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​ 

March 10, 2026
Thailand’s Ministry of Finance and Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) have issued regulations broadening the criteria for determining who qualifies as a “major shareholder” of licensed securities and digital asset business operators. Under relevant SEC regulations, major shareholders of a regulated entity must obtain regulatory approval and undergo screening by the SEC. The revised framework introduces both shareholding-based and control-based tests to determine which shareholders require regulatory approval for a wider range of indirect ownership structures and de facto control. The Ministry of Finance notification took effect on February 21, 2026, while the SEC’s clarifying rules took effect on March 4, 2026. These changes aim to enhance transparency around beneficial ownership and strengthen regulatory oversight of entities operating in Thailand’s capital markets. Expanded Definition Under the revised framework, a “major shareholder” now includes persons who directly or indirectly hold more than 10% of the voting rights in a regulated company, as well as persons who exercise control over the regulated company or its shares. This system of two separate tests, based on both shareholding and control, differs from the prior regime, which focused primarily on shareholding thresholds and applied a more limited method for determining indirect shareholdings. The two tests (detailed below) operate independently of each other, and any person identified by either of the tests will be deemed a major shareholder. Shareholding-Based Test Broadens Indirect Ownership Attribution For the shareholding-based test, the SEC recognizes two existing methods for identifying indirect ownership, together with a new proportional attribution method. Any person captured under these methods, which are described below, will be regarded as a major shareholder of the regulated company and must obtain SEC approval as a major shareholder. First, the existing framework continues to apply to both first-tier and chain ownership structures. Approval is required for (1) first-tier
Read More
March 6, 2026
Thailand’s Legislation Consideration Committee of the Ministry of Interior has ruled that in-game loot boxes in online games do not constitute gambling under the Gambling Act B.E. 2478 (1935). This first-of-its-kind ruling provides useful guidance for online game operators and digital entertainment companies operating in Thailand. Background The ruling came in response to an inquiry concerning an online role-playing game operator that launched a campaign featuring a loot box mechanism. The mechanism allowed players to purchase a token in exchange for the opportunity to receive a virtual loot box containing randomized in-game items. The key features of this were as follows: The items received were digital, noncash items usable only within the game. The items could not be exchanged, redeemed, or converted into cash with the game operator. Items may differ in rarity but remain purely virtual. The central question was whether paying money to obtain randomized in-game items constituted a risk-based activity involving the chance to receive money or property of monetary value, which would constitute gambling under the Gambling Act. Committee Ruling The committee reached the following conclusions regarding the characteristics of the game’s loot-box mechanism: No cash or monetary equivalent: Players did not receive cash or property that could be exchanged for cash. The in-game items were merely usage rights within the online game ecosystem. No real-world monetary valuation: There was no determination of item value in real currency, and no mechanism for redeeming or converting items into money with the game operator. Any off-platform trading of in-game items between players is irrelevant to online game operators, as any value arising from such transactions is determined by the market rather than by the operators themselves. Service fee characterization: Payments made by players purchasing in-game loot boxes constituted fees for online game services. Accordingly, the committee concluded
Read More
March 5, 2026
Thailand’s Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has filed a criminal complaint against a licensed digital asset broker, its overseas trading platform, and its executives for allegedly operating an unlicensed digital asset exchange targeting Thai customers. The case marks an escalation in the SEC’s enforcement efforts against unlicensed offshore platforms that attempt to serve Thai users through local licensed entities. Criminal Complaint On February 20, 2026, the SEC filed a criminal complaint with the Economic Crime Suppression Division against a local licensed digital asset broker, its overseas global trading platform, and its executives. The SEC alleges that the parties violated the Digital Asset Business Emergency Decree B.E. 2561 (2018) by cooperatively operating a digital asset exchange business on a cross-border basis since 2023 without the required SEC license. According to the SEC, the local broker promoted the overseas platform’s services to the public through Thai-language posts on social media channels, with services available exclusively to customers residing in Thailand. Access to the global platform was provided through the local broker’s website and mobile application. Customers who registered for the local broker’s services were automatically granted access to the global platform without having to undergo a separate identity verification process. The SEC also found that the local broker provided back-office system support services to the global platform. The SEC considers these activities to constitute joint operation of an unlicensed digital asset exchange. The former executives of the local broker are being held liable as the responsible persons during the relevant period. The SEC emphasized that the complaint initiates the criminal process, and the decision to prosecute or convict the accused parties will ultimately be made by law enforcement authorities and the criminal courts. Platform Blocking The SEC has also coordinated with the Ministry of Digital Economy and Society to block public
Read More
February 27, 2026
The Bank of Thailand (BOT) has officially implemented a new regulatory framework supervising systemically important retail payment systems (SIRPS), effective February 21, 2026, with PromptPay being the first payment system designated as a SIRPS. Under this new set of regulations, the BOT may designate payment systems under the Payment Systems Act B.E. 2560 (2017) as SIRPSs based on quantitative and qualitative assessments. Once a system is designated as a SIRPS, the operator becomes subject to expanded supervisory obligations beyond the general requirements of the Payment Systems Act. Enhanced Supervisory Requirements SIRPS operators must comply with a heightened supervisory regime across three key areas, outlined below. 1. Governance SIRPS operators must maintain robust and transparent governance structures, including: Balanced board composition, with at least one-third of the board comprising independent directors who represent stakeholders in the system (such as payment service providers, consumers, and experts). Independent directors may serve for no more than two consecutive terms. Subcommittees to assist the board in overseeing compliance, policy implementation, and operational strategy. Clear separation between executives responsible for risk and information security and those overseeing day-to-day business operations. Risk Management and System SecuritySIRPS operators must implement comprehensive risk management frameworks, including: Clear service agreements between the SIRPS operator and its direct participants (payment service providers who connect directly to the SIRPS), defining roles and responsibilities among stakeholders. These agreements must include obligations for direct SIRPS participants to supervise any indirect participants they onboard to ensure compliance with service agreements and business rules. A business continuity plan covering both IT and non-IT aspects, with annual review. The SIRPS must target service availability comparable to international payment infrastructures, including the ability to recover operations within two hours of a disruption and to maintain scalable operational capacity. Tools and controls to monitor and manage material or
Read More