The case against Mr Nguyen Duc Kien and its potential implication
The first hearings of the criminal cases against Mr Nguyen Duc Kien, former Board member of Asia Commercial Bank (ACB) and Ms Huynh Thi Huyen Nhu, former staff of Vietinbank, a large State-owned bank have raised many fundamental issues about the business law framework in Vietnam. Unfortunately, without a full transcript of the hearings, one cannot comment on the legal interpretation adopted by the courts.
That being said, newspaper reports about Mr Kien’s conviction of illegally doing business (tội kinh doanh trái phép) have shed some light about the court’s interpretation of “doing business” under Article 4.2 of the Enterprise Law. The background of the case is as follows:
Mr Kien set up two companies which do not register for the business lines of sale and purchase of shares but for other business lines;
These two companies acquire and/or sell shares in other companies;
The procurator takes the view that the two companies have illegally done business which are not recorded in their business registration certificates. Under Article 9.1 of the Enterprise Law, a company is required to do business within the scope of its business registration certificates;
Mr Kien takes the view that under Article 13 of the Enterprise Law, a company is entitled to acquire shares in another company. Therefore, there is no need for Mr Kien’s companies to register for the business lines of sale and purchase of shares. In practice, the approach taken by Mr Kien’s companies is widely common. Some business registration authorities even refuse to register the business line of sale and purchase of shares on the basis that this activity is permitted by the Enterprise Law already; and
The first instance court hold that because Mr Kien’s companies do not do any business other than sale and purchase of shares, these companies are considered as engaging in the business of sale and purchase of shares.
Article 4.2 of the Enterprise Law provides that “doing business” (kinh doanh) means the continuous conduct of one, several or all of the stages of the investment process, from production to sale of products or provision of services in the market for profits. There is no further interpretation of the term “continuous conduct”. Now, it seems that the court will consider a business conduct by a company to be a continuous conduct if such business conduct is the only business conduct of the company. In light of this interpretation, owners of companies in Vietnam will likely pay more attention to ensure that their companies will at least actually engage in some business lines as provided in their business registration certificates.
On 14 June 2025, the National Assembly passed the amended Corporate Income Tax Law 2025 (CIT Law 2025). Among other things, this legislation is expected to bring significant changes in determining the method of calculating tax for capital transfer and securities transfer transactions (Capital Gains Tax) undertaken by foreign companies. This post aims to provide a comprehensive and clear overview by analyzing and comparing these new regulations with those stipulated in the Corporate Income Tax Law 2008 (CIT Law 2008).
1) Definition of Taxable Income Arising in Vietnam for Foreign Companies
A key area of adjustment in the CIT Law 2025 relates to the definition of taxable income arising in Vietnam for foreign companies, making it more transparent.
Under the CIT Law 2008, the specific definition of such income was not explicitly clarified within the law itself; rather, it was detailed in Decree 218/2013 guiding the CIT Law 2008. In contrast, the CIT Law 2025 has directly incorporated this definition, clearly stating that taxable income arising in Vietnam for foreign companies is income originating from Vietnam, irrespective of the location where business activities are conducted.
On 27 June 2025, as a foundational step for establishing an international financial hub in Vietnam, the National Assembly of Vietnam adopts the Resolution 222 on the International Financial Center (IFC) in Vietnam (specifically in Ho Chi Minh City and Da Nang City) (Resolution 222). However, when compared to international best practices, the Resolution reveals several weaknesses that may deter international investors.
Based on a comparative analysis, here are the main drawbacks:
Isolation from Vietnam domestic markets – Perhaps the most important benefits of investing in an IFC in Vietnam is the opportunity to access Vietnam domestic capital and financial market. Unfortunately, Resolution 222 does not clearly contemplate how an IFC member can invest or interact with Vietnam domestic capital and financial market. Without a better access to Vietnamese domestic markets, investors from regional financial centers may have less incentives to move to the IFC in Vietnam.
Unstable and unpredictable legal framework: Resolution 222 took effect from 1 September 2025. After five years, the legal framework contemplated by Resolution 222 will be reviewed by the National Assembly and may be replaced by a Law on International Financial Center. Existing projects can continue to operate under “existing” legal frameworks at such time. Given the amount of implementing legislation and the infrastructure required, it may take one to two years for the IFC to be up and running. Accordingly, investors may only have around three to four years to actually run theirs businesses before a potential new law will be issued. During the operation of the IFC, a regulation can be issued to limit the rights of IFC members to ensure “national interests” and “prevent threats against national security”. This provision is very broad and vague and could allow IFC regulators to change their regulations at any time.
The Vietnamese Government has recently issued Decree 168/2025 on enterprise registration, which replaces the previous Decree 1/2021. This blog post highlights several significant changes and clarifications to enterprise registration procedures under Decree 168/2025.
1) Additional forms of documents evidencing the completion of capital contribution and transfer
Decree 168/2025 introduces new options for documenting the completion of capital contributions or capital transfers in the enterprise registration application dossiers as follows:
For evidence of the completion of a transfer, one of the following documents is now accepted:
• A copy or extract of the member register or shareholder register.
• A copy or original of the liquidation minutes of the transfer contract.
• Bank confirmation of completed payment.
• Other documents validly proving the completion of share or capital contribution transfer as prescribed by law.
Decree 153/2020 (as amended), which governs private corporate bond offerings, creates ambiguity concerning the permissible use of bond proceeds, especially when parent companies aim to finance their subsidiaries.
Decree 153/2020 stipulates that bond proceeds can be used for implementing investment programmes and projects, restructuring debts of the issuing enterprise itself, or for other purposes sanctioned by specialised laws. The ambiguity stems specifically from how the qualifier “of the issuing enterprise itself” applies to these permissible uses. This leads to two primary interpretations:
The recently enacted law amending the Investment Law 2020 (Amendment Law 2025), effective 1 July 2025, introduces the following key changes:
1. Major Decentralization of Approval Authority
1.1. Under the Amendment Law 2025, the Provincial People's Committees, rather than the Prime Minister under the previous law, have the authority to grant investment policy approval for the following projects:
A pdf version of this post can be downloaded here.
In June 2025, the National Assembly passed a new Law on Management of State Capital (Law on State Capital 2025) replacing the same law issued in 2014 and amended in 2018 (Law on State Capital 2014). The Law on State Capital 2025 have given the individuals managing State-owned (or controlled) enterprises (i.e., the Members’ Council or the Chairman) substantial flexibility to run their businesses. In this post, we discussed some key changes introduced by the Law on State Capital 2025. A comparison between the Law on State Capital 2025 and Law on State Capital 2014 by Deep Research of Gemini 2.5 Pro can be found here.
Clearer scope of application
Law on State Capital 2025 clearly provides that enterprises which more than 50% charter capital or voting shares of which is held by the State are also subject to this law. This point is not clear under the Law on State Capital 2014.
Definition of State Capital
Under Law on State Capital 2025, State capital in a State-owned enterprise only includes the contributed capital portion held by the State out of the total owner's equity of the enterprise. In addition, the Law on State Capital 2025 defines State capital by reference to the holding percentage of the State. This new approach is a significant change from the Law on State Capital 2014 because:
The Law on State Capital 2025 excludes other funding sources such as the state budget, public assets, and development investment funds from the definition of "State capital" within an enterprise. Instead, the Law on State Capital 2025 classifies these as sources of capital and assets to be used for investing state capital in enterprises; and
in many scenarios, the holding percentage is more important than the absolute amount
The 9th working session of the National Assembly of Vietnam, which lasted 35 days and ends on 27 June 2025, is probably the most productive working session of the National Assembly for several decades. In this one working session, the National Assembly has passed a number of laws equal to all laws passed by the National Assembly in 17 previous working sessions.
Immediately after the conclusion of the National Assembly’s working sessions in late June 2025, newspapers and social media in Vietnam were flooded with information about these new laws and regulations. Information about these new laws was important since many of those laws would take effect on 1 July 2025 – only one week after the National Assembly concluded its working session.
As part of our marketing efforts, we also set out to review those laws and resolutions for our legal updates. However, when we first started, our lawyers struggled to locate the final text of many of these laws. For us, a “final text” of a law would be a scanned PDF of these laws bearing the seal of the National Assembly and signatures of the Chairman of the National Assembly or an official publication on official websites such as the Official Gazette or the National Database of Legal Documents.
Introduction
From 1 July 2025, Vietnam’s local Government system formally operates according to a new “two-tier” system in 34 provinces as opposed to the old “three-tier” system in 63 provinces. In the new system, there are only two levels of local Government including provinces (tỉnh) and wards (xã, phường). Government agencies at district level no longer exist. Vietnam also combines several existing wards to form a larger ward. As a result, we estimate that Vietnam now has about 3,300 local people’s committees down from 10,000 local people’s committees.
To achieve this, by 1 July 2025, the National Assembly and the Government have, among other things, amended the Constitution, amended the Law on Organisation of Local Government, issued 34 resolutions and 28 Decrees to restructure the local government system. Unfortunately, despite such herculean efforts, it appears that the new regulations have not addressed adequately various legal issues arising from the restructuring. In this post we will discuss some of these issues. More information can be found from the attached research generated by the latest AI LLM from Google (Gemini Pro 2.5).
No clear geographical boundaries between various local authorities at wards levels.
It appears that on 1 July 2025, the Government did not establish clear geographical boundaries between the newly established wards. This is because the Standing Committee of the National Assembly sets a deadline of 30 September 2025 for the Government to do so for each province. Until a source of truth of the geographical boundaries at wards level is set up, many companies and individuals may not know for sure the correct addresses that they may use in their operations including application submitted to the authorities, invoices issued to clients, or contracts.
In 2024, the National Assembly of Vietnam enacted the new Law on Organization of the People’s Court (Law on Courts), which implemented significant reforms to the structure of the People’s Court system in comparison to the 2014 Law on Courts. Shortly after the promulgation of the 2024 Law on Courts, Vietnam initiated a substantial reorganisation of its administrative divisions, transitioning from a three-tier (province, district, commune) model to a two-tier (province, commune) model. Consequently, in 2025, the National Assembly approved an amendment to the 2024 Law on Courts to align the court system with the updated two-tier administrative division model (2024-2025 Law on Courts). Below are our discussions on the key changes under the 2024-2025 Law on Courts when compared to the 2014 Law on Courts.
1) Complete Restructuring of the Court Hierarchy
The court system is majorly reformed with the removal of the High People's Courts (Tòa án nhân dân cấp cao) and replacement of District Courts with Regional Court (Tòa án nhân dân khu vực).
On 16 June 2025, the National Assembly of Vietnam officially passed the Employment Law 2025, replacing the Employment Law 2013. The new law will take effect on 1 January 2026. Among its most significant revisions are changes to unemployment insurance (UI) regulations, aimed at expanding coverage, increasing benefits, and clarifying the responsibilities of both employers and employees. This article summarizes the most notable updates to Vietnam’s unemployment insurance system and other key changes under the new Employment Law 2025.
1. Major Changes to the Unemployment Insurance System
· Broader Scope of Participants: The Employment Law 2025 broadens the scope of mandatory UI participation to include (1) employees with labor contracts of at least one month and (2) part-time employees under similar contracts whose monthly salary exceeds the minimum wage.
· Additional Exclusions: The Employment Law 2025 now excludes the following groups from UI participation: (1) employees who meet the conditions for receiving retirement pensions (not just those already receiving them, as under the 2013 Law), (2) employees receiving other social insurance benefits or monthly government allowances, and (3) employees on probationary contracts. The new law also broadens the situations where UI contributions are not required. Now, employees who do not receive a salary for 14 working days or more in a month will not be subject to UI contributions. (Previously, under Decree 28/2015, this only applied to those on maternity or sick leave for that duration).
· Contribution Rates and Salary Basis: The UI contribution rate is set at a maximum of 1% of the employee’s monthly salary, giving the government flexibility to adjust the rate below this ceiling if needed. The salary basis for UI contributions now includes the monthly salary plus any allowances or other regular additional payments. This is a change from the Employment Law 2013, which based UI contributions only on the salary used for social insurance.