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

December 2, 2014

Myanmar Legal Update: Moving Toward Market Liberalization

Informed Counsel

Myanmar is in the midst of undergoing significant political and economic change. A full sixty-six years after its independence from Great Britain and after nearly fifty years of strict military rule, Myanmar has embarked on a path toward sustainable economic reform. The reform has, as its primary focus, the liberalization of most market sectors and the active promotion of foreign direct investment—objectives shared by Myanmar’s regional counterparts and consistent with Myanmar’s commitments as an ASEAN member country.

Thein Sein’s Government

Since the current civilian government took political control in 2010 under the leadership of President Thein Sein, the pace of Myanmar’s legal and regulatory developments to support foreign direct investment has been remarkable. From 2011, Parliament has passed more than 120 laws and a seemingly countless number of ministerial notifications and regulatory guidelines, many of which are aimed at facilitating market liberalization. With a substantial domestic commitment of resources and assistance from international legal and regulatory experts, Myanmar continues to evaluate, draft, and implement additional laws aimed at the country’s long-term economic reform goals, and so far, the results have been very good.

According to the World Bank, foreign direct investment is at record levels in Myanmar, growing from a paltry USD 330 million in the 2009–2010 fiscal year prior to implementation of the country’s economic reforms, then jumping to USD 1.9 billion in 2011–2012 and USD 2.7 billion in 2012–2013, to what is estimated to exceed USD 5 billion in the current period of 2013–2014.

This interest is based, in large part, on passage and implementation of Myanmar’s foreign investment laws and subsequent ministerial notifications. A primary facilitator of such foreign direct investment has unquestionably been the Foreign Investment Law of 2012.

Foreign Investment Law 2012

Myanmar’s Foreign Investment Law of 2012 replaced the country’s Foreign Investment Law of 1988, providing a vehicle through which foreign investors can obtain economic incentives from the Myanmar Government in return for foreign capital infusion. While companies engaged in certain designated activities—such as manufacturing, oil and gas extraction, and major infrastructure deals—are required to register under the Foreign Investment Law, for the vast majority of wholesale and retail trade investors, registration is optional.

While companies registered under the Foreign Investment Law will be subject to the same principles of company law as unregistered companies (and, in general, subject to the same environmental, labor, and other such regulations), registered companies have the advantage of a number of important benefits, including:

  • basic “guarantees” against nationalization and arbitrary state action and that invested foreign capital may be remitted in the same currency upon expiry of the term of the investment contract;
  • provisions for the repatriation of profits and invested funds on an ongoing basis, subject to payment of taxes and creditors;
  • long-term leases for permitted foreign or joint venture companies with terms of up to 50 years, which are extendable twice for further 10-year periods (i.e., to a maximum of 70 years); and
  • tax exemption for a period of at least five consecutive years, commercial tax relief, and customs and other tax relief.

In addition, interpretations by the Myanmar Investment Commission (MIC) and the ministries relevant to Foreign Investment Law applications are guided by subsequent issuances of defining MIC notifications. These notifications are some of the first documents that foreign investors and counsel can seek guidance from in order to determine whether the investment model is likely to obtain regulatory approvals.

The first set of defining regulations were announced in January 2013 with MIC Notification No. 1/2013, which set out categories of prohibited or otherwise restricted business activities for foreign investors. Changes to the regulations were most recently announced in August 2014 with MIC Notification Nos. 49, 50, and 51/2014. Specifically, Notification No. 49/2014 prescribes business activities which are:

  1. prohibited;
  2. allowed only in the form of a joint venture with a local partner;
  3. allowed only in the form of a joint venture with a local partner, subject to the relevant ministry’s approval; or
  4. permitted, subject to another condition. 

Overall, Notification No. 49/2014—the August 2014 Notification—which supersedes the January 2013 Notification, represents a step toward further liberalization of the Myanmar foreign investment regime. While some activities under the January 2013 Notification are now subject to tighter foreign investment restrictions, on the whole, the number of businesses that can be 100 percent foreign owned has increased. It is particularly notable that both wholesale and retail trading activities are omitted from the August 2014 Notification. Since this notification states clearly that activities not “expressly” prescribed in the notification may be undertaken by a 100 percent foreign-owned company, the formerly-restricted trade sector is now ostensibly open for foreign investment. 

This represents a potentially significant opening for foreign investors in a broad variety of trade sectors.  However, it remains unclear exactly how this will be interpreted over time by the MIC, which has broad discretionary authority for the approvals of all applications—a discretionary authority which has been criticized for encouraging inconsistency in the foreign investment review process. Initial indications are that each case will continue to be reviewed on its own merits by the relevant ministries and the MIC, even where a notification has not expressly restricted the activity. In fact, our experience suggests that internal policies at the relevant ministries and at the MIC will continue to be a factor in the review of foreign trade applications under the Foreign Investment Law and related investment laws, such as the recently enacted Special Economic Zones Law and the Myanmar Companies Act.

An Issue of Concern: Regulatory Interpretation

One of the ongoing issues of concern for many foreign investors is the fact that some uncertainty about regulatory interpretation remains. The laws and regulations are new and there is little historical guidance offered to many of the ministerial and governmental officers considering foreign investment applications. While internal guidelines do exist at various levels of review for the relevant government officers, there may exist inconsistencies in the interpretation and application of discretionary authority.  This is an issue that we believe will improve through time as officers develop expertise in dealing with a variety of foreign investment applications.

Qualifying Applications

The Foreign Investment Law and its subsequent implementing notifications provide guidance for qualifying applications, such as those requiring approvals of long-term land leases or those involving large capital investments. Smaller investments, such as those in the service sector, are not covered by the notifications, although it is possible that the reviewing ministries and the Directorate of Investment and Company Administration may nonetheless look to the notifications for guidance. Since the notifications were developed based on input from various governmental ministries, it is fair to assume that they represent insight into some of their policies. This is valuable for investors seeking to anticipate how investment applications may be reviewed and interpreted.

Opposition to Reform

To date, Thein Sein’s economic liberalization policies have been largely embraced domestically, but as certain business sectors are opened for foreign direct investment, some resistance has been met, complicating efforts to liberalize certain markets. It is not a surprise, however, that some local businesses are opposed to Myanmar’s liberalization plans, particularly those in the trade and import/export sector—a sector valued in excess of USD 12.4 billion as recently as 2012. Many local business leaders have voiced their concern that they will be unable to compete with international companies which have better access to capital, technology, and skilled labor. Some even fear certain trade sectors could ultimately be monopolized by international investors.

The historical facts, however, prove otherwise. While market entry by international investors has reduced market share and, in some cases, eliminated local businesses, history suggests that the benefits to an emerging economy from foreign direct investment outweigh the negatives. Access to foreign capital and technology, in turn, assists in the development of domestic industry and encourages a skilled and competitive workforce. It is argued convincingly that countries such as South Korea, Japan, Taiwan, and Singapore are all examples of how such a model brings with it long-term benefits to a developing economy.

The Future of Myanmar

Myanmar, through the promotion of controlled foreign investment, seeks, at least in principle, to follow such a model. In fact, the Ministry of Commerce continues to consult with the World Trade Organization and other leading global institutions to determine how to best bring Myanmar’s economy and investment policy slowly in line with international practice. While imperfect, the Foreign Investment Law, its subsequent notifications, and the actions of Myanmar’s civilian government to encourage foreign trade all point down the path of long-term sustainable development. While many political and cultural challenges remain, we have reason to believe that Myanmar will maintain its commitment to economic trade reform.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

January 26, 2026
Tilleke & Gibbins has contributed an updated Cambodia chapter to Foreign Investment Review 2026, a global guide to the legal and regulatory environment for foreign investment in 25 jurisdictions around the world. Published and distributed by Lexology Panoramic, the guide is focused on law and policy regarding foreign investment oversight, regulatory frameworks, procedural requirements, and other notable concerns for foreign investors. The updated Cambodia chapter was prepared by Jay Cohen, partner and director of Tilleke & Gibbins’ Phnom Penh office, and Nitikar Nith, associate. The chapter focuses most closely on the law and policy section, which explains the government’s policies and practices regarding foreign direct investment, the main investment laws and their scope, and the relevant authorities responsible for regulating mergers, acquisitions, and other business transactions. The chapter also brings up key recent developments, such as the prospect of Cambodia establishing a competition regulator. A PDF of the Cambodia chapter can be downloaded through the button below. Tilleke & Gibbins also provided the Laos, Myanmar, and Vietnam chapters to Foreign Investment Review 2026. Readers can also gain 30 days of complementary access to the full Foreign Investment Review 2026 guide and the rest of Lexology Panoramic’s varied offerings through this link.
January 26, 2026
Myanmar’s Private Security Services Law, enacted on February 18, 2025, together with its implementing Directive on Applications for a Private Security Services License or Permit issued on June 18, 2025, establishes the country’s first comprehensive regulatory framework for both commercial private security service providers and companies that employ in-house security personnel. The framework applies to both Myanmar and foreign entities. For foreign investors and multinational operators, the new regime introduces strict licensing requirements, local content rules, and various approvals that must be carefully considered as part of business planning and compliance processes. Regulatory Authority and Structure The governing authority under the Private Security Services Law is the Private Security Services Central Supervisory Committee, formed with the minister of the Ministry of Home Affairs (MOHA) as chairperson, the chief of the Myanmar Police Force as vice-chairperson, and members from other high-ranking officials from relevant ministries, such as Transport and Communications, Defense, Planning and Finance, Investment and Foreign Economic Relations, Legal Affairs, Immigration and Population, Labor, and Commerce. This Central Committee is the highest regulatory authority and has the power to adopt policies, approve or reject applications for licenses and permits, and decide appeals against administrative actions taken by Supervisory Committees, which operate under the Central Committee at the state and regional level. They are responsible for processing applications, verifying compliance with statutory requirements, submitting applications to the Central Committee with remarks, and issuing licenses and permits once approved. Supervisory Committees also monitor compliance by license or permit holders and impose administrative penalties for noncompliance, while the Central Committee exercises final decision-making authority. License Requirements for Security Service Providers To apply for a private security services license, companies must be registered under the Myanmar Companies Law. Foreign companies may also operate a private security services business in Myanmar, subject to compliance
January 21, 2026
Spurred by global geopolitics and Canada’s Indo-Pacific Strategy, which aims to forge deeper ties with ASEAN, Canadian companies have been showing growing interest in Thailand and Southeast Asia in recent years. To understand the opportunities offered by the region, we sat down with Andrew Stoutley, a Toronto native and the chief operating officer of Tilleke & Gibbins, a leading Southeast Asian regional law firm with over 130 years of history in Thailand. Q: Why are Canadian companies looking at Thailand and Southeast Asia right now? A: Two reasons stand out. First, diversification has moved up the agenda. Many Canadian companies want options outside North America due to tariff volatility and policy uncertainty in the United States, as well as questions around the next Canada–United States–Mexico Agreement mandatory joint review. At the same time, the shift of global production from China to Southeast Asia is accelerating, driven by rising costs, geopolitics, and the need to avoid overreliance on a single market. As a result, Canadian companies are looking for a second production base or a regional hub, and Thailand and its neighbors are natural choices given their manufacturing depth, location, and established supply chains. Second, Canada’s own efforts in the region are gaining traction. The Indo-Pacific Strategy has led to more on-the-ground support, including larger trade missions, upgraded diplomatic posts, and new financing options. Export Development Canada (EDC) now has a presence in Bangkok, giving Canadian companies a direct line to financing and insurance in Thailand. There’s also steady progress on trade frameworks like the recently signed Canada–Indonesia Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (which will come into effect pending domestic procedures), ongoing negotiations of a Canada–ASEAN FTA, and the exciting announcement about the launch of negotiations of a Canada–Thailand FTA. Together, these developments have the potential to make it much easier
January 20, 2026
Thailand’s Board of Investment (BOI) has imposed new restrictions on foreign-majority shareholding and land ownership for companies in certain promoted activities. The changes took effect on September 1, 2025, but were not published in the Government Gazette until December 30, 2025, under Notification of the Board of Investment No. Sor. 7/2568 on the Amendment to List of Activities Eligible for Investment Promotion under Notification of the Board of Investment No. 9/2565, dated July 22, 2025. Foreign Land Ownership Restrictions Generally, foreign land ownership is one of the privileges granted to BOI-promoted companies, allowing them to own land to engage in the promoted activities. However, with these new restrictions, the BOI will no longer grant land-ownership privileges to foreign-majority-owned companies that conduct business activities in the following categories: Rolling, drawing, casting, or forging of nonferrous metals (category 5.4.9) Manufacturing of ferrous metal products or ferrous metal parts (category 5.4.11.2) Manufacturing of nonferrous metal products and/or nonferrous metal parts for industrial use (category 5.4.11.4) Manufacturing of other metal products, including other metal parts for industrial use (category 5.4.11.5) Manufacture of chemical products for industry (category 6.2) Manufacture of plastic products for industrial goods and parts (category 6.4.1) These restrictions do not apply to existing BOI-promoted companies that have at least three projects granted promotion under the same juristic person during the past 15 years (2011–2025) with total investment of at least THB 5 billion, excluding the cost of land and working capital. Foreign Shareholding Restrictions For companies to be eligible for BOI promotion in three other categories of business activities, at least 51% of the company’s registered capital must be held by Thai individual shareholders, unless the BOI-promoted activity is located within a special border economic zone as designated by the BOI. These three categories are: Manufacture of bags made of