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​ 

March 6, 2026
Thailand’s Legislation Consideration Committee of the Ministry of Interior has ruled that in-game loot boxes in online games do not constitute gambling under the Gambling Act B.E. 2478 (1935). This first-of-its-kind ruling provides useful guidance for online game operators and digital entertainment companies operating in Thailand. Background The ruling came in response to an inquiry concerning an online role-playing game operator that launched a campaign featuring a loot box mechanism. The mechanism allowed players to purchase a token in exchange for the opportunity to receive a virtual loot box containing randomized in-game items. The key features of this were as follows: The items received were digital, noncash items usable only within the game. The items could not be exchanged, redeemed, or converted into cash with the game operator. Items may differ in rarity but remain purely virtual. The central question was whether paying money to obtain randomized in-game items constituted a risk-based activity involving the chance to receive money or property of monetary value, which would constitute gambling under the Gambling Act. Committee Ruling The committee reached the following conclusions regarding the characteristics of the game’s loot-box mechanism: No cash or monetary equivalent: Players did not receive cash or property that could be exchanged for cash. The in-game items were merely usage rights within the online game ecosystem. No real-world monetary valuation: There was no determination of item value in real currency, and no mechanism for redeeming or converting items into money with the game operator. Any off-platform trading of in-game items between players is irrelevant to online game operators, as any value arising from such transactions is determined by the market rather than by the operators themselves. Service fee characterization: Payments made by players purchasing in-game loot boxes constituted fees for online game services. Accordingly, the committee concluded
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