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​ 

January 6, 2026
On December 30, 2025, Thailand’s Electronic Transactions Development Agency (ETDA) notified digital marketplace operators of a consolidated list of “high‑risk products” that are subject to strict monitoring on digital platforms. The list was jointly prepared by the Thai Industrial Standards Institute (TISI) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to guide platform compliance in the initial phase of implementation of the Electronic Transaction Committee’s Notification on Other Measures for Marketplace for Goods with Specific Characteristics under Section 18(2) of the 2022 Royal Decree on Digital Platform Businesses Requiring Notification B.E.2568 (2025). The notice is addressed to operators of digital platform services that function as product marketplaces with specific characteristics laid out in the notification. The ETDA states that the TISI and the FDA are closely monitoring the high‑risk product categories on digital platforms, and the published list serves as the baseline reference for platform screening during the initial phase of the notification’s implementation. High‑Risk Product List The list aggregates categories of products that are illegal to sell online or are otherwise tightly regulated under Thai law, with an emphasis on health-related products, controlled substances, medical devices, and a wide range of industrial products that require certification or compliance with specified Thai Industrial Standards, as detailed below. Prohibited and tightly controlled health products. This includes all categories of modern medicines subject to control other than general household remedies; all categories of controlled herbal products except for over-the-counter herbal products; narcotics; psychotropic substances; and medical devices requiring use in medical facilities or a physician’s prescription. Selected industrial products requiring heightened controls. The list highlights dozens of TISI-regulated items commonly sold online. Examples include pacifiers, rice cookers, electrical wire, food wrap film, crayons, washing machines and dryers, air conditioners, electric cookers and air fryers, water heaters, microwave ovens, LED luminaires, hair dryers
Read More
January 5, 2026
On December 31, 2025, Vietnam’s Ministry of Health (MOH) issued Circular No. 57/2025/TT-BYT providing guidance on the classification of medical devices according to technical standards and quality requirements (Circular 57), applicable to procurement activities for medical devices in Vietnam. According to the MOH, the purpose of the classification is to establish a principle-based legal framework and regulations that enable purchasers to easily identify groups of medical devices aligned with their professional requirements and financial capacity. Some of the key stipulations of Circular 57 are outlined below. Basis for Determining Technical Standards and Quality Under Circular 57, the technical standards of medical devices are determined in accordance with Vietnamese laws on standards and technical regulations, through the following means: Certification of conformity with standards in accordance with Vietnamese laws on standards and technical regulations; Results of conformity assessment conducted by an internationally recognized conformity assessment organization or a legally established domestic or foreign conformity assessment organization operating in Vietnam; and Documentation evidencing compliance provided by the medical device owner. The quality of medical devices is determined based on whether the device has been approved for circulation by the relevant marketing authority of one or more jurisdictions. Classification of Medical Devices Circular 57 classifies medical devices into six groups (from Group 1 to Group 6) based on technical standards and quality. Medical devices subject to classification must simultaneously meet technical standards and quality requirements in accordance with professional specifications and user needs, and must be lawfully marketed in Vietnam. Medical devices manufactured in Vietnam may participate in all corresponding groups, provided they meet the technical standards required by the user and are lawfully marketed in Vietnam. Outlook Circular No. 57 will take effect on February 15, 2026, while the classification requirements will become effective on January 1, 2027. Holders of medical
Read More
December 30, 2025
The Intellectual Property Office of Vietnam (IP Office), with support from the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), is drafting additional annexes to its Guidelines for Patent Examination, focusing on the examination of patent applications in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology sectors. The new annexes are expected to be officially issued in early 2026 as Annexes III and IV, following the successful issuance in 2023 of Annexes I and II addressing computer program-related inventions. The IP Office recently organized a seminar to gather feedback on the draft annexes from intellectual property representatives, academic institutions, research institutes, and other interested parties, emphasizing its intention to receive further constructive opinions to refine the guidelines for pharmaceuticals and biotechnology. Why These Guidelines Matter Patent examination in Vietnam has traditionally relied on the Guidelines for Patent Examination issued under Decision No. 487/QD-SHTT (2010), recently supplemented by Annexes I and II. While these documents provide a solid foundation, they do not fully address practical challenges in examining pharmaceutical and biotech inventions, particularly issues related to clarity, sufficiency of disclosure, enablement, features of function and utility, combination therapies, and inventions involving artificial intelligence (AI) applications in these fields. Annexes III and IV aim to close these gaps by introducing structured principles and illustrative examples. Guidance on Patent Specification Requirements Annex III provides detailed guidance on the requirements for patent specifications in pharmaceuticals and biotechnology, covering two main parts: Part A addresses sufficiency of disclosure, clarity of specifications, and consistency between claims and descriptions. Part B covers inventions related to Markush-type compounds, claims containing exclusion statements (disclaimers), and additional experimental data submitted during examination. The Guidelines outline specific disclosure requirements for subject matters such as compounds, formulations, pharmaceutical compositions, genes, polypeptides, proteins, vectors, transgenic organisms, modified organisms, and hybrid cells. Annex III emphasizes that disclaimers are not accepted
Read More
November 25, 2025
Food safety incidents can emerge without warning, requiring businesses to act swiftly to protect consumers and comply with regulatory obligations. Across Southeast Asia, Thailand, Vietnam, and Indonesia have each developed comprehensive food recall frameworks designed to ensure rapid removal of unsafe products from the market while holding businesses accountable for compliance failures. While these three jurisdictions share common objectives—protecting public health and ensuring food safety—each has crafted distinct regulatory approaches reflecting their unique administrative structures, enforcement priorities, and legal traditions. Understanding these differences is essential for food businesses operating in the region, as recall procedures, timelines, reporting requirements, and penalties vary significantly across borders. This guide, available through the button below, examines the food recall regulations in Indonesia, Thailand, and Vietnam, providing practical guidance on legal requirements, procedural steps, and compliance obligations in each market.
Read More