Vietnam’s IP Law Amendments and Impact On Foreign Investors

Introduction : For years the “China+1” strategy has been about hedging with manufacturers balancing the need to diversify with the risk of becoming dependent on an alternate supplier. Vietnam has emerged as an important “destination” for Indian manufacturers, shippers and even ordinary consumers. But manufacturing infrastructure capabilities only tell one story, with intellectual property (IP) protection presenting several key challenges. In particular, Vietnam amended its IP laws for the first time in over a decade in 2026 and it is critically important for Indian manufacturers as well as shippers and other stakeholders to understand what has changed, with a particular focus on the opportunities and risks.

The Legal Framework: A Decade and More of Amendments

Vietnam’s legal framework is defined by the Law on Intellectual Property 2005 (Law 50/2005/QH11), which has been amended several times since its adoption in order to bring it in line with international IP protection standards. In particular, the 2022 amendment introduced several key procedural changes, including the introduction of formal opposition procedures, bad faith filings, sound marks, patent grace periods and other adjustments. However, the 2025 amendment goes even further with several key changes that may be of particular interest to Indian manufacturers and exporters:

1. Examination timelines for patents are reduced from 18 to 12 months with an option to accelerate to 3 months;
2. Trademark opposition timeframe is reduced from 4 to 3 months;
3. Examination timelines are reduced to 5 months for all trademarks;
4. Design protection is extended to cover digital/non-physical products such as graphical interfaces;
5. For the first time ever, there is no need to file a patent application in Vietnam before other jurisdictions, enabling true simultaneous filings.

Overall, the trend in Vietnam seems to be to reduce timelines for obtaining IP protection in the country while also reducing the number of formalities associated with the process.

The One Substantive Risk That Cannot Be Repealed: Squatting Under the First-to-File Regime

Despite the opportunities presented by Vietnam’s IP regime, the risk environment in the country remains significantly more complex than in most other Asian jurisdictions that have switched to the first-to-file trademark protection standard. At its core, the issue is that Vietnam, like China, utilizes the absolute priority standard when it comes to trademarks and related IP, meaning that the application date is the determining factor in the event of disputes. This is not unique to Vietnam, as most Asian jurisdictions have switched to the first-to-file system in the last 10-15 years, with the notable exception of Japan. Instead, it is the lack of protection against bad faith filers that makes Vietnam a particularly challenging jurisdiction.

In short, what this means for Indian manufacturers and exporters is that they can be “ambushed” by local bad faith suppliers for the right to use a trademark/design in Vietnam. In particular, in the context of manufacturing, it is not uncommon for local suppliers to file a trademark application for an Indian manufacturer’s trademark of design – even if the Indian company has already launched its product/service in Vietnam. This is especially the case in Vietnamese industrial parks, where it may be challenging for an Indian manufacturer to distinguish between bad faith suppliers.

While a similar issue affects industrial property trademarks, it becomes considerably more problematic with trademarks and service marks, which tend to enjoy greater protection under Vietnam’s industrial property law. Fortunately, there are options available to address these risks. In particular, if an Indian manufacturer/exporter discovers a third party that has filed a trademark application in Vietnam, it can request cancellation of the trademark application at the Vietnam Patent Office or, if the trademark has been registered in Vietnam, initiate trademark cancellation proceedings.

On the other hand, if a domain name has been registered by a bad faith supplier in Vietnam, the dispute will need to be resolved through the UDRP arbitration procedure. At the same time, the most important lesson is to always register trademarks/service marks, logos or design in Vietnam prior to launching a product/service in the Vietnamese market.

A somewhat similar issue may arise in the context of generic trademarks such as Tiger with regards to specific categories of goods. In this scenario, it is even more important to register the trademark in Vietnam even for generic marks since squatting attempts from bad faith actors may come not just for distinctive marks but also for inherently descriptive terms, although the risk is significantly lower in this case. On the other hand, there is no need to immediately register a domain name in Vietnam for a generic trademark since squatting attempts may also come through domain name registrations. With that said, it is critical to always register the domain name in Vietnam immediately after initiating a trademark application in order to ensure that there is a formal link between the domain and trademark in the eyes of the UDRP panel.

Enforcement: Parallel Procedures, Increased Customs Oversight and Criminal Penalties

When compared to the rest of Asia, Vietnam stands out as a country where there are multiple parallel procedures for enforcing different types of IP rights. Broadly speaking, this means that the enforcement of IP rights in Vietnam can be achieved through both judicial and administrative channels. In particular, trademark rights can be enforced through administrative channels (Department of Intellectual Property, Market Management Authority or Industrial Property Inspectorate) as well as through judicial courts, which may be an appealing scenario for high-profile trademark infringement cases.

In particular, administrative protection can provide for the suspension of the continued use of infringing/trademark-violating goods/services, including the closure of a business if the continued operation of the infringing entity after the administrative authorities formally notify it of its violation. While administrative enforcement is generally considered to be less effective than judicial enforcement, it may be worth considering administrative protection of trademarks in high-profile cases. It is also important to note that administrative protection in Vietnam can be used against counterfeit goods/knockoffs, with the expanded procedures coming into force in January 2026.

Another key way to protect trademark/IP rights in Vietnam is through customs. In particular, Vietnamese customs can take action to suspend the import/export of infringing or counterfeit goods upon request by the rights owner. At the same time, it is worth noting that as of January 2026, there are significant changes to customs enforcement in Vietnam, with the implementation of Circular 06/2026/TT-BTC dated 17 January 2026, which grants Vietnamese customs additional authority over counterfeit goods. In particular, customs personnel may now independently suspend the import/export of suspected infringing goods without a formal request from the rights owner. Overall, customs enforcement is a significantly more attractive option in comparison to administrative enforcement, with the process being much faster and more cost-effective.

In particular, one of the positives for 2026 is that Vietnam’s customs added e-commerce and express delivery to the list of transportation methods subject to customs inspections. In the past, customs inspections only applied to traditional shipping methods, leaving e-commerce marketplaces in Vietnam exposed to suppliers of counterfeit goods.

Finally, it is impossible to discuss IP enforcement in Vietnam without mentioning criminal enforcement. In theory, criminal enforcement options in Vietnam are particularly attractive to foreign rights owners, with the possibility of imposing prison sentences of up to 7 years for IP-related violations. At the same time, it is important to remember that criminal liability in Vietnam is only imposed in the case of particularly aggravating circumstances, most of which would apply to large-scale counterfeiting operations.

Why These Developments Are Particularly Interesting for Indian Exporters and Manufacturers?

As mentioned above, Vietnam has been one of the preferred destinations for “China+1” manufacturers, including Indian manufacturers. In particular, Indian manufacturers benefit from Vietnam’s ability to provide access to a talented and relatively cheap labor force as well as proximity to India. In particular, India and Vietnam have secured special shipping lanes for companies/exporters utilizing the Indian subcontinent as a transit destination, with the Hai Phong and Ho Chi Minh ports reporting record-low freight rates for ships heading to India.

At the same time, Vietnamese authorities added yet another challenge for Indian exporters and manufacturers who want to utilize Vietnam as an alternate manufacturing base. In particular, Vietnam was added to the United States Trade Representative’s (USTR) 2026 Special 301 Report on Trade Enforcement Reviews for the first time since 2019, with USTR designating Vietnam as a “Priority Foreign Country.” In short, this means that USTR believes that Vietnam’s IPR protection regime is not satisfactory from the perspective of American trade law, with the USTR reserving the right to impose Section 301 sanctions on Vietnam. While it is unclear what impact this could have on India’s trade relations with Vietnam, this is yet another sign that IPR protection in Vietnam is unpredictable at best. In particular, Vietnam’s addition to USTR’s Special 301 list as a Priority Foreign Country should be seen as an additional red flag by Indian exporters about to enter into long-term manufacturing/service agreements with Vietnamese suppliers.

The USTR report is a useful guide for understanding IPR enforcement in Vietnam, with the report being a useful reminder about how cultural and legal differences in Vietnam can offset opportunities for IP rights owners. In particular, despite several opportunities for foreign companies to register their trademarks in Vietnam, it is critical to remember that trademark squatting in Vietnam continues to be a serious challenge. At the same time, Vietnam being added to USTR’s Special 301 list as a Priority Foreign Country should be regarded as a warning sign by Indian exporters about potential risks in trademark litigation in Vietnam.

Best Practices: What Indian Businesses Should Always Do When Dealing with Vietnam

Given the recommendations outlined in this legal update, Indian manufacturers, exporters and shippers should consider the following best practices when dealing with Vietnamese customs, courts and intellectual property authorities:

1. Always register trademarks, service marks, logos, and copyrights in Vietnam before manufacturing/exporting commences;
2. To the extent possible, secure the appropriate contractual protection for trademarks/IP in Vietnam;
3. Where relevant, register trademarks with Vietnamese customs for additional protection against counterfeit goods;
4. Depending on the circumstances, register trademarks and copyrights with the Department of Copyrights;
5. Take advantage of the expedited procedures for trademark registration introduced in Vietnam in 2025;
6. In some cases, consider alternative dispute resolution avenues such as administrative protection in Vietnam.

Author :- Shambhavi Agrawal, in case of any query, contact us at Global Patent Filing or write back us via email at support@globalpatentfiling.com.

Endnotes

1. Law on Intellectual Property 2005 (Law No. 50/2005/QH11, Vietnam), as amended in 2009, 2019, 2022, and by the amendment of December 10, 2025 (effective April 1, 2026).
2. Law on Intellectual Property (Amendment) 2022, Vietnam, effective January 2023 - provisions on opposition proceedings, bad-faith filings, sound marks, patent inventor grace period, and customs enforcement powers.
3. Law on Intellectual Property (Amendment), Vietnam, adopted December 10, 2025, effective April 1, 2026 - provisions on patent examination timelines, trademark opposition and examination periods, design protection for digital/non-physical product forms, and removal of first-filing-in-Vietnam requirement for certain inventions.
4. Law on Intellectual Property 2005 (Vietnam), first-to-file trademark registration principle, as amended.
5. Circular 06/2026 (Vietnam), ex officio customs suspension mechanism, including Article 14a on e-commerce and cross-border parcel flows.
6. Reports on Vietnam's industrial zone expansion and the Hai Phong/Ho Chi Minh City–India shipping corridor (trade and logistics press coverage, 2025–2026).
7. Office of the United States Trade Representative, 2026 Special 301 Report, designation of Vietnam as a "Priority Foreign Country."
8. Copyright Law of Vietnam (Law No. 50/2005/QH11, as amended), provisions on dual trademark–copyright protection for logos and design works.