Will Vietnam block numerous international cryptocurrency exchanges like South Korea did?
South Korea takes strong control over international cryptocurrency exchanges.
On October 13, 2026, the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) of South Korea announced its decision to block domestic access to 27 websites of unregistered cryptocurrency service providers. The affected platforms include KuCoin, MEXC, Phemex, CoinW, BingX, and BitMart.
This move expands regulatory measures from restricting new app installations and updates on app stores to blocking websites. The FIU stated that unregistered service providers may be blocked immediately upon detection, without waiting for confirmation of specific user damages.
In the context of Vietnam’s pilot program for the cryptocurrency market, South Korea’s approach raises a noteworthy issue: how will international platforms be regulated once a domestically licensed trading system is established?
According to Clause 2, Article 7 of Resolution 05/2025/NQ-CP, after a period of 6 months from the date the first cryptocurrency service provider is licensed, domestic investors who trade without going through an organization licensed by the Ministry of Finance will be subject to penalties depending on the nature and severity of the violation and applicable laws.
The transition period is calculated from the date of the initial licensing, rather than the date a trading platform opens or announces a product launch. This is an important distinction to make when assessing when regulatory requirements impact investor trading activities.
However, the Resolution does not provide for an automatic mechanism to block websites or applications of foreign exchanges immediately after the 6-month period expires. Therefore, the regulation on transactions through licensed organizations is not sufficient to conclude that Vietnam will simultaneously block all international platforms at a specific time.
Essentially, investor compliance obligations and platform access restrictions are two different issues. A website may remain accessible while trading activity on it is subject to legal limitations.
Is a scenario of “banning” international stock exchanges feasible?
From an enforcement perspective, blocking access could become a considered option if unlicensed platforms continue to serve the Vietnamese market. This is an assessment of future management possibilities, not a measure already announced within the framework of Resolution 05.
The establishment of a licensed exchange system necessitates monitoring transactions, protecting client assets, and fulfilling compliance obligations. If activity on platforms outside this system remains widespread, the effectiveness of managing the pilot market could be challenged.
However, restricting access is only one possible option. Measures related to advertising, marketing, or payment channels may also be considered, depending on the legal basis and the decision of the competent authority. The South Korean case also shows that a problem to be addressed when blocking the platform is the ability of existing customers to withdraw their assets. The FIU acknowledges that users may face difficulties and plans to coordinate with relevant units to guide withdrawal procedures.
In Vietnam, the approach of managing transactions through licensed organizations has been established. However, to confirm whether an international exchange will be blocked, specific decisions regarding the target, scope, and timing of implementation are still needed. The launch of domestic exchanges may therefore mark the beginning of a stricter regulatory phase, but this does not necessarily mean that international platforms will immediately lose access in Vietnam.（Vietnam Crypto Exchange）