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

March 21, 2025

Vietnam’s Amended Securities Law: What You Need to Know

Subscribe to Updates

Vietnam’s Law on Securities of 2019 was one of several laws amended (“Amended Securities Law”) under the wide-ranging Law No. 56/2024/QH15 passed by the National Assembly on November 29, 2024. The amendments came into force on January 1, 2025, with certain provisions related to professional securities investors and the eligibility criteria for public companies becoming effective on January 1, 2026.

Below are some of the key points of the Amended Securities Law.

Changes to Professional Securities Investors

Professional securities investors (PSIs) are investors who have adequate financial capacity or securities qualifications and can participate in private placements and private funds, among other investment activities. Under the Amended Securities Law, foreign investors, including individuals and organizations, are now automatically classified as PSIs, without having to meet any requirements regarding financial capacity. This loosening of requirements is expected to attract more foreign investment.

However, from January 1, 2026, individual PSIs will only be able to purchase, trade, and transfer privately placed corporate bonds that: (i) have been given credit ratings and are secured by collateral, or (ii) have been given credit ratings and covered by payment guarantees from credit institutions. Meanwhile, institutional PSIs will not be bound by these restrictions relating to privately placed corporate bonds.

Protecting Shareholders in Private Securities Issuance

The Amended Securities Law introduces additional conditions for private issuance of shares, convertible bonds, and warrant-linked bonds by public companies, and revises the required contents in the issuance plans from “criteria and number of investors” to “number of shares, offering price, or principles for determining the offering price.” This change promotes shareholder supervision and protects minority shareholders from overly powerful boards of directors.

Expanded Powers of SSC

The Amended Securities Law grants the State Securities Commission (SSC) new powers to suspend and cancel private placements of securities and adds new circumstances for the SSC to cancel public offerings.

The SSC may suspend a registered private placement of securities for up to 60 days: (i) if the offering documents contain misleading information or omit material information that could impact investment decisions and cause damage to investors, or (ii) if the distribution of the securities does not comply with statutory requirements. The issuer must announce the suspension within 7 business days from the suspension and recall the issued securities upon the investor’s request as well as provide a refund to the investor within 15 days from the investor’s request. If deficiencies leading to the suspension are corrected, the SSC will issue a written notice of withdrawal of the suspension. As a result, such private placement will be allowed to proceed.

The SSC may cancel a registered private placement of securities if (i) the issuer fails to address deficiencies leading to the suspension within the suspension period; (ii) the offering documents or the distribution of the private placement of shares are found to have violated the law while the issued shares are not yet listed or registered for trading on the stock exchange; or (iii) the offering documents or the distribution of the securities upon completion of private placement are found to have breached the law. Cancellation of the private placement does not apply to offered shares, shares converted from convertible bonds, or shares purchased from warrants that have been listed or registered for trading on the stock exchange after the private placement.

Under the Amended Securities Law, the SSC may now cancel a public offering if the offering documents or the distribution of the public offering are found to have violated the law after the public offering, but before completion of procedures to be listed or registered for trading on the stock exchange.

Liability Framework for Public Companies, Shareholders, and Advisors

Previously, issuers, underwriters, auditors, and “certifying organizations” were liable for the legality, accuracy, and sufficiency of securities-related documents and reporting during public offerings or when registering securities for listing or trading. The Amended Securities Law extends this liability to private offerings of securities, public disclosures by public companies or their shareholders, and reporting of secondary trading of securities by investors. Further, advisors involved in these activities may be exposed to greater liability for their failure to adhere to professional standards.

This change pushes public companies, their shareholders, and advisors to be more accountable and enhance the transparency in the securities market. They must ensure that all documents and information related to public disclosures and securities trading do not have misleading information and comprehensively include all material facts that could influence decisions by investors, authorities, and other stakeholders.

Defining “Securities Market Manipulation”

The Amended Securities Law updates the acts of “securities market manipulation” as outlined in the 2015 Penal Code to align the definitions of securities market manipulation under securities law and criminal law, closing any gaps between the two. This change aims to imposes administrative liability for market manipulation that does not reach threshold for criminal liability.

Other Changes

The Amended Securities Law adds additional grounds for the cancellation of public company status, which include a public company (i) failing to publish its audited financial statements or annual shareholder meeting resolutions, for two consecutive years; (ii) failing to register its shares with the Vietnam Securities Depository and Clearing Corporation; or (iii) failing to register its shares for listing.

Privately issued corporate bonds offered before January 1, 2026, will adhere to the 2019 Securities and the 2020 Law on Enterprises until the principal and interest are fully paid. Privately issued corporate bonds disclosed to the stock exchange before January 1, 2026, but not yet distributed will follow the same laws until distribution is complete, after which they will comply with the Amended Securities Law.

A public company repurchasing shares from employees in accordance with an employee stock ownership program does not need to reduce charter capital, but only needs to report the total number of repurchased employee shares at the nearest annual general meeting of shareholders. Accordingly, the Amended Securities Law is implicitly reviving treasury shares as previously outlined in the expired 2006 Securities Law, allowing public companies to hold treasury shares after the effective date of the 2019 Securities Law for this limited case of repurchased employee shares. This amendment is paired with an exception to the 6-month blackout period for issuing new shares after a share repurchase for repurchase of shares from leaving employees according to the employee stock ownership program.

Outlook

The Amended Securities Law aims to significantly strengthen governance, increase robustness, and provide better protection for investors in Vietnam’s securities market. This initiative should help address evolving challenges, upgrade the local market, and ensure alignment with international practice.

Related Professionals

Practices

Banking and Finance

Capital Markets

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

March 16, 2026
Thailand’s Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has broadened the definition of institutional investors, expanded the types of qualifying investments, and updated financial qualification thresholds for various investor categories through a revised notification on the definitions of institutional investors, ultra-high net worth investors, and high net worth investors. The amended framework, which came into force on March 1, 2026, adds digital asset business operators, investment planners, and investment consultants to the roster of entities recognized as institutional investors, and broadens the definition of investment to account for digital tokens. Expanded Definition of Institutional Investors Under the SEC’s revised notification, the category of institutional investors now expressly includes digital asset business operators licensed under the Royal Decree on Digital Asset Businesses B.E. 2561 (2018). This addition recognizes the growing role of digital asset platforms and service providers in Thailand’s investment ecosystem and aligns the regulatory treatment of digital markets with that of traditional markets. The definition of institutional investors now also encompasses investment planners and investment consultants approved by the SEC. Previously, only SEC-approved investment analysts held this status; the expansion covers a broader scope of professionals who possess comparable expertise and experience in evaluating investment opportunities. Broadened Investment Definition The revised framework now defines investment to mean direct or indirect investment in a wider range of assets beyond deposits. Specifically, the definition covers: Securities under the Securities and Exchange Act Derivatives under the Derivatives Act Investment tokens offered to the public Government-issued digital tokens (G-tokens) as specified in a separate SEC notification This expansion ensures that financial status assessments reflect the full spectrum of an investor’s holdings, including emerging digital assets. Updated Financial Qualification Thresholds The amended SEC notification also provides updated qualification thresholds for angel investors, ultra-high net worth investors, and high net worth investors. While the core criteria
Read More
March 10, 2026
Thailand’s Ministry of Finance and Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) have issued regulations broadening the criteria for determining who qualifies as a “major shareholder” of licensed securities and digital asset business operators. Under relevant SEC regulations, major shareholders of a regulated entity must obtain regulatory approval and undergo screening by the SEC. The revised framework introduces both shareholding-based and control-based tests to determine which shareholders require regulatory approval for a wider range of indirect ownership structures and de facto control. The Ministry of Finance notification took effect on February 21, 2026, while the SEC’s clarifying rules took effect on March 4, 2026. These changes aim to enhance transparency around beneficial ownership and strengthen regulatory oversight of entities operating in Thailand’s capital markets. Expanded Definition Under the revised framework, a “major shareholder” now includes persons who directly or indirectly hold more than 10% of the voting rights in a regulated company, as well as persons who exercise control over the regulated company or its shares. This system of two separate tests, based on both shareholding and control, differs from the prior regime, which focused primarily on shareholding thresholds and applied a more limited method for determining indirect shareholdings. The two tests (detailed below) operate independently of each other, and any person identified by either of the tests will be deemed a major shareholder. Shareholding-Based Test Broadens Indirect Ownership Attribution For the shareholding-based test, the SEC recognizes two existing methods for identifying indirect ownership, together with a new proportional attribution method. Any person captured under these methods, which are described below, will be regarded as a major shareholder of the regulated company and must obtain SEC approval as a major shareholder. First, the existing framework continues to apply to both first-tier and chain ownership structures. Approval is required for (1) first-tier
Read More
March 5, 2026
Amid increasing financial globalization, Vietnam’s establishment of an International Financial Center (IFC) represents a strategic initiative to attract high-quality foreign investment and enhance the country’s position in the global financial system. In support of this objective, a Specialized Court was introduced under Resolution No. 222/2025/QH15 as a dedicated dispute resolution mechanism within the IFC framework. The Specialized Court at the IFC was subsequently operationalized by Law on the Specialized Court No. 150/2025/QH15, effective from January 1, 2026. Organizational Structure of the Specialized Court The Specialized Court at the IFC is a court within the system of the People’s Courts, organized and operating in accordance with the Law on the Specialized Court, and vested with jurisdiction to adjudicate and resolve cases at the IFC. The Specialized Court is located in Ho Chi Minh City and comprises (i) a Court of First Instance; (ii) a Court of Appeal, and (iii) a supporting apparatus. Jurisdiction of the Specialized Court The jurisdiction of the Specialized Court at the IFC is strictly defined based on both (i) the subject matter of the cases and (ii) the membership status of the parties involved. Specifically, the Specialized Court has jurisdiction over (except for cases involving public interests or the interests of the state) the following: Disputes arising from investment and business activities. Requests for recognition and enforcement in Vietnam of judgments and decisions of foreign courts and foreign arbitral awards. Requests related to dispute resolution by arbitration. Other disputes directly related to investment and business activities (to be specified by the Supreme People’s Court). Additionally, at least one party in the case must be a member of the IFC. The IFC’s membership status is established through registration, recognition as a member, or the grant of a license for establishment and operation within the IFC. In the
Read More
February 27, 2026
The Bank of Thailand (BOT) has officially implemented a new regulatory framework supervising systemically important retail payment systems (SIRPS), effective February 21, 2026, with PromptPay being the first payment system designated as a SIRPS. Under this new set of regulations, the BOT may designate payment systems under the Payment Systems Act B.E. 2560 (2017) as SIRPSs based on quantitative and qualitative assessments. Once a system is designated as a SIRPS, the operator becomes subject to expanded supervisory obligations beyond the general requirements of the Payment Systems Act. Enhanced Supervisory Requirements SIRPS operators must comply with a heightened supervisory regime across three key areas, outlined below. 1. Governance SIRPS operators must maintain robust and transparent governance structures, including: Balanced board composition, with at least one-third of the board comprising independent directors who represent stakeholders in the system (such as payment service providers, consumers, and experts). Independent directors may serve for no more than two consecutive terms. Subcommittees to assist the board in overseeing compliance, policy implementation, and operational strategy. Clear separation between executives responsible for risk and information security and those overseeing day-to-day business operations. Risk Management and System SecuritySIRPS operators must implement comprehensive risk management frameworks, including: Clear service agreements between the SIRPS operator and its direct participants (payment service providers who connect directly to the SIRPS), defining roles and responsibilities among stakeholders. These agreements must include obligations for direct SIRPS participants to supervise any indirect participants they onboard to ensure compliance with service agreements and business rules. A business continuity plan covering both IT and non-IT aspects, with annual review. The SIRPS must target service availability comparable to international payment infrastructures, including the ability to recover operations within two hours of a disruption and to maintain scalable operational capacity. Tools and controls to monitor and manage material or
Read More