Foreign ownership in Vietnamese securities companies

Vietnam undertakes to the WTO that “after 5 years from the date of accession, securities service suppliers with 100% foreign-invested capital shall be permitted”.  To implement this undertaking, Decree 58/2012 has expressly allowed:

  • any foreign investor to acquire up to 49% interest in a domestic securities company; and
  • foreign investors satisfying certain conditions (including coming from countries which have a cooperation agreement with the SSC) to acquire 100% interest in a domestic securities company.

Decree 58/2012 is silent on whether a foreign investor can acquire more than 49% but less than 100% interest in a domestic securities company. In a recent post on its website, the State Securities Commission has expressly confirmed that a foreign investor cannot acquire more than 49% but less than 100% interest in a domestic securities company.

Vietnam Business Law Blog

In recent years, digital assets have been at the forefront of regulatory discussions worldwide. Vietnam is also making an effort to create a legal framework for its 100-billion-dollar market with the issuance of the 2025 Law on Digital Technology Industry – which is the first to introduce the legal definition of “digital assets”, and the Resolution 05/2025/NQ-CP greenlighting pilot program for the cryptographic digital assets market (Resolution 05/2025).

With the effective date of the Law on Digital Technology Industry fast approaching, we have a few comments on the current legal concept of digital assets in Vietnam, which we find to be rudimentary and raises more questions than answers.

For a long time, Vietnam’s housing law has restricted housing developers (generally, “master developer”) from distributing houses or residential land use rights within a project as in-kind profit to capital-contributing partners (generally, “secondary investors”). This restriction aims to prevent the master developers from using capital contribution arrangements to sell off-plan houses to customers before those properties are legally qualified for sale. In particular, Article 116.1(e) of the Housing Law 2023 currently provides that:

Under the Enterprise Law 2020, a minority ordinary shareholder voting against certain important decisions of the General Meeting of Shareholders may request the relevant joint stock company to redeem the shares held by such dissenting shareholder.  However, the law is not clear about the scope of this redemption. In particular,

  • It is not clear whether the redemption right covers both ordinary shares and preference shares held by the dissenting shareholder. The law provides that in the request for redemption, the shareholder will specify the number of shares of each class. This suggests that the redemption right covers preference shares in addition to ordinary shares.

  • A conflict arises if the redemption right is found to cover preference shares, but the terms of those shares (as defined in the charter) do not permit redemption. In this situation, it is not clear whether the company can lawfully refuse the request. Since a shareholder needs to comply with the charter which contains the terms of the preference shares, the dissenting shareholder cannot require the company to redeem the relevant preference shares. On the other hand, since the provisions on the content of a redemption request do not clearly exclude shares which cannot be redeemed, the dissenting shareholder can argue that it has the right to specify all the shares (including non-redeemable preference shares) in the redemption request.

In June 2025, the National Assembly passed a new Law on Personal Data Protection (PDPL 2025), set to take effect on 1 January 2026. This new law represents a significant evolution from the foundational framework established by Decree 13/2023, introducing a far more comprehensive and stringent regime for personal data protection. This post will analyze some critical highlights of the new PDPL 2025, with some important implications for businesses. To offer a comprehensive perspective, we also include a summary generated by Google's Gemini AI for comparison and reference (see here).

A narrower extraterritorial scope of application

The PDPL 2025 narrows its extraterritorial application compared to previous regulations. Instead of a broad rule for "foreigners' data, the PDPL 2025 explicitly applies to foreign entities that are directly involved in or related to the processing of personal data of Vietnamese citizens and people of Vietnamese origin residing in Vietnam. This new provision successfully addressed the confusion and uncertainty that the earlier draft of PDPL 2025 had introduced (see our discussions here).

However, this scope of application still has the following issues:

·       It has not addressed the existing ambiguity under Decree 13/2023 of whether the applicable subjects under the PDPL 2025 apply to the processing entities or data subjects (see our discussions here)

·       The PDPL 2025 is also unclear on its application to foreign organizations processing the data of non-Vietnamese individuals (e.g., tourists, expatriates) within Vietnam. While Article 1.2 of the PDPL 2025 does not explicitly cover this scenario, Article 5.1 states the law applies to all "personal data protection activities on the territory of Vietnam", which may arguably cover this case.

In June 2025, the National Assembly adopted several amendments to existing 2012 Law on Advertising (Advertising Law Amendments 2025). The amended law will take effect from 1 January 2026. In this post, we discuss some of the material changes introduced by Advertising Law Amendments 2025. To offer a comprehensive perspective, we also include a summary generated by Google's Gemini AI for comparison and reference (see here).

New Carve-out To The Prohibition On Comparative Advertising

The Advertising Law Amendment 2025 allows comparative advertising between one’s own products/goods/services and those of other entities of the same kind when there is “legitimate supporting documentation”. Before this, all comparative advertising was prohibited. The new carved out opens the door for lawful and transparent comparative advertising.

Factors affecting an acquisition of companies in Vietnam

Any acquisition will have its own details and structures. That being said, a foreign investor intending to do deal in Vietnam should take into account the following factors, among other things:

Corporate form of the target company

A target company in Vietnam may be:

  1. a limited liability company (LLC) (công ty trách nhiệm hữu hạn) incorporated under the Enterprise Law. A LLC may be a single-member LLC (One Member LLC), which is owned by a single member, or a two or more members LLC (Multiple Member LLC), which is owned by two or more members; or
  2. a joint stock company (JSC) (công ty cổ phần) incorporated under the Enterprise Law. A JSC can be a public JSC (which usually has 100 or more shareholders) or a private JSC. A public JSC may also be a “listed company” (công ty niêm yết) if the shares of the relevant company is listed on a stock exchange.

The corporate form of the target company may affect a transaction significantly. For example, a foreign investor may not be able to acquire more than 49% of a public JSC while it can acquire 100% of a LLC doing the same business. The selling shareholders in a public JSC can be subject to substantially lower capital gain tax than the selling shareholders in a private JSC.

Nature of the existing owner(s) of the target company:

A target company in Vietnam may be owned and controlled by:

  1. local private investors, in which case the target company is considered as a domestic company. Investing in a domestic company may or may not require an Investment Certificate;   
  2. foreign investor, in which case the target company is considered as a foreign invested enterprise. A foreign invested company incorporated on or after 1 July 2006 should operate either as a LLC or JSC under the Enterprise Law. However, a foreign invested company which was incorporated before 1 July 2006 and has not re-registered as a LLC under the Enterprise Law will operate in a legal vacuum and be subject to many uncertainties. Investing in a foreign invested company is usually subject to an Investment Certificate; or
  3. Vietnamese Government, in which case the target company is considered as a State-owned enterprise. Investing in a State-owned enterprise may be subject to separate rules on equitisation (or privatisation) of State-owned enterprises.

Nature of the business of the target company

Depending on the business of the target company, there may be specific restrictions on foreign investment or other special requirements applicable to the proposed acquisition or the target company.

Vietnam Business Law Blog

In recent years, digital assets have been at the forefront of regulatory discussions worldwide. Vietnam is also making an effort to create a legal framework for its 100-billion-dollar market with the issuance of the 2025 Law on Digital Technology Industry – which is the first to introduce the legal definition of “digital assets”, and the Resolution 05/2025/NQ-CP greenlighting pilot program for the cryptographic digital assets market (Resolution 05/2025).

With the effective date of the Law on Digital Technology Industry fast approaching, we have a few comments on the current legal concept of digital assets in Vietnam, which we find to be rudimentary and raises more questions than answers.

For a long time, Vietnam’s housing law has restricted housing developers (generally, “master developer”) from distributing houses or residential land use rights within a project as in-kind profit to capital-contributing partners (generally, “secondary investors”). This restriction aims to prevent the master developers from using capital contribution arrangements to sell off-plan houses to customers before those properties are legally qualified for sale. In particular, Article 116.1(e) of the Housing Law 2023 currently provides that:

Under the Enterprise Law 2020, a minority ordinary shareholder voting against certain important decisions of the General Meeting of Shareholders may request the relevant joint stock company to redeem the shares held by such dissenting shareholder.  However, the law is not clear about the scope of this redemption. In particular,

  • It is not clear whether the redemption right covers both ordinary shares and preference shares held by the dissenting shareholder. The law provides that in the request for redemption, the shareholder will specify the number of shares of each class. This suggests that the redemption right covers preference shares in addition to ordinary shares.

  • A conflict arises if the redemption right is found to cover preference shares, but the terms of those shares (as defined in the charter) do not permit redemption. In this situation, it is not clear whether the company can lawfully refuse the request. Since a shareholder needs to comply with the charter which contains the terms of the preference shares, the dissenting shareholder cannot require the company to redeem the relevant preference shares. On the other hand, since the provisions on the content of a redemption request do not clearly exclude shares which cannot be redeemed, the dissenting shareholder can argue that it has the right to specify all the shares (including non-redeemable preference shares) in the redemption request.

In June 2025, the National Assembly passed a new Law on Personal Data Protection (PDPL 2025), set to take effect on 1 January 2026. This new law represents a significant evolution from the foundational framework established by Decree 13/2023, introducing a far more comprehensive and stringent regime for personal data protection. This post will analyze some critical highlights of the new PDPL 2025, with some important implications for businesses. To offer a comprehensive perspective, we also include a summary generated by Google's Gemini AI for comparison and reference (see here).

A narrower extraterritorial scope of application

The PDPL 2025 narrows its extraterritorial application compared to previous regulations. Instead of a broad rule for "foreigners' data, the PDPL 2025 explicitly applies to foreign entities that are directly involved in or related to the processing of personal data of Vietnamese citizens and people of Vietnamese origin residing in Vietnam. This new provision successfully addressed the confusion and uncertainty that the earlier draft of PDPL 2025 had introduced (see our discussions here).

However, this scope of application still has the following issues:

·       It has not addressed the existing ambiguity under Decree 13/2023 of whether the applicable subjects under the PDPL 2025 apply to the processing entities or data subjects (see our discussions here)

·       The PDPL 2025 is also unclear on its application to foreign organizations processing the data of non-Vietnamese individuals (e.g., tourists, expatriates) within Vietnam. While Article 1.2 of the PDPL 2025 does not explicitly cover this scenario, Article 5.1 states the law applies to all "personal data protection activities on the territory of Vietnam", which may arguably cover this case.

In June 2025, the National Assembly adopted several amendments to existing 2012 Law on Advertising (Advertising Law Amendments 2025). The amended law will take effect from 1 January 2026. In this post, we discuss some of the material changes introduced by Advertising Law Amendments 2025. To offer a comprehensive perspective, we also include a summary generated by Google's Gemini AI for comparison and reference (see here).

New Carve-out To The Prohibition On Comparative Advertising

The Advertising Law Amendment 2025 allows comparative advertising between one’s own products/goods/services and those of other entities of the same kind when there is “legitimate supporting documentation”. Before this, all comparative advertising was prohibited. The new carved out opens the door for lawful and transparent comparative advertising.

Foreign ownership limit in a public-turned-private shareholding company.


Under the new Decree 58/2012, a company, which ceases to be a public company, will still be subject to the restrictions applicable to a public company for a period of one year after the date on which it is no longer a public company. This effectively means that a public-turned-private shareholding company is still subject to the 49% foreign ownership limit applicable to public companies for a period of one year after ceasing being a public company.

However, the restriction under the new Decree 58/2012 does not apply if the relevant company is turned private due to “consolidation, merger, bankruptcy, dissolution, change of form of enterprise or acquisition by another entity”. Among these exceptions, the “change of form of an enterprise” seems to be easier to implement. Under the Enterprise Law, a shareholding company can change its corporate form by turning it into a limited liability company. However, this will likely require the public shareholding company to reduce its number of shareholders from more than 100 to 50 or less. 

Certain Limitations on Privately Issued Shares



Under the controversial Decree 1/2010,  a private placement of shares in a private shareholding company was subject to various restrictions under Decree 1/2010, including:
  • shares privately issued were subject to a lock-up period of 1 year;
  • there had to be a six-month gap between two tranches of a private placement; and
  • the proceeds resulting from the sale of shares had to be kept in an escrow account.


Decree 58/2012 of the Government dated 20 July 2012 implementing the Securities Law has repealed Decree 1/2010 and therefore has removed these restrictions. However, except in certain limited circumstances, private placement of shares by a public shareholding company is still subject to the first two restrictions, which are provided in the amended Securities Law rather than in Decree 1/2010.