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

March 9, 2015

Franchise Agreement Registration in Indonesia

Subscribe to Updates
Informed Counsel

With the biggest economy in ASEAN and the fourth-largest population in the world, Indonesia is an attractive location for franchisors. In this article, we will examine the process for registering franchise agreements in Indonesia, in order to provide guidance to those operating or planning to operate in this lucrative and highly competitive market.

The Governing Law

Government Regulation No. 42 of 2007 on Franchising, together with a few other regulations issued by the Ministry of Trade, set out the requirements to establish a franchise in Indonesia. For a business to be qualified as a franchise, it must have:

  1. specific business characteristics;
  2. proven records of profitability for at least two years; and
  3. written standards of the offered goods and/or services (franchise-offering prospectus).

In addition, business conduct must be teachable and capable of being applied by the franchisee, and the franchisor must be available for continuous support and must have registered any related intellectual property rights with Indonesia’s Directorate General of Intellectual Property. All relevant franchise agreements must also be completed and registered.

Franchise Agreement Registration

Upon entering into a franchise agreement, the franchisor must provide the franchisee with a franchise-offering prospectus (detailed disclosure). The franchise-offering prospectus must contain, among other details on the business and the franchising parties, a history of business activities, financial statements, lists of franchisees, and the rights and obligations of the franchisor and the franchisee.

The franchise-offering prospectus and the franchise agreement must be registered with the Ministry of Trade in order to obtain a franchise registration certificate (Surat Tanda Pendaftaran Waralaba/STPW). A franchisor (or an authorized proxy) must first submit a draft franchise agreement to the Ministry of Trade for its review. If the draft franchise agreement does not violate any local laws or regulations, the franchisor may proceed to file an application and register their franchise-offering prospectus in the Indonesian language with the Ministry of Trade. If the franchisor is a foreign entity, the prospectus must be legalized in the country of origin prior to registration in Indonesia and must be submitted together with a sworn translation. The prospectus must be filed at least two weeks before entering into an agreement with a franchisee.

Once the prospectus is registered, the franchisor and franchisee can enter into a franchise agreement. Franchise agreements, among other requirements, must be registered by each franchisee (or an authorized proxy) with the Ministry of Trade.

A franchise agreement must be executed on the basis of a written agreement between a franchisor and a franchisee, it must comply with Indonesia’s law, and it must be drawn up in the Indonesian language. Thus, if a franchise agreement is drafted in a foreign language, an Indonesian translation of the agreement must be provided alongside the original. In case of a dispute arising over the agreement, the Indonesian version shall prevail.

If everything is in order, the Ministry of Trade will issue a franchise registration certificate, which shall be valid for five years and extendable for another five years, subject to the period that the franchise agreement is effective. If the application is rejected, applicants are entitled to resubmit the application.

Sanctions for Failing to Comply

Government authorities can impose administrative sanctions on franchisors or franchisees in the following cases:

  • The franchisor fails to foster training, operational counseling of management, offerings, research and development, and the sustainability of a franchisee.
  • Either the franchisor or the franchisee fails to register the franchise-offering prospectus or the franchise agreement.

Administrative sanctions can be made in the following forms:

  1. Written Warnings: A warning in writing can be made once every two weeks for a total of three times, starting from the date of issuance of the previous warning.
  2. Fine: After the third written warning has been issued, a fine shall be imposed on franchisors that do not register the franchise-offering prospectus or on franchisees that do not register the franchise agreement. The maximum fine is IDR 100 million (approximately USD 8,333).
  3. Revocation of the Franchise’s Certificate of Registration: After the third written warning has been issued, the certificate of registration of the franchise shall be revoked from a franchisor if it is not fostering its franchisees.

Franchise Logo

An additional obligation under the law is that the franchise logo must be used at the location of the head office and outlets of the domestic franchisor. Franchisors and franchisees who have franchise registration certificates must use a franchise logo—otherwise, they may face sanctions from written warnings, leading up to suspensions and a revocation of the franchise registration certificate.

In addition to the overview provided above, there are numerous other factors and requirements involved in starting and operating a franchise business in Indonesia. Franchisors and franchisees need to have a clear understanding of the various steps in the process and their compliance requirements, as the responsible government authorities are keeping a watchful eye on this growing sector.

Download Full Article
Related Professionals

Practices

Corporate/M&A

Intellectual Property

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

October 7, 2026
M&A specialists at Tilleke & Gibbins have contributed the Vietnam chapter to Private M&A 2027, a guide published by 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 2027 and Lexology Panoramic’s full library of resources through this link.
Read More
October 2, 2026
On July 24, 2026, a new 12.5% Section 301 tariff took effect on most imports from Thailand into the United States. The tariff was imposed by the Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR) under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, following a finding that Thailand had failed to impose and effectively enforce a prohibition on imports of goods produced with forced labor. The new tariff replaced the temporary 10% Section 122 surcharge that had applied since February 24, 2026, following the US Supreme Court’s invalidation of the prior tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). The 12.5% tariff is not the only potential source of additional US duties on Thai-origin goods. Thailand is also subject to a separate Section 301 investigation concerning structural excess manufacturing capacity, which could result in additional duties. Unlike the Section 122 surcharge, which was capped at 15% and limited to 150 days, Section 301 provides a more flexible framework for imposing and maintaining trade measures. Section 301 actions are generally subject to a four-year termination rule but may continue following a review if continuation is requested. The new tariff therefore represents a potentially longer-term change in the tariff treatment of Thai-origin goods entering the US market. This article explains the legal and policy developments that led to the new tariff, how the Section 301 tariff differs from the tariff regimes that preceded it, Thailand’s response and ongoing negotiations with the United States, and the practical implications for businesses that manufacture, export, import, or distribute goods between Thailand and the United States. From IEEPA to Section 122 to Section 301 IEEPA Era (April 2025–February 2026) Beginning in April 2025, the US administration imposed sweeping tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), invoking national emergencies relating to trade
Read More
September 30, 2026
Packaging is a valuable commercial asset that helps consumers identify and distinguish products through their shape, colors, graphics, labels, and overall presentation. Obtaining legal protections for these assets is thus an important step. Businesses entering into or operating in the Myanmar market should assess whether trademark protection, industrial design protection, or both provide the strongest IP strategy for these features. The country’s Intellectual Property Department (IPD) under the Ministry of Commerce now administers trademark and industrial design registrations since Myanmar’s modernization of its intellectual property framework through the enactment of four key IP laws in 2019. Trademark Protection for Packaging Under the Trademark Law 2019, a “mark” is any visually perceptible sign, including words, names, letters, numerals, figurative elements, color combinations, or combinations of these signs, capable of distinguishing one undertaking’s goods or services from another’s. Trademark protection may therefore extend to certain elements of product packaging that function as source identifiers. Depending on their presentation and distinctiveness, packaging elements such as brand names, logos, labels, configurations, color combinations, and three-dimensional (3D) shapes may qualify for trademark protection. However, under the current practice of the IPD and its available examination guidelines, the packaging and  trade dress (including product get-up) are not expressly recognized as separate registrable subject matter in Myanmar. Under the Trademark Law 2019, trademark infringement—including unauthorized use of a registered mark on packaging—may give rise to civil remedies, including injunctions and damages, as well as criminal penalties. A 3D mark may protect packaging shape or configuration if it has acquired distinctiveness through use and consumers associate it with the relevant products. However, a shape dictated by a functional or technical purpose is ineligible for registration. Registration of a 3D mark may be renewed indefinitely for successive ten-year periods, subject to compliance with renewal requirements. Industrial Design Protection
Read More
September 30, 2026
Under Thailand’s Patent Act B.E. 2522 (1979), any person may raise the invalidity of a patent as a matter of defense. However, the right to initiate court proceedings to cancel a patent is reserved exclusively for an “interested person” or the public prosecutor. This distinction between merely challenging validity and initiating judicial revocation proceedings has given rise to a significant body of Supreme Court (Dika) jurisprudence interpreting who qualifies as an “interested person” under the Patent Act. Statutory Framework Section 54 of the Patent Act provides that any invention patent granted not in compliance with the patentability requirements will be invalid, and that a petition to cancel such a patent may be submitted to the court by any “interested person” or the public prosecutor. Section 64 mirrors this provision for design patents, and section 65 novies extends the same framework to petty patents. However, none of these provisions defines the term “interested person,” leaving its interpretation to the courts. Supreme Court Interpretation The Thai Supreme Court has developed a consistent body of case law establishing that an “interested person” must be someone directly affected by the existence of the patent—not simply any member of the public. In 1989, the court found (Dika No. 2670/2532) that a party whose intended use of the patented technology was still in a preparatory stage—before actual manufacturing had commenced—did not qualify as an interested person. However, in 2009 the Supreme Court further elaborated  (Dika No. 2906/2552) that an interested party is one whose rights to utilize the invention are restricted by virtue of the patent, such as a manufacturer or producer whose operations are directly impacted by the patentee’s exclusive rights. In the 2008 case of T.M. Grating Steel Co., Ltd. v. Billion Mass Industry Co., Ltd. (Dika No. 974/2551), where the plaintiff had
Read More