Over the past two years—particularly since Thailand announced incentives for EVs, including tax exemptions and reductions—there has been a clear trend of manufacturers relocating their facilities to Thailand. This shift is reshaping the country’s industrial landscape and creating significant opportunities in the real estate sector for companies looking to establish or expand EV manufacturing operations in Southeast Asia. Incentive-Driven Market Transformation The government’s tax exemptions and reductions have proven effective in attracting foreign investment, with Chinese manufacturers currently dominating the market. Most EV parts and car manufacturers operating in Thailand are from China, reflecting the prominence of Chinese EV brands that have already established a presence in the country. The sector encompasses manufacturers of electrical equipment as well as companies seeking to establish facilities for producing electric vehicle components, parts, and accessories. The surge in activity is evident across Thailand’s EV manufacturing sector, with legal practices handling these transactions experiencing unprecedented demand. Industrial Real Estate Framework and Market Dynamics Thailand’s industrial real estate framework provides compelling advantages for foreign manufacturers, who typically face restrictions on foreign land ownership under the Land Code. However, foreign investors can benefit from exemptions to these restrictions if the land is located within industrial real estate zones designated by the Industrial Estate Authority of Thailand (IEAT) or they obtain investment promotion from the Board of Investment (BOI) if the land is located outside an industrial estate area governed by the IEAT. Both the IEAT and BOI provide special tax and nontax incentives, including foreign land ownership, with even greater incentives available for land situated within the country’s Eastern Economic Corridor (EEC). This regulatory advantage has sparked a parallel trend in land development. Industrial real estate developers in the EEC are actively consolidating land into large plots to develop new industrial estate projects, recognizing that

M&A specialists at Tilleke & Gibbins have contributed the Vietnam chapter to Private M&A 2025, a newly released guide from Lexology Panoramic. The publication provides practical insights into private mergers and acquisitions frameworks in jurisdictions worldwide. The Vietnam chapter addresses key aspects of private M&A transactions, including: Structure and process, legal regulation, and required consents Advisers, negotiation, and documentation Due diligence and disclosure obligations Pricing, consideration, and financing Conditions, preclosing covenants, and termination rights Representations, warranties, indemnities, and postclosing covenants Taxation of transfers Employees, pensions, and benefits Recent legal, regulatory, and market practice developments The chapter highlights how Vietnam’s legal framework governs private acquisitions and disposals, outlines typical transaction processes and structures, and provides guidance on common regulatory and practical considerations. It also notes recent trends, including increased scrutiny of merger control filings by the Vietnam Competition Commission and regulatory changes affecting M&A approvals. The full Vietnam chapter is available as a PDF through the button below. Readers can also gain 30 days of complimentary access to Private M&A 2025 and Lexology Panoramic’s full library of resources through this link.

On September 10, 2025, Vietnam’s National Credit Information Center (CIC) reported to the Vietnam Cybersecurity Emergency Response Team (VNCERT) a suspected significant cybersecurity incident involving unauthorized access to the CIC’s credit information database. A hacker group has claimed responsibility and allegedly posted over 160 million records for sale, including sensitive personal and financial data. Implications for Banks and Financial Institutions Companies that share customers’ or potential customers’ personal data with the CIC for credit scoring or other purposes—and continue to act as a data controller for such data—may be obligated under Vietnam’s Personal Data Protection Decree (PDPD) and related regulations to: Notify A05 (Department of Cybersecurity and High-Tech Crime Prevention) and the State Bank of Vietnam without delay. Inform affected individuals if their personal data is at risk. Recommended Actions Companies that could be impacted by this data breach should take the following actions: Conduct an internal review of CIC-related data in their systems, and identify whether and how the systems have been affected by this incident. Assess whether to notify regulators and customers/potential customers. Enhance cybersecurity controls, monitor for suspicious activity, and implement additional safeguards to prevent secondary breaches.

Under Thai law, authorized directors stand as a company’s mind and will and, as such, may incur personal criminal liability for acts or omissions committed in the course of company business. When allegations surface, directors must be prepared for the practical reality that, before guilt or innocence is ever adjudicated, they could be deprived of liberty unless bail release is promptly achieved through the competent legal authority. When Bail Can Be Granted Two procedural moments trigger the need to consider bail. The first arises during the investigative phase, when a claim is lodged against a director with the competent law enforcement authorities. Upon receipt of a complaint, the assigned inquiry officer summons the director for questioning, compiles evidence, and ultimately forwards a prosecution or nonprosecution recommendation to the public prosecutor. Although the public prosecutor retains ultimate discretion to indict an accused director, the police or prosecutor may conclude that pretrial detention is necessary and may therefore apply to the court for an order to hold the director in court custody. The second moment occurs after a criminal case is filed directly with the court. This occurs once a court accepts a criminal case filed by a prosecutor against a director or, alternatively, when the court accepts a case filed by an individual for trial. For cases filed by individuals, the plaintiff presents prima facie evidence at the preliminary hearing, and the court will accept the complaint if it finds sufficient grounds, thereby conferring upon the director the status of a criminal defendant. Upon acceptance of the criminal case, the court then has the inherent authority to order custody pending trial unless the defendant secures bail release. Procedural Considerations Experienced litigants typically prepare bail security in advance and submit a bail petition at the earliest possible time. While there are