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

July 11, 2025

Vietnam’s Regulatory Sandboxes: Paving the Way for Digital Innovation

Subscribe to Updates

Vietnam’s recent embrace of “regulatory sandboxes” reflects a deliberate policy choice to balance the need for robust oversight with an equally pressing imperative to catalyze innovation. A sandbox is a controlled, time-bound framework in which businesses may pilot emerging technologies, products, or business models under relaxed or tailor-made regulatory requirements, thereby allowing regulators to observe risks in real time while innovators validate commercial viability without bearing the full weight of the traditional compliance regime.

By issuing sandbox regulations, the government of Vietnam is signaling its commitment to accelerating digital transformation, attracting investment, and developing a knowledge-based economy, all while safeguarding financial stability, consumer protection, and national security. This strategy is embodied in a suite of instruments that together establish sector-specific sandboxes:

  • Decree No. 94/2025/ND-CP on the Regulatory Sandbox in the Banking Sector (Fintech Sandbox Decree), effective July 1, 2025.
  • Law on Digital Technology Industry (DTI Law), effective January 1, 2026, and Law on Science, Technology and Innovation (STI Law), effective October 1, 2025.
  • Resolution No. 222/2025/QH15 on International Financial Centers (IFC Resolution), effective September 1, 2025.

In addition, a draft resolution on the pilot implementation of the crypto-asset market (Draft Crypto Pilot Resolution) is expected to introduce a dedicated sandbox for crypto-asset service providers later this year, further underscoring Vietnam’s holistic, forward-looking approach to regulating emerging technologies.

Below is a brief summary of all the regulatory sandboxes, who they are open for, and what businesses are attracted.

Fintech Sandbox Decree

Under the Fintech Sandbox Decree, besides credit institutions and foreign bank branches, fintech companies operating in Vietnam can apply for a Certificate of Sandbox Participation issued by the State Bank of Vietnam to operate any of the following services in Vietnam:

  • Credit scoring: A solution applicable to information technology systems of credit institutions, branches of foreign banks, and fintech companies to score the creditworthiness of an individual or organization supporting the credit approval by credit institutions and branches of foreign banks.
  • Data sharing via open API: A standardized application programming interface set that may be used by computer systems of credit institutions, branches of foreign banks, fintech companies, and other third parties to send service requests to systems of credit institutions and branches of foreign banks sharing that Open API.
  • Peer-to-peer (P2P) lending: An information technology application solution provided by a P2P lending company to connect borrowers and lenders, and provide assistance for contract conclusion via a digital platform. The currency used in P2P lending solutions must be VND.

The maximum sandbox period is two years, with the possibility of extension of no more than two times, with each extension not exceeding one year.

See our previous article: Vietnam Issues Fintech Sandbox Decree

DTI Law and STI Law

Under the DTI Law, the regulatory sandbox is expressly designed to support and promote the development of “digital technology application products and services”. These products and services are defined to include:

  • Hardware products;
  • Software products;
  • Digital content products; and
  • Services in consultancy, design, installation, integration, management, operation, training, digitization, data processing, warranty, maintenance, repair, refurbishment, publication and distribution of digital technology products; providing digital technology products in the form of services and other digital technology services.

The regulatory sandbox for such products and services will be implemented according to the STI Law.

Under the STI Law, multiple regulatory sandboxes may be established based on government initiatives. In general, these sandboxes require a special license for participation; may provide liability exemptions for participating parties; and are subject to a maximum duration of three years, with a one-time extension of up to an additional three years.

See our previous article: Vietnam’s National Digital Transformation: Key Legal Developments to Expect in 2025

IFC Resolution

Under the IFC Resolution, international financial centers will be organized within specific geographic areas in Ho Chi Minh City and Da Nang, where preferential specific policies for entities registered or recognized as members will be applied.

One such policy is a regulatory sandbox for fintech technologies, products, services, and business models not yet prescribed by law, offering exemption from compliance with standards and technical regulations as well as exemption from liability for damage to the state during experimentation.

The products and services to be provided in the international financial centers include stocks, bonds, fund certificates, financial derivatives, fund management, insurance, reinsurance, banking and foreign exchange, green finance, carbon credits, fintech, digital assets, and other products and services prescribed by the government.

The IFC Resolution does not specify a specific expiry date, but would be replaced by a “Law on International Financial Centers” that is to be proposed in 2034. Approved projects and operation may continue to operate and receive incentives until the end of the project or operation.

See our previous article: Vietnam’s Resolution on International Financial Centers Brings New Opportunities

Draft Crypto Pilot Resolution

Under the Draft Crypto Pilot Resolution, there will be a regulatory sandbox for crypto asset services, including (i) organization of crypto asset transaction/trading markets; (ii) proprietary trading of crypto assets; (iii) custody of crypto assets; and (iv) provision of platforms for crypto asset issuance.

These crypto asset service providers are subject to a joint venture requirement in which the foreign ownership limit is 49%. The entity will need to satisfy stringent requirements to be issued a crypto asset service provider license from the Ministry of Finance.

It is currently contemplated that the regulatory sandbox will run until December 31, 2027. After this, depending on the result of the pilot program, the authority may consider the future legal framework.

Outlook

Vietnam’s regulatory sandboxes represent a significant step forward in fostering innovation and development within the country’s financial and technological sectors. By providing a controlled environment for new and innovative businesses to operate, these sandboxes offer a unique opportunity for companies to test their products and services without the onerous compliance requirements or fears of liability. These initiatives are expected to attract both domestic and international businesses, driving economic growth and positioning Vietnam as a leader in the digital economy.

As these regulatory frameworks take effect, it will be crucial for businesses to stay informed and adapt to the evolving landscape. Now that the Vietnamese government has opened up, the success of these sandboxes will depend on the participation of the business community. The ball is in the private sector’s court.

Related Professionals

Industries

Fintech

Technology

Practices

Banking and Finance

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

July 1, 2025
Now halfway through 2025, Thailand continues to advance in the realm of data privacy, with the ambitious goal of achieving zero data breaches. The Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC), an independent government body established by the Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA), is taking a more proactive approach, having published several rulings and orders to enhance data protection measures and clarify compliance expectations for businesses. Here is a look back at Thailand’s data privacy developments in the first half of the year. Strengthening Law Enforcement and New Guidance for Compliance Enforcement of existing data protection laws and regulations has taken a step forward this year. Some of the specific initiatives include: Increased enforcement by the PDPC. A key trend to watch from the first half of 2025 is the PDPC’s active enforcement of the PDPA as it intensifies oversight through compliance orders and public warnings against noncompliant organizations while ramping up efforts to prevent and halt the illegal trading of personal data by actively monitoring emerging societal issues. Call center scams and cyber fraud control. Thailand published an amendment to the Emergency Decree on Measures for the Prevention and Suppression of Technological Crimes to strengthen measures against technological crimes, particularly targeting call center scams and cyber fraud. Orders from the Expert Committee. Several orders issued by the Expert Committee under the PDPA were announced in the first half of this year. These include directives for data controllers to take corrective actions to comply with the PDPA, as well as initiatives to raise awareness of data privacy within organizations, reflecting the regulator’s focus on promoting organizational awareness and compliance. A guideline report summarizing the Expert Committee’s decisions and orders was also published to serve as a reference for compliance. Public issue monitoring. The PDPC has been taking a more proactive approach
Read More
June 27, 2025
Three American giants are actively protecting their intellectual property rights against generative AI, as two legal battles commence on both sides of the Atlantic. In the UK, Seattle-based media company Getty Images accuses UK-based Stability AI of multiple IP infringements. In the US, The Walt Disney Company and Universal Studios are teaming up against Midjourney, an AI startup, with their main ground being copyright infringement. Both cases are centered around questions legal minds have been posing since the introduction of generative AI: Is the output of generative AI an infringement? And who is ultimately responsible for the output, the platform or the user? Getty Images v. Stability AI Getty initially filed a claim in the High Court in 2023, which resulted in Stability applying for reverse summary judgment on the grounds that Getty had no real prospect of success, arguing that their operations took place outside the UK. However, the High Court judge hearing the case decided that the claims brought by Getty did have a real prospect of succeeding in court. Despite this, Stability saw a small victory when the court ruled that the representative action brought by Getty would not succeed due to the difficulties in identifying who qualified for the class. The proposed class was comprised of 50,000 rightsholders who alleged their rights were also infringed. Stability was successful in arguing that identifying these individuals would be challenging due to the unclear definition of the class. This current trial is centered around four main grounds: Copyright infringement. Getty accuses Stability of using content that Getty owns or has an exclusive license for when training their model, Stable Diffusion, resulting in the generated output containing substantial parts of that content. Getty is also alleging secondary copyright infringement, arguing that Stability is importing an article into the UK
Read More
June 26, 2025
Vietnam’s new Personal Data Protection Law (PDPL) was passed by the National Assembly on June 26, 2025, and will enter into force on January 1, 2026. The PDPL introduces several new concepts, exemptions, and obligations in comparison with the current Decree No. 13/2023/ND-CP on personal data protection (PDPD), while other contents remain essentially the same. The relationship between the PDPD and the PDPL has not been clearly addressed; however, it is expected that the government will issue a new decree providing necessary guidance on certain requirements under the PDPL, and the PDPD will remain in effect until it is replaced by this new decree. Some key points of the new PDPL include the following: Personal data will be further defined by lists of basic personal data and sensitive personal data to be issued by the government. The consent-centric approach of the PDPD remains in place, along with additional exemptions for certain data processing activities. The requirements for the data processing impact assessment (DPIA) and transfer impact assessment (TIA) remain unchanged. However, there are new exemptions for the TIA, including for the processing and storing in the cloud of employee data, and when the data subject is the person sending its own data outside of Vietnam. Consent obtained under the PDPD remains valid under the PDPL. DPIAs and TIAs submitted under the PDPD are valid under the PDPL but may need to be updated to be in line with the requirements of the PDPL. Administrative fines depend on the type of violation. The fine for sale and purchase of personal data will be 10 times the revenue from the sale or VND 3 billion (about USD 115,000), whichever is higher. The fine for cross-border transfer violations is 5% of the violator’s revenue of the preceding year or VND 3 billion,
Read More
June 25, 2025
Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) is no longer a distant innovation confined to science fiction and research labs; it has become an integral part of daily business operations worldwide. Employees across industries are adopting GenAI tools at a remarkable pace—including in Southeast Asia, where a tech-savvy workforce and widespread internet and mobile access have driven early adoption. The reality facing organizations today is clear: employees are integrating GenAI into their daily work, often without official approval or clear policies. This phenomenon, often called “Bring Your Own AI,” comes out of a disconnect between organizational governance and employee behavior and reveals the urgent need for proactive AI policies and oversight. For business leaders and legal teams, GenAI is both an opportunity and a challenge. On one hand, these tools can deliver real business value and boost efficiency. On the other, the unsanctioned and unmonitored use of GenAI introduces substantial legal risks, such as data privacy violations, confidentiality breaches, and intellectual property issues. The widespread adoption of GenAI tools by employees, regardless of official organizational stance or guidelines, demonstrates that prohibition is neither practical nor effective. A more strategic approach involves establishing comprehensive governance policies that encourage responsible AI use while managing the risks. Organizations that take the lead in developing GenAI governance policies are better positioned to benefit from its transformative potential. The question isn’t whether GenAI will change how we work, but how quickly organizations can put the right safeguards in place to manage this change successfully. Risks of GenAI Use The use of GenAI in business operations, whether sanctioned or not, exposes organizations to a unique set of risks. The following are particularly relevant: Data security and confidentiality: General GenAI tools in the market may transmit data to external servers, retain conversation histories, and use inputs for model training.
Read More