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

April 13, 2018

New Decree on Multi-Level Marketing in Vietnam

Subscribe to Updates

Multi-level marketing (MLM) activities are allowed under the law in Vietnam. However, in recent years, a few MLM companies in Vietnam have been accused of not being fair to customers, not fulfilling tax obligations, and/or at times trading in low-quality products. A report from the Ministry of Industry and Trade (MOIT) showed that from June 2015 to November 2016, the MOIT inspected and initiated investigations into 65 MLM companies and imposed fines totaling VND 11 billion (approximately USD 485,000) for violations. By the middle of March 2018, the MOIT had revoked the licenses of 17 MLM companies and another 17 MLM companies had voluntarily stopped their operations. Currently, there are 33 MLM companies operating in Vietnam.

With the aim of tightening the existing MLM regulations and giving MLM companies a better legal framework under which to operate, the government issued Decree No. 40/2018/ND-CP on Management of Multi-Level Marketing Activities (Decree 40) on March 12, 2018. The new decree, which will take effect on May 2, 2018, revises and replaces Decree 42/2014/ND-CP dated May 14, 2014 (Decree 42). Some of the highlights of Decree 40 are provided below.

New Registration Requirements

Decree 40 adds a few new requirements to the conditions a company must satisfy to obtain an MLM license: The MLM company must operate an IT system with a server in Vietnam to manage its MLM network; it must have a website with full information on its MLM activities; and it must have a communications system to receive and resolve queries and complaints from MLM participants.

In addition, the MLM company needs to have charter capital of at least VND 10 billion (approximately USD 440,000), and make an escrow deposit equivalent to 5% of its charter capital (but not less than VND 10 billion – an increase from the VND 5 billion required under Decree 42) into a bank account. The escrow serves as security for the MLM participants and funds may be used toward payment of unpaid penalties to Vietnamese authorities, and/or compensation for damages should the MLM company breach any of its obligations to the MLM participants.

Additional Restrictions

As was the case under Decree 42, only goods (not services) are permitted to be traded under the MLM model, and certain types of goods, including pharmaceuticals, medical devices, and various chemicals, are prohibited. Decree 40 also adds digital content products to the list of prohibited goods.

To combat the risks associated with some forms of multi-level marketing, Decree 40, like the previous Decree 42, prohibits MLM companies from performing a wide range of acts, such as requiring deposits or monetary payments from MLM participants. The following acts are newly prohibited under Decree 40:

  • Conducting promotions using an MLM network in which participants in the promotion have more than one position/ID number (in other words, where participants could benefit from having multiple virtual identities).
  • Organizing commercial intermediary activities (for example, engaging a commercial agent or broker) for the purpose of maintaining, expanding, or developing MLM networks.
  • Receiving or accepting documents from MLM participants in which the participants renounce some or all of their rights or release enterprises from their obligations toward participants under provisions of Decree 40.
  • Failing to use the management system registered with the MOIT to manage MLM participants.

Implementation

Within nine months from May 2, 2018 (i.e., by February 2, 2019), companies which were licensed for MLM activities under the previous Decree 42 must satisfy all conditions for doing business under Decree 40 (for example, their IT system must have a server placed in Vietnam, and they must have a system to receive and resolve queries and complaints from MLM participants).

Related Professionals

Practices

Corporate/M&A

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

October 30, 2025
Recent events at a Thai listed company, where a proposal to remove the director was not successful, amid claims that a competitor was attempting to gain control of the company, illustrate how disputes over corporate control can unfold differently at the board level and shareholder level. At the board level, removing directors of a listed company mid-term to gain corporate control is not an easy task under Thai law, as it requires a higher threshold than appointing a new director, which typically only requires a simple majority vote in a listed company. At the shareholder level, Thailand’s tender offer and competition regimes add complexity where different shareholder groups act in concert to remove opposing board representatives or otherwise influence control. In this article, we will explore why the attempted removal of a director may fail, and how the tender offer regime may apply. Key Issues at a Glance Shareholder groups may seek to convene meetings to propose changes to board composition or company authority. Such proposals can be delayed or complicated by regulatory requirements and the need for additional disclosures. Regulatory authorities and minority shareholders may raise concerns when major shareholders coordinate to influence board control, especially if such actions could trigger tender offer or merger control obligations. Companies often respond by seeking further information on shareholder relationships and potential conflicts before proceeding. Why the Director Removal Failed Under Section 76 of the Public Limited Companies Act B.E. 2535 (as amended), the early removal of a director requires two conditions to be satisfied at the same meeting of shareholders: Headcount test: At least 75% of shareholders attending and entitled to vote must vote in favor. If multiple shareholders appoint the same person as proxy, each proxy is counted as a separate head for the purpose of the headcount test,
Read More
October 24, 2025
On October 22, 2025, the Thai government posted a directive not to grant gambling licenses for gambling involving poker nationwide to crack down on illegal gambling activities. The directive was issued by Thailand’s Ministry of Interior to align with government policies to prevent the legalization of all types of gambling businesses, including poker as a sporting activity. This will result in the revocation of poker activities as sport and institute a strict ban on such activities nationwide. Businesses should note the new government’s strict approach toward gambling activities as the legal situation regarding gambling in the country continues to draw close attention.
Read More
October 1, 2025
In September 2025, Thailand’s Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) accused a company listed on the Stock Exchange of Thailand (SET), including its current and former directors, of concealing material information in connection with its filing registration and draft prospectus. This recent enforcement action demonstrates the serious consequences of making false statements or appearing to conceal material information in IPO filings and ongoing disclosures. In addition to being subject to criminal penalties, such actions can impact the eligibility of directors and executives to serve and may cause lasting reputational damage. Key Legal Risks The Securities and Exchange Act B.E. 2535 (1992) (as amended) imposes strict liability for making false statements or concealing material information in IPO registration statements and draft prospectuses. In such cases, investors can claim for damages, and there are also criminal penalties, including imprisonment for up to five years and substantial fines, may apply to the company, its directors, and responsible officers. However, misstatements or omissions in IPO filings do not, by themselves, disqualify directors or executives from holding office, whether arising from an SEC accusation or even a final court judgment. In contrast, for ongoing disclosures after listing, such as financial statements, annual reports, and meeting notices, false or misleading statements or concealment of material information can result in not only criminal liability but also immediate disqualification of directors and executives. If the SEC accuses a listed company or its directors or executives of such misstatements or omissions, those directors or executives are immediately disqualified from their positions, even before a final court judgment. Director and Executive Qualifications Directors and executives must meet the SEC’s specified standards of trustworthiness, as set out in the relevant rules. The SEC clearly defines characteristics that are considered to demonstrate a lack of trustworthiness. For ongoing disclosures, being involved in
Read More
September 30, 2025
Vietnam’s higher education system is at a pivotal stage of reform, with the government taking decisive steps to strengthen its policy and regulatory framework. In response to obstacles encountered during the implementation of the Law on Higher Education, issued in 2012 and amended in 2018, the third draft of the amended Law on Higher Education (Draft Law) is scheduled for submission to the National Assembly in October 2025. The Draft Law reflects the state’s commitment to aligning the education sector with international standards while addressing persistent structural challenges. The Draft Law emphasizes clarifying institutional mandates, enhancing accountability, and modernizing governance models to enable higher education institutions to operate with greater autonomy and efficiency. Against this backdrop, we outline below several notable provisions of the third draft and their potential implications for higher education institutions (HEIs) in Vietnam. Applicable Entities In addition to HEIs as defined and covered under existing legislation, the Draft Law extends its scope of applicable entities. The current Law on Higher Education does not regulate training institutions under state agencies, the armed forces, or political and social organizations, nor does it provide specific provisions for institutions offering only postgraduate education. To address this, the Draft Law introduces the term “institutions with higher education activities,” expanding its scope to include: (a) academies and research institutes established by the prime minister, mandated to provide doctoral-level training; (b) educational institutions affiliated with state agencies, political organizations, socio-political organizations, and the people’s armed forces, authorized to offer higher education programs in their specialized fields; and (c) institutions established pursuant to international treaties or by decision of the prime minister, with authorization to deliver certain levels of higher education. The inclusion of “institutions with higher education activities” represents a significant development both legally and institutionally. In an increasingly diversified higher education
Read More