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

May 7, 2021

New Decrees Help Clarify Vietnam’s 2020 Enterprise and Investment Laws

Subscribe to Updates

On the first day of 2021, Vietnam’s new Law on Enterprises (2020 LOE) and Law on Investment (2020 LOI) took effect, replacing the previous versions of each law passed in 2014. These are the primary laws governing corporate and investment activities in Vietnam, for both domestic and foreign companies, and the new versions introduced some key changes for foreign investors.

To provide further guidance on the new laws, the government issued Decree No. 01/2021/ND-CP on enterprise registration under the 2020 LOE (Decree 1) and Decree No. 31/2021/ND-CP guiding the implementation of the 2020 LOI (Decree 31), which took effect on January 4 and March 26, 2021, respectively. Key highlights of these decrees are summarized below.

Decree 1: Great improvements in administrative procedures for enterprise registration

One enterprise – one ID number. Under Decree 1, an enterprise is granted only one ID number for all necessary governmental filings during the course of its existence. The enterprise code will now not only act as the tax code but also as the account number to participate in the compulsory social insurance system.

No hard copies required for enterprise registration. Under the previous 2014 LOE, procedures for enterprise registration could be conducted online via the National Business Registration Portal (NBRP), a publicly accessible centralized database of registered corporate details of all enterprises in Vietnam. However, this “e-filing” process still retained some burdens in terms of paperwork for both the enterprise management authorities and applicants. The 2020 LOE and Decree 1 have finally lifted the requirement for hard copies following a valid online filing, regardless of whether a certified electronic signature is utilized or not. The applicants only need to physically come to the local authority once, to directly obtain the results, or they can even request delivery. This development shows Vietnam’s legitimate efforts to build up and transform to a true e-government system.

More options for an enterprise’s legal status. In comparison with the preceding laws, Decree 1 provides clearer and more concise wording to report on a target enterprise’s operating status. Particularly, there are now seven options for an enterprise’s legal status as publicly shown in the NBRP: “business suspended,” “not operating at the registered address,” “enterprise registration certificate revoked due to enforcement of tax management,” “undergoing dissolution, acquisition, consolidation or merger,” “undergoing bankruptcy proceedings,” “dissolved, bankrupt or ceased to exist,” and “active/in operation.”

The Ministry of Planning and Investment recently issued Circular No. 01/2021/TT-BKHDT, which took effect on May 1, 2021, promulgating the standard forms to carry out the enterprise registration procedures in line with the 2020 LOE and Decree 1.

Decree 31: Brings clarity to certain key changes under the 2020 LOI

Definition of areas affecting national defense and security. The 2020 LOI newly introduced a regime of investment policies relating to national defense and security. However, in addition to setting out specific areas such as islands, border or coastal areas, the law contains a catch-all provision for “other areas affecting national defense and security.” Due to a lack of clear guidance on how to identity these areas, foreign investors faced difficulties in registering new investment projects or relocating existing projects after the 2020 LOI took effect. These “other areas” are now clearly defined in a closed list under Decree 31, which hopefully can help to resolve the recent issues.

List of business lines subject to market access restrictions for foreign investors. Decree 31 presents a combined list of business lines for which foreign investors are subject to market access restrictions. The list is divided into two sections: the first containing the business lines for which Vietnam has yet to open the market for foreign investment, the second containing those for which foreign investors have to satisfy conditions to enter the market. These conditions typically include restrictions on foreign ownership percentage, form of investment, scope of investment activities, and capacities of the foreign investor and local partners involved in an investment project. Specific conditions for each business line are further governed by and documented in relevant international treaties of which Vietnam is a member, and domestic specialized legal provisions.

Termination of a project as a result of a sham transaction. Following its introduction under the 2020 LOI, Decree 31 further clarifies that a project can be forced to be terminated in part or in whole as a result of a sham transaction in accordance with civil law, pursuant to a court judgment or arbitral award.

To promulgate standard forms for investment procedures in line with the 2020 LOI and Decree 31, the Ministry of Planning and Investment also issued Circular 03/2021/TT-BKHDT on April 9, 2021, which took effect on the same date.

Outlook

All the recent changes under the new legal framework demonstrate the government’s efforts to reduce administrative burden, create a more user-friendly e-government system, attract foreign investors, improve fairness and competitiveness in the market, and gradually ease discrimination between domestic and foreign-invested sectors to observe Vietnam’s commitments under international treaties. However, most of the new provisions are likely to come under close scrutiny, and conflicting interpretations and views can be expected in the immediate future.

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