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​ 

December 19, 2025
Prior to the dissolution of the House of Representatives, Thailand’s cabinet approved a draft amendment to the Administrative Procedure Act, following review by the Council of State. If enacted, this reform will fundamentally change how state agencies process business applications and appeals by imposing enforceable timelines and legal consequences for inaction. The draft directly targets a longstanding commercial frustration: applications and appeals that vanish into administrative silence, stalling investment and foreclosing judicial review across sectors ranging from real estate and manufacturing to healthcare and finance. The “Silence Means Yes” Rule for Applications At the core of the reform is a new automatic “approval by implication” for applications subject to statutory processing deadlines. If an official fails to notify an applicant of a decision within the legally prescribed period, the application will be deemed approved as a matter of law. This presumption shifts the costs of delay from businesses to the bureaucracy and gives applicants a definitive legal position once time expires. The mechanism applies to routine licensing and registration matters governed by explicit consideration periods in existing statutes or ministerial regulations. Officials may extend the decision period by up to thirty days, but only if they notify the applicant before the original deadline and substantiate that the delay arises from genuinely exceptional circumstances beyond their control. Certain sensitive applications are expressly excluded from automatic approval, including those that may significantly affect national security or defense, public safety and health, the environment or natural resources, or national cultural heritage. Once the deadline passes without a decision, businesses can proceed with deployment of capital and operations—construction, hiring, procurement, and market entry—without waiting for formal permission that may never arrive. For time-sensitive projects, this materially reduces regulatory timing risk. The “Deemed Rejection” Rule for Appeals The draft introduces a parallel “deemed rejection”
Read More
December 17, 2025
Vietnam’s National Assembly approved wide-ranging amendments to the Intellectual Property (IP) Law on December 10, 2025, marking one of the most significant overhauls of the country’s IP regime in recent years. The changes, which supplement and refine existing provisions, are designed to align Vietnam’s framework more closely with international standards while addressing practical challenges faced by rights holders and practitioners. The amendments will come into force on April 1, 2026. The most notable changes are detailed below. Recognition of partial and nonphysical industrial designs: Industrial design protection has been broadened to cover partial designs and nonphysical forms (class 32), explicitly extending rights to parts of products that are not independently circulated as well as digital and intangible product appearances. The law clarifies that the external appearances of nonphysical products are protected industrial designs, and circulation of digital copies of any part of that appearance will be treated as an act of using the industrial design. The provision on the industrial applicability of industrial designs has also been amended accordingly to include the uniform reproduction of nonphysical products in cyberspace. Resolving conflicts between overlapping rights: The IP Law provides a safeguard against conflicts when a single subject matter is protected by multiple IP rights. Where overlapping rights exist, the later-arising right will be terminated if its exercise interferes with the normal exploitation of an earlier right. The decision to terminate such a later right rests with the court. Use of published data for AI training: Organizations and individuals may use lawfully published and publicly accessible documents and data for scientific research, testing, and AI system training. Such use must not unreasonably prejudice the rights or legitimate interests of authors or IP rights holders. Where the documents and data fall under copyright or related rights protection, their use must also comply
Read More
December 15, 2025
Thailand is taking steps to energize its startup scene by drafting the Startup Promotion Law. This draft law aims to remove obstacles, open new funding opportunities, and provide coordinated government support. The goal is to make it easier for Thailand-based startups to grow and compete on a global stage. Why Is This Law Needed? For many years, Thai startups have operated under traditional company law frameworks that were not designed with high-growth businesses or with fundraising opportunities in mind. Restrictions on issuing bonds, offering shares to outside investors, and repurchasing shares for employee incentive programs made it challenging for emerging companies to access capital and accelerate their growth. The draft Startup Promotion Act seeks to remove these obstacles and foster a more competitive, entrepreneur-friendly environment in Thailand. Who’s in Charge? Two main organizations will oversee the startup ecosystem: Startup Promotion Committee: This group, to be appointed by the National Science, Research, and Innovation Policy Council, will set national strategies, policies, and budget; design promotional campaign and incentives; and propose further legislative amendments to promote startups. National Innovation Agency (NIA): Under the draft act, the NIA will be the main contact for startups and will serve as the secretariat office of the Startup Promotion Committee, coordinating data, advising startups, maintaining the public registry, and providing funding and investment (grants, repayable grants, loans, and equity) under committee criteria and, where applicable, cabinet approval. What Startups Are Eligible for Benefits? To be officially recognized and access benefits, a company must: Be a private limited company less than 10 years old at the time of application. Existing companies that already exceed the 10-year threshold may still apply for startup statues within one year of the law’s enactment, as long as they otherwise still qualify for the new regime. Have average annual revenue not
Read More
December 5, 2025
One morning, a California-based company mapping its Southeast Asia rollout opened an unexpected cease-and-desist letter from a Vietnamese IP firm. To the company’s surprise, the letter asserted that a local client already owned the company’s brand in Vietnam and threatened legal action. This is not an isolated incident. In another recent matter in the sports industry, a squatter demanded at least USD 48,000 from our client to “resolve” a similar conflict. For brands entering Vietnam or expanding distribution there, these tactics can create acute risk at precisely the point at which market momentum is building. Vietnam’s rapid economic growth and deepening integration into global trade have made it an increasingly attractive destination for multinational brands. Those same dynamics have intensified a longstanding issue: trademark squatting. Vietnam has modernized its IP framework over the past decade, but its strict first-to-file trademark system continues to incentivize opportunistic filings by parties with no legitimate interest in a mark. As more foreign brands build their reputation abroad before turning to Vietnam, squatters remain alert to timing gaps and enforcement frictions. The First-to-File System: Advantages and Vulnerabilities Vietnam adheres closely to the first-to-file principle under its Law on Intellectual Property. In practice, exclusive trademark rights belong to whoever submits the earliest valid application to the Vietnam Intellectual Property Office, regardless of prior use in Vietnam. This approach offers administrative clarity and reduces evidentiary burdens compared to use-based jurisdictions. Yet it also creates fertile conditions for squatting. Bad-faith actors regularly monitor foreign markets, identify brands gaining traction, and move quickly to register those marks domestically, often long before the genuine owner enters the market or prioritizes local filings. By the time the true brand seeks protection, the squatter’s application (or registration) stands as a legal obstacle, pushing businesses toward costly oppositions, cancellations, or uncomfortable negotiations
Read More