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

June 19, 2024

Vietnam’s New Decree on Non-Cash Payments

Subscribe to Updates

Vietnam’s financial landscape is set to further transform on July 1, 2024, when the government’s long-awaited Decree No. 52/2024/ND-CP dated May 15, 2024 (“Decree 52”), will officially replace Decree No. 101/2012/ND-CP dated November 22, 2012, on non-cash payments (“Decree 101”).

Decree 52 marks an important milestone by introducing the country’s first-ever legal definition of e-money. In addition, the decree brings forth new updates to regulations governing payment and intermediary payment services, laying the groundwork for more comprehensive guidance that will be provided in draft circulars now being developed by the State Bank of Vietnam (SBV).

Non-Cash Payment Instruments

The new definition of non-cash payment instruments under Decree 52 expands upon the previous definition in Decree 101. Notably, it clearly specifies the issuing entities as payment service providers, financial companies licensed to issue credit cards, and e-wallet service providers. Additionally, the new definition further clarifies that bank cards include debit, credit, and prepaid cards, and adds e-wallets to the list of non-cash payment instruments. Unlawful non-cash payment instruments are still defined as those that are not otherwise specified.

E-Money

Prior to Decree 52, the concept of e-money lacked a precise legal definition, despite its growing prevalence in forms like prepaid cards and e-wallets. The absence of a clear framework for e-money led to confusion with terms like “cryptpcurrency” and “virtual currency” and left significant ambiguity on whether e-money includes certain instruments, such as online game cards and mobile money. Decree 52 addresses this issue by clearly defining e-money as value in Vietnamese dong (VND) stored electronically and prepaid by customers to banks, foreign bank branches, and e-wallet service providers. It also specifically designates e-wallets and prepaid cards as types of storage mechanisms for e-money.

Non-Cash Payment Services

Decree 52 categorizes non-cash payment services into services with and without client payment accounts. Payment services with client accounts involve various financial transactions like money transfers and card payments, while services without client accounts focus on transactions not requiring such accounts. The decree also expands the range of entities providing these services to include not only banks and financial institutions but also public postal service providers (as defined by the Law on Post). So far, regulations for non-cash payment services provided by public postal service providers have been outlined in Circular No. 38/2019/TT-NHNN dated December 31, 2019. Decree 52 now further formalizes the inclusion of public postal service providers, a move that emphasizes expanded access to financial services, particularly in underbanked areas.

In a bid to further clarify and regulate these payment services, the SBV is currently working on a draft circular that will replace Circular No. 46/2014/TT-NHNN dated December 31, 2014, on non-cash payment services. This circular aims to offer updated guidance on all aspects of non-cash payment services under Decree 52 to address the new practical challenges in the current non-cash payment landscape.

Intermediary Payment Services

Decree 52 defines intermediary payment service (IPS) providers as non-bank organizations licensed by the SBV to provide IPSs, which encompass financial switching services, international financial switching services, electronic clearing services, e-wallet services, collection and payment support services, and payment gateway services. Compared to the old IPS regime under Decree 101 and Circular No. 39/2014/TT-NHNN dated December 11, 2014 (“Circular 39”), Decree 52 removes electronic money transfer support services from the list of IPSs.

The decree also sets stringent requirements for obtaining an IPS license, encompassing capital adequacy, technical capabilities, and personnel qualifications. The most notable requirements for organizations applying for an IPS license include the following:

  • The organization must not be in the process of division, separation, consolidation, merger, conversion, dissolution, or bankruptcy.
  • For financial switching services and electronic clearing services, the organization must provide only IPSs.
  • The organization must fulfill minimum charter capital requirements of either (1) VND 50 billion (approx. USD 1,964,560) for e-wallet services, collection and payment support services, and payment gateway services, or (2) VND 300 billion (approx. USD 11,787,360) for financial switching services, international financial switching services, and electronic clearing services.
  • The organization must comply with information system security level 4 requirements for financial switching services and electronic clearing services, or level 3 for other IPSs.
  • The organization must meet specific technical and personnel requirements.

Decree 52 also introduces new regulations for the provision of IPSs with international elements. These affect:

  • Foreign service providers providing IPSs to nonresident customers and foreigners residing in Vietnam to perform payment transactions for goods and services in Vietnam; and
  • Providers of IPSs that customers use to perform payment transactions for foreign goods and services.

The SBV is currently preparing a draft circular that will replace Circular 39 on IPSs and is expected to be issued soon.

Safety and Security of Non-Cash Payments

Under Decree 52, payment service and IPS providers are responsible for ensuring the safety and confidentiality of transactions, conducting inspections of payment-accepting units, and actively managing risks to prevent the misuse of their services for illegal activities. IPS providers specifically must adhere to information system security requirements with varying levels of compliance depending on the specific services offered (level 4 for financial switching services and electronic clearing services, and level 3 for other IPSs). IPS providers should therefore also carefully review relevant regulations under the Law on Network Information Security and Decree No. 85/2016/ND-CP dated July 1, 2016, on the security of information systems by levels, for full compliance in this regard.

In addition to these requirements, payment service and IPS providers should also pay attention to the new, stringent requirements under Decision No. 2345/QD-NHNN dated December 18, 2023, on security measures for online payments and bank card transactions. To solidify the compulsory measures set out under this decision, the SBV is currently drafting a circular to replace Circular No. 35/2016/TT-NHNN dated December 29, 2016, which will further guide the requirements on safety and security for online banking services.

Other Notes

In addition to the above, Decree 52 also has the following key points:

  • Monitoring Activities: Decree 52 grants the SBV extensive supervisory powers over payment systems, payment services, and IPSs. The SBV is authorized to promulgate regulations, conduct remote and on-site supervision, and request information from relevant entities. Payment service providers and IPS providers must comply with these regulations and provide the requested information. Notably, the SBV has the authority to determine and supervise economically important payment systems to maintain their stability and security. To provide more guidance in this regard, the SBV is also currently working on a draft circular that will replace Circular No. 20/2018/TT-NHNN dated August 30, 2018, on supervision of payment systems.
  • Payment Agents: The SBV is developing a draft circular on payment agents for non-cash payment services as regulated under Decree 52. This initiative aims to enhance financial inclusion by enabling banks and foreign bank branches to expand their customer base and service reach without incurring the costs associated with expanding their physical networks. By partnering with payment agents, banks can offer basic financial services in remote areas, reducing travel time for customers and improving overall service efficiency.
  • Transitional Period: Decree 52 provides various transitional periods for different stakeholders to align with its new regulations, as follows:
    • Commercial banks and foreign bank branches have 24 months to comply with Decree 52 for international payment system participation;
    • IPS providers licensed for money transfer support services under Decree 101 can continue operations as agreed between the parties;
    • Financial switching service providers connected to international payment systems have 24 months to comply and apply for a new license under Decree 52;
    • Public postal service enterprises have 24 months to apply for approval to provide payment services other than through customer payment accounts; and
    • IPS providers licensed before Decree 52’s effective date can operate until their licenses expire, unless they apply for new licenses under Decree 52’s regime.

Outlook

Decree 52 introduces significant changes to the non-cash payment landscape in Vietnam, including the country’s first legal definition of e-money and expanded regulations for non-cash payment and IPS services. In light of the new regime under Decree 52, the SBV is also developing a number of new circulars to provide further guidance on implementing these regulations. Payment and IPS providers should therefore closely follow legal developments in this field to ensure full compliance with the fast-evolving regulatory framework.

Related Professionals

Industries

Fintech

Technology

Practices

Banking and Finance

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

June 15, 2026
The surge in AI development has led to a desperate demand for large, high-quality training data. However, real-world data can be expensive to collect, difficult to access, and often subject to strict privacy and regulatory constraints. Synthetic data, which consists of artificially generated records that replicate the statistical properties of real-world data without reproducing specific individuals’ information, provides an appealing solution by generating artificial datasets at scale without relying on identifiable personal information. It combines speed, cost efficiency, and regulatory compliance, making it a sensible alternative for organizations seeking to reduce risks while maintaining data utility. When properly anonymized, synthetic datasets may fall outside the scope of laws such as the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) or Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA), reducing compliance burdens while still supporting high-quality model training. However, relying on synthetic data without rigorous legal due diligence could be a strategic mistake. It replaces one set of known risks (scraping, direct privacy liability) with a new set of complex liabilities. The narrative that synthetic data is a “silver bullet” for privacy and IP compliance is dangerous and could be misleading. While synthetic data addresses data scarcity, it also introduces new legal uncertainties. Legal counsel should anticipate downstream risks arising from compromised data sources. Models trained on unlawfully obtained data may need to be decommissioned, even if their outputs appear lawful. What is synthetic data? Synthetic data refers to artificially generated information created using AI techniques such as deep learning and generative models. Instead of copying real records, it reproduces the statistical patterns and relationships found in the original dataset. Synthetic data generally falls into three categories: Fully synthetic data – Entirely new data points generated from learned patterns. The model studies the structure of the original data and produces records that resemble real-world
Read More
June 11, 2026
Thailand’s Electronic Transactions Development Agency (ETDA) has released a revised draft Electronic Transactions Act (ETA) for public hearing from May 12, 2026, to June 15, 2026. This is not merely an amendment to certain provisions of the current ETA, but a comprehensive redrafting of the entire act. The revised draft ETA introduces several significant changes from the current framework, with practical implications for businesses operating in Thailand. Unified Coverage of Public and Private Sectors The current law segregates government transactions into a separate chapter with distinct rules. The draft ETA eliminates this division, defining “transaction” to encompass civil and commercial juristic acts as well as administrative procedures, administrative contracts, and other acts of government agencies. Enhanced E-Signature Definition The definition of “electronic signature” is broadened to expressly include biometric data and refocused on identifying the signatory and demonstrating intent regarding the content of the electronic data. Shift in Burden of Proof When a party challenges the reliability of electronic data created using a “trusted electronic method” or a method prescribed by the ETDA, the burden of proof and the cost of proving unreliability shifts to the challenger. Introduction of New Digital Method Concepts The draft ETA introduces several new digital method concepts that are not currently recognized under the existing ETA framework. These include: Electronic timestamping (e-timestamp) Electronic registered delivery Electronic company seals Electronic stamp duty compliance Electronic identity authentication and verification Electronic transferable records (electronic bills of lading, promissory notes, and similar negotiable instruments) Recognition of Automated Systems and Electronic Contracting The draft ETA expressly recognizes the legal validity and enforceability of contracts formed through automated systems, including contracts concluded entirely between automated systems or between an automated system and a person. A party may not deny the binding effect of such contracts solely because no human review
Read More
June 5, 2026
Vietnam’s AI regulatory framework has reached an important milestone. While the Law on Artificial Intelligence No. 134/2025/QH15 (AI Law) established the foundation for AI governance, many practical compliance requirements were left to implementing regulations. On April 30, 2026, the government issued Decree No. 142/2026/ND-CP (Decree 142), which took effect on May 1, 2026, and provides the first detailed guidance on the implementation of the AI Law. Although an official list of high-risk AI systems is still pending from the prime minister, Decree 142 provides valuable insight into how Vietnam’s risk-based AI regulatory framework will operate in practice. Risk Classification Framework The AI Law adopts a risk-based approach under which AI systems are classified as high-risk, medium-risk, or low-risk. Decree 142 builds on this framework by providing detailed guidance on how these classifications are determined. High-risk AI systems are determined based on factors such as (i) their potential impact on life, health, property, human rights, public interests, or national security; (ii) the sector in which they are deployed; and (iii) the scale of affected users or integration with critical infrastructure. The latest draft list of high-risk AI systems appears to follow these same principles. Medium-risk AI systems generally include systems that may mislead, influence, or manipulate users, particularly where users may not realize they are interacting with AI or AI-generated content. The focus is therefore on transparency and authenticity risks rather than broader societal or safety concerns. Low-risk AI systems are those that do not meet the criteria for either high-risk or medium-risk classification. Importantly, Decree 142 seeks to avoid over-classification. Certain systems may fall outside the high-risk or medium-risk regimes, including internal-use systems, office-support tools, technical editing applications, certain back-end processing systems, and AI systems used in artistic, gaming, cinematic, or other creative contexts. Providers must also review and
Read More
June 5, 2026
On May 11, 2026, Thailand’s Ministry of Social Development and Human Security released a draft Child Protection Act (“CPA”) for public review. The draft CPA would completely repeal and replace the current Child Protection Act B.E. 2546 (2003). This represents the most comprehensive overhaul of Thailand’s child protection framework in over two decades, reflecting the government’s stated objective of modernizing the law to address evolving social challenges—including those arising from digital technology—and to promote greater coordination among government agencies, local authorities, and civil society. The public review period closes on June 9, 2026. Key changes introduced by the draft CPA that could have significant implications for businesses, particularly online platform providers, media companies, and entities operating child-related services in Thailand, are set out below. Expanded Definition of “Child” Under the current CPA, a “child” is defined as a person under the age of 18, excluding those who have attained legal majority through marriage. The draft CPA removes the marriage exception entirely, broadening the scope of the law’s protections to include all individuals under 18 without exception. Replacement of “Abuse” with Broader Concept of “Violence” The current CPA uses the term “abuse/cruelty,” which covers acts causing harm to a child’s liberty, body, or mind; sexual offenses against children; and using children in harmful or immoral activities. The draft CPA replaces this with the broader concept of “violence,” which encompasses any act or omission causing harm to a child’s body, mind, or development; abandonment or neglect; improper exploitation; and sexual abuse. Notably, the new definition adds developmental harm as a recognized category of injury and captures all forms of misconduct regardless of the child’s consent. New Standalone Definition of Sexual Abuse, Including Online Conduct One of the most significant additions in the draft CPA is the introduction of a standalone definition
Read More