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 29, 2014

Food and Beverage Franchising in Vietnam

Informed Counsel

On February 8, 2014, a few days after the Lunar New Year, Vietnam’s first-ever McDonald’s opened in Ho Chi Minh City’s District 1. Situated on a major transportation axis, but away from tourist areas and the downtown core, the new restaurant boasted 24-hour service and a drive-thru—for both cars and motorbikes—which was also purported to be the first in Vietnam.

Curious customers queued round the clock in snaking lines more commonly seen at amusement parks than chain restaurants, as a flood of teens, families, and professionals awaited their first taste of the famous Big Mac. In just the first 24 hours of business, 22,500 customers were served, according to the Daily Mail. By the end of the first month, a staggering 400,000 people had dined at this single location. Though those numbers may be inflated, they reflect an apparent truth: the Vietnamese market has a great demand for famous worldwide brands.

As of March 2014, there were approximately 120 foreign franchisors registered in Vietnam. The businesses predominantly come from the United States, the United Kingdom, and Singapore, but there is a good mix of nationalities. The dominant business sectors are retail, education, and food service, with food and beverage franchises accounting for 30% of the registered franchises. KFC and Lotteria came to Vietnam over a decade ago and currently have over 140 restaurants and over 170 outlets, respectively, in the country. Pizza Hut arrived in 2007 and now has over 40 restaurants. Meanwhile, newcomers such as Subway, Starbucks, Popeye’s, and Burger King are steadily opening restaurants in Vietnam, and McDonald’s surely has an eye on rapid expansion.

Franchising has become a popular way for foreign food brands to enter the Vietnamese market because it is considered to be the fastest and least risky alternative, one which sidesteps certain regulatory restrictions still imposed on foreign-invested businesses in the food service industry. For example, despite Vietnam’s accession to the WTO in 2007, foreign-invested businesses are not allowed to establish their own restaurants, subject to narrow exceptions (e.g., where a restaurant is established in parallel with the construction of a hotel), though this restriction is to be removed in 2015.

In addition, foreign food and beverage service providers entering Vietnam through a franchising arrangement with a Vietnamese partner do not need to have a legal presence in Vietnam or set up a business entity in Vietnam, and thus can avoid significant capital outlays. However, franchising carries its own set of challenges and hurdles.

Franchising Regulations and Procedures

Despite the market entries of a number of globally recognized food and beverage brands, potential franchisors should understand that franchising is still in an early stage in Vietnam, and the same could be said for Vietnam’s franchising laws. Franchising was first recognized as a form of commercial activity in the Commercial Law of 2005, with the legal groundwork for franchising activities laid out a year later in Decree 35 and Circular 09. There is now a registration system with the government and a comprehensive set of regulations; however, there is still a lack of depth in the regulations, which can leave ambiguities in many areas for those wishing to operate a franchise system in Vietnam.

Franchising law in Vietnam requires that all foreign franchisors register their proposed franchising activities with the Vietnamese authorities before carrying out the activities. The authority responsible for managing franchising is the Ministry of Industry and Trade (MOIT). The MOIT sets out requirements for the application file that foreign franchisors need to submit to register their activities in Vietnam. As part of the application, a foreign franchisor will need to submit a “Franchise Description Document” (FDD), which may contain a considerable amount of commercially sensitive data about the franchisor. Apart from the extensive FDD, the application file must include relevant business certificates, intellectual property certificates, and, in the case of a secondary franchisor, a letter of approval to sub-franchise from the franchisor. The amount of information that the franchisor must prepare may be substantial and the costs incurred to translate and notarize such documents can also be considerable.

Keys to Successful Franchising

As a prerequisite to franchising, foreign franchisors should ensure that their intellectual property rights (trademarks, patents, etc.) are registered in Vietnam. The registration of trademarks should be in the foreign franchisor’s own name as the registrant. Otherwise, if the local franchisee is the registrant, complications may arise if a dispute occurs between the two parties.

Franchisors often want disputes arising under franchise agreements to be resolved by foreign courts or arbitration centers. However, the recognition and enforcement in Vietnam of foreign judgments or awards can be extremely difficult or even impossible to secure. Foreign courts’ judgments are generally unenforceable in Vietnam unless there is a treaty between Vietnam and the relevant country on the recognition of judicial decisions. Thus, franchisors must give close consideration as to the dispute resolution provisions under their franchise agreements.

Finally, franchisors should also be aware that fees and payments arising from the franchise agreement, such as initial franchise fees, royalties, technical assistance fees, training fees, and marketing fees, are subject to Vietnam’s foreign contractor tax regime, which includes value-added tax and corporate income tax. Corporate income tax rates may vary depending on whether there are applicable double tax avoidance treaties. (Vietnam is a party to double tax avoidance treaties with more than 60 other countries, but notably not with the U.S.)

Outlook

The government has made great efforts to set up regulations allowing franchises to be established in Vietnam. This has resulted in a number of global brands entering the market, highlighted by the recent entry of McDonald’s. However, additional guidance will be required as Vietnam’s laws on franchising continue to develop.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

September 17, 2025
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.
September 10, 2025
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
September 8, 2025
On September 1, 2025, Myanmar’s Directorate of Investment and Company Administration (DICA) issued Directive No. 106/2025 to remind all companies and organizations registered under the Myanmar Companies Law of their obligation to strictly comply with the DICA registrar’s orders, directives, and procedures. This directive highlights the importance of legal and procedural compliance in corporate filings, governance changes, and operational conduct. It also signals increased scrutiny over documentation submitted during annual returns, share transfers, and director appointments or resignations. Public companies will be subject to closer regulatory attention, and new company registrations will involve vetting of proposed directors to ensure prior compliance with applicable laws. Compliance The directive emphasizes the following points: Companies must ensure full compliance with the Myanmar Companies Law and all directives issued by the registrar. This includes the proper submission of annual returns and adherence to updated requirements for share transfers and changes in directors. Companies and organizations must comply with all applicable laws, rules, directives, and procedures issued by relevant ministries and departments. If any authority takes action due to noncompliance, the registrar may also take appropriate measures. Noncompliance may result in regulatory sanctions, including restrictions on future company participation and vetting under anti–money laundering and counter–terrorism financing protocols. Prospective directors of newly registered companies will be vetted to confirm no prior violations of applicable laws. Entities must respond promptly and accurately to document requests from the registrar, both during initial registration and in subsequent filings. Companies are strongly advised to review their internal compliance frameworks and ensure readiness to meet DICA’s documentation and procedural expectations. In particular, companies must respond promptly and accurately to document requests from the registrar, whether during initial registration or in subsequent filings. For more information on this DICA announcement, or on any aspect of corporate registration, or assistance with
September 2, 2025
Thailand’s Office of the Consumer Protection Board (OCPB) has initiated a sweeping regulatory review of licensed direct sale and direct marketing businesses in Thailand and is in the process of notifying business operators to submit their annual business report and financial statement to the OCPB as part of their postlicensing obligations. This move marks a significant escalation in the government’s efforts to enforce compliance and transparency in the sector, which has faced growing scrutiny in recent years. Key Regulatory Considerations All businesses holding a direct sales or direct marketing license are required to submit their audited financial statement along with their business operation report to the OCPB within 60 days from the end of their fiscal year (extendable for up to 30 days by request, if necessary). The OCPB is currently conducting license audits as part of its enforcement duties. The office aims to complete audits for at least 90% of the 2,983 registered businesses that have obtained their license since 2022. This includes a review of the business conduct of the license holder. New license applications are also under scrutiny. Applicants are currently being subjected to background checks, and the OCPB has signaled a more rigorous vetting process moving forward. Impact of Noncompliance Failure to comply with these reporting obligations may result in escalating enforcement actions, including: Official notice to rectify noncompliance within a specified timeframe. Revocation of business registration, if the operator fails to respond. Revocation of business registration could result in a five-year prohibition on reapplying for a direct sales or direct marketing license following the revocation. The OCPB has already initiated outreach efforts, including SMS and email notifications, and has hosted seminars to raise awareness of these obligations. These measures are part of a broader initiative to enhance transparency and consumer trust in the sector. Businesses operating in the direct selling and