A New Decree on Derivatives in Vietnam

Decree 42/2015 is an entirely new decree governing “derivative securities” (chứng khoán phái sinh) and will take effect from July 2015. A quick read of Decree 42/2015 seems to indicate that Decree 42/2015 is intended to provide a legal framework for a regulated market for derivatives in Vietnam. In particular, Decree 42/2015 provides detailed requirements for:

 

    Registration of securities issued by public companies

    The Securities Law 2006 requires any securities issued by a public company to be registered with the Vietnam Securities Depository Centre (VSD). The term “securities” includes, among other things, shares, bonds, warrants, options, future, and “investment contracts”. The registration at VSD is to record the ownership rights and other rights of the securities holders. 

    Options in Vietnam

    Option arrangements are used quite frequently in M&A transactions in Vietnam. Many foreign investors have used options or convertible securities as a mechanism to, among other things, acquire additional shares once the regulatory restriction is removed or to allocate commercial risks between the parties.

    Generally speaking, an option arrangement should be valid for the following reasons:

    • Under Article 122 of the Civil Code, a civil transaction will be valid when it satisfies all of the following conditions: (a) persons participating in the transaction have capacity for civil acts; (b) the objective and contents of the transaction are not contrary to the law or social morals; and (c) persons participating in the transaction act entirely voluntarily. An option arrangement generally satisfies all these requirements and should be valid.
    •  Articles 6.1 and 6.7 of the Law on Securities recognize options as a form of securities. In particular, option to sell or option to buy is defined as a right stipulated in a contract which entitles a purchaser to choose the right to purchase or to sell a pre-determined volume of securities at a pre-determined price during a specified period.
    • Under Article 64 of the Commercial Law, options to purchase goods or options to buy goods are allowed to traded on a commodity exchange organized under the Commercial Law. In particular, call option or put option contract means an agreement whereby the option purchaser has the right to purchase or to be sold a certain type of goods at a pre-determined price (referred to as the contracted price) and must pay a certain amount of money for the purchase of this right (referred to as the option price). The option purchaser has the right to opt to carry out or not to carry out such purchase and sale of such goods. 

    However, the major difficulty relating to option arrangement is that exercising an option is not an automatic process. In Vietnam, after an option is exercised, the parties usually have to obtain necessary regulatory or corporate approvals so that shares can be issued or transferred to the relevant option holder. Therefore, cooperation of the counterparties is essential for successfully exercising an option arrangement. Certain option arrangements appear to have been successfully implemented with the cooperation of the parties involved.

    Another difficulty is that although there is law which generally recognizes options arrangements, there are few detail implementation rules and regulations or court precedents. Therefore, it is difficult to anticipate how the authorities including the courts and other authorities view and enforce an option arrangement in practice.

    Vietnam Business Law Blog

    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.

    The Ministry of Finance has recently collected opinions on a new draft of the Business Investment Law, which proposes certain changes to the current Investment Law 2020. The draft law is expected to take effect from 1 July 2026. We discuss some key changes proposed in the draft Business Investment Law.

    Lack of bold reforms directed by the Politburo  

    Earlier this year, the Politburo of the Communist Party of Vietnam (the highest decision- making authority in Vietnam) issued Resolution 68/2025 on developing the private business sector. At the time, Resolution 68 was widely reported as a bold move to start a “new dawn” for Vietnam private business sector (see here for example). Following Resolution 68, the National Assembly duly issued Resolution 198/2025 to make Resolution 68 the law of the land. However, since Resolution 198/2025 simply copied and pasted from the text of Resolution 68, it is difficult to know how the instructions and reforms directed by the Politburo are to be implemented in practice. The National Assembly nevertheless requires complete changes to the “investment law” to implement the instructions from the Politburo by December 2025 which includes a reduction of at least 30% of business conditions.

    One would expect that the amendments to the Investment Law will provide further implementation and guidance to Resolution 198/2025. However, it appears this is not the case. For example, the new draft Business Investment Law has 212 areas of conditional business a reduction of mere 10% (not 30%). The new draft Business Investment Law retains  the investment licensing procedures introduced 30 years ago under the Foreign Investment Law 1987 with some unclear tinkering.

    Shortly after the issuance of the Law on Promulgation of Legal Normative Documents early this year, on 25 June 2025, it enacted a law amending such law (the Amending Law) (collectively known as the Law on Law 2025). Below are the key changes:

    1. Enhancing certainty

    1.1. A crucial reform for legal certainty is the revised provision on effectiveness for guiding documents. Under the Amending Law, when a parent law is replaced or expires, any documents issued to detail it (such as decrees) will now automatically expire as well. They will only remain in effect if a state agency makes a formal, public announcement that they will continue.

    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.

    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:


    Pre-emptive rights over new shares of Vietnamese shareholding companies

    At law, the following provisions suggest that existing shareholders of a Vietnamese shareholding company have pre-emptive rights over new shares issued by the company:

    • Under Article 79.1(c) of the Enterprise Law, an ordinary shareholder in a shareholding company has priority right to subscribe for new shares issued by the company in proportion to the shareholding of such shareholder in the company;

    • Article 87.2 of the Enterprise Law provides that when a shareholding company issues new ordinary shares and offers such shares to all ordinary shareholders, the company must send a written notice to each shareholder setting out the terms of the offer and a reasonable period for the shareholder to consider the offer. If there is any shareholder failing to subscribe for the shares offered to them, the Board of Directors (the Board) of the company is entitled to offer such shares to a third party on terms, which are not more favourable than the terms originally offered to the relevant shareholder; and

    • Article 87.2(c) of the Enterprise Law provides that a shareholder may transfer its pre-emptive right to other persons.

    On the other hand, there are certain provisions, which indicate that there may be exemptions to the pre-emptive rights of existing shareholders under the Enterprise Law. In particular,

    • Article 87.6 of the Enterprise Law states that “the Government shall provide implementing regulations for private placement of shares”. One therefore may argue that in case of a private placement of shares, there is no pre-emptive right. This is consistent with the fact that the regulations on private placement of shares which involve issuance of new shares to third party investor do not specifically require each existing shareholder to waive their pre-emptive rights before the company can issue new shares to third party investors. In practice, it seems that the regulators do not take into account pre-emptive rights of existing shareholders if the new share issuance is approved by the shareholders meeting; and

    • The Ministry of Finance has issued a model charter applicable to public companies in Vietnam, which provides that new shares must be offered to existing shareholders proportionally “unless otherwise decided by the General Meeting of Shareholders” (Decision 121 of the MOF dated 26 July 2012). A resolution of the General Meeting of Shareholders of a public company (which adopts the model charter) to issue shares to a specific entity could therefore be interpreted as constituting an exception to the right to personal notice and waiver that is in the Enterprise Law.