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

May 15, 2020

Decree 35 Provides Important Guidance on Vietnam’s New Competition Law

Subscribe to Updates

On March 24, 2020, the government of Vietnam issued Decree No. 35/2020/ND-CP detailing a number of articles of the Competition Law (Decree 35). Decree 35 took effect on May 15, 2020, and provides much-needed elaboration on various ambiguous issues under the 2018 Competition Law, which has been in effect since July 1, 2019. Notably, it clarifies the conditions triggering the restrictions on anti-competitive agreements and economic concentration (e.g., M&A transactions).

1. Definition of Relevant Market

“Relevant market” is a key term used for determining whether entering into an agreement with anti-competitive elements or carrying out an M&A transaction would be restricted or subject to any requisite conditions under Vietnamese law. The definition of relevant market is based on the determination of the relevant product market and the relevant geographical market. Decree 35 provides new guidance for such determination by the National Competition Commission (NCC), the new competition authority.

For determination of the “relevant product market”, Decree 35 sets out new regulations for determining the interchangeability or substitutability of goods and services:

  • In terms of characteristics – Under the previous regulations, it could be argued that the factors to be considered to determine interchangeability were only suitable for goods, and did not sufficiently cover the characteristics of services. Decree 35 has sealed this gap and stipulates factors which could capture the characteristics of both goods and services, including features, compositions, technical functions, side effects on users, users’ absorbability, and/or other specific attributes and qualities.
  • In terms of price – Decree 35 newly sets out that goods/services are considered substitutable if the difference in price between the goods/services in similar transaction conditions is not greater than 5%. However, no definition of “similar transaction conditions” is given, making the application of this provision less straightforward than it may seem.

For determination of the “relevant geographical market”, Decree 35 introduces some new factors for determining the boundaries of geographic areas, including consumption habits and cost and time for customers to purchase goods/services.

2. Prohibited Anti-Competitive Agreements

According to Articles 12.3 and 12.4 of the 2018 Competition Law, various types of anti-competitive agreements will be prohibited if they cause or are likely to cause a “significant anti-competitive effect” in the market. Decree 35 provides the clarification that an anti-competitive agreement would not be considered to cause or be likely to cause such “significant anti-competitive effect” in the following cases:

  • For enterprises in the same relevant market, the combined market share of the enterprises intending to participate in the agreement is less than 5%.
  • For enterprises intending to participate in the agreement from different stages in the same chain of production, distribution, and supply of specific goods/services, the market share of each participating enterprise is less than 15%.

3. Restricted M&A Transactions

M&A Transactions Subject to Notification Requirement

According to the 2018 Competition Law, if an intended M&A transaction reaches any of the thresholds set out by law, the enterprises intending to participate in such transaction must submit a notification to the NCC prior to carrying out the transaction. Decree 35 sheds more light on these thresholds by determining that the thresholds triggering the notification requirement include the following:

  1. Total assets in the Vietnamese market of each enterprise intending to participate in the transaction, or the group of affiliated companies of which such enterprise is a member, is worth VND 3,000 billion (approximately USD 126.3 million) or more in the financial year preceding the planned year of the transaction; or
  2. Total revenue in the Vietnamese market of each enterprise intending to participate in the transaction, or the group of affiliated companies of which such enterprise is a member, is VND 3,000 billion (approximately USD 126.3 million) or more in the financial year preceding the planned year of the transaction; or
  3. Value of the transaction is at least VND 1,000 billion (approximately USD 42.1 million); or
  4. The combined market share of the enterprises intending to participate in the transaction is at least 20% of the relevant market in the financial year preceding the planned year of the transaction. It is worth noting that this combined market share threshold under Decree 35 is stricter than the threshold set out under the prior notification regime (30% to 50%).

The foregoing thresholds would change if the enterprises intending to participate in the M&A transaction are credit institutions, insurance companies, or securities companies.

This notification requirement is also applicable to M&A transactions implemented outside of Vietnam. In this case, the thresholds under (i), (ii) and (iv) above would be applied.

Prohibited M&A Transactions

As mentioned above, under the 2018 Competition Law, if an intended M&A transaction causes or is likely to cause a “significant anti-competitive effect,” such transaction will be prohibited. Decree 35 elaborates on this provision by providing that M&A transactions will be permitted (will not be considered to cause or be likely to cause a significant anti-competitive effect) if the combined market share of all entities intending to participate in the transaction is below 20% of the relevant market.

If the combined market share of all entities intending to participate in the transaction is 20% or above, the NCC will further assess whether such transaction is prohibited based on established criteria, including mathematical formulas.

For more information on Decree 35, please contact us at [email protected].

Related Professionals

Practices

Antitrust and Competition

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

December 9, 2020
Thailand’s Trade Competition Commission (TCC) has issued new rules governing business relations between food delivery platform operators and the restaurants operating through those platforms. The guidelines identify various arrangements, that are sometimes imposed upon restaurants by digital platforms, as unfair and damaging to restaurant operators, and restrict them accordingly. This is the fourth time that the TCC has deemed it necessary to intervene in a specific industry by restricting certain unfair trade practices in accordance with the Trade Competition Act B.E. 2560 (2017) (TCA), and is indicative of the TCC’s greater drive to quell unfair practices using its powers under the TCA. It also shows their willingness to react quickly to new developments in the market—in this case, the substantial increase in restaurant operators selling their products through online platforms in recent months. The Guidelines on Unfair Trade Practices between Digital Platform Operators for Food Delivery and Restaurants were published in the Government Gazette on November 23, 2020, and take effect on December 23, 2020. Key Definitions Digital platforms mean online services which establish a trade linkage between restaurant businesses, food deliverers, and consumers—in other words, applications or websites that allow consumers to use restaurants via food deliverers. Digital platform operators for food delivery means the business operators that provide digital platform services, acting as an intermediary to accept the purchase order and deliver food between restaurant operators, food delivery service providers, and consumers; or between restaurant operators and consumers in accepting the purchase order for food. Put simply, they are the companies operating food delivery platforms. Unfair Conduct  The main principle set forth in the TCC’s food delivery guidelines is that business conduct between food delivery platform operators and restaurant operators must respect the freedom of each party; must be fair, noncompulsory, and nondiscriminatory; and must not obstruct another
Read More
December 7, 2020
With virtually all business operations in Thailand affected by the fallout of the COVID-19 pandemic, the government has been keen to provide relief measures to limit the economic damage. In addition to implementing broad economic relief, this has also meant changes to the government’s own internal operations, and in recent months, the Public Procurement and Supplies Administration Ruling Committee has issued two circular letters prescribing guidelines on how government authorities should handle their procurement operations during this period. The circulars, which were issued under the Public Procurement and Supplies Administration Act B.E. 2560 (2017), detail the relief measures for government procurement contracts that cannot be fulfilled because of the disruptive effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. Most significantly, the circulars clarify that the impact of COVID-19 should be deemed force majeure under government procurement contracts and government procurement law, which affects the penalties levied on contractors for late performance of required duties under government procurement contracts. The Ruling Committee specified the start of the force majeure period as March 26, 2020 (the date when the government first announced a nationwide state of emergency). This official designation enables contractors to cite disruption from COVID-19 when requesting additional time to perform their duties under a contract, or exemption from or reduction of penalties incurred due to the delay. For contracts that have not yet reached their maturity date, the Ruling Committee granted relief measures by directing the relevant government authorities to count the number of days that COVID-19 has affected performance of the contract, and use this number as the basis for determining an extension of the timeframe for performing the contractual duties. For contracts that have already reached their maturity date, the contractual party that failed to perform according to the contract would normally be subject to an assessed fine for
Read More
May 5, 2020
The Global Attorney-Client Privilege Guide, published by Lex Mundi, provides information on what constitutes attorney-client privilege in over 65 jurisdictions around the world. The Thailand chapter of the guide was written by Michael Ramirez, counsel in the dispute resolution group of Tilleke & Gibbins’ Bangkok office.
Read More
April 16, 2020
On April 15, 2020, the Lao Prime Minister’s Office issued Notification No. 481/PMO, which provides further recommendations on the implementation of PM Order No. 06/PM issued on March 29, 2020, including the extension of the earlier lockdown measures imposed in Laos to May 3, 2020, and reiterating that measures to tackle the COVID-19 pandemic should remain in effect until further notice. 
Read More