam, or number of accesses from users in Vietnam of such platforms (Article 47.4).

7. Open Data

The LOET 2023 adds new content regarding the open data of state agencies, which is defined as data that is published or disclosed by a state agency for other parties to freely use, reuse, and share, in order to promote e-transactions, digital transformation, and development of the digital economy and digital society (Article 43.1). Organizations and individuals are free to access and use open data without being requested to provide identification, and are allowed to freely copy, share, exchange, and use open data or combine open data with other data, and use open data in their commercial or non-commercial products or services unless otherwise provided by law (Articles 43.3, 43.4).

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

August 11, 2026
On July 27, 2026, the State Bank of Vietnam (SBV) released a draft decree proposing amendments to Decree No. 52/2024/ND-CP dated May 15, 2024, on non-cash payments (Decree 52). The draft decree would amend 17 of Decree 52’s 38 articles, with several key changes directly affecting providers of intermediary payment service (IPS). The key proposed changes affecting IPS providers are outlined below. Streamlining IPS Licensing Procedures A central objective of the draft decree is to simplify regulatory procedures for IPS providers. Notably, it would significantly reduce IPS licensing documentation requirements by removing the need to submit enterprise registration certificates, investment registration certificates, and documents evidencing the qualifications of the legal representative and general director. Instead, the SBV would retrieve this information directly from national business registration and other specialized databases, requesting additional documents only where the relevant information cannot be verified electronically or is incomplete. The draft decree also removes the current limit of two rounds for dossier supplementation and shortens processing timelines for several IPS licensing procedures such as issuance, amendment, and reissuance of IPS licenses. The processing time for new IPS license applications would be thereby reduced from 90 to 60 working days. In addition, several continuing IPS business conditions would be removed. For example, IPS providers would no longer be required to maintain certain representations relating to corporate restructuring or the legality of contributed capital. Likewise, the IPS project plan (đề án) would become a one-time application document rather than an ongoing licensing condition. If retained in the final decree, this change could provide IPS providers with significantly greater flexibility to implement post-licensing technology upgrades, system integrations, and corporate restructuring transactions without needing to revisit the originally approved project plan. The draft decree also removes the requirement for the SBV to consult the Ministry of Public
August 10, 2026
Thailand has finalized its social media KYC (“know your customer”) rules under Notification of the Electronic Transactions Commission on Measures to Prevent Technological Crimes for Social Media Service Providers (No. 2), which was published in the Government Gazette on May 5, 2026, and will take effect on November 1, 2026. While an early draft of the notification proposed requiring social media platforms to arrange identification of every user account, the final notification is significantly more targeted, focusing on paid online advertising and advertiser identity verification. Though the regulatory initiative primarily aims to combat online fraud and technology-related crimes, it also has important consequences for intellectual property enforcement, because the verified platform records that will be generated under the new requirements can help IP rights holders to identify anonymous online infringers. Key Regulatory Mandates The notification requires social media service providers to verify the identity of advertisers before their paid advertisements are published and disseminated in Thailand through social media, regardless of whether the advertising fees come from the advertisers or third parties. Verification of an advertiser is valid for one year, after which verification would have to be performed again before the platform could publish additional paid advertisements from the advertiser. Permitted verification methods are specified under the notification. A platform may verify an advertiser by checking identity evidence and confirming the connection between the advertiser and that identity evidence, with the notification giving facial comparison against certain government-issued identity documents as an example. Alternatively, platforms may verify advertisers through a digital identity verification and authentication system with an identity-proofing assurance level not lower than the level prescribed by Thailand’s Electronic Transactions Commission. The notification further requires platforms to retain only the advertiser’s information necessary to identify the advertiser, beginning from the start of the advertising activity and for
August 10, 2026
On July 31, 2026, Thailand’s Big Data Institute (BDI) launched a public consultation on the principles of a proposed new data-sharing law, with comments accepted until August 31, 2026. If enacted, the law would establish Thailand’s first comprehensive framework for government and private-sector data sharing, creating a systematic, secure, and transparent regime to support analytics, policymaking, research, and innovation. Central Data-Sharing Platform The draft law establishes a central system for data sharing, managed by the BDI. Government agencies would be required to connect to the BDI’s Data Integration and Intelligence Platform (also referred to as D2), in accordance with the BDI’s rules and procedures. Five Dimensions of Data Sharing The draft law covers five key types of data sharing between government (G), businesses (B), and consumers (C): G2B: Private organizations may request government data specifically for research and development purposes. The BDI will assess the applicant’s data governance, security, and privacy capabilities whether such measures meet prescribed standards before forwarding the request to the relevant government agency within 90 days. Any dispute may be escalated to a newly established Data-Sharing Promotion Committee for final determination. G2G: Government agencies may request data from other agencies through the central system. The data-holding agency must respond within 90 days, taking legality, necessity, proportionality, public interest, and personal data protection into account. Disputes may be referred to the Data-Sharing Promotion Committee for adjudication. B2G: In emergency situations involving public safety, economic security, or disaster response, the Minister of Digital Economy and Society may require private entities to provide data through the central data-sharing system. Government agencies must specify the data requested, demonstrate its necessity and expected benefits, and request only data reasonably available to the data holder. Requests for personal data must be limited to the minimum amount necessary. B2C: Royal decrees may
August 10, 2026
Thailand’s Office of the Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC) recently released draft guidance on records of processing activities (ROPA) for personal data controllers and processors under the Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019) (PDPA). The draft guidance, which was presented to the public on July 7, 2026, addresses both controller records of collection, use, and disclosure of personal data and processor records of processing activities carried out on behalf of controllers. If implemented, the guidance will significantly expand organizational expectations for ROPA preparation, maintenance, and use across all sectors. Key Takeaways The draft guidance contains several important implications for organizations subject to the PDPA: ROPA reframed as a core accountability tool. The guidance elevates ROPA from an administrative record to a central accountability mechanism, connecting controller duties with recordkeeping obligations. ROPA as a source for privacy notices and governance documents. ROPA should serve as the primary source for privacy notices and align with consent management, retention schedules, DPIAs, incident response plans, and vendor contracts. Expanded scope across all activities. ROPA must cover all processing activities across the organization—including security, finance, HR, and external contractors—with correct controller or processor classification for each. Ongoing maintenance and auditability. ROPA must be updated for any change to systems, purposes, or processors, reviewed at least annually, and maintained with version control and a designated owner. Enhanced vendor, processor, and cross-border transfer requirements. Organizations must document all processors, external recipients, and cross-border transfers, specifying purposes, access scope, and destination countries. Linkage with risk assessment, DPIAs, and LIAs. ROPA should assign risk levels to each activity and identify when data protection impact assessments (DPIAs) or legitimate interests assessments (LIAs) are required, functioning as a risk-management tool. ROPA and data breach readiness. Incomplete ROPA can delay breach response and notification. Organizations should map data flows, vendors,