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 22, 2022

Overview of Franchising in Indonesia

Rules for franchising in Indonesia were first published in 1997 through a government regulation and a ministerial decree, which was subsequently amended several times. The franchising regulations currently in effect are Government Regulation No. 42 of 2007 concerning Franchises and Regulation issued by the Minister of Trade No. 71 of 2019 concerning the Implementation of Franchising (MOT No. 71 of 2019).

Franchises in Indonesia must meet certain criteria that distinguish them from other types of businesses, and franchising must be based on a franchise agreement governed by Indonesian law. Prior to entering into a franchise agreement, a franchisor must provide a prospectus (disclosure document) to the prospective franchisee at least two weeks before the execution of the franchise agreement so that the prospective franchisee has sufficient time to review the reputation and goodwill of the franchisor through the prospectus. The prospectus must contain various details about the franchise business, its management, its operations, and other relevant aspects.

Both local and foreign franchisors must obtain a franchise registration certificate—referred to as an STPW—from the Ministry of Trade before offering their franchises to prospective franchisees. The franchisee is also required to obtain an STPW. The STPW for the franchisor is the proof of prospectus registration, while the STPW for the franchisee is the proof of registration of the franchise agreement. Franchisors and franchisees who have STPWs are required to submit reports on franchise business activities to the Ministry of Trade’s director of business development and distribution by the end of June each year.

Up to three written warnings will be served on a franchisor or franchisee who does not comply with the registration requirements. A fine of up to IDR 100 million (approx. USD 6,400) will be imposed if the franchisor or franchisee fails to respond to the warnings.

MOT No. 71 of 2019 on franchising was a step forward for the industry, as it streamlined some steps and relaxed some of the more onerous requirements. The table below indicates how some typical franchising concerns in Indonesia are handled under the current regulations.

Issue Rules under MOT No. 71 of 2019
Validity of STPW As long as the franchise agreement is valid
Direct control between franchisor and franchisee No longer regulated
Requirement to use domestic materials Previous requirement to use 80% domestic materials removed by the 2019 ministerial regulation, which states only that use of domestic materials must be prioritized
Intellectual property (IP) IP registration can be pending when the STPW is applied for, but the STPW will be considered invalid if the IP is eventually rejected
Clean break No longer regulated

 

Franchising in Relation to Competition and Antitrust Law

Indonesia’s Law No. 5 of 1999 concerning the Prohibition of Monopolistic Practices and Unfair Business Competition prohibits:

  • restrictive agreements and practices, including oligopoly, monopoly, entering into cartels, price discrimination, and resale price maintenance;
  • abuse of dominance;
  • mergers, amalgamations, or acquisitions of companies that can result in monopolistic practices or unfair business competition; and
  • conglomerate power through interlocking directorates or majority equity stakes in several companies accounting for a market share exceeding 50%.

The law specifically mentions franchising, exempting franchise agreements from its list of prohibited agreements. This is intended to benefit holders of IP rights; in general, if the contents of the agreement are intended to protect IP rights or maintain the characteristics of the IP rights used in the franchise, the agreement can be exempted from Law No. 5 of 1999.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

October 26, 2021
Parallel imports—branded goods imported into a domestic market and sold there without the consent of the intellectual property (IP) owner—pose a unique challenge for IP owners. In contrast to counterfeit goods, parallel imported goods are manufactured by or under the license of the IP owner and formulated or packaged for a particular jurisdiction and then imported into a different jurisdiction without the authorization of the IP owner. Intellectual property laws and perspectives on parallel import vary throughout Southeast Asia. The distinct legal landscape in each nation should be carefully navigated in consultation with legal experts to ensure brand protection to the fullest degree. This guide provides insight into the legal frameworks relating to parallel imports in Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Myanmar, Thailand, and Vietnam. Each section examines the relevant laws and regulations that pertain to parallel imports and explores the remedies available to IP owners in each country. Finally, the guide presents some strategies to combat parallel importation and maximize IP protection in Southeast Asia. The full guide can be downloaded through the button below.   This guide was prepared with the assistance of Tilleke & Gibbins interns Christian Pederson and Keoni Williams.
October 26, 2021
Attorneys from Tilleke & Gibbins in Vietnam have written the Vietnam chapter of the newly released Fashion Law 2021, a guide to law surrounding the business of fashion in jurisdictions around the world. The guide covers 18 key jurisdictions for the global fashion industry, offering insights into local legal frameworks surrounding vital issues such as brand enforcement and protection, e-commerce and marketing, and sustainability considerations. The Vietnam chapter of Fashion Law 2021 provides detailed information on the following topics: Trademarks, designs, copyright, and other intellectual property types such as patents and trade secrets. Strategic local contractual arrangements for manufacturing, distributing, and advertising fashion products. Overview and application of online marketing regulations and consumer protection regulations in Vietnam. The most relevant unfair competition rules for fashion businesses, and local courts’ interpretation and enforcement of the rules. ESG (environmental, social, and governance) concerns and sustainability issues for the fashion industry. Customs monitoring and local import and export guards against counterfeit products. The full Vietnam chapter is available for free on the Global Legal Post website, or it can be downloaded as a PDF through the button below. Tilleke & Gibbins also contributed the Thailand chapter to the guide.
October 26, 2021
Attorneys from Tilleke & Gibbins’ Bangkok office have written the Thailand chapter of the newly released Fashion Law 2021, a guide to law surrounding the business of fashion in jurisdictions around the world. The guide covers 18 key jurisdictions for the global fashion industry, offering insights into local legal frameworks surrounding vital issues such as brand enforcement and protection, e-commerce and marketing, and sustainability considerations. The Thailand chapter of Fashion Law 2021 provides detailed information on the following topics: Trademarks, designs, copyright, and other intellectual property types, as well as the main intellectual property legal tools available to protect fashion products in Thailand. Strategic local contractual arrangements for manufacturing, distributing, and advertising fashion products. Overview and application of online marketing regulations and consumer protection regulations in Thailand. The most relevant unfair competition rules for fashion businesses and local courts’ interpretation and enforcement of the rules. ESG (environmental, social, and governance) concerns and sustainability issues for the fashion industry. Customs monitoring and local import and export guards against counterfeit products. Frequently asked questions and common concerns regarding fashion business operations in Thailand. The full Thailand chapter is available for free on the Global Legal Post website, or it can be downloaded as a PDF through the button below. Tilleke & Gibbins also contributed the Vietnam chapter to the guide.
October 25, 2021
Michael Ramirez, a counsel in Tilleke & Gibbins’ dispute resolution group in Bangkok, has updated the firm’s contribution to the Global Attorney-Client Privilege Guide, published by Lex Mundi. The newly expanded guide provides information on what constitutes attorney-client privilege in over 70 countries around the world. The Thailand section of the guide contains in-depth information on the function and applications of attorney-client privilege in Thailand (or, as explained in the guide, an equivalent concept enshrined in Thai law), including coverage of the following topics: Privilege in corporations Common interest doctrine Litigation funding Crime-fraud exception Work product doctrine/litigation privilege Other privileges including mediation, accountant-client and settlement negotiation The interactive guide features expert contributions by Lex Mundi member firms from jurisdictions worldwide. Readers can browse the contributions, generate country-specific reports, and compare attorney-client privilege in multiple jurisdictions. For more information, please visit the Lex Mundi website.