Checklist for setting up a Representative Office in Vietnam

To establish a Representative Office (RO) in Vietnam, the Investor would need to submit the application documents to the Department of Industry and Trade of the province where the Investor intends to set up such RO. The application documents should include:

 

Document

Notes

1.

Application for the issuance of a License for the establishment of a RO (the License).

To be notarised and legalised in the home country of the Investor.

2.

Copy of the Certificate of Incorporation of the Investor

To be notarised and legalised in the home country of the Investor.

3.

The audited financial statements of the Investor for the latest financial year or any equivalent thereof (to prove the existence and actual operations thereof).

 

To be notarised and legalised in the home country of the Investor.

4.

The Charter/Memorandum and Articles of Association of the Investor.

To be notarised and legalised in the home country of the Investor.

5.

The passport of the head of the RO

To be notarised and legalised in the home country of the Investor.

6.

Certified copy of the lease contract for the representative office in Vietnam.

The lease contract itself may need to be notarised in Vietnam.

Landlord should provide copies of building ownership certificate and business certificate also.

7.

Notarised Vietnamese translation of documents 2 - 5

 

8.

Power of Attorney for the Investor’s agent to submit the RO application

To be notarised and legalised in the home country of the Investor.

 

Info
Comment
Written by Nguyen Quang Vu On In

Representative Offices in Vietnam

Representative office (RO) is a suitable vehicle for a foreign investor who needs a limited commercial presence in Vietnam to serve as liaising office, conduct market researches, explore new opportunities and monitor contract performance. Legally, the RO does not have independent legal person status and is considered as part of the company that the RO represents in Vietnam. However, a RO licence should allow the RO to hire talents, offices and open bank accounts for spending in its own name.

The most drawback is that a RO cannot have its own business. At law, a RO is not allowed to enter into and perform revenue generating contracts. In practice, there is certain flexibility for a RO to enter into and perform contracts on behalf of the head-office. In addition, technically, a RO can only act as a RO of one legal person. Therefore, a RO may not be able to act as a RO for companies of the same group. 

Vietnam Business Law Blog
Is Metadata Personal Data? New Risks Under Vietnam’s Personal Data Protection Law (PDPL 2025)

When companies think about data protection, they usually focus on “visible” data like names, email addresses, or bank details. However, there is a hidden layer called metadata - essentially “data about data” - that often gets ignored.

Under Vietnam’s new personal data protection rules, overlooking metadata is a major risk. If metadata can be used to identify a specific person, it falls under the same strict rules as regular personal data.

What is Metadata? The “Digital Footprint”

Metadata is information that describes the context of a file or a message rather than the content itself. Even if you remove a person’s name from a file, the metadata can still point directly to them.

Land Access Privileges for Investor under Vietnam’s New BT Framework

Vietnam is currently at a pivotal stage of infrastructure modernization. To meet the immense demand for capital, the State has moved to revitalize private sector participation, most notably through the “Build – Transfer” (BT) model.

In a typical BT arrangement, a private investor finances and constructs an infrastructure project, then transfers it to the State upon completion. In return, the State “pays” the investor with land funds, allowing them to develop a “reciprocal project” (dự án đối ứng) to recover their capital and generate profit. While this mechanism is essential to stimulate private sector participation, the recent new legal framework for BT projects may raise significant concern regarding the land access privileges granted to BT investors compared to their counterparts in the general real estate market. In particular,

Case Law No. 81/2024 Creates More Confusion Than Clarification

The recently issued Case Law No. 81/2024/AL (CL 81) introduces a precedent that allows creditors to bypass the standard statute of limitations by re-characterizing an unpaid contractual debt as a property reclamation claim upon the mutual termination of the contract and an agreement on the payable amount. Below are a few of our observations regarding CL 81.

Summary of the Case

The dispute originated from a service contract between Company M (the Service Provider) and Company A (the Client). After the Service Provider performed its services, the parties mutually agreed to terminate the contract. Subsequently, the Client explicitly confirmed in writing the specific amount of the service fee it owed to the Service Provider and the late payment interest but ultimately failed to make the payment. When the Service Provider filed a lawsuit to recover the unpaid amount, the Client requested the court to dismiss the case, arguing that the 3-year statute of limitations for a contractual dispute had already expired.

Insights From Case Law 78/2025/AL - Distinguishing Contributions For Charter Capital From Business Cooperation

For investors in Vietnam, "contributing capital" to a company can mean two very different things: becoming a legal owner (member/shareholder of a company) or simply being a business partner. A recent case law no. 78/2025/AL clarifies this distinction and indicates that several pieces of evidence may be considered to prove company member/shareholder status.

Case Summary

In this dispute, Mr. H, the plaintiff, provided significant funds to D Limited Liability Company, which was managed by his relatives. Although Mr. H received the profit distribution for over a decade and signed minutes acknowledging his contribution, Mr. H was never officially recorded as a member of the company in the enterprise registration certificates (ERC) or the company’s charter.

Comments on The Draft of Government Resolution to Solve Transitional BT Projects

When partnering with government agencies (G2B), the risks often come from policy changes and the adoption of new legislation, causing obstacles, delays, and payment backlogs in PPP contracts (especially BT contracts). Following the establishment of Steering Committee 751 (Ban Chỉ Đạo 751) to resolve investment projects with pending legal issues, the Government has recently prepared a Resolution Draft (the Draft) to address approximately 160 transitional BT projects still facing legal obstacles (such projects, “Pending BT Project”).

Focusing specifically on Pending BT Projects where land-use rights serve as the State’s payment mechanism, the following analysis highlights critical issues arising from the proposed changes introduced by this Draft:

Key points under Decree 356/2025 guiding the Personal Data Protection Law (PDPL 2025)

On 31 December 2025, the Government issued Decree 356/2025 guiding the implementation of the PDPL 2025, which took effect on 1 January 2026. Decree 356/2025 provides critical detailed guidance and, notably, resolves several ambiguities under the PDPL 2025 framework. This post highlights the key takeaways from this new regulation.

1.         Expansion of "sensitive personal data": ID Cards and login credentials

As compared to the Draft PDPL Decree, Decree 356/2025 expands the scope of sensitive personal data to explicitly include:

Key Changes In New Investment Law 2025

On 11 December 2025, the National Assembly adopted new investment law (Investment Law 2025). On this blog, we discuss some key changes in the new Investment Law 2025.

Clarification of business investment conditions

The Investment Law 2025 refines the definition of business investment conditions (Điều kiện đầu tư kinh doanh) by introducing an explicit exclusion: these conditions no longer encompass technical standards and regulations issued by competent authorities concerning product or service quality. This addition narrows the scope of what constitutes a "conditional business line", distinguishing administrative market-entry conditions from mere technical product standards.

Info
Comment
Written by Nguyen Quang Vu On In

“Bailiff” services in Vietnam

Vietnam has just introduced bailiff services (dịch vụ thừa phát lại) on a nationwide scope under a Joint Circular 9/2014 between the Ministry of Justice and the Supreme Court issued on 28 February 2014. A bailiff service company may provide services:

  • To serve notices relating to court proceedings;
  • To prepare certified written minutes (vi bằng) to serve as evidence for use before the courts; and
  • To verify the conditions of the debtor for enforcement of a court judgements and to enforce court judgments.

The introduction of bailiff services will hopefully improve the poor state of dispute settlement through courts in Vietnam. 

Vietnam Business Law Blog
Is Metadata Personal Data? New Risks Under Vietnam’s Personal Data Protection Law (PDPL 2025)

When companies think about data protection, they usually focus on “visible” data like names, email addresses, or bank details. However, there is a hidden layer called metadata - essentially “data about data” - that often gets ignored.

Under Vietnam’s new personal data protection rules, overlooking metadata is a major risk. If metadata can be used to identify a specific person, it falls under the same strict rules as regular personal data.

What is Metadata? The “Digital Footprint”

Metadata is information that describes the context of a file or a message rather than the content itself. Even if you remove a person’s name from a file, the metadata can still point directly to them.

Land Access Privileges for Investor under Vietnam’s New BT Framework

Vietnam is currently at a pivotal stage of infrastructure modernization. To meet the immense demand for capital, the State has moved to revitalize private sector participation, most notably through the “Build – Transfer” (BT) model.

In a typical BT arrangement, a private investor finances and constructs an infrastructure project, then transfers it to the State upon completion. In return, the State “pays” the investor with land funds, allowing them to develop a “reciprocal project” (dự án đối ứng) to recover their capital and generate profit. While this mechanism is essential to stimulate private sector participation, the recent new legal framework for BT projects may raise significant concern regarding the land access privileges granted to BT investors compared to their counterparts in the general real estate market. In particular,

Case Law No. 81/2024 Creates More Confusion Than Clarification

The recently issued Case Law No. 81/2024/AL (CL 81) introduces a precedent that allows creditors to bypass the standard statute of limitations by re-characterizing an unpaid contractual debt as a property reclamation claim upon the mutual termination of the contract and an agreement on the payable amount. Below are a few of our observations regarding CL 81.

Summary of the Case

The dispute originated from a service contract between Company M (the Service Provider) and Company A (the Client). After the Service Provider performed its services, the parties mutually agreed to terminate the contract. Subsequently, the Client explicitly confirmed in writing the specific amount of the service fee it owed to the Service Provider and the late payment interest but ultimately failed to make the payment. When the Service Provider filed a lawsuit to recover the unpaid amount, the Client requested the court to dismiss the case, arguing that the 3-year statute of limitations for a contractual dispute had already expired.

Insights From Case Law 78/2025/AL - Distinguishing Contributions For Charter Capital From Business Cooperation

For investors in Vietnam, "contributing capital" to a company can mean two very different things: becoming a legal owner (member/shareholder of a company) or simply being a business partner. A recent case law no. 78/2025/AL clarifies this distinction and indicates that several pieces of evidence may be considered to prove company member/shareholder status.

Case Summary

In this dispute, Mr. H, the plaintiff, provided significant funds to D Limited Liability Company, which was managed by his relatives. Although Mr. H received the profit distribution for over a decade and signed minutes acknowledging his contribution, Mr. H was never officially recorded as a member of the company in the enterprise registration certificates (ERC) or the company’s charter.

Comments on The Draft of Government Resolution to Solve Transitional BT Projects

When partnering with government agencies (G2B), the risks often come from policy changes and the adoption of new legislation, causing obstacles, delays, and payment backlogs in PPP contracts (especially BT contracts). Following the establishment of Steering Committee 751 (Ban Chỉ Đạo 751) to resolve investment projects with pending legal issues, the Government has recently prepared a Resolution Draft (the Draft) to address approximately 160 transitional BT projects still facing legal obstacles (such projects, “Pending BT Project”).

Focusing specifically on Pending BT Projects where land-use rights serve as the State’s payment mechanism, the following analysis highlights critical issues arising from the proposed changes introduced by this Draft:

Info
Comment
Written by Nguyen Quang Vu On In

Take-or-pay clause in Vietnamese law contracts

In Vietnam, take-or-pay arrangement is quite common in long term supply or off-take contracts especially those relating large scale infrastructure projects with foreign sponsors  which require project financing.  A take-or-pay arrangement is essentially an agreement whereby the buyer agrees to either: (1) take, and pay the contract price for, a minimum contract quantity of goods annually (the TOP Quantity); or (2) pay the applicable contract price for such TOP Quantity (TOP Liability) if it is not taken during the applicable year.

It is not clear under Vietnamese law if the payment of TOP Liability by the buyer under in a long term contract could be viewed as a penalty. This is because:

  • Article 300 of the Commercial Law defines “penalty for breach” as a remedy whereby the aggrieved party requires the defaulting party to pay a penalty sum for breach of contract if so agreed in the contract; and
  • One can argue that the buyer’s failure to take TOP Liabilities is a breach of the long term contract and therefore the TOP Liability is a penalty to be paid by the Buyer.

If the TOP Liability is characterised as a penalty for breach then it is subject to a limit of 8% of the value of obligations which are in breach. To avoid this potential characterisation, the parties to a long term contract with a take-or-pay arrangement may consider characterising TOP Liability payment as adjustment to the sale price or payment for reservation of supplying capacity of the supplier. 

Vietnam Business Law Blog
Is Metadata Personal Data? New Risks Under Vietnam’s Personal Data Protection Law (PDPL 2025)

When companies think about data protection, they usually focus on “visible” data like names, email addresses, or bank details. However, there is a hidden layer called metadata - essentially “data about data” - that often gets ignored.

Under Vietnam’s new personal data protection rules, overlooking metadata is a major risk. If metadata can be used to identify a specific person, it falls under the same strict rules as regular personal data.

What is Metadata? The “Digital Footprint”

Metadata is information that describes the context of a file or a message rather than the content itself. Even if you remove a person’s name from a file, the metadata can still point directly to them.

Land Access Privileges for Investor under Vietnam’s New BT Framework

Vietnam is currently at a pivotal stage of infrastructure modernization. To meet the immense demand for capital, the State has moved to revitalize private sector participation, most notably through the “Build – Transfer” (BT) model.

In a typical BT arrangement, a private investor finances and constructs an infrastructure project, then transfers it to the State upon completion. In return, the State “pays” the investor with land funds, allowing them to develop a “reciprocal project” (dự án đối ứng) to recover their capital and generate profit. While this mechanism is essential to stimulate private sector participation, the recent new legal framework for BT projects may raise significant concern regarding the land access privileges granted to BT investors compared to their counterparts in the general real estate market. In particular,

Case Law No. 81/2024 Creates More Confusion Than Clarification

The recently issued Case Law No. 81/2024/AL (CL 81) introduces a precedent that allows creditors to bypass the standard statute of limitations by re-characterizing an unpaid contractual debt as a property reclamation claim upon the mutual termination of the contract and an agreement on the payable amount. Below are a few of our observations regarding CL 81.

Summary of the Case

The dispute originated from a service contract between Company M (the Service Provider) and Company A (the Client). After the Service Provider performed its services, the parties mutually agreed to terminate the contract. Subsequently, the Client explicitly confirmed in writing the specific amount of the service fee it owed to the Service Provider and the late payment interest but ultimately failed to make the payment. When the Service Provider filed a lawsuit to recover the unpaid amount, the Client requested the court to dismiss the case, arguing that the 3-year statute of limitations for a contractual dispute had already expired.

Insights From Case Law 78/2025/AL - Distinguishing Contributions For Charter Capital From Business Cooperation

For investors in Vietnam, "contributing capital" to a company can mean two very different things: becoming a legal owner (member/shareholder of a company) or simply being a business partner. A recent case law no. 78/2025/AL clarifies this distinction and indicates that several pieces of evidence may be considered to prove company member/shareholder status.

Case Summary

In this dispute, Mr. H, the plaintiff, provided significant funds to D Limited Liability Company, which was managed by his relatives. Although Mr. H received the profit distribution for over a decade and signed minutes acknowledging his contribution, Mr. H was never officially recorded as a member of the company in the enterprise registration certificates (ERC) or the company’s charter.

Comments on The Draft of Government Resolution to Solve Transitional BT Projects

When partnering with government agencies (G2B), the risks often come from policy changes and the adoption of new legislation, causing obstacles, delays, and payment backlogs in PPP contracts (especially BT contracts). Following the establishment of Steering Committee 751 (Ban Chỉ Đạo 751) to resolve investment projects with pending legal issues, the Government has recently prepared a Resolution Draft (the Draft) to address approximately 160 transitional BT projects still facing legal obstacles (such projects, “Pending BT Project”).

Focusing specifically on Pending BT Projects where land-use rights serve as the State’s payment mechanism, the following analysis highlights critical issues arising from the proposed changes introduced by this Draft:

Info
Comment
Written by Nguyen Quang Vu On In