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

January 28, 2021

Myanmar Issues New Guidelines for Non-Banking Financial Institutions

Subscribe to Updates

On January 26, 2021, the Central Bank of Myanmar (CBM) published Notification 1/2021 in relation to non-banking financial institutions (NBFIs). This notification, which took immediate effect and has far-reaching implications for NBFI operations in Myanmar, applies to NBFIs wishing to conduct finance company business, leasing business, or factoring business, which are defined in the Financial Institutions Law (2016) (FIL) as follows:

  • Finance company business is “business engaging primarily in financing the purchase of goods or services with funding other than deposits from the public.” Interest would be charged on such finance.
  • Leasing business is “the business of letting or sub-letting movable property on hire, regardless whether the letting is with or without an option to purchase the property.” An obvious example would be vehicle leasing.
  • Factoring business is “the business of financing accounts receivables.” This is when a business sells its accounts receivable at a discount.

The key provisions of the notification are summarized below.

NBFI Registration

To conduct any of the above businesses, an individual or company must apply for a registration certificate from the CBM by submitting the documents specified in the notification. The registration certificate may come with terms and conditions prescribed by the CBM on a case-by-case basis. It seems likely that these terms and conditions could include minimum capital requirements, but this remains to be seen.

Trading as an NBFI without a CBM certificate is punishable by two to five years imprisonment and a fine of MMK 500 million (approx. USD 375,000).

NBFI Certificate Revocation

The CBM has extensive powers to revoke the NBFI certificate in certain circumstances, including failure to comply with the terms and conditions of the registration certificate; conducting non-NBFI business; conducting business in a manner detrimental to the interests of consumers; failure to comply with anti-money laundering or counter terrorism laws and regulations; and so on.

Prohibition on Deposit Acceptance

The notification makes clear that, unlike a commercial bank, an NBFI may not accept a deposit, which is defined by the FIL as “a sum of money paid on terms under which it will be repaid or it is repayable, either wholly or in part, with any consideration in money or money’s worth and such repayment being either, on demand or at a time or in circumstances agreed by the person or an entity making the payment and the person receiving it.”

Foreign Ownership

Interestingly, the notification refers to changes in ownership from local to foreign control, or ceasing the status of a foreign company, which implies that 100% foreign-owned NBFIs will be permitted. From our discussions with the CBM it appears that foreign investment may be allowed on a case-by-case basis, but this has yet to be confirmed. If so, this would be an interesting new opportunity for foreign investors in the financial sector. Currently there are no foreign-owned NBFIs in Myanmar.

Further Provisions

Among other things, the notification continues to deal with interest rates that may be charged by an NBFI, fit and proper requirements for senior management, financial reporting to the CBM, and inspection by the CBM.

For more details on the CBM’s notification for NBFIs, or on any aspect of banking law in Myanmar, please contact Dr. Ross Taylor at [email protected] or +66 2056 5880.

Related Professionals

Practices

Banking and Finance

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

February 9, 2026
When unauthorized credit card transactions occur, who bears responsibility—the cardholder or the issuing bank? In Thailand, a landmark 2025 ruling by the country’s Supreme Court has clarified this question, establishing a stricter standard for banks in fraud disputes and significantly strengthening consumer protections. The case centered on disputed charges where a customer claimed their credit card had been used without authorization. The bank sued to recover the amount, and both the court of first instance and the Court of Appeal ruled in favor of the bank. However, the Supreme Court overruled their judgments and decided that the customer did not need to pay for the unauthorized transactions, placing liability squarely on the bank. This ruling was based on three key findings, which are outlined below. Finding 1: Insufficient Expert Testimony In this case, the bank bore the burden of proving matters related to the credit card system’s manufacture, design, security, and operation, as required under the Consumer Case Procedure Act B.E. 2551 (2008). To meet this requirement, the bank presented testimony from two employees in its credit card department regarding ’security measures and issuance procedures. However, the Supreme Court found these witnesses unqualified as experts, as they did not present technical or academic evidence and did not possess specialized expertise in credit card technology. As a result, their testimony failed to establish that the bank’s credit card technology was sufficiently secure against fraudulent misuse. Finding 2: Contradictory Terms and Conditions The bank’s own credit card terms and conditions included a provision acknowledging that despite the card’s EMV security standards, cardholders must still exercise caution to prevent unauthorized access. The Supreme Court interpreted this clause as an explicit admission that credit card systems remain vulnerable to hacking and fraud, even with high-level security measures in place. This acknowledgment undermined the
Read More
February 4, 2026
On November 18, 2025, Vietnam’s Ministry of Finance released for public consultation a draft decree on administrative sanctions in the field of crypto assets and crypto asset markets (the “Draft Decree”), intended to implement Resolution No. 05/2025/NQ-CP dated September 9, 2025, on the pilot crypto asset market in Vietnam (“Resolution 05”). While Resolution 05 sets out who may participate and under what conditions, the Draft Decree addresses a more practical question for market participants, i.e., what happens if those conditions are not met. In doing so, the Draft Decree offers important insight into how Vietnamese regulators intend to supervise, discipline, and ultimately shape the crypto market during the pilot phase. Regulatory Scope and Overall Sanctions Architecture The Draft Decree applies to both domestic and foreign organizations and individuals engaging in crypto-related activities in Vietnam’s market. Covered entities include: (i) crypto asset issuers; (ii) crypto asset service providers, including trading platforms and market operators; (iii) Vietnamese and foreign investors participating in the pilot market; and (iv) other organizations involved in the offering, issuance, or provision of crypto-related services in Vietnam. The breadth of this scope is deliberate. It appears to reflect a regulatory view that cross-border structures, offshore platforms, and indirect participation may not necessarily insulate market actors from compliance obligations once they operate within the pilot framework. For the crypto industry, this may mark a shift from regulatory ambiguity toward a more explicit articulation of jurisdictional reach. At first glance, the Draft Decree’s monetary penalties appear restrained. The maximum fine per administrative violation is capped at VND 200 million (approx. USD 7,700) for organizations and VND 100 million (approx. USD 3,800) for individuals. However, focusing solely on fine levels risks missing the point. The Draft Decree also places great regulatory weight on supplementary sanctions and corrective measures, including: (i)
Read More
January 23, 2026
On December 31, 2025, the State Bank of Vietnam (SBV) issued Circular No. 72/2025/TT-NHNN (Circular 72), establishing a streamlined foreign exchange framework for Vietnam’s International Financial Center (IFC). Circular 72, which took effect on the same day, implements core provisions of Decree No. 329/2025/ND-CP and marks a fundamental shift from ex ante licensing to ex post supervision for IFC member enterprises and foreign investors. These changes are designed to accelerate capital flows, reduce compliance costs, and position Vietnam as a competitive regional financial hub by granting IFC members substantially greater autonomy in currency transactions, borrowing, lending, and investment activities. Key provisions for IFC members to note are discussed below. Use of Foreign Currency and Payments within the IFC Vietnam generally requires the use of Vietnamese dong for transactions within the country, with limited exceptions. This can be burdensome for foreign investors, who may be unfamiliar with all the foreign exchange rules they must comply with. Under the new regulation, IFC member enterprises and foreign investors gain the ability to transact, list prices, and settle obligations in foreign currency when dealing with other IFC members or offshore counterparties, avoiding currency risk and conversion friction. With respect to individuals and organizations located within Vietnam who are not IFC members, the use of foreign currency must continue to comply with general restrictions on foreign exchange usage within Vietnam. Dual-Track Account System for IFC Members The new regulation introduces a two-tier account structure that differentiates transactions by purpose and counterparty. IFC member enterprises must use a designated foreign currency capital account at an IFC member bank for four specified activities: Borrowing from offshore individuals and organizations Lending to offshore entities and domestic borrowers Outbound investing from the IFC Investing elsewhere in Vietnam from the IFC All other foreign exchange transactions—including operational receipts, vendor
Read More
January 22, 2026
On January 20, 2026, Vietnam’s Ministry of Finance (MOF) issued Decision No. 96/QD-BTC to formally launch pilot administrative procedures for licensing crypto asset trading market services in Vietnam. The decision took immediate effect and implements the government’s pilot crypto asset market program under Resolution No. 05/2025/NQ-CP. Notably, competent authorities have now begun accepting license applications, marking the first time Vietnam has operationalized a licensing pathway for crypto trading market operators. Administrative Procedures and Applications The decision stipulates procedures for (i) granting, (ii) adjusting, and (iii) revoking licenses to provide services for organizing crypto asset trading markets. It provides detailed, step-by-step guidance for each procedure, including dossier composition, internal review stages, coordination mechanisms, and statutory timelines. These procedures apply specifically to entities seeking to organize and operate crypto asset trading markets within Vietnam’s pilot regulatory framework. The MOF is the authority responsible for reviewing and deciding on the above procedures, with the State Securities Commission acting as the receiving, coordinating, and procedural focal point. For licensing applications, the MOF will coordinate with multiple authorities, including the State Bank of Vietnam and the Ministry of Public Security, particularly in relation to anti-money laundering, cybersecurity, system safety, and risk control requirements. Applications may be submitted in person, by post, or electronically via the National Public Service Portal or the administrative procedure information system, in line with applicable regulations. Statutory processing timelines vary depending on the specific procedure and stage involved. For applications to obtain a license to organize a crypto asset trading market, the process is conducted in multiple phases: The MOF will issue an initial written response within 20 working days from receipt of a complete and valid initial dossier, following which, upon submission of the full set of required documents, the MOF will complete substantive review and issue the license
Read More