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 29, 2020

Vietnam’s New Decree 91 Sets Out Stricter Anti-Spam Regulations

Subscribe to Updates

On August 14, 2020, the government of Vietnam issued Decree 91/2020/ND-CP on fighting against spam text messages, spam email, and spam calls. The new decree will take effect on October 1, 2020, replacing Decree 90/2008 on anti-spam and all of its amendments. In general, Decree 91 retains the essential rules on anti-spam regulated in Decree 90, but expands the scope of application and provides stricter measures in controlling spam.

Some essential rules from Decree 90 that are retained in Decree 91 include the consent rule (advertisers can only send advertising text messages or advertising email, or make advertising calls, after obtaining express consent from recipients); the opt-out mechanism (recipients can refuse receiving advertising text messages, emails, and calls); a limit on the number of advertising text messages, emails, or calls an advertiser can send/make per day to a recipient and a specified time during the day for them to be sent/made; and rules for labeling advertising text messages and emails, and identifying advertisers or advertisement service providers.

Decree 91 additionally provides the following new and improved contents:

  • The scope of application is expanded to include spam calls, in addition to the spam text messages and spam emails covered under Decree 90.
  • A new, clearer definition of what could be considered spam is provided. Spam includes advertising messages, advertising emails, and advertising calls which are sent or made to users without their prior consent, or which violate regulations of Decree 91; and messages, emails, and calls containing prohibited content in violation of the specified provisions of relevant laws specified in the decree.
  • Stricter anti-spam control measures are provided. For example, a system of reporting spam to the operating number of 5656 will be developed and operated by the Authority of Information Security (AIS) under the Ministry of Information and Communications for receiving feedback about spam messages and calls. Advertisers that send advertising messages must also send copies to this system. Users, when receiving spam, may send feedback and evidence to this system. In addition, the AIS must set up and operate a Do-Not-Call Register, which is a list of phone numbers that have been registered by subscribers who do not want to receive any opt-in messages, advertising messages, or advertising calls. Advertisers must not send opt-in messages or advertising messages or make advertising calls to people on this list. Telecom service users can register or withdraw their phone numbers from the Do-Not-Call Register. Also, a blacklist of IP addresses that spread spam email will be developed and updated by the AIS on its website.
  • Relevant stakeholders will have increased responsibilities and obligations. For example, telecom and internet service providers will have to deploy and strictly implement new measures to prevent advertising messages and calls from being sent/made to the Do-Not-Call Register, and compile, update, and share blacklists of spam senders. They must also deploy artificial intelligence, big data, and other technological advances to establish and operate anti-spam systems. Email service providers will have to provide users with instructions, tools, and applications for reporting and blocking spam email; implement measures to block, filter, and update sources of spam emails; have solutions to prevent loss and accidental blocking of users’ email addresses; and monitor, inspect, and scan their email servers to make sure they are not sources of spam email. Advertisers will be required to check the Do-Not-Call Register to avoid sending opt-in messages or advertising messages or making advertising calls to numbers on the list; have appropriate solutions and enable users to refuse advertising messages and email; and promptly stop calling users if the users refuse to receive advertising calls.
  • New and stronger sanctions for administrative violations of anti-spam regulations are provided for deterrence and user protection. For example, if advertisers send any advertising messages or make any advertising calls to numbers on the Do-Not-Call Register, they will be subject to a fine ranging from VND 80,000,000 to VND 100,000,000 (around USD 3,400 to 4,300). A fine ranging from VND 140,000,000 to VND 170,000,000 (around USD 6,000 to 7,250) could be imposed for a failure to have measures to block advertising messages and advertising calls to the Do-Not-Call Register, or a failure to develop and operate anti-spam systems.

The administrative measures under Decree 91 are also improved compared to Decree 90. Decree 91 calls for the establishment of a national system for management and storage of identification names of advertisers/advertising service providers nationwide, allowing anyone to access the system to check names of advertising message senders or callers. The issuance of identification names for advertisers/advertising service providers can be done online with simple procedures via the website http://tendinhdanh.ais.gov.vn, which helps save resources, costs, and time.

Related Professionals

Industries

Technology

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

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
July 27, 2026
Vietnam’s new E-Commerce Law, which took effect on 1 July 2026 along with its implementing Decree No. 248/2026/ND-CP (Decree 248), marks a significant development in the country’s approach to online intellectual property (IP) enforcement, reflecting a clear shift from a reactive model of intermediary liability to one that expects platforms to play a more active role in preventing infringement. From notice-and-takedown to platform responsibility The most significant change introduced by the E-Commerce Law is the transformation of the legal role of e-commerce platforms. The existing safe harbor provisions under the IP Law and the copyright notice-and-takedown regime established by Decree 17/2023/ND-CP (Decree 17) largely required intermediaries to act only after receiving notice of infringement. Once infringing content had been removed, the platform’s legal obligation was generally considered fulfilled. The new legislation adopts a fundamentally different approach. Article 17 of the E-Commerce Law requires intermediary platforms to screen information relating to goods and services before publication in order to prevent listings involving counterfeit or IP-infringing goods, and goods of unknown origin. Rather than relying exclusively on complaints from rights holders, platforms are now expected to implement preventive measures before infringing listings become publicly available. Decree 248 further requires platforms to update keyword filters based on recommendations issued by competent authorities. These filtering mechanisms are intended to prevent prohibited listings from appearing on the platform and represent a further move away from a purely complaint-driven enforcement model. The legislation also introduces Vietnam’s first statutory stay-down obligation. Under the E-Commerce Law and Decree 248, major digital platforms must maintain automated systems capable of reviewing, warning against, and removing unlawful listings while also implementing measures to prevent repeat violations, defined under Decree 248 as conduct that has previously been identified and handled by the platform, but continues to recur. This obligation addresses one
Read More
July 27, 2026
A new decree on penalties for violations related to the crypto asset market creates compliance risks for offshore crypto asset exchanges in Vietnam that do not hold, and practically cannot obtain, a Vietnamese license, and for Vietnamese users who continue to transact on those platforms. Decree No. 284/2026/ND-CP (Decree 284), issued by the government of Vietnam on July 16, 2026, formally establishes an administrative penalty framework for violations related to crypto assets and the crypto asset market. The decree takes effect on September 1, 2026, and will remain in force for the duration of the five-year pilot program under Resolution No. 05/2025/NQ-CP, which is scheduled to end in September 2030. Direct Penalties on Vietnamese Users The most immediate commercial risk to offshore platforms is that their Vietnamese users now face direct personal liability for using their exchanges. Vietnamese users who trade crypto assets outside of a Ministry of Finance-licensed service provider face fines of up to VND 50 million (approximately USD 1,900). Vietnamese users trading in crypto assets that are offered or issued to foreign users face higher penalties of up to VND 100 million (approximately USD 3,800). It is expected that Vietnamese users will be more willing to migrate away from offshore platforms now that there is a risk of real enforcement against them. Penalties on Unlicensed Service Providers Violations of providing crypto asset services or advertising crypto-related services without a license face fines of up to VND 200 million (approximately USD 7,700). Operating a crypto asset trading market without proper authorization falls within the same highest penalty bands. Organizations that violate issuance, provision, or disclosure rules may face fines of up to VND 200 million. Although the maximum administrative fine per violation is capped at VND 200 million for organizations and VND 100 million for individuals, these
Read More
July 21, 2026
Thailand’s Ministry of Digital Economy and Society (MDES) published a notification establishing an expedited court-ordered takedown mechanism for online content in cases of “urgent necessity.” The notification, which was issued on July 17, 2026, under the Computer Crime Act B.E. 2550 (2007), as amended, took effect the following day. It significantly expands the categories of content subject to rapid government-initiated removal. Content Categories Subject to Takedown The notification defines “urgent necessity” (section 20, paragraph 5, of the Computer Crime Act) as circumstances where any delay in suppressing computer data may impact national security, religion, the monarchy, good morals, social culture, or public order. In this regard, it establishes four broad categories of content: Computer Crime Act offenses. National security offenses. IP and other criminal offenses, where it is contrary to public order or good morals and a competent officer has requested its suppression. Content contrary to public order or good morals, a broad residual category encompassing 14 subcategories approved by the Computer Data Screening Committee. The fourth category is the most expansive. Its 14 subcategories include: Content defaming, mocking, satirizing, or devaluing the monarchy. Online gambling advertising or facilitation. Offering illegal firearms for sale. Offering baraku (hookah) products or e-cigarettes for sale. Offering cannabis inflorescences or processed cannabis products for sale. Advertising or soliciting prostitution. Content inciting violence, hatred, or social division. Unauthorized overseas employment advertising. Offering boiled kratom juice for sale. Online sale or advertising of alcoholic beverages. Content satirizing or degrading Buddhism. Money lending at interest rates exceeding legally prescribed limits. Advertising or disseminating information about surrogacy services. Forgery of documents, cards, or official documents. Enforcement Procedure In cases of urgent necessity, a competent official assigned by the MDES permanent secretary must file a petition with supporting evidence to the court with jurisdiction, requesting an order to
Read More