Did Vietnam actually close 86 million bank accounts and seize funds due to lack of digital ID?
Executive summary
Vietnam began a large-scale program in 2025 to remove or deactivate over 86 million bank accounts judged inactive or not biometrically verified as part of Project 06 and SBV rules; Vietnamese authorities frame the action as a “system cleanup” to prevent fraud, while multiple media and industry outlets report accounts were frozen or deleted starting September 2025 [1] [2] [3]. Reporting diverges on consequences: official lines emphasize prevention of scams and reinstatement paths, while crypto and activist outlets portray it as mass freezes that could lock users out or risk fund loss [1] [4] [3].
1. What happened: a government-led “data cleanse” tied to biometric rules
The State Bank of Vietnam (SBV) and related digital-ID efforts under Project 06 set deadlines in 2024–25 requiring biometric authentication for many account activities; Vietnamese outlets and the SBV described deletion or deactivation of “more than 86 million” accounts that were frozen long-term or lacked biometric verification, framing it as a system cleanup to prevent fraud and cybercrime [1] [5] [6].
2. Numbers and scope: 86 million out of roughly 200 million accounts
Multiple sources place the figure at about 86 million accounts targeted for deletion or freezing and estimate roughly 200 million total bank accounts in Vietnam, implying roughly 40–45% of accounts were affected; coverage notes that many were dormant, “frozen,” or linked to fraud/bots rather than everyday active retail users [1] [5] [7].
3. Official rationale vs. alarmed reactions
The SBV and Vietnamese reporting present the move as anti-fraud hygiene tied to expanded biometric KYC rules and digital-ID integration; they describe temporary suspensions and cleanup rather than arbitrary seizures [1] [8]. By contrast, crypto media, advocacy pieces and some commentators portrayed the action as an aggressive “closing” or mass freeze that could leave people unable to access funds, fueling fear about state control of finance [4] [3] [9].
4. Which accounts were targeted — inactive, frozen, or “unverified”?
Available reports consistently say the action focused on accounts that were long-frozen, inactive, or not updated with biometric verification — not all active daily-use accounts. Several outlets and compliance analyses emphasise that many affected accounts were dormant, belonged to foreigners who left the country, or were fraudulent/bot-created, though some reporting says rural, elderly or low‑tech users also faced hurdles [8] [1] [7].
5. Did the government “seize” or permanently take funds?
Sources present two recurring claims: official lines call this deletion/deactivation a cleanup (not a blanket confiscation), while some outlets and social posts warned users they could “lose their money” if they failed to reverify by a deadline. Independent reporting notes no confirmed evidence of widespread, immediate confiscation but does document that unverified accounts lost transaction access and could face further limits until resolved [8] [3] [2].
6. Who is most likely to be harmed — real people or fake accounts?
Authorities and several commentators argue the purge mainly removed fake, fraudulent, or obsolete accounts; advocates and some news outlets counter that millions of ordinary users — especially elderly, rural, low-income or expatriate account-holders who could not easily complete biometric updates — risked being locked out of funds or services [8] [7] [4].
7. The wider context: Project 06, digital ID and compliance trends
This action sits inside Project 06, Vietnam’s national digital identity and authentication program (2022–2025, vision to 2030) and new SBV circulars expanding biometric KYC for transactions and corporate accounts. Reporting ties the bank-account cleanup to deadlines created by these regulatory moves [5] [6] [10].
8. Areas of disagreement and reporting limits
Sources disagree on severity and impact: some outlets treat the event as routine anti‑fraud maintenance [1] [8], while others depict it as a sweeping, punitive closure risking fund loss [3] [9]. Available sources do not mention a single, independent audit confirming how many affected accounts belonged to active, everyday users versus fraudulent or dormant ones; nor do they uniformly document the mechanics by which funds would be permanently forfeited (not found in current reporting).
9. Takeaway for a reader evaluating the claim
The core factual claim — that Vietnam deactivated/removed over 86 million bank accounts tied to biometric/non‑verification issues in 2025 — is supported across official and independent reporting [1] [2] [5]. The sharper claim that the state “seized” all funds from those accounts is not uniformly documented: officials call it cleanup and suspension while alarmist accounts warn of permanent loss; independent confirmation of mass, immediate confiscation is not found in the cited coverage [8] [3].
Limitations: this briefing relies solely on the provided articles; local Vietnamese government releases, bank notices and audited data beyond these sources are not included and could change the factual picture (not found in current reporting).