86 Million at Risk: Why Vietnam is Mass-Closing Bank Accounts and How Biometrics Turned into a Nightmare
$38 million laundered using deepfakes prompts authorities to respond with unprecedented controls.
$38 million laundered using deepfakes prompts authorities to respond with unprecedented controls.
Starting September 1, 2025, banks in Vietnam began closing accounts deemed inactive or non-compliant with new biometric verification requirements. According to government estimates, over 86 million accounts out of roughly 200 million are at risk if users fail to update their data.
The State Bank of Vietnam has imposed stricter transaction limits. Facial authentication is now mandatory for online transfers exceeding 10 million VND (approximately $379). Cumulative daily transfers totaling more than 20 million VND ($758) also require biometric confirmation.
This policy is part of a broader strategy to transition to a cashless society, aimed at reducing the risks of fraud, identity theft, and the use of deepfakes to deceive banking systems.
The measures follow several high-profile cases. In May, police uncovered a network that used AI-generated facial images to bypass verification checks and launder over 1 trillion VND (around $38 million).
According to authorities, biometric authentication has already helped reduce the number of incidents, although a direct causal link is not always immediately evident.
While many Vietnamese citizens have updated their data without issues, significant difficulties have arisen for foreigners and expatriates who find it challenging to visit local bank branches. "Dormant" accounts, unused for years, have also been targeted.
Real-life examples are circulating on social media. One expatriate who left the country after their contract ended shared on Reddit that they are awaiting a social insurance payout but couldn't complete biometric verification remotely because the system requires one-time passwords (OTPs) sent to a Vietnamese phone number they no longer possess. The bank informed them that without an in-person visit, the account would be closed. The individual stated that this situation risks causing them to lose both the expected payout and the funds remaining in the account.
Additional barriers are created by technical requirements: the need to link OTPs to local phone numbers and synchronization with crypto wallets. This has strengthened the arguments of self-custody advocates, who view Bitcoin as a safeguard against centralized restrictions.
For crypto enthusiasts, these events serve as an example of how access to traditional money can suddenly become dependent on government decisions or biometric checks. In contrast, holding digital assets in self-custody wallets does not require bank involvement.
However, this alternative is not without its own risks: cryptocurrencies are subject to volatility, require stringent key management, and still rely on fiat on-ramps/off-ramps for use in everyday life.
The mass closure of bank accounts in Vietnam has highlighted the fragile balance between security and personal financial freedom. While tightening controls reduces fraud risk, it simultaneously calls into question individuals' right to control their own money. As the digital economy grows, this conflict of interests is unlikely to disappear.
