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

January 5, 2023

Vietnam’s Data Protection Regulations: What to Expect in 2023

Subscribe to Updates

Data protection in Vietnam has been an ever-changing area of law in the last few years, with many legislative and practical developments. From its initiative to build the very first comprehensive Personal Data Protection Decree to meet international standards, to its actions to tackle widespread illegal data processing and trading, the Vietnamese government has shown its determination to strengthen the protection of data, which it has recognized as one of the national key tasks in the Prime Minister’s Strategy for Development of E-Government.

The year 2023 is expected to be another year of many important changes made to the law and practices in this area. This article discusses what we anticipate to be the key upcoming developments in Vietnam’s data protection regime that businesses may wish to keep a close eye on to ensure compliance.

Tightened Rules on Data Collection and Data Transfer

The conditions for personal data processing under the current law are rather sketchily outlined. In general, the data subject’s consent to the scope and purposes of the data processing may be considered sufficient for any collection, use, retention, or sharing of personal data. Explicit consent is not clearly required, except when the data is collected in e-commerce, used for direct marketing purposes, or for other strictly controlled activities. This leads to the practice where data controllers usually do not treat consent as a serious matter. In addition, once consent has been obtained, data controllers tend to comfortably collect whatever data they want, since the law does not require the collection to be “proportionate.”

This situation is expected to change in 2023 with more stringent regulations on personal data processing underway. The first and most influential set of rules on data protection to come out early this year will likely be the much talked-about Personal Data Protection Decree (“PDPD”) developed by the Ministry of Public Security (MPS), which has been in draft form since early 2021. The first public version of the draft PDPD (dated February 2021) proposed ruling out silence by data subjects as a valid form of consent, as well as requiring consent to be expressed in writing with a printable and reproducible format.

These new requirements, once taking force, could render illegal any processing of personal data without explicit consent. Other conditions of consent include that it can be made partially and conditionally, and withdrawn at any time by the data subject. In addition, the draft PDPD also proposed introducing the principle of data minimization (proportionality), according to which personal data collected must be limited to only what is necessary to accomplish the specified purposes.

The Draft Amended Consumers Protection Law (“Draft CPL”), scheduled to be promulgated within 2023, has also proposed tightening the conditions on consent for processing of consumers’ personal data. The Draft CPL requires traders, in obtaining consent for collecting consumer data, to establish a mechanism for consumers to select the types of information that they agree for the traders to collect and express their consent in a suitable form. For special processing purposes like sharing, disclosure, or transfer of personal data to third parties, and use of personal data for sending advertisements and introducing products, the Draft CPL requires a mechanism for the data subjects to clearly opt in to giving or not giving their consent. This requirement is similar to what is currently required for e-commerce websites/applications. In addition, bundled consent, i.e., a clause in a consumer contract or general terms and conditions that makes the conclusion of the contract or the terms and conditions dependent on the consumer’s consent to the collection, storage, and use of his or her data, is likely to be invalid under the Draft CPL.

Interestingly, the Draft CPL provides that collection of personal data that has been publicly disclosed does not require any notification to the consumers. This means scraping of publicly available personal data might be acceptable in Vietnam once the Draft CPL is promulgated and takes effect. However, scraping of non-publicly available personal data is still prohibited and could constitute a crime.

Apart from consent, the regulations on cross-border transfer of personal data will also soon be strengthened. The potential new approach to regulate cross-border transfer of personal data is believed to be revealed by chance in the Draft Decree on Sanctioning Administrative Violations in the Field of Cybersecurity (dated September 2021), which stipulates violations against the draft PDPD. Accordingly, the newly proposed conditions for cross-border data transfer may include only an impact assessment dossier for the transfer, a data transfer agreement between the sender and the recipient, and a post-transfer report to the personal data protection authority.

Compared to the onerous set of conditions for cross-border transfer of personal data that the MPS originally proposed in the draft PDPD, which include among others a state approval prior to the transfer and the storage of the original data in Vietnam, the new conditions appear less burdensome.

Intensified Regulatory Scrutiny

Despite the data protection regulations in place, reports on actual enforcement in practice have been rather limited. One possible reason is that regulatory inspectors have not been focusing on personal data in their activities. Things may change shortly with the recent message from the Ministry of Information and Communications (MIC) on its enforcement plan in this area (source).

In particular, the minister of the MIC announced that the MIC would conduct comprehensive inspections into companies’ compliance with the regulations on collection, processing, and protection of customers’ personal data in the coming time. Telecommunications carriers are said to be the first enterprises to be inspected, followed by postal companies and social networking platforms.

The issue of consent for data processing was notably highlighted by the minister in his discussion. Therefore, compliance in obtaining customer consent can be anticipated to be key in the MIC’s inspection scope. The implementation of technical and managerial measures to protect personal data according to the law is also likely to be scrutinized.

Continued Assertive Action against Illegal Data Trading

Vietnam has for years been a hotspot for the unauthorized trading of personal data, according to recent reports by the MPS and the MIC. The most common violation is where the infringing companies or their employees sell packages of customers’ identity and contact information including phone numbers, email addresses, and ID card information to third parties without authorization. Most of these data buyers would use the personal information for marketing purposes, including to make advertising calls or to send spam SMS or email advertisements to the information subjects. The violators may even use the personal data to commit financial fraud, including to obtain bank loans under the name of the data subject victims, or to impersonate state authorities or acquaintances of the victims to request money transfers (source). Data crimes therefore have been and will continue to be under the enforcement focus of the high-tech police at both the central and provincial levels.

The police are also likely to take a strict view and initiate a criminal prosecution against any act of illegal data trading. The most recent actions reported in the media include two cases where the police of Phu Tho Province prosecuted five individuals for the criminal act of “trading, exchanging, giving […] lawfully private information of an organization or individual on the computer or telecommunications network without the consent of the information owner” under Article 288 of the Criminal Code.

In one of the cases, two individuals were found using self-developed software to collect personal data of over 2 million people by scanning and capturing the data from Facebook and Google accounts, and selling the data. The other case involved three individuals’ collection and sale of more than 400,000 personal information records containing phone numbers and addresses, generating about VND 1.1 billion (approx. USD 47,000) from the illegal business (source). With the government’s determination to tackle data crimes, more criminal actions like these are expected to be seen in 2023.

Related Professionals

Industries

Technology

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

April 9, 2026
As part of its ongoing public consultation process for the development of new practical guidelines under the Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019) (PDPA), Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC) held a two‑day public hearing on April 1–2, 2026. The hearing followed an online questionnaire and stakeholder engagement activities conducted in March 2026 and reflects the PDPC’s continued efforts to develop guidance that aligns international regulatory standards with Thai operational realities. The public hearing provided a forum for participants from both the public and private sectors to exchange views with the PDPC on the proposed guidance so that it responds to the needs of the business community while supporting effective and balanced enforcement of the PDPA. The PDPC emphasized that the consultation process is part of a wider policy objective to build trust in the convenient, secure, and internationally aligned exchange of data. Structure of the Consultation Process According to the PDPC, the initiative to develop the draft PDPA guidelines is being implemented through three core phases: Review of international best practices. The PDPC has conducted a comparative review of data protection guidance and regulatory approaches in jurisdictions with internationally recognized standards, including Singapore, the United Kingdom, the European Union (EU), and Japan. These materials are intended to serve as a reference point for developing practical recommendations across key subject areas under the PDPA. Identification of practical issues and challenges. To ensure that the guidelines respond to real‑world compliance challenges in Thailand, the PDPC has gathered views from a broad range of stakeholders across the public sector, the private sector, and the general public. This phase included focus group discussions and questionnaires aimed at identifying areas to provide organizations with greater clarity and consistency on regulatory expectations. Preparation of draft guidelines. Insights from the comparative study and stakeholder
Read More
April 3, 2026
On March 16, 2026, Vietnam’s Ministry of Public Security released a draft version of a new Decree on the Prevention and Combating of Cybercrime and High-Tech Crime to replace the currently effective Decree 25/2014/ND-CP. In the draft, the ministry has proposed a comprehensive regulatory framework aimed at addressing violations occurring within the cybersecurity domain, including measures related to intellectual property. Acts of Online IP Infringement Article 9 of the draft decree notably introduces specific provisions addressing online intellectual property infringement, with detailed lists of acts considered to constitute infringement in the online environment. Copyright and related rights infringement includes: Uploading or sharing works, performances, sound recordings, video recordings, broadcasts, computer programs, software, research, documents, theses, or other intellectual creations on digital platforms without the consent of the rights holder. Unauthorized livestreaming of copyrighted television programs, sporting events, or artistic performances. Uploading, sharing, storing, transmitting, or providing links to infringing works or digital content via websites, social networks, applications, or digital platforms. Providing or using software, tools, devices, or access codes to circumvent technological protection measures or evade lawful control mechanisms implemented by rights holders. Using artificial intelligence (AI) tools to replicate the ideas or structure of another person’s work without significant new creativity or without proper attribution, thereby causing damage to the original author. Industrial property infringement includes: Manufacturing, trading, advertising, or distributing counterfeit goods bearing counterfeit trademarks, geographical indications, or industrial designs, as well as goods infringing industrial property rights through online platforms. Unauthorized registration, appropriation, or use of domain names, account names, or digital identifiers that create confusion regarding the rights holder or the origin of goods or services. Producing, using, or offering for sale products containing all or part of a patented invention via online platforms. Advertising or introducing products with technical features or characteristics identical
Read More
April 3, 2026
Thailand’s Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has established a comprehensive governance framework for the use of artificial intelligence and machine learning (AI/ML) in the capital markets. The framework provides guidance to capital market business operators on understanding the risks associated with AI/ML implementation and adopting appropriate practices to build public confidence in Thailand’s capital markets. While the guidelines are principle-based rather than prescriptive, they reflect the SEC’s expectations for responsible AI/ML governance and are likely to inform supervisory activities and industry standards going forward. Scope The framework applies to capital market business operators supervised by the SEC. This includes, for example, securities and derivatives firms, asset management companies, mutual fund and private fund managers, investment advisors and investment consultants (including robo-advisory service providers), derivatives intermediaries, and other licensed intermediaries and market operators in the Thai capital markets that deploy AI/ML in their operations. Core Principles of the Guidelines The framework is presented as a best-practice manual rather than prescriptive regulation, providing guidance that regulated entities may apply to their AI/ML governance and risk management as appropriate. While currently nonbinding, the guidelines signal the SEC’s expectations for the sector, particularly in relation to other binding SEC regulations such as those covering IT risk management and market conduct. The guidelines name four core principles for AI/ML deployment: Fairness: Design and develop AI/ML with consideration for fairness, equality, and social diversity to prevent discrimination against individuals or groups. Legal and ethical compliance: Ensure AI/ML use aligns with applicable laws, ethical standards, and organizational values and policies. Accountability: Establish clear responsibility—both internally and externally—for AI/ML activities and outcomes. Transparency: Provide adequate disclosure to users about AI/ML use, including explainability of decisions and traceability of activities. AI/ML Best Practices The guidelines prescribe best practices across four stages of the AI/ML lifecycle, as described below.
Read More
April 2, 2026
Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA) enforcement has entered a new phase, and the insurance industry is squarely in the regulatory spotlight. The Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC) considers insurers “large-scale” processors of sensitive data—including health records, financial information, and biometric data—making the sector a focal point for enforcement action. In August 2025 alone, the PDPC issued administrative fines totaling THB 21.5 million, and fines for individual violations have ranged from THB 50,000 to THB 2 million. The PDPC has also deployed its “Eagle Eye Crawler,” an AI-driven surveillance tool that monitors websites around the clock for data leaks and noncompliant privacy notices. This article highlights the key regulatory developments directly affecting insurers and outlines practical steps toward compliance. What Has Changed: OIC and PDPC Alignment The Office of Insurance Commission (OIC) has synchronized its sector-specific rules with the PDPA through the Notification on Customer Personal Data Protection (No. 2) B.E. 2568 (2025). The combined effect of the PDPC’s general enforcement push and the OIC’s sectoral guidance creates four critical compliance areas for insurers. Consent unbundling. Consent for marketing must be strictly separated from the core insurance contract; bundling marketing consent into the policy application is no longer permissible. Agent and intermediary oversight. Insurance intermediaries are generally classified as data processors, meaning that insurers—as data controllers—must provide specific written instructions and security protocols to all agents and brokers. A 2026 enforcement trend shows controllers being held liable for the “weak security” of their vendors and downstream processors. Enhanced privacy notices. Insurers must provide a summary privacy notice alongside the full policy, plainly stating categories of data, purposes, lawful bases, disclosure recipients, cross-border transfers, retention periods, data subject rights, and easy marketing opt-out channels. DPO registration and ROPA. All organizations involved in “regular or systematic monitoring of data subjects on
Read More