When Digital Technology Industry Law 71/2025/QH15 takes effect from 1 January 2026 and recognises digital assets as property, a set of civil questions that seemed remote becomes immediate: how is a deceased person wallet inherited, can a digital asset secure a loan, and how does an enforcement agency seize an asset with no physical form. This article follows those three legal consequences through the general law currently in force, the Civil Code 91/2015/QH13 for inheritance, Decree 21/2021/ND-CP for secured transactions, and civil judgment enforcement law for seizure. It also states the limit plainly: as of 21 October 2026 no specialised instrument or precedent exists for digital assets in any of the three fields, so the analysis stays at mechanism level and marks what still awaits practice.
Inheriting digital assets: an estate on paper and keys in practice
As a matter of law the inheritance path is fairly clear: Article 612 of Civil Code 91/2015/QH13 defines the estate as the deceased separate property plus their share of common property; because Law 71/2025 recognises digital assets as property, a holder digital assets join the estate on death and are divided by will or by law under Articles 650 and 651 of the Civil Code, with the first line of heirs covering spouse, parents and children. Heirs may ask the pilot-framework provider where assets are custodied to freeze and transfer their share after completing estate declaration or division at a notarial practice organisation.
Inheritance preparation for digital assets is therefore work done while alive: make a will that mentions the digital asset class and custody locations without writing private keys directly into the will, prepare an access instruction held in a sealed envelope or an executor authorisation mechanism, and tell at least one heir that a custody portfolio exists. With a self-custody wallet, no agency or organisation can restore access when the private key is lost, so that estate share becomes technically unrecoverable although the inheritance right on paper is fully valid.
Mortgaging and securing with digital assets: permitted as a mechanism, hard on valuation and realisation
In principle, a digital asset is property and can therefore become security for a civil obligation under the Civil Code frame and Decree 21/2021/ND-CP on securing performance of obligations, through mortgage or pledge depending on the asset control structure. The core validity conditions of a secured transaction are that the asset be identifiable, owned by the securing party, and that the security be registered where the law requires registration for effect against third parties, through the current security registration system.
Valuation and realisation on default form the second bottleneck: crypto-asset prices move hourly, so the security contract needs a loan-to-value ratio, a margin-call mechanism when price falls through a threshold and a sale mechanism on a licensed exchange upon realisation, with settlement in Vietnamese dong under the pilot framework. At the writing date no bank in Vietnam has announced a lending product secured by digital assets and the registration authority has issued no specialised guidance on describing this asset class, so secured transactions over digital assets, if any, will mainly occur between private parties with individually designed documentation, at a materially lower certainty level than traditional collateral.
Enforcement and recognition on the enterprise balance sheet
When a judgment debtor holds digital assets, the civil enforcement agency has a mechanism basis for seizure because a digital asset is property of the debtor under Law 71/2025, and the general sequence of civil enforcement law on verification, seizure, valuation and sale applies. Verification is the hardest step in practice: the enforcement officer needs information from the licensed service provider where the debtor holds an account, and freezing works only for assets custodied with that provider; for a self-custody wallet whose private key the officer does not hold, a seizure decision is almost technically unenforceable.
For an enterprise holding digital assets on its balance sheet, recognition as property raises consistent recording and valuation demands: the enterprise needs an internal accounting policy on recognition timing, a valuation basis using prices on the licensed exchange where the asset trades, period treatment of price differences, and notes disclosing custody location, key control mechanism and price volatility risk in the financial statements. Auditors will request proof of ownership and existence similar to other custodied assets, including custodian confirmation and wallet address verification.
Frequently Asked Questions
Now that the 2025 Digital Technology Industry Law recognises digital assets as property, how is inheritance of digital assets carried out?
Under the Civil Code mechanism, a deceased person digital assets belong to the estate under Article 612 and are divided by will or by heir lines in Articles 650 and 651 of Civil Code 91/2015/QH13, because Law 71/2025 recognises digital assets as property. Heirs complete estate declaration or division at a notarial organisation, then ask the pilot-framework custodian to transfer their share. The decisive practical condition is proving the account or wallet belonged to the deceased; with a self-custody wallet whose key is lost, the inheritance right is valid on paper but the asset is technically unrecoverable.
Can digital assets be used as mortgaged assets, and what is the security registration procedure?
Yes at mechanism level: a digital asset is property and can be security under the Civil Code and Decree 21/2021/ND-CP, and the security must be registered through the security registration system for third-party effect where the law requires it. The contract must identify the asset by custody account, wallet address and quantity, with a transfer-lock and a licensed-exchange realisation mechanism on default.
By what sequence does the enforcement agency seize and sell digital assets?
The enforcement agency applies the general civil enforcement sequence: verify assets through the licensed service provider where the debtor holds an account, issue a seizure decision and require that provider to freeze, then value and sell through the lawful pilot-framework trading channel in Vietnamese dong. The largest difficulty is verifying and freezing self-custody wallets without the private key. As of the writing date no digital-asset enforcement case has been published in Vietnam, so the sequence above is mechanism analysis from general law, not precedent practice.
What must an enterprise holding digital assets on its balance sheet note on recognition and valuation?
An enterprise needs a consistent internal accounting policy: recognise when it controls the asset, value by prices on the licensed exchange where the asset trades, treat price differences by period, and disclose custody location, private-key control mechanism and volatility risk. Auditors will require custodian confirmation and wallet address verification to prove ownership and existence. A group enterprise must test its global digital-asset policy against the domestic pilot framework on licensed trading channels and dong settlement before recording a holding in Vietnam.
FLAT Law Firm designs the inheritance file and secured transaction for digital assets before any dispute arises
A digital asset is truly property only when the right to it can be proved before a notary, a registration authority and an enforcement officer, and all three work on documents the owner prepares in advance. FLAT Law Firm builds the will structure and access instructions for a digital-asset portfolio, drafts security contracts with transfer-lock and realisation mechanisms, and advises recognition policy for enterprises holding digital assets on the balance sheet. Individuals and enterprises holding digital assets of material value may contact the firm for a legal readiness review of the current portfolio.
