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

August 27, 2025

Vietnam’s New Personal Data Protection Law: A Closer Look

Subscribe to Updates

Vietnam officially enacted Law No. 91/2025/QH15 on Personal Data Protection (“PDPL”) on June 26, 2025, marking a major milestone in the country’s legal landscape. While the PDPL retains many provisions from its predecessor, Decree No. 13/2023/ND-CP on Personal Data Protection (“PDPD”), it adds new concepts, exemptions, and compliance obligations. Notably, it sets out a framework regulation for penalties for violations, including monetary fines of up to 5% of the corporate violator’s annual revenue in the previous year for cross-border data transfer breaches.

With an effective date of January 1, 2026, the PDPL will apply to (i) Vietnamese agencies, organizations, and individuals; (ii) foreign agencies, organizations, and individuals in Vietnam; and (iii) foreign agencies, organizations, and individuals directly involved in or related to the processing of personal data of Vietnamese citizens and persons of Vietnamese origin without a determined nationality, currently residing in Vietnam, who have been granted a personal identification certificate.

Although the PDPL does not explicitly define its relationship with the currently effective PDPD, the government is drafting a new decree to guide the PDPL’s implementation, the first draft of which is expected to be completed by September 2025, with an effective date aligned with that of the PDPL. Once both the PDPL and its implementing decree come into force, the PDPD will presumably cease to have legal effect. [Update: Decree No. 356/2025/ND-CP detailing and guiding the implementation of the PDPL was issued on December 31, 2025, and took effect on January 1, 2026. See our article here.]

Some key takeaways from the PDPL are presented below.

1. Definitions of “Personal Data,” “Basic Personal Data,” and “Sensitive Personal Data”

The PDPL introduces broad definitions for “personal data,” “basic personal data,” and “sensitive personal data.” It expands the scope of personal data to include both digital and non-digital formats, such as paper-based records. Notably, de-identified personal data is explicitly excluded from the definition of personal data. The PDPL further delegates authority to the government to issue exhaustive lists specifying which types of data qualify as basic and sensitive personal data. These lists are expected to be detailed in the PDPL’s implementing decree.

2. Data Subjects’ Rights and Obligations

The PDPL retains the rights of data subjects as previously outlined in the PDPD, with clarifications of the rights themselves and certain strengthened procedural requirements. In addition to the data subjects’ rights, the PDPL imposes specific obligations on data subjects, including the obligations to:

  • Self-protect their own personal data;
  • Honor and protect others’ personal data;
  • Provide adequate and accurate personal data according to applicable laws and regulations, contracts, or consent given to the processing of their own personal data; and
  • Comply with the personal data protection laws and regulations and participate in the prevention of personal data infringements/violations.

These provisions are designed to prevent misuse of personal data rights and promote a culture of shared responsibility in the digital environment, while reinforcing individuals’ control over their own data.

3. Personal Data Trading and Transfer

The PDPL strictly prohibits the sale and purchase of personal data, except as otherwise prescribed by the law. This prohibition is part of a broader effort to combat the widespread illegal online trading of personal data and prevent insider abuse. Violations of this provision may result in severe penalties, including fines of up to 10 times the revenue gained from the unlawful act of personal data trading.

The PDPL provides clarification, however, that certain types of data transfers do not constitute the “sale and purchase of personal data.” These include:

  • When the data subject has given consent.
  • When data is shared between departments within the same agency or organization for processing in line with the determined purpose.
  • When data is transferred for continued processing due to the division, separation, or merger of agencies, organizations, or administrative units; the reorganization or transformation of ownership of state-owned enterprises; the division, separation, merger, consolidation, or dissolution of entities or organizations; or the establishment of entities or organizations based on the dissolution of other entities or organizations.
  • When the data controllers or data controller-processors transfer data to a data processor or third party (e.g., independent data controllers) for processing as prescribed.
  • Upon request from competent state authorities.
  • In circumstances where personal data can be processed without the data subjects’ consent as prescribed under the PDPL (see item 5 below).

These exceptions are expected to be further detailed in the PDPL’s implementing decree.

4. Maximum Administrative Sanctions for Violations

In addition to the maximum fine for illegal personal data trading, the PDPL sets the maximum administrative fine on an organization for violations related to cross-border personal data transfers at 5% of the violator’s revenue in the preceding fiscal year. In cases where the organization has no revenue in the preceding year, or where the fine calculated based on such revenue is lower than VND 3 billion (approx. USD 114,500), the latter will apply. The maximum administrative fine for other violations in the field of personal data protection is VND 3 billion. The method to calculate revenue arising from violation of personal data protection regulations will be further prescribed by the government under the PDPL’s implementing decree.

5. Consent Requirements

The consent-centric approach and strict consent formality requirements of the PDPD are maintained in the PDPL, which provides additional cases of consent-exemptions. These include, among others, situations where personal data processing is necessary to protect one’s own legitimate rights or interests, or those of others, as necessary against acts that infringe upon such interests (e.g., legal defense), and the fulfillment of contractual obligations not only of the data subjects but also of the service provider.

While the PDPL uses the term “legitimate interest,” its scope is significantly narrower than under the GDPR, and applies only when data processing is required to prevent infringement by third parties.

For situations where consent is exempted, the PDPL introduces a requirement for the data controllers and relevant data processors to implement a monitoring mechanism to protect the data, including but not limited to implementing appropriate data protection measures and regularly assessing possible risks, periodically inspecting and assessing compliance with the law, and receiving and addressing feedback and petitions from relevant parties.

The PDPL includes a transition clause allowing personal data processing activities that have been carried out prior to the effective date of the PDPL with the consent of the data subject or based on an agreement in accordance with the PDPD, to continue, without requiring new consent or a new agreement. This provision offers continuity for businesses already compliant with the PDPD, while signaling the need for updated practices that align with the PDPL’s enhanced standards.

6. Data Processing and Data Transfer Impact Assessment

The requirements for the preparation, submission, and maintenance of a Data Processing Impact Assessment (“DPIA”) and a Data Transfer Impact Assessment (“TIA”) under the PDPD are inherited by the PDPL. The PDPL has assigned the government to provide detailed requirements on the dossier, conditions, order, and procedures for each impact assessment in the PDPL’s implementing decree. However, it is anticipated that these requirements will generally align with those outlined in the PDPD.

To reduce the compliance burden, the PDPL makes it optional for small businesses and startups to comply with the DPIA requirements for five years from the PDPL’s effective date, while household businesses and micro-enterprises are exempt. However, entities that provide personal data processing services, directly process sensitive personal data, or process the personal data of a large number of data subjects are not eligible for this exemption.

The PDPL mandates a six-month update cycle for both the DPIA and the TIA if there are any changes. Immediate updates are required in specific circumstances, such as (i) company restructuring, termination, dissolution, or bankruptcy; (ii) change of organization or individual providing personal data protection services; or (iii) introduction of new business lines/activities or changes to the current business lines/activities involving personal data as declared in the DPIA and TIA.

DPIAs and TIAs received by the Cybersecurity and High-Tech Crime Prevention Department under the Ministry of Public Security (known as the “A05” department) before the PDPL’s effective date (i.e., January 1, 2026) in accordance with the PDPD will remain valid. However, any updates made to these dossiers made after the PDPL comes into force must comply with the requirements set out under the PDPL.

7. Notification of Violations

One of the key changes introduced by the PDPL is the revised timeline for notification of detected violations. Organizations are now required to report violations within 72 hours of detection, rather than from the time of occurrence as previously mandated under the PDPD. Moreover, while the PDPD only requires notification to the regulator (specifically, the A05), the PDPL expands this obligation to include notifying affected data subjects in cases involving biometric data incidents or incidents related to financial service providers.

8. Special Personal Data Protection Mechanisms

Some special data protection mechanisms are introduced under the PDPL, as follows:

For specific data subject groups: The PDPL sets out enhanced and more comprehensive safeguards for the personal data of vulnerable groups, such as children and individuals with limited or lost civil act capacity, or those with cognitive or behavioral impairments. For instance, the processing of children’s data generally requires only parental consent. However, if the data pertains to the child’s private life or personal secrets, and the child is age 7 or older, dual consent from both the child and the parent must be obtained.

For specific businesses and operational activities: The PDPL outlines tailored safeguards for personal data processing activities across various sectors and operational activities, including employment (recruitment and employee management); health data and insurance business; financial, banking, and credit information activities; advertising services; social network platforms and online communications services; big data processing, artificial intelligence, blockchain, virtual universe and cloud computing; and audio and video recording in public places and public activities. While some provisions are sector-specific, some can be generally applied to all enterprises; for instance, the requirement for deletion/destruction of information provided by job applicants who are not hired, unless there is a different agreement with the applicant.

For specific types of sensitive personal data: Specific safeguards required for processing location and biometric data are also prescribed under the PDPL.

9. Personal Data Protection Department and Personnel

The PDPL requires organizations to either designate a qualified department and personnel dedicated to personal data protection, or engage external data protection service providers. Such personal data protection departments, personnel, and service providers are components of what the PDPL refers to as the “personal data protection forces.”

While the government has yet to issue detailed regulations on “personal data protection forces,” further guidance on the conditions, responsibilities, and tasks of the designated data protection department and personnel are expected in the PDPL’s implementing decree.

Small and startup enterprises are granted a five-year grace period from the PDPL’s effective date to determine whether to comply, while household businesses and micro-enterprises are exempted from this requirement (save for cases where these entities provide personal data processing services, directly process sensitive personal data, or process the personal data of a large number of data subjects).

Outlook

The promulgation of the PDPL represents a major advancement in Vietnam’s legal landscape, reinforcing the existing data protection framework for better safeguarding the privacy and personal rights of Vietnamese citizens in the digital era, and at the same time promoting the digital economy and international integration in the country. Businesses will need to reevaluate and consolidate their data governance practices and internal controls to ensure prompt and effective PDPL compliance. It is also important for businesses to keep an eye on upcoming regulations and guidance to properly implement the PDPL.

Related Professionals

Industries

Technology

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

July 16, 2026
Thailand’s Office of the Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC) published a series of draft guidance documents for public consultation on July 7, 2026. Issued under the Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019) (PDPA), the drafts address a range of compliance issues and offer insight into the regulator’s current enforcement priorities. This article examines two of those drafts: one on lawful bases for processing personal data, and another on marketing and direct marketing. Together, they reflect the Office of the PDPC’s evolving expectations on lawful-basis selection, accountability, and the use of personal data in marketing. Organizations operating in Thailand should assess the practical implications now, before the guidance is finalized. Lawful Bases: A Structured Selection Process The draft guidance on lawful bases introduces a systematic five-step process for selecting an appropriate lawful basis for each processing activity. Organizations are expected to: Identify the processing activity involved. Assess the appropriate lawful basis. Evaluate whether the data is necessary for the processing. Conduct a legitimate interest assessment (LIA) where applicable. Ensure transparency through privacy notices. The guidance provides practical explanations and examples for each lawful basis under section 24 of the PDPA—including archiving, research, statistics, vital interests, contractual necessity, legal obligation, public task, legitimate interests, and consent—as well as the bases applicable to sensitive personal data under section 26. The aim is to promote more consistent and accurate lawful-basis selection across public- and private-sector organizations. A recurring theme throughout the guidance is that organizations should select the lawful basis that most accurately reflects the actual purpose and circumstances of the processing activity. The guidance cautions against treating consent as a default or catch-all basis where another lawful basis is more appropriate. For processing based on legitimate interests, organizations should conduct and document an LIA. Processing involving sensitive personal data may require
Read More
July 14, 2026
Thailand’s National Broadcasting and Telecommunications Commission (NBTC) has published guidelines establishing a risk-based framework for the responsible use of artificial intelligence by telecom licensees. Released on July 2, 2026, the Guidelines on the Use of Artificial Intelligence for Telecommunications Services address governance structures, ethical principles, lifecycle management, and consumer protection obligations. Scope and Legal Context The nonbinding guidelines apply to holders of telecom business licenses under Thailand’s telecom licensing laws, but only with respect to the use of AI in providing licensed telecom services. Entities without such licenses are not directly subject to the guidelines, though they may be affected as third-party AI solution providers to licensees. The guidelines supplement and should be read alongside existing laws, including the Cybersecurity Act, the Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA), the Computer Crime Act, and the NBTC Notification regarding Measures to Protect Telecommunications Service Users’ Rights Regarding Personal Data, Privacy Rights, and Freedom of Telecommunications, as well as forthcoming AI governance legislation being drafted by the ETDA. AI Governance Structure Licensees are expected to establish committees, working groups, or designated officers at both policy and operational levels to set strategic direction for AI use, formulate governance policies and tools, and oversee risk management. Roles, responsibilities, and accountability should be clearly defined for all personnel across every stage of the AI lifecycle—including for third-party AI solution providers and outsourced service providers, whose obligations should be explicitly documented in service agreements. Core Principles The guidelines identify six core principles that licensees should adhere to when deploying AI: Compliance with laws, ethics, and international standards: AI should respect privacy, dignity, and human rights, and content filtering for inputs and outputs should be considered. For example, the AI should not be designed and developed to be used in generating false information, supporting illegal activities, or causing
Read More
July 10, 2026
Vietnam has taken a significant step in regulating its e-commerce sector with the issuance of a new decree guiding the country’s recently enacted Law on E-Commerce. Decree No. 248/2026/ND-CP, issued on June 30, 2026, and taking effect the following day, addresses mandatory platform policies, registration requirements for offshore platforms, additional obligations on platform operators, and market access conditions for foreign investors. Mandatory Policy Contents The decree sets out detailed guidance on the required contents of various platform policies, covering pricing, payment, display priority, livestream sales, delivery, returns, method of service provision, and service termination and refunds. Clarification of Obligations for Platform Operators The decree provides clarification of the obligations applicable to platform operators. Notably, intermediary e-commerce platform operators with online ordering functions must: Collect specific information to implement electronic identity verification of sellers; Cooperate with regulators by reporting online through the state e-commerce management system and by blocking, suspending, or removing content upon request of a competent authority; Maintain a mechanism to store contract data, including price, product or service information, and parties’ information, for at least three years from the date of contract conclusion; and If qualifying as a “large digital platform” under consumer protection law, maintain an online system for receiving and handling complaints and requests, and comply with enhanced content-removal requirements. Registration Requirements for Offshore Platforms Offshore e-commerce platforms, whether direct-sales, intermediary, social-network-based, or integrated, that conduct e-commerce activity in Vietnam must register with the Ministry of Industry and Trade if the platform: Allows Vietnamese-language selection; Uses a “.vn” domain; or Reaches 100,000 or more transactions with Vietnam-based buyers within a calendar year. Notably, the registration requirement now captures not only traditional intermediary platforms, but also direct-sales platforms. Foreign Investment Conditions Foreign investors holding a controlling interest in an intermediary e-commerce platform, a social media platform
Read More
July 8, 2026
On July 7, 2026, the Trade Competition Commission of Thailand (TCCT) issued a press release announcing the establishment of two new subcommittees designed to intensify oversight of digital platforms and modern trade businesses. The formation of the digital platform subcommittee marks a significant escalation in competition enforcement following the TCCT’s Guidelines on Multi-Sided Platforms and E-Commerce Businesses, which took effect on March 25, 2026. Platform operators, sellers, and related service providers should expect heightened regulatory scrutiny and potential investigations into practices already flagged under the March guidelines. Two Dedicated Enforcement Bodies The first new body is the digital platform subcommittee—formally the Subcommittee on Supervision, Monitoring, and Prevention of Trade Conduct in Digital Platform Business. It is tasked with driving intensive oversight of digital platform businesses. It will coordinate with government agencies, the private sector, business operators, and other relevant stakeholders to supervise and prevent trade conduct that may affect competition, and to promote free and fair competition in the digital platform sector. The subcommittee will be composed of TCCT members and representatives from the Department of Internal Trade. The second body—the Subcommittee on Determining Guidelines and Action Plans Concerning Competition Conditions in Modern Wholesale and Retail Business—will study, analyze, and monitor market structure in modern wholesale and retail businesses, compile databases to analyze retail business concentration, assess impacts on small-scale operators, and propose supervisory measures for the retail sector. TCCT members will serve on the subcommittee alongside experts from government and private organizations, including the Office of Industrial Economics, the Office of Small and Medium Enterprises Promotion, the Thai SME Federation, and the Thai SME Council. Operational Impact for Industry Participants These subcommittees provide the TCCT with a focused mechanism to investigate various trade practices deemed unfair, and the TCCT has authority under the Trade Competition Act to issue cease-and-desist
Read More