Data story · October 30, 2026 · Data as of October 30, 2026

Laos VA claims: Agent Orange, the PACT Act and what the Board grants

How the Board of Veterans' Appeals decided claims from veterans whose service names Laos: the PACT Act added a herbicide presumption for service there from December 1965 to September 1969, but at the Board the grants on herbicide-list conditions came from decisions that also named Vietnam, Thailand or another listed place.

Is there an Agent Orange presumption for service in Laos?

Yes, since the PACT Act took effect in August 2022. VA presumes herbicide exposure for veterans who served in Laos from December 1965 to September 1969 (38 U.S.C. 1116; M21-1 VIII.i.1.A). The conditions on the herbicide list are then presumed service connected.

The presumption covers service in Laos itself, in those dates. Records that place the veteran there are what most of these claims turned on.

How the Board decided Laos claims

146 Board decisions from 2020 to 2025 with a service-connection claim name Laos. The decision records herbicide exposure in 116 of them (79.5%). Only 6 conditions came up for 15 or more veterans, so the numbers below are small.

Board outcomes for Laos veterans, by condition
Bar: share granted for Laos veterans
Red mark: all veterans with the same condition

Conditions on the Agent Orange list

VA presumes these for veterans who served in Laos from December 1965 to September 1969.

  • Diabetes DC 7913

    34.0% · 18 of 53

    all veterans 24.0%On the Agent Orange list
  • Prostate, bladder or kidney cancer DC 7528

    44.0% · 11 of 25

    all veterans 33.7%On the Agent Orange list
  • Hypertension DC 7101

    30.4% · 7 of 23

    all veterans 19.0%On the Agent Orange list
  • Coronary artery disease DC 7005

    54.5% · 12 of 22

    all veterans 34.1%On the Agent Orange list

Other conditions Laos veterans claimed

  • PTSD DC 9411

    20.5% · 8 of 39

    all veterans 27.1%
  • Nerve damage, legs DC 8520

    16.7% · 3 of 18

    all veterans 23.0%

One count per veteran per condition; a remand counts as not granted. Conditions with at least 15 veterans.

How did Laos claims do at the Board?

On herbicide-list conditions, the Board granted 37.8% of claims in decisions that name Laos (54 of 143), against 25.0% for all veterans with the same conditions. Coronary artery disease did best: 12 of 22.

Diabetes, the most common claim, was granted for 18 of 53 veterans (34.0%, against 24.0% overall), and hypertension for 7 of 23 (30.4%, against 19.0%). PTSD did worse than for all veterans: 20.5%, against 27.1%.

Grants came with other service

Of 38 decisions that granted a herbicide-list condition, all 38 also name Vietnam, Thailand or another place with its own presumption, and 30 name Vietnam. Many veterans who were in Laos also served in Vietnam or at a Thai air base, and that service can carry the claim on its own. In the grants below, the Board relied on service in Thailand.

Did the PACT Act raise Laos grants at the Board?

Not in these decisions. On herbicide-list conditions, the grant share was 52.6% in decisions from 2020 and 2021 (38 claims) and 31.3% from 2023 to 2025 (80 claims). The numbers are small.

Herbicide-list conditionsGrantedClaims
Decisions from 2020 and 202152.6%38
Decisions from 2023 to 202531.3%80

Decisions from 2022 are left out of the comparison, because the law changed partway through that year. More Laos claims a year reached the Board after the law; the decisions do not show why a smaller share of them was granted.

Why are Laos herbicide claims denied?

For 41 denials of herbicide-list conditions, the Board's note named the exposure or the service in 80.5% of them: service in Laos not shown by the records, or not within the dates.

Read the decisions

Recent decisions, with the Board's reasoning as summarized by AI:

  • , October 2025: coronary artery disease and diabetes granted on herbicide exposure in Thailand.
  • , September 2025: hypertension granted on herbicide exposure in Thailand and a favorable VA opinion; diabetes and sleep apnea granted secondary to a psychiatric condition in the same decision.
  • , December 2025: hypertension denied; the records did not support service in Laos during the presumptive period, and a VA examiner found no link to the claimed exposures.
  • , October 2025: Parkinson's disease denied; no qualifying service or herbicide exposure was established, and the private opinions rested on that exposure.

What the data cannot tell you

The Laos group comes from the places each decision names; a mention is not proof of service there or within the dates. The group is small, so a few decisions move the shares. Service-connection claims only; rating appeals are left out. The herbicide flag and denial notes are AI-extracted. These are historical outcomes, not predictions.

For representatives

  • Pin down the dates in Laos first: December 1965 to September 1969. Personnel records, unit histories, flight records and award citations can show them.
  • Check for service in Vietnam or at a Thai air base, which may carry the claim on its own; every grant decision here also named such a place.
  • A veteran denied before the PACT Act can file a supplemental claim under the new presumption.

Explore the data

Read the decisions behind this story

VA Law Explorer finds the decisions, quotes the reasoning and writes a research memo.

Ask VA Law Explorer

About the data

Board of Veterans' Appeals decisions 2020-2025 (bva_cases_v2 lead basis). Laos veterans = decisions whose locations match 'laos([^a-z]|$)'. A mention is not proof of service there, or of service within the presumption's dates. Each veteran is counted once per condition, at the best ruling in the decision (granted, then remanded, then denied); grant share = granted / all decided, so a remand counts as not granted. Service-connection issues only (not rating, effective-date or TDIU appeals). 'All veterans' is the same count across all decisions. The herbicide flag and denial notes are AI-extracted from each decision. Historical outcomes, not predictions. Queried October 30, 2026. Every figure in this story is computed from the query results, and the AI-extracted data can contain errors. The figures are fixed as of that date. Related research pages describe their own data dates and methods.

VA Law Explorer Weekly

New data stories, M21-1 and 38 CFR changes, and updates to the Board decision data, in one email a week. Free; unsubscribe anytime.

We send this newsletter only. See our privacy policy.

Where this data comes from

  1. Claim
  2. Regional office decides
  3. Veteran appeals
  4. Board decides
  5. Granted · Denied · Remanded: back to the regional office

Board of Veterans' Appeals decisions show how VA's highest review body applies 38 CFR and weighs evidence on contested claims.

Each one is an appeal: a regional office decided the claim first, and the veteran appealed. So these rates describe the Board, not a veteran's odds at the regional office, where most claims are decided and whose decisions are not public.

More on what Board decisions can and cannot tell you