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 14, 2015

Foreign Drug Company and Local Distributor Relationships in Vietnamese Public Drug Procurement

Subscribe to Updates
Vietnam Pharma Update

Vietnam’s Drug Distribution Policy

Under its WTO commitments, Vietnam agreed to allow foreign-invested entities (FIEs) to conduct distribution services (i.e., commission agent, wholesale, and retail services) for most types of products, but it specifically excluded “pharmaceutical products and drugs.” Consequently, foreign pharmaceutical producers typically establish legal presence in Vietnam by way of representative offices through which they can conduct marketing activities, and use local drug distributors to conduct sales and delivery of their products.

Drugs in state-owned hospitals are provided through either “internal pharmacy departments” or “hospital pharmacies.” The internal pharmacy departments supply drugs to doctors for treatment of patients and not directly to patients. Furthermore, the departments only provide drugs which have been paid for by the health insurance body through the public drug procurement process. In contrast, hospital pharmacies provide drugs directly to patients and at the patients’ own expense. These pharmacies may provide, along with other types of drugs, the same drugs that are on the list of drugs paid for by the health insurance body, but the patients will pay for them directly.

As of January 1, 2015, participation in health insurance became compulsory for all Vietnamese nationals working in Vietnam. Therefore, winning public drug tenders will play a key role in increasing sales for foreign pharmaceutical companies doing business in Vietnam.

Drug Tenders

There are two ways of conducting public drug procurement in Vietnam: (i) tenders by individual state-owned hospitals and (ii) centralized tenders. Currently, centralized tenders are only conducted at the provincial level, where the provincial Department of Health (DOH) is responsible for organizing the tenders and choosing the winning bids. All hospitals under a provincial DOH are required to use the tender results from the DOH to purchase drugs used in their establishments. Individual state-owned hospitals under the Ministry of Health (MOH) organize tenders and choose winning bids by themselves. However, according to the defined roadmap, centralized drug tenders will be held at the national level starting in 2016 and the MOH, not the DOH, will be responsible for organizing them. There are still no detailed guidelines for centralized tenders at the national level. A possible scenario is that hospitals under the MOH will use the tender results from centralized tenders at the national level, while hospitals under the DOH will continue to use the tender results from tenders at the provincial level.

There are three main tender packages: innovator drugs; generics; and traditional and herbal medicines. The generics package is divided into five sub-packages. Each package/sub-package has only one winning drug. This limits the number of chemical drugs with the same active ingredient which can win tenders to a maximum of six. However, bidders also face the challenges of ensuring adequate supply if they win. Therefore, it is difficult for a bidder with limited capacity to join a drug tender, especially a centralized tender.

Relationship Between Local Distributors and Foreign Drug Companies

Role of local distributors in winning the tender

As FIEs are prohibited from distributing drugs in Vietnam, they cannot be the bidders in drug tenders but must assign local distributors to be the bidders instead. Such appointments are normally governed under distribution agreements. In most cases, this is a mutually beneficial relationship.

The local distributor plays an important role in determining the success of a drug tender. There are three groups of criteria used to select the winning bid, including: (i) price; (ii) technical criteria of the drug (scored on a 100-point scale); and (iii) capacity and experience of the bidder. Although, technically, the capacity and experience of the bidder is evaluated on a pass/fail basis and most bidders can “pass,” in reality, the capacity of the bidder also carries over to the technical criteria group, where 70% of the score is for drug quality and the remaining 30% is ostensibly for “packaging, preservation, and delivery,” but is in fact used to evaluate the capacity of the bidder.

Therefore, foreign drug companies should carefully evaluate the capacity of their distributors to make sure they meet conditions that tenders would require, such as experience in providing drugs to hospitals or the ability to meet required conditions in goods delivery stated in the tender dossier, while also making sure the local distributor has other desired qualities such as the ability to meet the requirements set out in the distribution agreement. In practice, it is often difficult to balance the two factors.

Termination of the distribution agreement prior to fulfillment of tender obligations

After a public tender has been won, the most critical problems arise when there is a termination of the distribution agreement or other breakdown in the relationship between the foreign drug company and its local distributor prior to the fulfillment of each party’s obligations under the tender. When such events occur, the distributor is often unable to supply the products as committed in the tender contract and would be liable to pay compensation under the terms of tender contracts as well as become subject to administrative penalties under the tender laws. The bid solicitors (the bid solicitor in a centralized tender is the DOH, while in a hospital tender it is the hospital) can terminate the tender contract. In theory, they can choose another bidder to replace the previous bidder. However, in practice, bid solicitors generally do not choose this course of action. They simply terminate the tender contract because they have a maximum of five other products with the same active ingredients to use. For the foreign drug company, beyond its loss of profits, if the drugs earmarked for the tender have not been paid for but are in the possession of the distributor, the foreign drug company is likely to have trouble receiving payment and/or getting its drugs back from the distributor.

Therefore, terminating the distribution agreement prior to the completion of performance of a tender contract will cause losses for both the distributors and the foreign drug company. In most cases, the foreign drug companies would have sent at least some of their drugs to their distributor on credit terms, and therefore are likely to suffer more losses than the distributors.

Possibility of switching distributors while the tender contract is active

Under the Law on Bidding, in some circumstances, it is possible for a bidder to transfer a portion of a package to another bidder while the tender contract is still active, provided it is less than 10% of the total tender contract value, and the transferred portion is valued at below VND 50 billion. Thus, in theory, a foreign drug company could switch distributors for a portion of the tender, though it would require the approval of the distributor, as only the distributor (the bidder) is party to the tender contract under the law, and the hospital (the bid solicitor) would also have to approve. However, in practice, with drug tenders, it is nearly impossible to transfer to another bidder, largely because there is no regime governing such transfers in the pharmaceutical area and because hospitals/bid solicitors, as mentioned above, are usually content to rely on their remaining generic product options.

Protective measures for foreign drug companies

Measures that a foreign drug company can take in the context of drug tenders are: (1) carefully selecting its distributors by conducting proper due diligence on their capability to meet tender requirements as well as commercial and compliance requirements (such as FCPA); and, (2) carefully drafting distribution agreements.

At minimum, the distribution agreements should include the right to conduct inspections, allow termination on clearly enumerated grounds, and have a carefully considered damages and arbitration clause. Also, if the distributors also hold the market authorizations for the drugs, there should be a provision in the distribution agreement requiring them to either cancel or transfer the authorizations to another distributor of the foreign drug company’s choosing. However, practical enforcement of this provision is difficult because sign-off from the distributor is required at the time of cancellation or transfer. As a best practice, the foreign company should hold the marketing authorization in their own name, not in the name of the distributor.

Download Full Article
Related Professionals

Industries

Life Sciences

Practices

Corporate/M&A

Regulatory Affairs

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

August 20, 2026
As part of its membership in Lex Mundi, Tilleke & Gibbins has released the latest edition of its Guide to Doing Business in Thailand, providing an overview of the legal, regulatory, and commercial considerations for companies establishing or expanding operations in Thailand. The 2026 edition offers practical insight into the country’s business environment, investment framework, and operational requirements. The guide covers a wide range of topics relevant to foreign and domestic investors, including: Investment incentives and promotion schemes Financial facilities and banking regulations Exchange controls and money transfers Import and export regulations Business structures and incorporation options Requirements for establishing a business Operational and compliance considerations Business cessation and insolvency procedures Employment and labor laws Taxation Immigration and visa requirements Prepared by Tilleke & Gibbins lawyers across multiple practice areas, the publication outlines key aspects of doing business in Thailand, including foreign investment restrictions, regulatory compliance obligations, corporate structures, employment requirements, and recent legal and economic developments affecting investors. The publication forms part of Lex Mundi’s Country Guides series, a global collection of jurisdiction-specific reference materials prepared by member firms around the world. Together, these guides help companies evaluate opportunities, compare regulatory environments, and plan international business activities across multiple markets. The full Guide to Doing Business in Thailand 2026 is available through the button below.
Read More
August 10, 2026
On June 17, 2026, Indonesia’s National Agency of Drug and Food Control (BPOM) issued BPOM Regulation No. 10 of 2026 on Nutritional Information on Processed Food Labels. The new regulation, which revokes three previous nutrition labeling regulations, introduces several notable changes affecting food and beverage manufacturers, importers, and distributors. These changes range from updated nutrient reference values and serving-size requirements to the introduction of the Nutri-Level front-of-pack labeling system for certain beverage products. Businesses operating in Indonesia should carefully review these developments and assess their products’ compliance with the new requirements during the transition period. Implementation of the Nutri-Level Labeling System To implement the recently issued decree on Nutri-Level labeling, BPOM Regulation No. 10 of 2026 stipulates the requirements to implement the Nutri-Level labeling system on the front-of-pack. Under the new framework, ready-to-drink beverages, powdered beverages, and liquid or solid concentrates are required to display Nutri-Level labeling on the front label of their packaging. The Nutri-Level labeling system classifies products into color-coded levels A through D based on their sugar, sodium, and total fat content. The applicable Nutri-Level is determined based on the lowest level measured in the assessment of sugar, sodium, and total fat content. For products classified as level C or D, the Nutri-Level label must be accompanied by information on the relevant sugar, sodium, and total fat content per 100 ml of the ready-to-consume product. Products classified as level A or B may either display only the Nutri-Level designation or display the Nutri-Level together with the relevant nutritional information per 100 ml. Minimum Vitamin and Mineral Content Required for Declaration BPOM Regulation No. 10 of 2026 introduces a stricter threshold for the declaration of vitamins and minerals in the nutritional value information section (ING). Vitamins or minerals may only be declared if they are present at a
Read More
August 10, 2026
The drug registration process in Vietnam will be simplified, particularly for foreign applicants, following the recent issuance by Vietnam’s Ministry of Health (MOH) of a new circular that is expected to reduce administrative hurdles. Circular No. 32/2026/TT-BYT on the registration of drugs and medicinal ingredients (Circular 32) was issued on July 29, 2026, and will take effect on October 1, 2026, replacing Circular No. 12/2025/TT-BYT. Key provisions of the new circular are discussed below. Five-Year Data Exclusivity and Five-Month Public Disclosure Framework Circular 32 updates data protection guidelines by explicitly referencing Article 128 of the amended Intellectual Property Law, which sets out that new drugs supported by clinical trial data submitted for the first time will be granted a five-year data exclusivity period from the date of the initial marketing authorization (MA) approval. Subsequent applications that rely on the originator’s protected data will not be eligible for approval from the date of submission of the originator’s registration dossier until five years after the first MA is granted. Furthermore, in accordance with the new regulations, the regulatory authority must publicly disclose information on subsequent applications five months before the granting of MA, providing originator companies with an opportunity to exercise and enforce their intellectual property rights. Simplified Requirements for Foreign Legal Documents Circular 32 expands the circumstances under which legal documents issued by foreign authorities are exempt from consular legalization and authenticity verification requirements. Specifically, such documents may be exempt if the Drug Administration of Vietnam (DAV) is able to verify their authenticity directly through official electronic means, including written confirmation or email correspondence sent directly to the MOH by the competent foreign authority, or publicly accessible English-language databases maintained by recognized foreign regulatory authorities. In addition, the new circular permits the submission of electronic notarized copies of legal documents
Read More
July 24, 2026
As food innovation continues to accelerate, manufacturers are increasingly introducing ingredients derived from new sources, produced using novel technologies, or lacking a significant history of human consumption. While these innovations create new opportunities for the food industry, they also raise important questions regarding consumer safety. For this reason, many jurisdictions, including Thailand, the European Union, Australia and New Zealand, Canada, and Singapore, require a premarket safety assessment for novel food ingredients before they can be placed on the market. The objective of this assessment is to ensure that each ingredient is safe for its intended use and level of consumption, does not present toxicological, allergenic, microbiological, or nutritional concerns, and will not mislead consumers. Scientific authorities typically evaluate the ingredient’s identity, manufacturing process, composition, specifications, anticipated dietary exposure, toxicological information, nutritional impact, and history of use before determining whether it can be marketed. Against this background, the Thai Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently took an important step toward improving regulatory transparency by publishing, for the first time, a consolidated public list of substances that have successfully completed the Thai FDA’s safety assessment process, including substances determined to be novel foods and those determined not to fall within the novel food category. The list identifies the approved substances, the corresponding manufacturers or importers, approval dates, and the approved conditions of use. Although the publication does not change the existing legal framework governing novel food approvals, it provides businesses with greater visibility into the Thai FDA’s regulatory precedents and the types of substances that have previously been accepted through the safety assessment process. The full announcement is available on the Thai FDA’s website. As the list is now publicly available, it also provides useful insight into the types of substances that have successfully completed the Thai FDA’s safety assessment process.
Read More