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 8, 2019

Vietnam Issues Penalties for Violations of Competition Law

Subscribe to Updates

On September 26, 2019, the government of Vietnam issued Decree No. 75/2019/ND-CP on sanctioning of administrative violations in the field of competition (“Decree 75”). Decree 75 will take effect on December 1, 2019, replacing Decree No. 71/2014/ND-CP. The new decree primarily provides guidance on the forms, levels, and procedures of administrative penalties found in the updated Law on Competition, which took effect on July 1, 2019.

The new Law on Competition mainly governs four groups of activities: (1) competition-restricting agreements, (2) abuse of dominant market position or monopoly position; (3) economic concentration; and (4) unfair competitive practices. Violators of the Law on Competition, depending on the nature and seriousness of the violation, can be subject to an administrative penalty or prosecuted for criminal liability. Additionally, if loss or damage is caused to other parties, compensation must be paid. Under the Penal Code, criminal penalties in the field of competition include fines of up to VND 3 billion (approximately USD 129,000) and a term of imprisonment of up to five years.

The main administrative penalties under Decree 75 are warnings or fines. In addition to the main administrative penalties, the violator may be subject to additional penalties such as confiscation of profits earned from the violation, revocation of its Enterprise Registration Certificate or similar license, or suspension of business activities from six months to one year.

Violators may also be subject to remedial measures, such as public correction, restructuring of an enterprise which abuses its dominant market position or monopoly position, or removal of illegal clauses from an agreement or contract.

Some key provisions on administrative penalties in Decree 75 are as follows:

(a) The maximum fine for violations on competition-restricting agreements and abuse of market dominance/monopoly position is 10% of the violating company’s total turnover in the relevant market in the financial year immediately preceding the year in which the violations were committed, but shall be lower than the lowest level of fines applicable to violations of corresponding regulations in the Penal Code.

(b) The maximum fine for violations of the provisions on economic concentration is 5% of the violating company’s total turnover in the relevant market in the financial year immediately preceding the year in which the violations were committed.

(c) The maximum fine for violations of the provisions on unfair competition is VND 2 billion (approximately USD 86,000).

If the violating company’s total turnover in the relevant market in the financial year immediately preceding the year in which the violations were committed in items (a) and (b) above is 0, the fine will be imposed in the range of VND 100 million to VND 200 million (approximately USD 4,300 to USD 8,600).

It is worth noting that the Decree 75 removed some overlapping penalties for violations related to intellectual property, multi-level marketing, and unfair competition in advertising and promotions, as these violations are governed by specific laws.

For more information on penalties in the field of competition, please contact [email protected].

Related Professionals

Practices

Antitrust and Competition

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

September 2, 2025
Thailand’s Office of the Consumer Protection Board (OCPB) has initiated a sweeping regulatory review of licensed direct sale and direct marketing businesses in Thailand and is in the process of notifying business operators to submit their annual business report and financial statement to the OCPB as part of their postlicensing obligations. This move marks a significant escalation in the government’s efforts to enforce compliance and transparency in the sector, which has faced growing scrutiny in recent years. Key Regulatory Considerations All businesses holding a direct sales or direct marketing license are required to submit their audited financial statement along with their business operation report to the OCPB within 60 days from the end of their fiscal year (extendable for up to 30 days by request, if necessary). The OCPB is currently conducting license audits as part of its enforcement duties. The office aims to complete audits for at least 90% of the 2,983 registered businesses that have obtained their license since 2022. This includes a review of the business conduct of the license holder. New license applications are also under scrutiny. Applicants are currently being subjected to background checks, and the OCPB has signaled a more rigorous vetting process moving forward. Impact of Noncompliance Failure to comply with these reporting obligations may result in escalating enforcement actions, including: Official notice to rectify noncompliance within a specified timeframe. Revocation of business registration, if the operator fails to respond. Revocation of business registration could result in a five-year prohibition on reapplying for a direct sales or direct marketing license following the revocation. The OCPB has already initiated outreach efforts, including SMS and email notifications, and has hosted seminars to raise awareness of these obligations. These measures are part of a broader initiative to enhance transparency and consumer trust in the sector. Businesses operating in the direct selling and
Read More
August 21, 2025
On August 19, 2025, the Trade Competition Commission of Thailand (TCCT) released its draft Guidelines on the Consideration of Unfair Trade Practices and Conduct Constituting Monopoly, Reducing Competition, or Restricting Competition in Multi-Sided Platform Businesses in the Category of Digital Platforms for the Sale of Goods or Services (E-commerce). A public comment period on the guidelines is open until September 18. The draft provides the first detailed framework for how the TCCT will interpret and enforce the substantive provisions under the Trade Competition Act against digital platforms, which have a unique network effect and require complex competition analysis. This development will profoundly impact the operations of e-commerce platforms, sellers, and associated service providers in Thailand. The guidelines primarily target e-commerce digital platform business operators, which are defined as follows: E-commerce digital platform: A medium facilitating the sale, purchase, or exchange of goods or services, including any operations to create transactions or interactions between business operators via an electronic transaction system, regardless of whether service fees are charged. E-commerce digital platform business operator: A service provider of a digital platform for the sale of goods or services who acts as an intermediary facilitating the sale of goods or services, including any operations to create transactions or interactions through an electronic transaction system by receiving orders for goods or services transacted via an electronic system, whether in the form of an e-marketplace, a social marketplace, or any other form that connects purchase orders for goods or services with business operators through an electronic system. Prohibited Conduct The guidelines classify potentially anticompetitive conduct and unfair trade practices into two categories: price-related and non-price-related conduct. 1. Price-related conduct The TCCT is targeting pricing strategies that can harm competition. Key prohibited behaviors include: Price below cost: Setting prices below the average total cost without
Read More
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
Read More
July 4, 2025
On July 3, 2025, the Trade Competition Commission of Thailand (TCCT) officially announced an invitation for stakeholders to participate in a public survey to gather feedback on the flexibility and appropriateness of credit terms across different business sectors for goods and services. The TCCT initially introduced guidelines on unfair trade practices related to credit terms applicable to small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in 2021, with amendments following in 2022. The guidelines have had a wide impact, as businesses have had to adapt their payment procedures and practices, particularly those for dealing with SMEs, to comply with the guidelines. The TCCT is now seeking comprehensive feedback from businesses and other stakeholders to evaluate the effectiveness and practicality of these guidelines. The collected responses may potentially lead to future amendments aimed at enhancing fairness and efficiency in business transactions. To summarize the core principles, the guidelines aim to improve the liquidity and cash flow of SMEs, stipulating payment terms of: Within 30 days for agricultural products or primary agricultural processing involving non-complex production. Within 45 days for trade, manufacturing, and service sectors. The guidelines also identify practices deemed unfair, including: Unjustified delays in payment beyond agreed credit terms. Changes to credit terms or contractual conditions without at least 60 days’ advance notice. Other unfair conduct or credit term conditions that impose excessive burdens on an SME. Interested stakeholders are encouraged to submit their feedback through the TCCT’s online survey form available via their official public media channels. The survey is open for responses until July 20, 2025.
Read More