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

October 13, 2020

Vietnam Issues New Administrative Penalties for Violations in Commercial Activities

Subscribe to Updates

On August 26, 2020, the government of Vietnam issued Decree No. 98/2020/ND-CP on the penalties for administrative violations in commercial activities, production and trade of counterfeit and banned goods, and consumer rights protection (Decree 98). Decree 98 will come into effect on October 15, 2020, replacing Decree No. 185/2013/ND-CP as amended in 2015 and 2018 (Decree 185).

The administrative penalties and remedial measures under Article 4 of Decree 98 are restructured and more well-organized than in Decree 185, with increased monetary fines for a number of violations.

Some notable changes in Decree 98 in comparison to Decree 185 include:

  • Acts of trading in goods/services for which business is restricted or conditional, and acts of violation in commercial intermediary activities are no longer listed as administrative violations subject to the governing scope of the decree.
     
  • The definition of “counterfeit goods” no longer includes “intellectual property counterfeit goods” as found in Decree 185, which now leaves two separate definitions of counterfeit goods under the Vietnamese laws:
  1. Counterfeit goods covered under Decree 98, referring to goods not meeting expected use or quality standards; counterfeit drugs (for humans and animals); goods with forged information such as the name or address of the manufacturer, importer or distributor; and goods with counterfeit stamps, labels, or packages; and
  2. Intellectual property counterfeit goods as defined under the Law on Intellectual Property, referring to goods bearing counterfeit trademarks and counterfeit geographical indications.
  • The grounds for determining the manufacturer or origin of goods are clarified.
     
  • Violations in business activities in relation to business registration certificates are no longer sanctioned.
     
  • Penalties for violations against regulations on trade in alcoholic beverages include liquor and beer, instead of liquor only.
     
  • Several new regulations on penalties for administrative violations in e-commerce activities have been added. For example, for an online shopping website or mobile shopping application, a fine ranging from VND 1 million to VND 5 million (approximately USD 43 to USD 216) will be imposed for the failure to adequately and accurately publish information on the owner of such website or application, the goods or services sold and their prices, transport and delivery, general transaction terms and conditions, and payment methods. A fine ranging from VND 10 million to VND 20 million approximately (USD 430 to USD 860) will be imposed for providing information, trading in, or selling counterfeit goods, IP-infringing goods or services, or other goods or services banned from trade on the internet.

Although the changes in Decree 98 are not large, such amendments are necessary and in accordance with other relevant laws and regulations, and will provide the authorities with sufficient grounds to deal with violations as they arise.

Related Professionals

Practices

Corporate/M&A

Intellectual Property

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

March 10, 2026
Indonesia’s trademark prosecution process has been significantly streamlined with Ministry of Law Regulation No. 5 of 2026 (MOLR 5/2026) coming into effect on February 23, 2026. In straightforward cases without opposition, applicants may now see their trademarks proceed to registration within three months from filing—a substantial improvement over previous practice. The regulation also introduces detailed procedures for recording changes of name and address and for transferring rights over pending applications. It enhances the role of the Ministry of Law’s regional offices in assisting local individuals and SMEs, adds provisions governing force majeure situations, implements new requirements for collective trademarks, and formalizes several practices already in place. Substantive Examination Acceleration The most significant change under MOLR 5/2026 concerns substantive examination. The regulation now explicitly requires that applications be published within 15 days of filing, followed by a two-month publication period. Oppositions must be filed only within this window; late submissions will not be processed, even if the system accepts payment. The new regulation requires the Trademark Office (TMO) to forward copies of any opposition to applicants within 14 days of receipt. If no opposition is filed, substantive examination begins immediately after the publication period ends and will be completed within 30 days. If an opposition is filed, the examination is to be finalized within 90 days of the counterstatement filing date. These timelines enable unopposed applications to move from close of publication to final decision in roughly one month. If an application is provisionally refused during ex officio examination, the applicant has 30 working days from the date of notification to file a response. However, the regulation does not specify the timeline for subsequent reexamination after the response is filed. In recent practice, the TMO has been completing reexamination within approximately two to three months. Ownership Recordals May Pause Substantive
Read More
March 6, 2026
Myanmar’s Trademark Law 2019 introduced a modern framework for the registration, enforcement, and protection of trademarks. However, due to the high volume of applications filed during the soft-opening period of the Intellectual Property Department (IPD), marks submitted from 2022 onward remain pending as the IPD works its way through the applications filed in 2021, which it has been publishing on a monthly basis since May 1, 2024. During this period, businesses should adopt proactive strategies to protect their brands, monitor conflicting marks, and ensure a smooth registration process. Practical Steps for Safeguarding Pending Marks While a pending application does not confer full trademark rights, brand owners can take several practical steps to strengthen their position: Monitor IPD publications. Businesses should regularly review the IPD’s monthly gazette to identify any identical or confusingly similar marks at an early stage and prepare timely oppositions in accordance with the Trademark Law’s provisions allowing “any interested party” to file an objection to a trademark application. Monitor market activity. Early detection of potential infringement enables swift action, such as cease-and-desist letters and opposition proceedings. Businesses should monitor competitors, distributors, and retailers for unauthorized use of their marks. Collect evidence of use. Maintaining evidence of use strengthens claims of distinctiveness and supports enforcement efforts. Businesses should keep records of commercial activities, distribution, brand promotion and development, marketing communications, product packaging and labeling, and sales demonstrating brand recognition in Myanmar and internationally, particularly in Southeast Asian markets. Although the Trademark Law 2019 establishes a first-to-file system, evidence of use provides considerable practical support for distinctiveness claims and enforcement actions. Pursue Interim Enforcement Options. A pending trademark application can be relied upon to oppose or refuse other marks on absolute and/or relative grounds of refusal. In addition, marks with established reputations may be protected under passing-off principles
Read More
February 27, 2026
On January 26, 2026, Vietnam’s Ministry of Finance issued Circular No. 06/2026/TT-BTC (Circular 06), amending and supplementing Circular No. 13/2015/TT-BTC, which provides guidance on dossiers and procedures for customs recordal and customs supervision in relation to intellectual property rights (IPR). Circular 06 has an effective date of March 1, 2026. Some notable points of Circular 06 include the following: Simplified Documentation for Customs Recordal Applications Circular 06 reduces some documentary requirements for IPR owners: A power of attorney is no longer required to be legalized. Applicants are no longer required to submit title or registration certificates if such documents are issued in digital form. In such cases, it is sufficient to declare comprehensive information on the relevant IPR, enabling customs authorities to verify the information through publicly accessible databases. In practice, this amendment is particularly beneficial for international trademark registrations designating Vietnam. IPR owners may no longer need to obtain a confirmation letter from the Intellectual Property Office of Vietnam regarding the validity of a trademark registration in Vietnam. Instead, they may rely on registration status information available from the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) database, reflecting that the international registration has been granted protection in Vietnam. Clearer Mechanism for Ex Officio Suspension of Suspected Infringing Goods Although ex officio suspension has been referenced in earlier regulations, Circular 06 provides clearer guidance on the circumstances and procedures under which customs may proactively suspend customs procedures for consignments suspected of being counterfeit or pirated goods. Accordingly, customs authorities may initiate the suspension of clearance without waiting for a formal request from IPR owners. Enhanced Supervision of Imported/Exported Goods in E-Commerce Circular 06 also supplements provisions on the inspection of imported and exported goods transacted through e-commerce channels. Customs authorities may apply risk management measures to assess goods traded via e-commerce
Read More
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
Read More