Vietnam Business Law is a website managed by lawyers of Venture North Law Limited (VNLaw). Venture North Law Limited (VNLaw) is a Vietnamese commercial law firm. We won the Rising Law Firm of the Year Award at the Southeast Asia Law Awards for the years 2020 and 2021 held by The Legal 500. Very few Vietnamese law firms have achieved a similar regional recognition.
Posted in: Legal Environment
Under Decree 98/2014, for the first time, the Government introduces a detailed regulations on setting up communist party cell and trade union bodies within a private company in Vietnam including foreign-invested enterprise. In particular,
Article 1 of the Ordinance on State Secrets defines State secrets as “information on cases, affairs, documents, objects, venues, time, speech, carrying important contents in the fields of politics, national defense, security, external affairs, economy, science, technology and other fields, which the State does not publicize or has not yet publicized and the disclosure of which will cause harm to the State of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam”. As a result, regulations on protection of State secrets in Vietnam are very broad and general which may sometimes conflict with certain business transaction or operation.
“Fundamental” (or basic) principles of Vietnamese law are an important concept. For example, while certain contracts with Vietnamese counterparties could be governed by foreign law, the choice of foreign law must not be contrary to fundamental principles of Vietnamese law. Vietnamese courts may refuse recognition of foreign arbitration awards if such awards are contrary to fundamental principles of Vietnamese law. Until recently, there is no clear guidance about what fundamental principles of Vietnamese law are. In March 2014, under Resolution 1/2014 implementing the Law on Commercial Arbitration, the Supreme Court seems to be for the first time has given some limited guidance on fundamental principles of Vietnamese law. In particular,
In this post, we continue to discuss certain aspects of the new provisions on beneficial owners (BOs or commonly called as “UBOs”) under the new amendments to the Enterprise Law 2020 passed in June 2025 (2025 Enterprise Law Amendment) and the new Decree 168/2025 on enterprise registration. We have discussed some of the issues in our earlier post.
UBOs with joint controls
Under the 2025 Enterprise Law Amendment and Decree 168/2025, the criteria to determine whether an individual is an UBO seem to apply to a single individual only. As such, it is not clear if the information about related persons of such individual (e.g., his/her relatives) should be taken into account when determining an UBO. For example, it is not clear if an individual together with his/her spouse hold more than 25% voting rights of an enterprise should be declared as an UBO. A literal reading of Decree 168/2025 suggests that declaration of UBOs is not required in case of joint control. However, such an approach is likely not consistent with the purpose of the provisions on UBOs.
The law amending the Enterprise Law 2020 (Amended Enterprise Law 2020), effective 1 July 2025, introduces the following key changes:
1. The New Beneficial Owner Regime
1.1. The Amended Enterprise Law 2020's most significant change is the introduction of a Beneficial Owner (BO) regime, designed to enhance transparency and align Vietnam with international anti-money laundering standards.
Who are BOs?
1.2. The Amended Enterprise Law 2020 defines a BO as the individual who ultimately owns or controls an enterprise. The recently issued Decree 168/2025 on enterprise registration (Decree 168/2025) further clarifies the specific criteria for identifying a BO. In particular, an individual is considered a BO if they meet one of the following conditions:
In Vietnam, industrial parks are usually developed by private investors (IP Developer), rather than the State. The IP Developer will directly lease a large land parcel from the State, build necessary infrastructure, and then sublease land with ready-built infrastructure to the ultimate tenants (IP Tenant) for their investment projects.
From a legal standpoint, the nature of these land sublease agreements (sublease contract) between the IP Developer and the IP Tenant is an interesting issue. Should the sublease contract be treated as a property sale or a traditional lease? The answer has significant implications for the rights and obligations of both parties.
As discussed in our previous post, we believe the pilot mechanism introduced under Resolution 171 will bring a significant improvement to the legal framework for commercial housing development in Vietnam. With the enactment of implementing Decree 75/2025, this pilot mechanism is now fully set up. In this post, we will highlight key takeaways from Decree 75/2025 and discuss potential implications for housing developers.
On 29 April 2025, the State Bank of Vietnam (SBV) has issued Circular 3 on the opening and using of VND account for conducting indirect investment in Vietnam (Circular 3/2025). From 16 June 2025, Circular 3/2025 will replace Circular 5 dated 12 March 2014 of the SBV (Circular 5/2014) guiding the opening and using of indirect investment capital account (IICA) for conducting indirect investment in Vietnam.
n a landmark reform for 2025, the Government of Vietnam has commenced a significant restructuring of its ministries. This major overhaul, approved by Resolution No 176 of the National Assembly dated 18 February 2025, aims to create a leaner, more efficient, and effective state apparatus to better support the nation's development.
The restructuring involves a series of complex mergers and transfers of functions between ministries. Based on the guiding decrees, the key changes include:
The Vietnamese government recently issued Decree 69/2025 (effective 19 May 2025), which amends Decree 01/2014 regarding foreign investor’s share purchase in Vietnamese credit institutions. Here are the main changes:
1. Scope of application
Decree 69/2025 clarifies that foreign-invested economic organisations (FIEOs) which are required to comply with investment conditions and procedures applicable to foreign investors must now follow the same rules (in Decree 01/2014 as amended by Decree 69/2025) applicable to foreign investors when buying shares in Vietnamese credit institutions.
Under the Investment Law 2020, these FIEOs refer to entities where foreign investors hold a majority of the charter capital (FIEO-F1). Notably, Decree 69/2025 does not explicitly state whether it applies to economic organisations majority-owned by an FIEO-F1, even though such economic organisations are also treated as foreign investors under the Investment Law 2020.
In criminal proceedings in Vietnam, civil claims (e.g., claims for compensation, repair of damaged property) often arise alongside criminal charges against criminals. The Criminal Procedure Code 2015 introduces the position of “civil claimants” (nguyên đơn dân sự) and “civil defendants” (bị đơn dân sự) to facilitate the handling of civil claims in Vietnamese criminal proceedings. However, other than creating these positions, the Criminal Procedure Code 2015 lacks detailed provisions on how these civil matters should be addressed in criminal proceedings. This legal gap, coupled with inconsistent judicial practices, makes the resolution of civil claims within criminal cases particularly complex and problematic. This post will explore the key challenges in resolving civil claims during criminal proceedings.
No clear procedures - Article 30 of the Criminal Procedure Code 2015 provides that civil matters in criminal cases are to be resolved during the adjudication of the criminal case. However, the Criminal Procedure Code 2015 provides no further instructions on the procedure for resolving civil claims within criminal proceedings. It remains unclear what procedural rules apply—whether the criminal court should follow its own process or adopt the procedures set out in the Civil Procedure Code 2015 to settle a civil claim during criminal proceedings. This uncertainty can lead to inconsistent judicial practices and procedural confusion.
Scope of civil claims - Article 64.1 of the Criminal Procedure Code 2015 defines a civil defendant as “an individual, agency, or organization that, as prescribed by law, is responsible for compensating for damages”. It appears from the definition of civil defendant that a civil claim during criminal proceedings only relates to the issue of compensation for damages. It is not clear whether other issues such as ownership of assets or return of illegal property could be covered in a civil claim during criminal proceedings. In addition, the court may also designate the person making or subjecting to a claim on civil issues which are not claim for damages to another position (e.g., person with related rights and obligations) during the proceedings.
Decree 125 of the Government dated 5 October 2024 (Decree 125/2024) introduces updated regulations for the education sector, including a requirement that a license must be obtained for establishing "other centres performing continuing education tasks" (trung tâm khác thực hiện nhiệm vụ giáo dục thường xuyên in Vietnamese and in the rest of this article, Other Continuing Education Centres). Crucially, the education law fails to clearly define these centres, creating significant ambiguity for education service providers, particularly those centres teaching K-12 subjects (e.g., math, literature).
First, the Education Law 2019 and Decree 125/2024 lack an explicit definition of Other Continuing Education Centres. Interpreting relevant provisions of the Education Law 2019, it appears that Other Continuing Education Centres are centres providing:
Navigating among numerous licences and permits required by law for running a business in Vietnam has never been easy. There many reasons including:
Regarding the first point, I just come across of report on business licences and permits prepared by the Ministry of Planning and Investment (MPI) in December 2013 (MPI List). The MPI seems to have spent substantial time and efforts verifying with all other ministries about the licences and permits issued by such other ministries. As such, the MPI List is quite comprehensive. The MPI List provides for the list of 334 licences and permits requires for various conditional business lines in Vietnam.
Therefore, a business owner may use the information in the MPI List to check if it has obtained all the licences and permits mentioned in the MPI List for its operation, if necessary.
A copy of the MPI List in Vietnamese can be downloaded here.
An unofficial translation of the MPI List by VILAF can be downloaded here.
n 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).
In this post, we continue to discuss certain aspects of the new provisions on beneficial owners (BOs or commonly called as “UBOs”) under the new amendments to the Enterprise Law 2020 passed in June 2025 (2025 Enterprise Law Amendment) and the new Decree 168/2025 on enterprise registration. We have discussed some of the issues in our earlier post.
UBOs with joint controls
Under the 2025 Enterprise Law Amendment and Decree 168/2025, the criteria to determine whether an individual is an UBO seem to apply to a single individual only. As such, it is not clear if the information about related persons of such individual (e.g., his/her relatives) should be taken into account when determining an UBO. For example, it is not clear if an individual together with his/her spouse hold more than 25% voting rights of an enterprise should be declared as an UBO. A literal reading of Decree 168/2025 suggests that declaration of UBOs is not required in case of joint control. However, such an approach is likely not consistent with the purpose of the provisions on UBOs.
The law amending the Enterprise Law 2020 (Amended Enterprise Law 2020), effective 1 July 2025, introduces the following key changes:
1. The New Beneficial Owner Regime
1.1. The Amended Enterprise Law 2020's most significant change is the introduction of a Beneficial Owner (BO) regime, designed to enhance transparency and align Vietnam with international anti-money laundering standards.
Who are BOs?
1.2. The Amended Enterprise Law 2020 defines a BO as the individual who ultimately owns or controls an enterprise. The recently issued Decree 168/2025 on enterprise registration (Decree 168/2025) further clarifies the specific criteria for identifying a BO. In particular, an individual is considered a BO if they meet one of the following conditions:
In Vietnam, industrial parks are usually developed by private investors (IP Developer), rather than the State. The IP Developer will directly lease a large land parcel from the State, build necessary infrastructure, and then sublease land with ready-built infrastructure to the ultimate tenants (IP Tenant) for their investment projects.
From a legal standpoint, the nature of these land sublease agreements (sublease contract) between the IP Developer and the IP Tenant is an interesting issue. Should the sublease contract be treated as a property sale or a traditional lease? The answer has significant implications for the rights and obligations of both parties.
As discussed in our previous post, we believe the pilot mechanism introduced under Resolution 171 will bring a significant improvement to the legal framework for commercial housing development in Vietnam. With the enactment of implementing Decree 75/2025, this pilot mechanism is now fully set up. In this post, we will highlight key takeaways from Decree 75/2025 and discuss potential implications for housing developers.
On 29 April 2025, the State Bank of Vietnam (SBV) has issued Circular 3 on the opening and using of VND account for conducting indirect investment in Vietnam (Circular 3/2025). From 16 June 2025, Circular 3/2025 will replace Circular 5 dated 12 March 2014 of the SBV (Circular 5/2014) guiding the opening and using of indirect investment capital account (IICA) for conducting indirect investment in Vietnam.
n a landmark reform for 2025, the Government of Vietnam has commenced a significant restructuring of its ministries. This major overhaul, approved by Resolution No 176 of the National Assembly dated 18 February 2025, aims to create a leaner, more efficient, and effective state apparatus to better support the nation's development.
The restructuring involves a series of complex mergers and transfers of functions between ministries. Based on the guiding decrees, the key changes include:
The Vietnamese government recently issued Decree 69/2025 (effective 19 May 2025), which amends Decree 01/2014 regarding foreign investor’s share purchase in Vietnamese credit institutions. Here are the main changes:
1. Scope of application
Decree 69/2025 clarifies that foreign-invested economic organisations (FIEOs) which are required to comply with investment conditions and procedures applicable to foreign investors must now follow the same rules (in Decree 01/2014 as amended by Decree 69/2025) applicable to foreign investors when buying shares in Vietnamese credit institutions.
Under the Investment Law 2020, these FIEOs refer to entities where foreign investors hold a majority of the charter capital (FIEO-F1). Notably, Decree 69/2025 does not explicitly state whether it applies to economic organisations majority-owned by an FIEO-F1, even though such economic organisations are also treated as foreign investors under the Investment Law 2020.
In criminal proceedings in Vietnam, civil claims (e.g., claims for compensation, repair of damaged property) often arise alongside criminal charges against criminals. The Criminal Procedure Code 2015 introduces the position of “civil claimants” (nguyên đơn dân sự) and “civil defendants” (bị đơn dân sự) to facilitate the handling of civil claims in Vietnamese criminal proceedings. However, other than creating these positions, the Criminal Procedure Code 2015 lacks detailed provisions on how these civil matters should be addressed in criminal proceedings. This legal gap, coupled with inconsistent judicial practices, makes the resolution of civil claims within criminal cases particularly complex and problematic. This post will explore the key challenges in resolving civil claims during criminal proceedings.
No clear procedures - Article 30 of the Criminal Procedure Code 2015 provides that civil matters in criminal cases are to be resolved during the adjudication of the criminal case. However, the Criminal Procedure Code 2015 provides no further instructions on the procedure for resolving civil claims within criminal proceedings. It remains unclear what procedural rules apply—whether the criminal court should follow its own process or adopt the procedures set out in the Civil Procedure Code 2015 to settle a civil claim during criminal proceedings. This uncertainty can lead to inconsistent judicial practices and procedural confusion.
Scope of civil claims - Article 64.1 of the Criminal Procedure Code 2015 defines a civil defendant as “an individual, agency, or organization that, as prescribed by law, is responsible for compensating for damages”. It appears from the definition of civil defendant that a civil claim during criminal proceedings only relates to the issue of compensation for damages. It is not clear whether other issues such as ownership of assets or return of illegal property could be covered in a civil claim during criminal proceedings. In addition, the court may also designate the person making or subjecting to a claim on civil issues which are not claim for damages to another position (e.g., person with related rights and obligations) during the proceedings.
Decree 125 of the Government dated 5 October 2024 (Decree 125/2024) introduces updated regulations for the education sector, including a requirement that a license must be obtained for establishing "other centres performing continuing education tasks" (trung tâm khác thực hiện nhiệm vụ giáo dục thường xuyên in Vietnamese and in the rest of this article, Other Continuing Education Centres). Crucially, the education law fails to clearly define these centres, creating significant ambiguity for education service providers, particularly those centres teaching K-12 subjects (e.g., math, literature).
First, the Education Law 2019 and Decree 125/2024 lack an explicit definition of Other Continuing Education Centres. Interpreting relevant provisions of the Education Law 2019, it appears that Other Continuing Education Centres are centres providing:
n 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).