Today, competition between businesses takes place not only in product quality but also in the ability to occupy consumer perception. Therefore, phrases such as "No. 1 in Vietnam", "unique in the market", "best solution", "leading brand", "No.1", "leading brand" or "best choice" appear more and more popular in advertising campaigns.
The advertising laws of many countries, including Vietnam, always consider this a group of content that needs to be strictly controlled.
However, from a legal perspective, these are not just marketing slogans. Each leading or absolute statement has the potential to directly impact consumers' purchasing decisions and affect the competitive environment in the market. Therefore, the advertising laws of many countries, including Vietnam, always consider this a group of content that needs to be strictly controlled.
Circular No. 12/2026/TT-BVHTTDL of the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism, will take effect from July 5, 2026 (Circular 12), marking a remarkable improvement in the mechanism for managing advertising claims that are absolutely affirmative. This document not only clarifies the concepts that have been controversial for many years, but also sends a clear message: businesses have the right to assert their leading position, but they must prove it with objective and transparent grounds.
Behind the word "best" is the story of market confidence
In marketing science, claims like "No. 1," "best," or "unique" are called superiority claims. These are very persuasive messages because they give customers the impression that there has been an objective comparison between many products on the market and the results show that the advertised product is superior to the rest.
Consumers often don't have the time or resources to verify all the information on their own. They tend to rely on the signals transmitted by the business. A product that is presented as the "No. 1 brand" can create a significant competitive advantage even before customers delve deeper into the actual quality.
Therefore, if these claims are not verified, advertising can become a tool of misleading instead of providing information.
From the perspective of state management, this is not only a matter of consumer protection but also related to maintaining a healthy competitive environment. A business that claims to be "No. 1" without a basis can gain an unfair market advantage over other competitors.
That is why Clause 11, Article 8 of the Advertising Law has long prohibited the use of the words "best", "only", "best", "number one" or similar words without legal documents to prove it.
However, in practice, the biggest question is always: what is a "similar word" and what is a "legal document proving"?
The new circular has significantly expanded the scope of control
One of the most notable points of Circular 12 is the clear definition of the concept of "words with similar meanings". Accordingly, not only the words listed in the Advertising Law are subject to control, but all words or phrases in Vietnamese or foreign languages that affirm the leading position, uniqueness or absoluteness of products, goods or services can be considered.
This means a lot in the current advertising landscape.
Many businesses used to think that just avoiding the direct use of the words "number 1" or "best" can avoid legal risks. Instead, they use expressions such as "leading", "top", "premier", "best-selling", "exclusive", "unrivaled", "top" or "top choice".
However, with the new approach of the Circular, the management agency will not only look at the text but also evaluate the actual meaning of the advertising message.
In other words, replacing the word "No.1" with "No.1" or "leading brand" does not change the legal nature of the advertising content.
This is a management trend similar to many developed countries, where regulators often evaluate ads based on the "overall impression" consumers receive rather than just individual words.
Not every survey is enough to prove the lead
Another important new point of Circular 12 is to clearly define the types of documents that can be used to prove leading or unique claims.
In essence, the law is requiring businesses to shift from a "self-affirming" mindset to a "proven" mindset.
Circular 12 only acknowledges two main groups of evidence.
The first group is the results of market surveys conducted by legally established market research organizations.
The second group is certificates, awards or ranking results issued by competent agencies or organizations in competitions, exhibitions or evaluation programs of national, regional or international scale.
This regulation may surprise many businesses.
In fact, many businesses are using internal voting results, customer surveys conducted by the business itself or commercial awards as a basis for "No. 1" statements. However, these documents are not sure to meet the requirements of independence, objectivity and reliability in the spirit of the Circular.
More importantly, the supporting documents are only used during the validity period. A survey result published many years ago may no longer properly reflect the current market situation.
Source: Business and Marketing Magazine
New trend: advertising must be transparent
If in the past businesses often only made statements without explaining the grounds, now this approach will become more risky.
The Circular requires that advertising content must clearly show the name of the document, the number of the document and the time of announcement or issuance of the certificate. This is a significant change that goes beyond advertising.
In essence, the regulator is promoting the principle of information transparency. Consumers not only know that the business is identifying itself as "No. 1", but also have the right to know what basis leads to that conclusion.
This trend is similar to international practice.
In the United States, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has repeatedly affirmed that all objective advertising claims must have a "reasonable basis" before being published. Enterprises are not allowed to make a statement and then try to prove it later.
In the UK, the Advertising Standards Agency (ASA) also regularly requires businesses to show data to support claims such as "best", "leading", "No.1" or "market leader".
From this perspective, Circular 12 is not a restrictive regulation on advertising activities but an approach to international standards for honest and responsible advertising.
Legal risks don't just come from regulators
Many businesses believe that the biggest risk is being sanctioned by state agencies. In fact, this is only part of the problem.
In the context of an increasingly competitive market, competitors are often the ones who detect and complain about advertisements that show signs of violation earlier than the regulator.
A statement of "only in Vietnam" or "No. 1 in the market" without clear grounds can become a basis for opponents to oppose, request corrections or initiate disputes related to unfair competition.
The bigger risk lies in the loss of reputation. A brand can take years to build trust with customers, but just one incident involving false advertising can significantly degrade a business's image.
In the age of social networks, the media consequences are sometimes much greater than the administrative sanctions.
From advertising control to marketing risk management
It is worth noting that the new regulations should not be seen as an obstacle to marketing. On the contrary, this is an opportunity for businesses to build a more professional marketing management system.
In many international corporations, all advertising content must go through a legal review process before being published. Claims about product quality, market share, market position, or effectiveness must all be documented.
This trend may become an inevitable requirement for Vietnamese businesses in the near future.
Instead of asking the question "is the number 1 word used", businesses should ask "whether we have enough evidence to prove it".
If the answer is no, the use of softer statements such as "one of the top brands", "chosen by many customers", "won a prestigious award", "leader in a specific segment" or "according to the annual market survey..." is often the safer and more sustainable option.
Conclusion
Circular 12/2026/TT-BVHTTDL has clarified an important principle of modern advertising law: any leading or absolute claim must be supported by objective, transparent and verifiable evidence. For businesses, this is not just a story of compliance with advertising laws. Furthermore, this is a matter of brand management and business risk management.
In a market where trust is increasingly the most valuable asset, businesses that can prove what they say have a more sustainable competitive advantage than those who simply say what customers want to hear. At that time, the title of "No. 1" is no longer an advertising slogan, but becomes the result of recognition from the market, from customers and from verifiable objective data.
Lawyer Nguyen Van Phuc
HM&P Law Firm
Read more: Quảng cáo 'nhất', 'duy nhất', 'số 1': làm sao tránh rủi ro pháp lý?
.png)
+84 28 7308 0839.png)
hmplaw.vn
