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

July 25, 2025

Navigating Key Updates of Vietnam’s Amended Law on Enterprises

Subscribe to Updates

On June 17, 2025, the National Assembly of Vietnam adopted Law No. 76/2025/QH15 (Amended LOE) amending and supplementing the 2020 Law on Enterprises, which aims to reshape the legal framework to enhance transparency and alignment with international standards. The Amended LOE took effect from July 1, 2025.

Below are key notes on the Amended LOE.

Recognition of Beneficial Owners

The beneficial owner (BO) concept was previously addressed under Vietnam’s anti-money laundering framework. However, the formal recognition of a BO in the Amended LOE marks a pivotal advancement in embedding ownership transparency into corporate governance, in line with the G7 Financial Action Task Force’s standards on anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing.

Under the Amended LOE and Decree No. 168/2025/ND-CP of the government dated June 30, 2025, on enterprise registration (Decree 168), a BO is identified through either equity ownership or control rights.

  • Equity ownership: Individuals holding 25% or more of a company’s charter capital or voting shares, either directly or indirectly, qualify as BOs. Indirect ownership is further defined as ownership of at least 25% of charter capital or voting shares through an intermediary organization.
  • Control rights: Individuals with the authority to make or influence major decisions are considered BOs. The actual control over a company includes the power (i) to appoint or remove most or all members of the board of directors or the members’ council or the general director of a company; (ii) to amend the charter; or (iii) to decide other key matters specified in the company’s charter. Notably, individuals representing state ownership in state-owned enterprises are excluded from the scope of the BO concept.

Companies are responsible for collecting, updating, and retaining information about BOs and cooperating with authorities when requested to identify BOs, among other obligations. Additionally, any companies registered before July 1, 2025, must submit a list of their BOs when updating or registering changes to their enterprise registration contents, unless they opt to provide an earlier notification.

Companies and their founders are required to declare BO information when (i) individuals or entities hold 25% or more of the voting shares in a joint-stock company, (ii) individuals own 25% or more capital contribution, or (iii) individuals have control rights. Decree 168’s guidance on “control rights” creates uncertainty, as determining who qualifies as a BO depends heavily on each company’s charter and specific decision-making powers. Additionally, control exercised indirectly makes it difficult to trace the actual individual behind corporate decisions. Therefore, the BO declaration will need further guidance from the competent authorities.

Re-definition of Market Price

The Amended LOE amended the definition of “market price” to provide clearer guidelines for listed shares, specifying a new method based on the average trading price over 30 days before valuation. The existing methods of determination of the market price under the 2020 Law on Enterprises remain unchanged.

These updates aim to standardize the valuation of shares and capital contributions and strengthen the credibility of registered capital figures.

Debt-to-Equity Cap for Private Bond Placement

To address regulatory gaps and heightened concerns over investor protection and financial stability in the bond market, the Amended LOE adds a new financial condition for private placements of bonds by non-publicly listed companies. The bond issuers’ total liabilities (including the bonds to be issued) must not exceed five times the equity as reflected in the latest audited financial statements. Importantly, this leverage cap applies exclusively to corporate bonds and does not extend to other privately issued debt instruments (such as debentures or promissory notes).

This new requirement does not apply to (i) state-owned enterprises, entities issuing bonds to fund real estate projects, credit institutions, insurers, reinsurers, insurance brokers, securities firms, and fund managers; and (ii) bond issuances disclosed to the stock exchange before July 1, 2025.

These reforms reflect a broader effort of lawmakers to restore investors’ trust, promote responsible capital raising, and safeguard the integrity of Vietnam’s financial markets.

Redemption of Redeemable Preference Shares

Previously, given the lack of specific legal procedures, licensing authorities were reluctant to approve capital reduction in cases where joint stock companies redeem redeemable preference shares (RPS). To solve this practical obstacle, the Amended LOE explicitly specifies the procedures for joint stock companies to decrease their charter capital after redeeming the RPS and returning capital to RPS holders

This amendment aims to streamline the licensing procedures in case of RPS redemption and promote operational flexibility. This is likely beneficial for investors seeking liquidity or exit rights tied to specific share classes, as it reinforces the viability of redeemable instruments within Vietnam’s corporate framework.

False Declaration of Charter Capital

False declaration of charter capital is prohibited, but is not explicitly defined, under the 2020 Law on Enterprises, resulting in inconsistent interpretations and enforcement by the competent authorities in practice. The Amended LOE provides a clear definition of “false declaration of charter capital” to clarify as either (i) failure to fully contribute the registered charter capital by the statutory deadline without registering a decrease in the declared amount; or (ii) intentional mis-valuation of assets contributed as capital in kind.

The reform aims to provide a clear legal basis to identify and penalize prohibited actions (such as false declaration of charter capital), prevent the formation of shell companies, and reduce risks of fraud and money laundering.

Outlook

The Amended LOE enhances transparency and regulatory oversight, aiming to boost foreign investor confidence, streamline compliance for businesses, and strengthen enforcement capabilities for regulators.

Related Professionals

Practices

Banking and Finance

Corporate/M&A

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

February 19, 2026
Thailand’s Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has issued a new regulation on material transactions (MTs) to govern asset acquisitions and disposals by listed companies and their subsidiaries. The new notification on MT criteria (No. TorJor. 45/2568) from the Capital Market Supervisory Board replaces the long-standing notification (No. TorJor. 20/2551) that has governed such matters. The SEC has also introduced parallel amendments to the country’s related-party transaction rules. The new regulation will take effect on July 1, 2026. Any MT matters approved by a company’s board of directors for shareholders’ approval before that date remain subject to Notification No. TorJor. 20/2551. Following that date, the new MT rules will introduce several significant changes that market participants should carefully consider. Expanded Scope of Material Transactions One of the key changes under the new regulation is the expansion of the definition of MTs, which now expressly covers financial assistance and certain lease and business lease arrangements that are not in the ordinary course of business of the listed company or its subsidiaries. For financial assistance, this includes lending, granting credit, providing guarantees, or entering into any arrangement that increases the company’s financial obligations, particularly where the recipient is facing liquidity issues or unable to repay debts. Other forms of financial support also fall within scope. However, whether the provision of collateral for others qualifies as an MT remains somewhat unclear, since no disposal of assets occurs for the provider of collateral. This issue remains to be carefully considered. For lease-related transactions, the MT rules now specifically include the lease or hire-purchase of all or part of a business or assets operated by or belonging to a listed company or its subsidiaries. New Exemptions The new regulation introduces clearer exemptions for transactions between a listed company and its subsidiaries or among subsidiaries, which
Read More
February 10, 2026
Data center and cloud investments are forming a major focus of private-sector investment in Thailand, with tech giants like Amazon, Google, Microsoft, and TikTok, as well as numerous telecom and data center companies, committing significant outlays to data center and cloud development. The country’s Board of Investment (BOI) approved projects worth THB 1.87 trillion in 2025, and THB 746 billion of this was from planned data center investments—by far the largest amount from any single industry. Thailand’s swift rise as a regional data center hub is fueled by surging demand for cloud, AI, and digital services, as well as large-scale investments from global tech firms. The country’s strategic location, competitive power costs, robust fiber infrastructure, expanding IT talent, and supportive government policies—including BOI incentives and streamlined approvals—have made it an attractive destination for scalable and sustainable digital infrastructure investments. The BOI’s proactive approach in updating promoted categories and providing both tax and non-tax incentives further ensures Thailand’s continued growth in this sector. 2025 BOI Changes for Data Centers In the middle of 2025, the BOI responded to the remarkable trend by updating investment‑promotion categories across various sectors (e.g., machinery and electrical equipment, public utilities, digital and innovative industries) to accommodate growing investment in data‑center projects. Before the change, which was detailed in a notification that has applied to investment promotion applications submitted from July 1, 2025, onward, data‑center projects under BOI promotion were granted a single A1 incentive (an eight‑year corporate income‑tax exemption) and subject to one uniform set of conditions. The July 2025 notification restructured promotion for data centers into two categories based on power‑usage efficiency: high‑efficiency data centers and other data centers. Under these rules, qualified high‑efficiency data centers are eligible for an eight‑year corporate income tax (CIT) exemption, while for other data centers this exemption is
Read More
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