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

September 22, 2025

Vietnam’s AI Push: Updated National Strategy and First AI Law by End of 2025

Subscribe to Updates

On September 15, 2025, Vietnam’s Ministry of Science and Technology announced that the country will issue an updated version of its National AI Strategy (first issued in 2021) and its first-ever AI Law by the end of this year. The ministry emphasized that the AI strategy is not just a legal framework, but a commitment to embracing AI to drive Vietnam into a new era.

The AI adoption plan is set as a priority of the country, and marks a significant step in shaping Vietnam’s AI governance and innovation landscape. Highlights of the plan include the following:

  • Strategic vision. Vietnam’s ambition is to leverage AI for economic growth, social development, and global competitiveness, under the guiding principle “AI for humans – safe, autonomous, cooperative, inclusive, and sustainable.”
  • AI as national infrastructure. The updated strategy positions AI as core national infrastructure, comparable to electricity or the internet, aiming to provide every citizen with a “personal digital assistant.”
  • Core principles for AI legislation. The AI Law will be built around the following six core principles:
    1. Risk-based regulation
    2. Transparency and accountability
    3. Human-centric development
    4. Domestic AI autonomy
    5. AI as a driver of sustainable growth
    6. Digital sovereignty, with data, infrastructure, and AI technology being three strategic pillars
  • Ethics and openness. A National AI Ethics Code will accompany the upcoming law, aligned with international standards but tailored to the Vietnamese context. The government emphasizes open standards and open-source development.
  • Market development and incentives. The government plans to expand domestic AI adoption, particularly in public services and key industries. The National Technology Innovation Fund (NATIF) will allocate at least 40% of its budget to AI projects, prioritizing SMEs through vouchers for locally developed AI solutions.

Background on AI Law Development

Regulations on AI are found in various Vietnamese laws and regulations, notably the recently adopted Law on Digital Technology Industry (DTI Law). However, these provisions are fragmented and not comprehensive. Accordingly, the government is developing a dedicated AI Law, which is expected to be adopted by the end of 2025. It is anticipated that the AI Law will build on the principles and requirements currently set out, and provide more detailed regulations.

The DTI Law introduces:

  • AI system categories (high‑risk, high‑impact, other), with stricter obligations for higher‑risk systems.
  • Identification requirements, such as disclosing when users interact with AI and including identifiable markers on certain AI‑generated digital products.
  • Principles on transparency, explainability, accountability, safety/security, lifecycle risk management, consumer protection, and data/privacy compliance.
  • Incentives for AI research and development (R&D), AI data centers, and high‑quality AI talent (including visa and tax benefits).

Outlook

As Vietnam’s AI strategy and legal framework evolve, companies can consider the following actions to prepare for effective compliance:

  • Mapping their AI systems and intended uses in Vietnam; conducting preliminary risk and impact screening for systems that may be classified as “high‑risk” or “high‑impact.”
  • Preparing for user disclosure/marking of AI interactions and potential product identification requirements.
  • Tightening data governance and Personal Data Protection Law (PDPL) compliance (consents/notices, opt‑out for AI/machine learning R&D where applicable, security controls).
  • Continuing to monitor forthcoming implementing decrees/circulars under the DTI Law and the upcoming AI Law and National AI Ethics Code, and aligning internal AI policies accordingly.
  • Assessing eligibility for incentives (AI R&D, data centers, digital tech zones) and for NATIF funding and SME vouchers.
  • Planning for infrastructure needs and potential use of Vietnam‑based computer/data resources consistent with “digital sovereignty” objectives.
Related Professionals

Industries

Technology

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

August 10, 2026
Thailand’s Office of the Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC) recently released draft guidance on records of processing activities (ROPA) for personal data controllers and processors under the Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019) (PDPA). The draft guidance, which was presented to the public on July 7, 2026, addresses both controller records of collection, use, and disclosure of personal data and processor records of processing activities carried out on behalf of controllers. If implemented, the guidance will significantly expand organizational expectations for ROPA preparation, maintenance, and use across all sectors. Key Takeaways The draft guidance contains several important implications for organizations subject to the PDPA: ROPA reframed as a core accountability tool. The guidance elevates ROPA from an administrative record to a central accountability mechanism, connecting controller duties with recordkeeping obligations. ROPA as a source for privacy notices and governance documents. ROPA should serve as the primary source for privacy notices and align with consent management, retention schedules, DPIAs, incident response plans, and vendor contracts. Expanded scope across all activities. ROPA must cover all processing activities across the organization—including security, finance, HR, and external contractors—with correct controller or processor classification for each. Ongoing maintenance and auditability. ROPA must be updated for any change to systems, purposes, or processors, reviewed at least annually, and maintained with version control and a designated owner. Enhanced vendor, processor, and cross-border transfer requirements. Organizations must document all processors, external recipients, and cross-border transfers, specifying purposes, access scope, and destination countries. Linkage with risk assessment, DPIAs, and LIAs. ROPA should assign risk levels to each activity and identify when data protection impact assessments (DPIAs) or legitimate interests assessments (LIAs) are required, functioning as a risk-management tool. ROPA and data breach readiness. Incomplete ROPA can delay breach response and notification. Organizations should map data flows, vendors,
Read More
August 4, 2026
Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019) (PDPA) could soon see some important changes, as a draft bill to amend the PDPA has been introduced in the House of Representatives. The draft amendment is currently in the public consultation phase, with comments accepted from July 16 to August 15, 2026. If enacted in its current form, the amendment would make three key changes: expanding the government exemption to cover anticorruption operations, introducing a statutory definition of “government agency,” and restructuring the lawful bases for personal data processing to align with international standards. Background The PDPA has encountered several enforcement challenges since its implementation, including three core problems identified by the bill’s sponsors: (1) the current exemptions for government agencies do not cover anticorruption and misconduct-prevention operations; (2) the PDPA lacks a clear statutory definition of “government agency,” causing legal uncertainty as to which entities are covered; and (3) the existing framework for lawful bases of data processing does not align with international standards—particularly the multiple-lawful-bases system in the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)—making compliance inflexible for both government and private sector entities. Expanded Government Exemption The current PDPA exempts government agencies performing duties related to national security (including fiscal security), public safety, anti-money laundering, forensic science, and cybersecurity. The proposed amendment adds “prevention and suppression of corruption and misconduct” to this list of exempted functions. This would allow anticorruption bodies—most notably the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC), which is identified as a directly affected party—to collect, use, and disclose personal data without being subject to PDPA requirements when carrying out their duties. New Statutory Definition of “Government Agency” Notably, while the current PDPA use the term “government agency” in several provisions, the term is not comprehensively defined, creating potential uncertainty as to its scope. The draft bill therefore
Read More
August 3, 2026
On July 23, 2026, the Bank of Thailand (BOT) released for public comment its draft Notification on Digital Channel Security, which would significantly expand the scope and stringency of Thailand’s existing mobile banking security framework. If finalized in its current form, the draft notification would extend mandatory security requirements to credit card providers and credit providers, cover internet banking in addition to mobile applications, phase out SMS one-time passwords (OTPs) for transaction authentication, and introduce biometric verification requirements for high-value transactions. The public comment period is open through August 24, 2026. Background The BOT’s existing Mobile Banking Security Notification, issued in 2024, sets minimum security standards for financial institutions, specialized financial institutions (SFIs), and e-money providers, significantly reducing “money-draining app” fraud. However, fraudsters have since shifted to nonbank providers and internet banking channels, prompting the BOT to propose broader security requirements. Expanded Scope of Regulated Entities and Channels The existing Mobile Banking Security Notification covers only financial institutions, SFIs, and e-money providers offering mobile banking services. The draft expands coverage in two key areas: entities and channels. On the entity side, it adds credit card providers and credit providers that offer fund transfers to third parties at other financial service providers or that provide cash withdrawal services to individual retail customers. On the channel side, it broadens coverage to include internet banking in addition to mobile banking. Strengthened Customer Authentication The draft introduces enhanced authentication requirements in three areas: Service enrollment and device changes. Providers must implement rigorous identity verification, notify customers of enrollment results through out-of-band communication channels, and adopt risk-mitigation measures such as cooling-off periods and temporary transaction limits. Transaction-level authentication. Providers must use two-factor authentication for fund transfers, cardless ATM withdrawals, and transaction limit increases. Secure authentication factors. Key requirements include the following: “What-you-know” factors must
Read More
July 28, 2026
Data protection officers (DPOs) have become a fixture of Thailand’s privacy compliance landscape since the Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019) (PDPA) took full effect and the Office of the Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC) began requiring certain organizations to appoint them. On July 7, 2026, the Office of the PDPC presented draft guidance on DPOs as part of a public consultation on a series of draft personal data protection manuals and recommendations. The draft offers the clearest indication yet of how the regulator expects the DPO role to work in practice, addressing recurring implementation issues under the PDPA—including when an organization must appoint a DPO, how the DPO should operate independently, how to manage conflicts of interest, and how data subjects and regulators should be able to contact the DPO. Because it remains in draft, organizations have an opportunity to weigh the practical implications now before the guidance is finalized. When a DPO Must Be Appointed The draft guidance clarifies the triggers for mandatory DPO appointment, including: Regular and systematic monitoring of personal data or systems on a large scale, such as tracking, analyzing, or predicting behavior, attitudes, or individual characteristics. Core activities involving large-scale processing of sensitive personal data, such as health data, biometric data, or criminal records. Certain foreign-organization representative arrangements. Public-sector coverage under relevant notifications identifying government entities that must appoint a DPO. Processing involving 100,000 or more data subjects may be considered large-scale. The guidance also contemplates voluntary DPO appointment for organizations that wish to raise their privacy governance standards, and such organizations should still comply with the standards applicable to DPOs under the law. Independence and Reporting Lines The draft guidance identifies lack of DPO independence as a core risk because an ineffective or constrained DPO may be unable to raise deficiencies
Read More