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

February 4, 2026

Vietnam’s Draft Crypto Sanctions Decree: Enforcement Comes to the Pilot Market

On November 18, 2025, Vietnam’s Ministry of Finance released for public consultation a draft decree on administrative sanctions in the field of crypto assets and crypto asset markets (the “Draft Decree”), intended to implement Resolution No. 05/2025/NQ-CP dated September 9, 2025, on the pilot crypto asset market in Vietnam (“Resolution 05”). While Resolution 05 sets out who may participate and under what conditions, the Draft Decree addresses a more practical question for market participants, i.e., what happens if those conditions are not met. In doing so, the Draft Decree offers important insight into how Vietnamese regulators intend to supervise, discipline, and ultimately shape the crypto market during the pilot phase.

Regulatory Scope and Overall Sanctions Architecture

The Draft Decree applies to both domestic and foreign organizations and individuals engaging in crypto-related activities in Vietnam’s market. Covered entities include: (i) crypto asset issuers; (ii) crypto asset service providers, including trading platforms and market operators; (iii) Vietnamese and foreign investors participating in the pilot market; and (iv) other organizations involved in the offering, issuance, or provision of crypto-related services in Vietnam.

The breadth of this scope is deliberate. It appears to reflect a regulatory view that cross-border structures, offshore platforms, and indirect participation may not necessarily insulate market actors from compliance obligations once they operate within the pilot framework. For the crypto industry, this may mark a shift from regulatory ambiguity toward a more explicit articulation of jurisdictional reach.

At first glance, the Draft Decree’s monetary penalties appear restrained. The maximum fine per administrative violation is capped at VND 200 million (approx. USD 7,700) for organizations and VND 100 million (approx. USD 3,800) for individuals. However, focusing solely on fine levels risks missing the point. The Draft Decree also places great regulatory weight on supplementary sanctions and corrective measures, including: (i) temporary suspension of activities; (ii) revocation of licenses for defined periods; (iii) disgorgement of unlawful gains; (iv) mandatory corrective disclosures; and (v) orders to remove, suspend, or rectify noncompliant platforms, systems, or information.

Repeated violations, particularly of disclosure obligations, may be treated as aggravating circumstances, allowing authorities to escalate penalties within the statutory range rather than issuing multiple isolated fines. This signals a focus on patterns of conduct, not one-off technical breaches.

Key Sanctions: Scope, Type, and Penalty Levels

The sanctions applicable to key violations under the Draft Decree are outlined below. Unless stated otherwise, the prescribed penalties apply to organizations, with individuals subject to penalties at generally 50% of the amounts imposed on organizations for the same violations.

Sanctions Applicable to Crypto Asset Issuance and Offerings

Issuers that breach regulatory requirements – such as foreign ownership restrictions or disclosure obligations – may be subject to monetary fines ranging from VND 70 million to VND 200 million (approx. USD 2,700 to USD-7,700), with higher penalties applicable to serious violations, including unauthorized offerings or failure to publish a prospectus. In addition to fines, regulators may impose temporary suspension of issuance or offering activities, require corrective or supplemental disclosures, and order the disgorgement of illegal gains.

These measures underline a key regulatory priority: Offerings are viewed as the primary risk entry point for retail investors, and compliance failures at this stage are treated as fundamentally serious.

Obligations and Sanctions Applicable to Crypto Asset Service Providers

The Draft Decree also devotes substantial attention to crypto asset service providers, reflecting their central role in market integrity. Depending on severity, service providers may face fines from VND 30 million to VND 200 million (approx. USD 1,200 to USD 7,700) for breaches of operational, disclosure, and investor protection obligations. Sanctionable conduct includes failures in disclosure and reporting, deficiencies in KYC and account opening procedures, misleading marketing, inadequate monitoring of trading activities, improper segregation of client assets, and weaknesses in cybersecurity or system controls.

In more serious cases, particularly where investor interests or market integrity are affected, authorities may apply temporary suspension of services, license revocation for a specified period, and orders to correct, remove, or cease the use of noncompliant systems or information, in addition to monetary penalties.

Sanctions Applicable to the Operation of Crypto Asset Trading Markets

Operators of crypto asset trading markets are subject to some of the highest penalties under the Draft Decree. Fines of VND 70 million to VND 200 million (approx. USD 2,700 to USD-7,700) apply to violations such as failure to disclose market launch information, noncompliance with obligations following license revocation, or operating without proper authorization. Supplementary measures may include temporary suspension of market operations, revocation of operating licenses, and disgorgement of illegal profits derived from non-compliant activities.

Investor Conduct and Cross-Border Transaction-Related Violations

Notably, the Draft Decree does not focus exclusively on platforms and issuers. Investors themselves, both domestic and foreign, are within scope. Domestic and foreign investors may be fined VND 10 million to VND 100 million (approx. USD 400 to USD 3,800) for conducting transactions outside licensed platforms or breaching foreign exchange, account usage, or reporting requirements. In addition to monetary penalties, regulators may require rectification of noncompliant transactions, submission of corrective disclosures or reports, and, where violations show signs of criminal conduct, referral to competent investigative authorities.

Competent Authorities and Enforcement Framework

The Draft Decree confers broad and overlapping sanctioning powers on multiple authorities. In principle, sanctions may be imposed by provincial People’s Committees, financial authorities, securities regulators, and competent public security authorities, except that violations relating to foreign investors’ fund transfers and anti-money laundering obligations fall within the sanctioning competence of State Bank of Vietnam authorities.

The Draft Decree also limits sanctioning powers by authority level: Certain officials are capped at lower fine thresholds and may not impose supplementary sanctions. Where a violation attracts sanctions exceeding an authority’s competence, the case file must be promptly transferred to the competent authority for handling.

Notably, certain violations, including investors trading outside licensed platforms, the provision or promotion of crypto services without a license, operating beyond the scope of an approved license, and breaches of anti-money laundering regulations, may also be referred for criminal investigation if they exhibit signs of criminal conduct. In such cases, the relevant authority must transfer the case file to competent investigative bodies for further proceedings.

Outlook

Read as a whole, the Draft Decree reflects a measured yet unequivocally firm regulatory stance. While the pilot market is intended to foster innovation, it does so within clearly defined and actively enforced boundaries. Importantly, the enforcement toolkit is designed to correct conduct and screen out noncompliant participants, rather than to function as a purely punitive mechanism. For participants across the crypto ecosystem, including issuers, exchanges, service providers, funds, and sophisticated investors, the message is clear: Vietnam’s crypto pilot may be experimental, but its compliance expectations are not.

The Ministry of Finance is expected to finalize the Draft Decree and submit it to the government for approval, potentially clearing the way for enforceable administrative sanctions from early 2026.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

January 13, 2025
The State Bank of Vietnam’s Circular No. 50/2024/TT-NHNN regulating safety and security for the provision of online services in the banking sector (“Circular 50”), issued on October 31, 2024, took effect on January 1, 2025, with delayed effectiveness for certain provisions on (i) network, communication, and security systems, online banking application software, and mobile banking application software (July 1, 2025); (ii) transaction confirmation for payment transactions conducted via the straight-through processing method (January 1, 2026); and (iii) authentication forms and reporting obligations (July 1, 2026). The cybersecurity situation in Vietnam is complicated, and the banking and finance sector has been one of the top targets of high-tech criminals. Circular 50 seeks to enhance user protection by expanding the technical requirements to more services in the banking sector as well as standardizing how transactions are authenticated. Expanded Scope of Services Covered Previous regulations on safety and security of online services in the banking sector only covered banking services and intermediary payment services. Circular 50 expands the scope to include other services of credit institutions and foreign bank branches such as credit information services, foreign exchange services, securities depository services, and services related to factoring and letters of credit, which now need to comply with technical requirements and standards for online services such as firewalls and DMZ network barriers. Risk-Based Approach to Authentication Circular 50 sets out standards for payment transactions and card transactions by: Classifying various online transactions based on the type of client, the purpose of the transfer, the value of the specific transaction, and the total value of certain transactions during the day; and Applying various types of authentication for the corresponding types of online transactions, e.g., using passwords or PINs for small-value online transactions, and using OTPs (through SMS, voice, or email), biometric matching, or e-signatures for
January 10, 2025
On January 8, 2025, Thailand’s Office of the Personal Data Protection Committee published two notifications in the Government Gazette—one for data controllers and the other for data processors—concerning exemptions for data controllers and data processors from the requirement to create and maintain records of processing activities (ROPAs) under the Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019). The notification for data processors took effect on January 9, 2025, the day after its publication. The notification for data controllers will take effect on April 8, 2025. The content of these notifications is identical to that in the draft versions of the notifications previously released for public consultation in October 2024. For more information on the ROPA exemptions for data controllers and data processors, or on any aspect of personal data protection in Thailand, please contact Nopparat Lalitkomon at [email protected] or Wilin Somya at [email protected].
January 9, 2025
On January 1, 2025, Myanmar’s State Administration Council enacted Cybersecurity Law No. 1/2025, which aims to regulate various aspects of digital security and online activities. The law has not yet been implemented and will come into force on a date specified by the Myanmar president, who will also provide an official adoption and compliance timeline for individuals and organizations impacted by the new regulations. Below are some of the key provisions, implications, and penalties under the Cybersecurity Law. Extraterritorial penalties. The law contains an important provision that authorizes penalties against Myanmar citizens who are found guilty of violations, even if these occur outside the country’s borders. VPN definition and regulation. Virtual private networks (VPNs) are defined by this law as specific systems that function as backup networks by using technological means in order to ensure the safety of linking networks to each other. This definition sets the framework for subsequent regulations and penalties associated with VPN usage. The law does not restrict individuals or entities from using VPNs; it regulates VPN service providers. Penalties for unapproved VPN services. Establishing a VPN or providing VPN services without approval from the designated ministry (to be appointed later by the government) can result in significant penalties. For individuals, the punishment may be imprisonment for 1–6 months, a fine of MMK 1–10 million (approx. USD 476–4,760), or both, with the proceeds of the violation being confiscated. If the violator is a company or organization, the minimum fine will be MMK 10 million, and the proceeds will be confiscated. Government oversight. The ministry designated by the government is authorized to investigate and take control of cybersecurity services and digital platform services for national defense and security purposes, or upon request from a government department or organization in accordance with respective laws. Licensing requirements. The
January 9, 2025
Thailand’s Fiscal Policy Office (FPO) has released a draft of its planned Financial Business Hub Act, which is in line with the government’s aim of positioning Thailand as a regional financial hub and a critical player in the global economy. The draft act, on which the FPO is accepting comments until January 9, 2025, details the framework for promoting and attracting international financial businesses and related services to operate in Thailand, proposes various incentives, and outlines supervisory guidelines. This article examines key elements of the draft Financial Business Hub Act relevant to financial business operators. Incentivized Financial Businesses The draft act identifies the financial businesses to be promoted and incentivized. These target businesses include: Commercial banking businesses, Payment service businesses, Securities businesses, Derivatives businesses, Digital assets businesses, Insurance and reinsurance brokerage businesses, and Other financial-related businesses as determined by the Committee for the Supervision and Promotion of Financial Centers. Thailand’s finance minister explained that initially, the draft law intends to target businesses using an “out-out” model, which describes the raising of capital abroad for investment abroad, before expanding to an “out-in” model, in which capital is raised abroad for investment domestically. Therefore, the draft law currently specifies that the target businesses must only provide services to nonresidents without soliciting residents of Thailand to use their services. Authorization Targeted financial business operators will need to receive authorization from the Committee for the Supervision and Promotion of Financial Centers. The main eligibility criteria for authorization are the incorporation an entity (e.g., a company registered in Thailand, a branch of a foreign juristic person) with an office in designated areas to be specified in a royal decree (currently expected to be Bangkok and adjacent provinces) and the possession of other qualifications as prescribed in the draft act. Target businesses in Thailand will