You are using an outdated browser and your browsing experience will not be optimal. Please update to the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. Install Microsoft Edge

September 3, 2019

Allowing Foreign Investment in the Yangon Stock Exchange Is Good News for Myanmar

Informed Counsel

On July 12, 2019, the Securities and Exchange Commission of Myanmar issued Notification 1/2019, which announced that foreign individuals and foreign entities will be permitted to invest in up to 35% of the shares in Myanmar companies listed on the Yangon Stock Exchange (YSX). This limitation aligns with the classification of any company with greater than 35% foreign shareholding as a “foreign” company under the Myanmar Companies Law (2017)—a classification which introduces many complications, not least of which is a restriction against owning land under the Transfer of Immoveable Property (Restriction) Act (1987). For a listed company, designation as a foreign company could therefore be ruinous, and although the YSX’s 35% foreign investment cap may seem a heavy fetter at first glance, in that context it is very reasonable.

In fact, the entire program of foreign investment, although not materialized in full at the time of writing, so far seems to be very progressive and reasonable. For example, trading on the YSX will be open to all foreigners, not restricted to Myanmar residents, and unlike the somewhat slow pace of reforms often seen in developing countries, foreign trading on the YSX is expected to begin in the near future—perhaps even sometime before the end of 2019 according to our sources. We understand that the YSX has even invested in the necessary software systems to allow for calculation of the 35% threshold, and had already implemented them ready for trading to begin. To the uninitiated, this may seem entirely at odds with the usual pace of reforms in developing countries. To regular Myanmar watchers, however, this kind of rapid and progressive change to the commercial landscape is becoming a regular feature.

This is, to some degree, because Myanmar’s determination to foster rapid economic growth is rooted in a strong understanding of the precedents set elsewhere. Research has shown that stock exchange development is extremely important for economic development. According to a report by the World Federation of Exchanges and the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development entitled The Role of Stock Exchanges in Fostering Economic Growth and Sustainable Development, “[w]ell-functioning exchanges enable economic growth and development by facilitating the mobilisation of financial resources—by bringing together those who need capital to innovate and grow, with those who have resources to invest. They do this within an environment that is regulated, secure, transparent and equitable. Exchanges also seek to promote good corporate governance amongst their listed issuers, encouraging transparency, accountability and respect for the rights of shareholders and key stakeholders.”

Furthermore, the theoretical and academic literature predominantly finds positive links between well-functioning exchanges and economic development. In a study looking at the performance of firms (used here in the economic sense to mean “business organizations”), Demigüç-Kunt and Vojislav (1996) found that firms in countries with “active” stock markets experience higher-than-predicted growth rates. Another study by Beck and Levine (2002), looking at data from 40 countries over four five-year periods, found not only that financial market development is important for economic growth but that both banks and stock markets independently and concurrently have a role to play. Caporale et al (2004) looked explicitly at the question of causality and concluded that well-developed stock markets can foster economic growth (see here).

Although some may be skeptical of the prospects for the YSX, in the medium to longer term we have more confidence. Our sources tell us that a number of foreign institutions have already expressed interest in investing in the YSX, with funds already allocated for investment in Myanmar. Furthermore, although there are only five companies currently listed on the YSX, we understand that there are at least two further companies already in the listing pipeline. With foreign investment coming to the YSX, interest by domestic companies in listing is only likely to increase. Those wishing to familiarize themselves with the procedure required for listing on the YSX might be interested in referring back to a previous article by this author written for Frontier Myanmar (see here).    

It would also be wrong to see the liberalization of investment in the YSX in isolation. Over the past several years, Myanmar has liberalized the telecommunications, banking, insurance, and wholesale/retail trading sectors, which collectively mark a huge stride forward for what was long regarded as an isolated and impenetrable economy, not to mention the reforms to the Myanmar Investment Law, the new Companies Law, and the new electronic company registration system in Myanmar. This pattern of economic liberalization shows no sign of slowing—for example, foreign banks are expected to be permitted to provide retail banking services in the very near future, and other highly regulated industries will likely follow suit. The liberalization of the YSX is just part of this pattern.    

With this latest announcement, it would seem that this  is now the “end of the beginning” of the YSX. We are moving forward into a new era.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

October 30, 2025
Recent events at a Thai listed company, where a proposal to remove the director was not successful, amid claims that a competitor was attempting to gain control of the company, illustrate how disputes over corporate control can unfold differently at the board level and shareholder level. At the board level, removing directors of a listed company mid-term to gain corporate control is not an easy task under Thai law, as it requires a higher threshold than appointing a new director, which typically only requires a simple majority vote in a listed company. At the shareholder level, Thailand’s tender offer and competition regimes add complexity where different shareholder groups act in concert to remove opposing board representatives or otherwise influence control. In this article, we will explore why the attempted removal of a director may fail, and how the tender offer regime may apply. Key Issues at a Glance Shareholder groups may seek to convene meetings to propose changes to board composition or company authority. Such proposals can be delayed or complicated by regulatory requirements and the need for additional disclosures. Regulatory authorities and minority shareholders may raise concerns when major shareholders coordinate to influence board control, especially if such actions could trigger tender offer or merger control obligations. Companies often respond by seeking further information on shareholder relationships and potential conflicts before proceeding. Why the Director Removal Failed Under Section 76 of the Public Limited Companies Act B.E. 2535 (as amended), the early removal of a director requires two conditions to be satisfied at the same meeting of shareholders: Headcount test: At least 75% of shareholders attending and entitled to vote must vote in favor. If multiple shareholders appoint the same person as proxy, each proxy is counted as a separate head for the purpose of the headcount test,
October 1, 2025
In September 2025, Thailand’s Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) accused a company listed on the Stock Exchange of Thailand (SET), including its current and former directors, of concealing material information in connection with its filing registration and draft prospectus. This recent enforcement action demonstrates the serious consequences of making false statements or appearing to conceal material information in IPO filings and ongoing disclosures. In addition to being subject to criminal penalties, such actions can impact the eligibility of directors and executives to serve and may cause lasting reputational damage. Key Legal Risks The Securities and Exchange Act B.E. 2535 (1992) (as amended) imposes strict liability for making false statements or concealing material information in IPO registration statements and draft prospectuses. In such cases, investors can claim for damages, and there are also criminal penalties, including imprisonment for up to five years and substantial fines, may apply to the company, its directors, and responsible officers. However, misstatements or omissions in IPO filings do not, by themselves, disqualify directors or executives from holding office, whether arising from an SEC accusation or even a final court judgment. In contrast, for ongoing disclosures after listing, such as financial statements, annual reports, and meeting notices, false or misleading statements or concealment of material information can result in not only criminal liability but also immediate disqualification of directors and executives. If the SEC accuses a listed company or its directors or executives of such misstatements or omissions, those directors or executives are immediately disqualified from their positions, even before a final court judgment. Director and Executive Qualifications Directors and executives must meet the SEC’s specified standards of trustworthiness, as set out in the relevant rules. The SEC clearly defines characteristics that are considered to demonstrate a lack of trustworthiness. For ongoing disclosures, being involved in
July 2, 2025
On June 17, 2025, Cambodia’s Ministry of Economy and Finance issued Instruction No. 18574 on Tax Obligations for Share Premiums to clarify that enterprises are not required to pay any income tax on share premiums that meet the conditions set out in the instruction. As outlined in the relevant provisions of the Law on Taxation (Royal Kram No. NS/RKM/0523/004) and Prakas No. 578 MEF.PrK.GDT on Tax on Income, taxable income is the difference between an asset’s value at the beginning and end of a period. This calculation deducts capital contributions, which are not taxable. A share premium is the amount of money that a company receives in excess of the par value of a share when the company issues new shares to a shareholder through a share subscription. In other words, share premiums are capital contributions made by shareholders into the equity of the company and, as a result, are not taxable. However, the government may nevertheless view share premiums as taxable if the company fails to meet certain legal conditions. Cambodian law requires share subscriptions to be properly recorded in the company’s accounting books and supported by documentary evidence. The recent instruction states that if an enterprise does not have proper documentation, any increase in equity, such as a capital increase through share premiums, will be treated as taxable income in accordance with the law. The instruction provides the following example: Enterprise A issues 200,000 new shares to an investor. The shares were registered with a par value of KHR 4,000 per share and were sold for a sale price of KHR 10,000 per share. The share premium of KHR 1.2 billion, which is calculated by subtracting the total par value (KHR 800 million) from the total value of the new capital (KHR 2 billion), is a capital
May 28, 2025
Tilleke & Gibbins attorneys in Vietnam have contributed the 2025 edition of Doing Business in Vietnam, a comprehensive Q&A-style resource from Thomson Reuters Practical Law that provides essential insights for companies navigating business operations in Vietnam. The guide presents a detailed overview of the country’s legal framework and regulatory environment, reflecting recent updates in Vietnamese legislation and practice. This annually updated guide offers key information on the following areas: Legal system: Structure of the Vietnamese judiciary and the role of codified law. Foreign investment: Conditions for market access, licensing requirements, foreign ownership restrictions, and investment incentives. Business vehicles: Formation and operation of legal entities, including limited liability companies, joint-stock companies, and representative offices. Employment: Employment contracts, social insurance, labor rights, and procedures for hiring foreign nationals. Tax: Overview of corporate income tax, personal income tax, value-added tax, and other tax obligations. Intellectual property: Procedures for protecting and enforcing patents, trademarks, copyrights, and other IP rights. Data protection: Compliance requirements under Vietnam’s data privacy laws, including the Personal Data Protection Decree. Competition law: Antitrust rules and regulatory oversight under the Law on Competition. Anti-bribery and corruption: Legal framework and enforcement practices aimed at curbing corrupt activities. E-commerce and digital business: Regulations governing online platforms, digital content, and cross-border services. Marketing and advertising: Laws and guidelines on advertising standards and consumer protection. Product regulation and liability: Safety requirements, product liability issues, and roles of relevant authorities. Doing Business in Vietnam is part of Practical Law’s global series of legal guides designed to support international practitioners and businesses. To access the most recent edition of the Vietnam guide, visit the Practical Law website and sign up for a free trial.