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

June 5, 2026

Vietnam Takes Major Step in AI Governance with New Guiding Decree

Vietnam’s AI regulatory framework has reached an important milestone. While the Law on Artificial Intelligence No. 134/2025/QH15 (AI Law) established the foundation for AI governance, many practical compliance requirements were left to implementing regulations.

On April 30, 2026, the government issued Decree No. 142/2026/ND-CP (Decree 142), which took effect on May 1, 2026, and provides the first detailed guidance on the implementation of the AI Law. Although an official list of high-risk AI systems is still pending from the prime minister, Decree 142 provides valuable insight into how Vietnam’s risk-based AI regulatory framework will operate in practice.

Risk Classification Framework

The AI Law adopts a risk-based approach under which AI systems are classified as high-risk, medium-risk, or low-risk. Decree 142 builds on this framework by providing detailed guidance on how these classifications are determined.

High-risk AI systems are determined based on factors such as (i) their potential impact on life, health, property, human rights, public interests, or national security; (ii) the sector in which they are deployed; and (iii) the scale of affected users or integration with critical infrastructure. The latest draft list of high-risk AI systems appears to follow these same principles.

Medium-risk AI systems generally include systems that may mislead, influence, or manipulate users, particularly where users may not realize they are interacting with AI or AI-generated content. The focus is therefore on transparency and authenticity risks rather than broader societal or safety concerns.

Low-risk AI systems are those that do not meet the criteria for either high-risk or medium-risk classification.

Importantly, Decree 142 seeks to avoid over-classification. Certain systems may fall outside the high-risk or medium-risk regimes, including internal-use systems, office-support tools, technical editing applications, certain back-end processing systems, and AI systems used in artistic, gaming, cinematic, or other creative contexts.

Providers must also review and reclassify AI systems where significant changes materially alter the system’s risk profile, where serious incidents reveal a higher level of risk, or where required by regulatory developments or competent authorities.

Key Compliance Requirements

Risk Classification Documentation and Notification of Medium- and High-Risk AI Systems

Before deployment, providers of medium-risk and high-risk AI systems must prepare risk classification dossiers containing key information regarding the system, its intended purpose, deployment context, affected users, principal input data, and applicable risk management measures.

Decree 142 limits disclosure obligations to information within the provider’s lawful access and control. Providers are generally not required to disclose source code, model parameters, raw training data, or protected confidential information. The decree also recognizes equivalent international technical documentation standards and, where an AI system uses personal data, permits a personal data processing impact assessment (DPIA) dossier prepared in accordance with personal data protection laws to replace or be integrated into the risk classification dossier, thereby reducing duplicative compliance requirements.

Providers must then notify the Ministry of Science and Technology (MST) of the risk classification results through the national AI one-stop portal before deployment. The notification follows a self-declaration model and automatically generates an AI system identification code and electronic confirmation.

Governance Requirements for High-Risk AI Systems

Decree 142 clarifies that mandatory third-party conformity certification applies only to certain categories of high-risk AI systems. For other high-risk systems, providers may conduct self-assessments or engage accredited conformity assessment organizations, while remaining responsible for the assessment results.

Providers of high-risk AI systems must also establish and maintain risk management systems addressing risk assessment, data quality, human oversight, risk mitigation measures, and ongoing reviews following significant system changes. Reassessment is required where material changes affect the original conformity assessment results.

Deployers are subject to corresponding obligations, including monitoring system performance, maintaining human oversight, implementing risk controls, and notifying providers and authorities where serious risks or incidents arise.

Transparency Requirements for All AI Systems

Transparency is a central feature of Decree 142. Providers must implement machine-readable technical markings for AI-generated or AI-modified audio, image, and video content, such as metadata, digital signatures, or other provenance verification measures. Separately, deployers making AI-generated content available to the public must provide clear notifications where such content could mislead users regarding authenticity, particularly in relation to deepfakes, simulated voices, and recreated real-world events.

The decree recognizes a number of exceptions, including certain technical edits, internal-use content, and research or testing activities. Overall, the framework adopts a dual-layer approach combining technical traceability with user-facing transparency.

Incident Reporting for All AI Systems

Decree 142 further clarifies the AI Law’s serious incident regime. Covered incidents include those involving death, serious health impacts, significant property damage, serious infringements of rights and interests, or disruptions to public services, essential services, national security, or public order.

Providers and deployers must submit preliminary reports within 72 hours for urgent incidents or within five working days for other serious incidents, preserve relevant logs and data, and submit follow-up reports within 15 days. Where incident reporting obligations also arise under cybersecurity, personal data protection, or sector-specific regulations, reporting must additionally comply with those requirements.

Foreign Providers

The AI Law requires foreign providers of certain high-risk AI systems subject to mandatory conformity certification to establish a commercial presence or appoint an authorized representative in Vietnam. Decree 142 does not further clarify the scope of this requirement, leaving uncertainty regarding its application to cross-border AI services.

Other Notable Developments

Decree 142 introduces a controlled regulatory sandbox mechanism for AI systems. Depending on the risk level, deployment scope, and data involved, participants may benefit from certain regulatory flexibilities during testing while remaining subject to regulatory oversight and compliance with cybersecurity and personal data protection laws.

The decree also contains transitional provisions pending the launch of the national AI one-stop portal. However, as of the date of writing, the portal has not yet been launched and no formal alternative submission mechanism has been announced.

Outlook

Decree 142 represents a significant step toward operationalizing Vietnam’s AI Law by introducing detailed compliance obligations, governance requirements, and implementation procedures, particularly for high-risk AI systems. However, several important elements remain pending, including the prime minister’s official list of high-risk AI systems, further guidance on conformity assessment methodologies, and the launch of the national AI one-stop portal. Businesses should therefore continue monitoring forthcoming regulations and guidance to assess the practical impact of the regime on their AI-related activities in Vietnam.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

July 10, 2026
Vietnam has taken a significant step in regulating its e-commerce sector with the issuance of a new decree guiding the country’s recently enacted Law on E-Commerce. Decree No. 248/2026/ND-CP, issued on June 30, 2026, and taking effect the following day, addresses mandatory platform policies, registration requirements for offshore platforms, additional obligations on platform operators, and market access conditions for foreign investors. Mandatory Policy Contents The decree sets out detailed guidance on the required contents of various platform policies, covering pricing, payment, display priority, livestream sales, delivery, returns, method of service provision, and service termination and refunds. Clarification of Obligations for Platform Operators The decree provides clarification of the obligations applicable to platform operators. Notably, intermediary e-commerce platform operators with online ordering functions must: Collect specific information to implement electronic identity verification of sellers; Cooperate with regulators by reporting online through the state e-commerce management system and by blocking, suspending, or removing content upon request of a competent authority; Maintain a mechanism to store contract data, including price, product or service information, and parties’ information, for at least three years from the date of contract conclusion; and If qualifying as a “large digital platform” under consumer protection law, maintain an online system for receiving and handling complaints and requests, and comply with enhanced content-removal requirements. Registration Requirements for Offshore Platforms Offshore e-commerce platforms, whether direct-sales, intermediary, social-network-based, or integrated, that conduct e-commerce activity in Vietnam must register with the Ministry of Industry and Trade if the platform: Allows Vietnamese-language selection; Uses a “.vn” domain; or Reaches 100,000 or more transactions with Vietnam-based buyers within a calendar year. Notably, the registration requirement now captures not only traditional intermediary platforms, but also direct-sales platforms. Foreign Investment Conditions Foreign investors holding a controlling interest in an intermediary e-commerce platform, a social media platform
July 8, 2026
On July 7, 2026, the Trade Competition Commission of Thailand (TCCT) issued a press release announcing the establishment of two new subcommittees designed to intensify oversight of digital platforms and modern trade businesses. The formation of the digital platform subcommittee marks a significant escalation in competition enforcement following the TCCT’s Guidelines on Multi-Sided Platforms and E-Commerce Businesses, which took effect on March 25, 2026. Platform operators, sellers, and related service providers should expect heightened regulatory scrutiny and potential investigations into practices already flagged under the March guidelines. Two Dedicated Enforcement Bodies The first new body is the digital platform subcommittee—formally the Subcommittee on Supervision, Monitoring, and Prevention of Trade Conduct in Digital Platform Business. It is tasked with driving intensive oversight of digital platform businesses. It will coordinate with government agencies, the private sector, business operators, and other relevant stakeholders to supervise and prevent trade conduct that may affect competition, and to promote free and fair competition in the digital platform sector. The subcommittee will be composed of TCCT members and representatives from the Department of Internal Trade. The second body—the Subcommittee on Determining Guidelines and Action Plans Concerning Competition Conditions in Modern Wholesale and Retail Business—will study, analyze, and monitor market structure in modern wholesale and retail businesses, compile databases to analyze retail business concentration, assess impacts on small-scale operators, and propose supervisory measures for the retail sector. TCCT members will serve on the subcommittee alongside experts from government and private organizations, including the Office of Industrial Economics, the Office of Small and Medium Enterprises Promotion, the Thai SME Federation, and the Thai SME Council. Operational Impact for Industry Participants These subcommittees provide the TCCT with a focused mechanism to investigate various trade practices deemed unfair, and the TCCT has authority under the Trade Competition Act to issue cease-and-desist
July 6, 2026
Vietnam has introduced an official list of high-risk AI systems, triggering more stringent compliance obligations for developers, suppliers, and deployers operating in the country. On June 30, 2026, the prime minister issued Decision No. 33/2026/QD-TTg (Decision 33), which establishes the List of High-Risk AI Systems under the Law on Artificial Intelligence (AI Law) and Decree No. 142/2026/ND-CP (Decree 142). Decision 33 takes effect on August 15, 2026. Decision 33 is significant because only AI systems included on the list will be subject to the heightened compliance obligations applicable to high-risk AI systems under the AI Law and Decree 142. These include, among others, local presence requirements for foreign providers, mandatory conformity assessment before deployment, comprehensive risk management and data quality documentation, and strict liability for damages even when the provider is fully compliant. Decision 33 also specifies the applicable conformity assessment pathway for each listed system, indicating whether the system must undergo mandatory third-party conformity certification before being placed into use, or whether the provider may self-assess conformity or voluntarily engage a registered or recognized conformity assessment body. Which AI Systems Are Covered? Decision 33 identifies high-risk AI systems across six sectors—the key attributes of which are summarized below. Education: AI systems used for automated assessment, learner ranking, behavioral monitoring, or generating educational content from uncontrolled data sources. Ethnic affairs and religion: AI systems used to automatically score, classify, or rank applications for government ethnic policies; approve or reject regulatory applications; suspend benefits on suspicion of fraud; allocate budgets; or infer and classify individuals by ethnicity or religion for administrative purposes. Healthcare: AI-assisted surgical systems and autonomous AI-powered surgical robots. Banking: AI systems that autonomously conduct electronic banking transactions or make credit approval decisions. Judicial proceedings: Certain large-scale biometric identification systems used in public-interest civil proceedings. Transport: Thirty-one categories
July 6, 2026
Indonesia’s regulation on reporting online intellectual property (IP) infringement provides comprehensive procedural guidance for IP rights holders and their licensees in reporting online infringement complaints. Issued in December 2025 by the Ministry of Law as Regulation No. 47 of 2025 regarding Handling of Intellectual Property Infringement Reports in Electronic Systems, this regulation covers all types of IP rights. It also specifies documentation when reporting infringement, and lays out the procedures for examination, verification, and enforcement actions. Submission of Complaints Complainants may submit reports through the online system of the Directorate General of Intellectual Property (DGIP) or in person at the DGIP office. Complaints may also be filed through an authorized proxy. Under the regulation, complainants are required to provide the following information and documents: Personal details of the complainant; Brief description of the protected work or subject matter (i.e., type of IP and name or address of the infringing website, portal, account, or application, or a link to the location of the infringing content); Complete description of the alleged infringement; Certificate of registration or recordal of the relevant IP; Recordal of IP license agreement, if any; and Other supporting evidence. Verification and Examination Process Upon receiving a complaint, the responsible formality officer may request clarification or additional supporting documents. In the latter case, the complainant must then submit the necessary administrative documents within 14 days of the notification date. Once the documentation is deemed complete and sufficient, the case will be formally registered. Subsequently, the DGIP will establish a verification team to handle online IP violations, which will include the Civil Servant Investigator (PPNS), the Ministry of Communication and Digital Affairs, experts with relevant expertise in IP, and representatives from related associations such as AVISI (Indonesian Video Streaming Association). After examining the report, the team will prepare the Minutes