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 17, 2020

Vietnam Extends Social Distancing, Provides Relief Measures for COVID-19

Subscribe to Updates

On April 15, 2020, Vietnam’s Prime Minister Nguyen Xuan Phuc agreed to a proposal to extend the country’s social distancing measures under Directive 16 for at least one more week in risk-categorized provinces and cities. These measures, including a prohibition on public gatherings of more than two people and a suspension of public transportation services, were originally put in place for the period from April 1 to April 15.

Specifically, according to the official website of the Government:

  • The measures under Directive 16 will extend until at least April 22 or April 30, depending on the situation, for high-risk areas including the cities of Hanoi, Ho Chi Minh City, and Da Nang, and the provinces of Lao Cai, Quang Ninh, Bac Ninh, Ninh Binh, Quang Nam, Binh Thuan, Khanh Hoa, Tay Ninh, and Ha Tinh.
  • A mix of the measures under Directive 16 and the looser social distancing measures issued under the earlier Directive 15 will extend until April 22 for at-risk areas including An Giang, Binh Duong, Binh Phuoc, Can Tho, Dong Nai, Dong Thap, Ha Nam, Hai Phong, Kien Giang, Lang Son Nam Dinh, Nghe An, Soc Trang, Thai Nguyen, and Thua Thien-Hue. For these areas, extensions may be considered on April 22.
  • In other (lower-risk) areas, the measures under Directive 15 (for example, no gatherings of more than 20 people) will continue to remain in effect until further notice.

Depending on the relevant circumstances, a provincial people’s committee will decide on the specific implementation of social distancing measures in its locality.

Relief Measures

The government recently announced some new relief measures to support workers who have lost income as well as companies who have lost business due to COVID-19.

Decree No. 41/2020/ND-CP, issued and taking effect on April 8, 2020, extends the deadline for tax and land rental payment for a number of taxpayers, including companies in many sectors, small and extra-small enterprises, and credit institutions providing supporting services for clients affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. For more details on Decree 41, please click here.

Resolution No. 42/NQ-CP, issued on April 9, 2020, sets out a number of financial relief measures applicable to individuals and companies facing hardship due to the COVID-19 pandemic. This includes payments to workers who have lost their jobs or incomes as a result of the pandemic, and collateral-free, zero-interest loans to companies who are struggling to meet payroll requirements. For more details on Resolution 42, please click here.

For further details on Vietnam’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic, please visit our COVID-19 Resource Center or contact us at [email protected].

Related Professionals

Practices

Corporate/M&A

Dispute Resolution and Litigation

Employment

Real Estate

Tax

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

August 27, 2026
On August 25, 2026, Thailand’s Ministry of Interior issued an urgent circular letter (No. MorTor 0515.2/Wor 19097) to all provincial governors, introducing enhanced enforcement guidelines for the investigation and prosecution of suspected nominee landownership by foreign nationals. The circular letter builds upon a prior circular letter issued on April 19, 2023 (No. MorTor 0515.2/Wor 7665), which first established the framework for provincial-level investigation committees and interagency cooperation on this issue. Under Thailand’s Land Code, foreign nationals are generally prohibited from owning land. To circumvent this restriction, some foreign nationals have historically used Thai nominees, whether individuals or Thai-registered juristic persons, to hold land on their behalf. Various government enforcement measures have been progressively strengthened in recent years. The new circular letter introduces three key measures: Expanded investigation committees. Provincial authorities must add representatives from specialized investigative agencies (such as local police superintendents) to the existing Fact-Finding and Investigation Committees, giving them broader access to shareholding data, tax records, immigration information, financial records, and evidentiary materials. Proactive screening of juristic persons. Provincial Land Offices are now required to actively screen and flag juristic persons (companies, partnerships, etc.) that show risk indicators of acting as nominees for foreign land ownership. The screening results must be referred to the investigation committees, which will determine whether the entity qualifies as a “foreign national” under the Land Code or was set up to circumvent the law. Two-track enforcement actions. Based on the committee’s findings, enforcement may consist of one or both of the following: Land disposal: If a juristic person is classified as a foreign national under the law, the provincial governor sets a deadline for the entity to dispose of the land under the Land Code. Criminal prosecution: If the entity was established specifically to hold land on behalf of a foreign national in circumvention
Read More
August 24, 2026
Myanmar’s Directorate of Investment and Company Administration (DICA) has published the guidelines it uses to assess and approve company names for registration in the country. The guidelines, which were published on May 18, 2026, explain how DICA determines whether a proposed name is identical or too similar to an existing name, and they identify words and expressions that may be prohibited or restricted. Businesses planning to incorporate in Myanmar should expect DICA to scrutinize proposed names more closely than it has in the past. Prohibitions on Company Names The Myanmar Companies Law prohibits company names that are identical or similar to existing company names, and DICA’s internal assessment guidelines explain how this rule applies in practice. Under the guidelines, DICA may reject a proposed company name if the proposed name: Is identical or nearly identical to an existing company name; Differs from an existing company name only in punctuation, capitalization, spelling, or transliteration; Only adds words such as “Group,” “Holding,” “International,” “Myanmar,” or “Family” to an existing company name; Merely rearranges the words in an existing company name; Is pronounced similarly to an existing name; Uses the same brand name as an existing company, even if the company carries out different business activities; or Uses an existing brand name together with an abbreviation of that brand name or a shortened form of the name or business description. DICA may also consider whether a proposed name could give the impression that two companies are related, even if they operate in different business sectors. In addition, DICA may review a company name even after registration. If it later determines that the name does not comply with the Myanmar Companies Law or is otherwise unsuitable, DICA may direct the company to change its name under section 26 of the Myanmar Companies Law.
Read More
August 24, 2026
Significant economic challenges facing Thailand in recent years have placed financial pressure on both individuals and businesses. As a result, many debtors may find themselves unable to meet their repayment obligations, leading to bankruptcy proceedings. When an individual or corporate debtor in Thailand is subject to bankruptcy proceedings, the Thai Bankruptcy Act B.E. 2483 (1940) provides a legal framework for collecting a debtor’s assets and using them to repay creditors. Under the Bankruptcy Act, creditors wishing to recover outstanding debts must file a debt repayment application (DRA), which is the primary mechanism for asserting claims in bankruptcy proceedings. However, the filing of a DRA is subject to specific legal requirements, procedural rules, deadlines, and supporting documentation. Failure to comply with these requirements may adversely affect a creditor’s ability to recover its claim. This article highlights the key considerations that creditors should be aware of when filing a DRA in a bankruptcy case in Thailand. Filing a DRA In a bankruptcy case, after the court issues an absolute receivership order, the debtor loses the authority to manage or dispose of its assets. Control over the debtor’s assets is transferred to the official receiver, a government official responsible for administering the bankruptcy estate in accordance with the Bankruptcy Act. Creditors seeking repayment of their debts must file a DRA with the official receiver within two months of the absolute receivership order being officially published in the Government Gazette. For creditors outside of Thailand, the official receiver may extend the filing period by up to an additional two months. These filing deadlines are strictly enforced. Failure to file within the prescribed period may result in the claim being barred, except in limited circumstances permitted by the Bankruptcy Act. Where a late filing is accepted due to force majeure, the creditor may only
Read More
August 20, 2026
Vietnam’s Law on Bankruptcy and Rehabilitation No. 142/2025/QH15, passed by the National Assembly on December 11, 2025, does something many regional counterparts do not yet attempt: it instructs parties and arbitral tribunals on exactly what happens to an arbitration once a debtor becomes insolvent. Together with the Law on Commercial Arbitration No. 54/2010/QH12, the new law improves upon what used to be an uncertain area of practice, now providing an explicit, mandatory sequence of procedures. Suspension and Termination of Arbitration Proceedings Under article 40(2) of the law, once a Vietnamese court accepts a bankruptcy petition, any arbitration that concerns the debtor’s financial obligations must be temporarily suspended as soon as the tribunal receives the court’s notification. If the court subsequently issues a decision commencing bankruptcy proceedings, article 59(2) takes a further step: the suspended arbitration is terminated outright, and the underlying case file is transferred to the court handling the insolvency for resolution. The two provisions work as a sequence: first suspension, then termination and transfer, rather than as independent triggers. Meanwhile, article 60(4) reinforces this effect by vesting the bankruptcy court with exclusive jurisdiction over all claims against the debtor from the date the petition is accepted. Notably, this mechanism operates automatically, without the need for the insolvency court to issue a separate anti-arbitration order. The tribunal simply suspends or terminates the proceeding by operation of law once notified; however, Vietnamese law currently provides no procedure by which a party can apply to the insolvency court for permission to continue the arbitration despite the statutory effect. Practitioners with a Vietnamese counterparty in arbitration should treat notification of a bankruptcy filing as something to flag to the tribunal immediately since continuing to arbitrate a claim that has become subject to article 40(2) or 59(2) risks producing an award vulnerable
Read More