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

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.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

August 13, 2026
Modern agricultural machinery is no longer purely mechanical but instead technology dependent. Modern tractors, harvesters, and other farm equipment increasingly incorporate embedded software, electronic control units, sensors, and digital diagnostic systems. While such technologies enhance efficiency, productivity, and precision farming, they also affect the manner of equipment repair and maintenance. As a result, farmers and independent repair providers may have little practical choice but to rely on authorized dealers, even for routine maintenance and repairs. Section 36 of Thailand’s Patent Act reflects the principle that the authorized sale of a patented invention usually exhausts the exclusive right of the patent owner over the specific product. This means that upon legal sale of the patented product, it can typically be used or resold without further authorization from the patent holder. This principle is relatively straightforward when applied to traditional mechanical equipment. Ownership of a machine ordinarily carries with it the practical ability to diagnose faults, replace worn parts, and restore the equipment to working order. Modern agricultural machinery, however, increasingly depends on embedded software, proprietary diagnostic systems, firmware updates, and other digital resources that may remain under the control of the manufacturer or patent holder. This tension lies within the “right to repair” debate. In the United States, on July 8, 2026, the Federal Trade Commission and five states announced a settlement with Deere & Company resolving allegations that Deere had unlawfully restricted farmers’ and independent repair providers’ ability to repair their equipment. Under the terms of the settlement, for the next ten years, Deere must provide repair resources, including software capabilities, on terms equivalent to those provided to authorized dealers. The Deere settlement highlights that the nature of ownership is changing, but legal concepts have not kept pace. Traditional patent-law concepts, including patent exhaustion, were developed with physical products
August 11, 2026
Cambodia’s Ministry of Justice has launched a new platform on its official website to publish notices of forced sales issued by each municipal and provincial court of first instance. The platform’s stated purpose is to inform the public and facilitate greater participation in forced-sale auctions conducted in connection with court-ordered enforcement proceedings. How the Platform Works The platform publishes forced-sale notices from courts of first instance across Cambodia’s municipalities and provinces and includes a link where the public can view properties currently subject to forced sale. To participate in a forced-sale auction, individuals can download Khmer-language bidding application forms through links provided on the platform. The form typically requires the applicant’s name, sex, year of birth, identity card number and issue date, and address, together with details identifying the immovable property (including its ownership certificate number), the relevant enforcement case number and date, and the reference to the public auction or tender announcement issued by the court. Completed application forms must be submitted directly to the specific municipal or provincial court that issued the forced sale. For further inquiries about a particular forced sale, interested parties should likewise contact the relevant municipal or provincial court. Forced Sale of Immovable Property in Cambodia The publication of these notices relates to the forced sale procedure for immovable property under Cambodia’s Code of Civil Procedure (CPC). Unlike property seizure by a court, a forced sale is a compulsory execution proceeding—a subsequent enforcement step that arises only after an underlying dispute has been adjudicated and a debtor fails to pay the debt or outstanding amount due under a final and binding judgment or other enforceable title of execution. For the purposes of this procedure, the term “immovable property” under the CPC refers to land, registered buildings, jointly held shares of such property, registered
August 10, 2026
Thailand has finalized its social media KYC (“know your customer”) rules under Notification of the Electronic Transactions Commission on Measures to Prevent Technological Crimes for Social Media Service Providers (No. 2), which was published in the Government Gazette on May 5, 2026, and will take effect on November 1, 2026. While an early draft of the notification proposed requiring social media platforms to arrange identification of every user account, the final notification is significantly more targeted, focusing on paid online advertising and advertiser identity verification. Though the regulatory initiative primarily aims to combat online fraud and technology-related crimes, it also has important consequences for intellectual property enforcement, because the verified platform records that will be generated under the new requirements can help IP rights holders to identify anonymous online infringers. Key Regulatory Mandates The notification requires social media service providers to verify the identity of advertisers before their paid advertisements are published and disseminated in Thailand through social media, regardless of whether the advertising fees come from the advertisers or third parties. Verification of an advertiser is valid for one year, after which verification would have to be performed again before the platform could publish additional paid advertisements from the advertiser. Permitted verification methods are specified under the notification. A platform may verify an advertiser by checking identity evidence and confirming the connection between the advertiser and that identity evidence, with the notification giving facial comparison against certain government-issued identity documents as an example. Alternatively, platforms may verify advertisers through a digital identity verification and authentication system with an identity-proofing assurance level not lower than the level prescribed by Thailand’s Electronic Transactions Commission. The notification further requires platforms to retain only the advertiser’s information necessary to identify the advertiser, beginning from the start of the advertising activity and for
August 6, 2026
Introduction: A Trademark Paradox in Sustainable Packaging Walk into any Thai supermarket, and the label-free water bottle is no longer a novelty. Thailand’s packaging market, valued at approximately USD 15.68 billion in 2025, is shifting toward minimalist, plastic-light designs as ESG pressures reshape how brands present their products. The country generated roughly 5.68 million tons of plastic waste in 2021, with a recycling rate of only 19 percent, and regulators are now considering rules that would allow label-free bottled water relying on embossing, laser printing, or QR codes instead of wrap-around labels. As packaging itself becomes the brand identifier, a paradox emerges: designs built to say the least often struggle hardest for protection under Thai intellectual property law. The Trademark Barrier: When Shape Is Not Enough Section 7, paragraph 2(10) of the Thai Trademark Act deems a shape distinctive only if it is not the natural form of the goods, is not necessary to achieve a technical result, and does not add value to the goods. The Department of Intellectual Property’s 2022 examination guidelines apply this test conservatively, as the following examples illustrate. A plain water bottle relying on subtle contours to signal its brand is typically read as just another bottle, not a source identifier. Acquired distinctiveness offers a theoretical escape route, but it demands extensive evidence of sales, advertising, and consumer recognition—an especially heavy burden for new entrants whose minimalist packaging has not yet achieved market prominence. The result is a structural bias against precisely the design innovation that sustainability goals are meant to encourage. Design Patents: A Partial, Imperfect Substitute Design patent protection, covering a product’s shape, configuration, or ornamentation, appears to offer an alternative route. In practice, it is constrained by the same forces driving the minimalist trend. Because many brands converge on similar solutions—clear