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 7, 2025

Vietnam’s Government Restructuring: Key Changes and Implications for Businesses

Subscribe to Updates

Vietnam’s political system is currently undergoing a significant reorganization to streamline government operations and improve efficiency. In this regard, Plan 141/KH-BCDTKNQ18, issued on December 6, 2024, provided guidelines on the restructuring of existing ministries, ministerial-level agencies, and government-affiliated agencies. Accordingly, the number of ministries is being reduced from 18 to 14 through mergers and consolidations and the establishment of a new Ministry of Ethnic and Religious Affairs. The number of ministerial-level agencies is being reduced to three, and government-affiliated agencies to five. Similar streamlining is happening at provincial levels.

The newly consolidated state agencies will assume all functions, rights, and responsibilities of the merged entities, and will continue handling all ongoing matters previously handled by the former agencies. Some examples of these changes include the following:

  • The Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST) will oversee telecommunications, IT applications, cybersecurity, e-transactions, and national digital transformation, which had previously been managed by the Ministry of Information and Communications (MIC). MOST will also be responsible for issuing licenses related to these areas, such as licenses for G1 online game services and telecommunication services. The Ministry of Culture, Sports, and Tourism will assume the responsibility of press management, previously under the MIC.
  • The Ministry of Finance will assume state management functions related to investment, previously handled by the Ministry of Planning and Investment. Provincial Departments of Finance will issue Investment Registration Certificates and Enterprise Registration Certificates, a responsibility previously held by the Departments of Planning and Investment.
  • The Ministry of Home Affairs will oversee labor and employment matters. Provincial Departments of Home Affairs will be authorized to issue work permits and will be the designated authorities for companies to register their internal labor regulations.

Advantages for Businesses

The restructuring aims to simplify regulations and expedite licensing processes. By reducing the number of agencies and streamlining their functions, businesses can expect to encounter fewer bureaucratic hurdles and experience faster processing times for permits, licenses, and approvals.

In addition, the government’s focus on attracting and retaining top talent through measures like increased salaries, allowances, and benefits (as outlined in Decree No. 179/2024/ND-CP) is expected to result in a more professional and efficient public sector. This, in turn, will lead to more informed and timely decision-making.

With a more streamlined government structure, businesses can potentially save time and resources by dealing with fewer government agencies. This can significantly reduce the administrative burden on businesses and free up resources for core activities such as product development, service innovation, and customer acquisition.

Potential Challenges

The government restructuring, while aiming for long-term benefits, may present some temporary challenges for businesses, including:

  • Disruptions during reorganization: As the newly formed agencies undergo internal restructuring, they may experience delays in resuming their normal operations. This can lead to temporary slowdowns in processing applications, issuing licenses, and handling other business-related interactions.
  • Uncertainty due to regulatory changes: The restructuring will likely involve changes in regulations and procedures governing various industries. This transitional period may create uncertainty for businesses as they navigate the evolving regulatory landscape. New state agencies might face delays in fully taking on their duties, which could lead to hesitancy in issuing licenses or making important decisions while they get used to their new roles. Additionally, changes in regulatory procedures might happen before the laws are updated, creating gaps in the legal framework and potentially slowing down decision-making by authorities.
  • Potential need for new licenses and permits: While existing licenses or permits issued under the former agency structure may remain valid until their expiry dates or until specific regulatory changes are implemented, the restructuring is expected to introduce new licensing requirements and permit application processes. The newly restructured agencies may eventually mandate the use of new license or permit forms, or require businesses to obtain entirely new licenses or permits based on revised regulations. This can lead to additional administrative burdens and delays for businesses.

Recommendations for Businesses

As Vietnam’s political system undergoes this significant transformation, businesses should take the following steps to effectively navigate this period:

  • Understand the roles and responsibilities of new state agencies to navigate the changing regulatory landscape effectively.
  • Regularly review and stay informed about new regulations to ensure compliance and avoid potential penalties.
  • Establish clear and prompt communication with relevant government agencies when carrying out regulatory procedures to avoid unnecessary delays and costs.
Related Professionals

Industries

Technology

Practices

Corporate/M&A

Employment

Regulatory Affairs

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

August 10, 2026
On July 31, 2026, Thailand’s Big Data Institute (BDI) launched a public consultation on the principles of a proposed new data-sharing law, with comments accepted until August 31, 2026. If enacted, the law would establish Thailand’s first comprehensive framework for government and private-sector data sharing, creating a systematic, secure, and transparent regime to support analytics, policymaking, research, and innovation. Central Data-Sharing Platform The draft law establishes a central system for data sharing, managed by the BDI. Government agencies would be required to connect to the BDI’s Data Integration and Intelligence Platform (also referred to as D2), in accordance with the BDI’s rules and procedures. Five Dimensions of Data Sharing The draft law covers five key types of data sharing between government (G), businesses (B), and consumers (C): G2B: Private organizations may request government data specifically for research and development purposes. The BDI will assess the applicant’s data governance, security, and privacy capabilities whether such measures meet prescribed standards before forwarding the request to the relevant government agency within 90 days. Any dispute may be escalated to a newly established Data-Sharing Promotion Committee for final determination. G2G: Government agencies may request data from other agencies through the central system. The data-holding agency must respond within 90 days, taking legality, necessity, proportionality, public interest, and personal data protection into account. Disputes may be referred to the Data-Sharing Promotion Committee for adjudication. B2G: In emergency situations involving public safety, economic security, or disaster response, the Minister of Digital Economy and Society may require private entities to provide data through the central data-sharing system. Government agencies must specify the data requested, demonstrate its necessity and expected benefits, and request only data reasonably available to the data holder. Requests for personal data must be limited to the minimum amount necessary. B2C: Royal decrees may
Read More
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