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

March 2, 2021

Vietnam Issues Guidance on Business Registration under New Law on Enterprises

Informed Counsel

When Vietnam’s new Law on Enterprises of 2020 (2020 LOE) came into effect on January 1, 2021, the implementing regulations for corporate matters guiding the now-repealed Law on Enterprises of 2014 ceased their effectiveness, per principles under the laws on promulgation of legislative documents. As a result, governmental bodies and enterprises have been awaiting the issuance of new implementing regulations that will apply to the 2020 LOE.

The first major guidance arrived on January 4, 2021, when the government issued Decree No. 01/2021/ND-CP on enterprise registration (Decree 01), which replaces Decree No. 78/2015/ND-CP dated September 14, 2015 (Decree 78) on the same matter. This article discusses some notable points of Decree 01 in comparison to Decree 78.

Operating Status of Enterprises

Decree 01 sets out seven possible legal statuses under which an established enterprise may be classified in its profile on the National Business Registration Portal (NBRP), which is available for public access:

  1. Active;
  2. Business temporarily suspended;
  3. No longer in business at the registered address;
  4. Enterprise registration certificate revoked due to decision issued by tax authority;
  5. In dissolution process, divided, merged, or acquired;
  6. In bankruptcy process; and
  7. Dissolved, bankrupt, or ceased to exist.

By default, the status of a company is active. The status will be updated to one of the other options in the NBRP when the respective licensing procedures are completed at the provincial Department of Planning and Investment (e.g., for temporary suspension of business or initiation of dissolution process), or according to the decision of the relevant authorities (e.g., for bankruptcy).

The previous Decree 78 did not provide detail on the available status options. The common statuses observed on the NBRP before the enactment of Decree 01 were “active,” “business temporarily suspended,” “locked” (akin to the current “in dissolution process”), and “dissolved.”

This change will make it easier for a third party to identify the operating status of a target company for a potential acquisition, legal due diligence, and so forth.

Signing of Application Documents by Legal Representative

For limited liability companies and joint stock companies with multiple legal representatives, documents for licensing purposes can be signed by any of the legal representatives, provided they undertake that they are doing so in accordance with their assigned duties as set out under Article 12.2 of the 2020 LOE, which requires that if there are multiple legal representatives, the charter of the company must specify the rights and obligations of each legal representative. If there is no such specification, each and every legal representative is considered a duly authorized person of the company vis-à-vis a third party.

The assurance that the legal representative signing the application documents is doing so in accordance with these provisions may aim to eliminate any responsibility of the licensing authorities who receive such documents if any wrongdoing of the signatory is uncovered after the application is approved.

Further, affixing the corporate seal is now optional for the prescribed forms, decisions, and meeting minutes that are required to be submitted in the application dossier. Other supporting documents may still need to be stamped if required under relevant laws.

For documents for non-licensing purposes such as contracts, strictly viewed, the signatory (for example, a legal representative) can only sign on those which are duly conferred to him or her under the charter of the company or otherwise. However, it is worth noting that the Civil Code of 2015, to a large extent, introduced the doctrine of apparent authority to recognize the validity of contracts which have been entered into by unauthorized persons.

Temporary Suspension of Business

In 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic forced many companies in Vietnam to temporarily suspend operations due to government restrictions (e.g., restaurants and theaters), lack of customers (e.g., travel companies and hotels), or other reasons, calling new attention to the regulations on business suspension.

Under previous regulations, an enterprise could apply for multiple periods of temporary suspension of up to one year each. However, the maximum consecutive duration of temporary suspension for a business, including any extensions, could not exceed two years.

This limit appears to have been lifted, as the maximum two-year period is no longer provided in Decree 01. In other words, an applicant can apply any number of times, each time with a one-year limit, for a temporary suspension of business.

Once an enterprise has notified the business registration office of its temporary suspension of business, such status will be updated on the NBRP for the company and all of its dependent units (branches, representative offices, business locations). It is worth noting, however, that even if an enterprise has properly suspended its business, it is still required to honor its due obligations (financial and other) under the relevant contracts or laws.

Business Registration Offices

Previously, in Decree 78, Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh City were given autonomy to open up to two additional business registration offices, apart from the customary office. Decree 01 abolishes this provision without giving a reason. Though the consequences of this are uncertain, it might lead to some backlog in the business registration offices of these major cities in the short term.

Outlook

New laws and regulations on companies and investment in Vietnam are issued at a fairly rapid pace, replacing the old versions. This causes certain concerns among businesses and lawyers about the lack of stability of legislation and well as the time and resources to follow the new legislation. However, one of the key notable bright spots of the change is the new legislation normally brings more flexibility and options for businesses. The foregoing changes in Decree 01 are a clear example.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

January 26, 2026
Tilleke & Gibbins has contributed an updated Cambodia chapter to Foreign Investment Review 2026, a global guide to the legal and regulatory environment for foreign investment in 25 jurisdictions around the world. Published and distributed by Lexology Panoramic, the guide is focused on law and policy regarding foreign investment oversight, regulatory frameworks, procedural requirements, and other notable concerns for foreign investors. The updated Cambodia chapter was prepared by Jay Cohen, partner and director of Tilleke & Gibbins’ Phnom Penh office, and Nitikar Nith, associate. The chapter focuses most closely on the law and policy section, which explains the government’s policies and practices regarding foreign direct investment, the main investment laws and their scope, and the relevant authorities responsible for regulating mergers, acquisitions, and other business transactions. The chapter also brings up key recent developments, such as the prospect of Cambodia establishing a competition regulator. A PDF of the Cambodia chapter can be downloaded through the button below. Tilleke & Gibbins also provided the Laos, Myanmar, and Vietnam chapters to Foreign Investment Review 2026. Readers can also gain 30 days of complementary access to the full Foreign Investment Review 2026 guide and the rest of Lexology Panoramic’s varied offerings through this link.
January 26, 2026
Myanmar’s Private Security Services Law, enacted on February 18, 2025, together with its implementing Directive on Applications for a Private Security Services License or Permit issued on June 18, 2025, establishes the country’s first comprehensive regulatory framework for both commercial private security service providers and companies that employ in-house security personnel. The framework applies to both Myanmar and foreign entities. For foreign investors and multinational operators, the new regime introduces strict licensing requirements, local content rules, and various approvals that must be carefully considered as part of business planning and compliance processes. Regulatory Authority and Structure The governing authority under the Private Security Services Law is the Private Security Services Central Supervisory Committee, formed with the minister of the Ministry of Home Affairs (MOHA) as chairperson, the chief of the Myanmar Police Force as vice-chairperson, and members from other high-ranking officials from relevant ministries, such as Transport and Communications, Defense, Planning and Finance, Investment and Foreign Economic Relations, Legal Affairs, Immigration and Population, Labor, and Commerce. This Central Committee is the highest regulatory authority and has the power to adopt policies, approve or reject applications for licenses and permits, and decide appeals against administrative actions taken by Supervisory Committees, which operate under the Central Committee at the state and regional level. They are responsible for processing applications, verifying compliance with statutory requirements, submitting applications to the Central Committee with remarks, and issuing licenses and permits once approved. Supervisory Committees also monitor compliance by license or permit holders and impose administrative penalties for noncompliance, while the Central Committee exercises final decision-making authority. License Requirements for Security Service Providers To apply for a private security services license, companies must be registered under the Myanmar Companies Law. Foreign companies may also operate a private security services business in Myanmar, subject to compliance
January 21, 2026
Spurred by global geopolitics and Canada’s Indo-Pacific Strategy, which aims to forge deeper ties with ASEAN, Canadian companies have been showing growing interest in Thailand and Southeast Asia in recent years. To understand the opportunities offered by the region, we sat down with Andrew Stoutley, a Toronto native and the chief operating officer of Tilleke & Gibbins, a leading Southeast Asian regional law firm with over 130 years of history in Thailand. Q: Why are Canadian companies looking at Thailand and Southeast Asia right now? A: Two reasons stand out. First, diversification has moved up the agenda. Many Canadian companies want options outside North America due to tariff volatility and policy uncertainty in the United States, as well as questions around the next Canada–United States–Mexico Agreement mandatory joint review. At the same time, the shift of global production from China to Southeast Asia is accelerating, driven by rising costs, geopolitics, and the need to avoid overreliance on a single market. As a result, Canadian companies are looking for a second production base or a regional hub, and Thailand and its neighbors are natural choices given their manufacturing depth, location, and established supply chains. Second, Canada’s own efforts in the region are gaining traction. The Indo-Pacific Strategy has led to more on-the-ground support, including larger trade missions, upgraded diplomatic posts, and new financing options. Export Development Canada (EDC) now has a presence in Bangkok, giving Canadian companies a direct line to financing and insurance in Thailand. There’s also steady progress on trade frameworks like the recently signed Canada–Indonesia Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (which will come into effect pending domestic procedures), ongoing negotiations of a Canada–ASEAN FTA, and the exciting announcement about the launch of negotiations of a Canada–Thailand FTA. Together, these developments have the potential to make it much easier
January 20, 2026
Thailand’s Board of Investment (BOI) has imposed new restrictions on foreign-majority shareholding and land ownership for companies in certain promoted activities. The changes took effect on September 1, 2025, but were not published in the Government Gazette until December 30, 2025, under Notification of the Board of Investment No. Sor. 7/2568 on the Amendment to List of Activities Eligible for Investment Promotion under Notification of the Board of Investment No. 9/2565, dated July 22, 2025. Foreign Land Ownership Restrictions Generally, foreign land ownership is one of the privileges granted to BOI-promoted companies, allowing them to own land to engage in the promoted activities. However, with these new restrictions, the BOI will no longer grant land-ownership privileges to foreign-majority-owned companies that conduct business activities in the following categories: Rolling, drawing, casting, or forging of nonferrous metals (category 5.4.9) Manufacturing of ferrous metal products or ferrous metal parts (category 5.4.11.2) Manufacturing of nonferrous metal products and/or nonferrous metal parts for industrial use (category 5.4.11.4) Manufacturing of other metal products, including other metal parts for industrial use (category 5.4.11.5) Manufacture of chemical products for industry (category 6.2) Manufacture of plastic products for industrial goods and parts (category 6.4.1) These restrictions do not apply to existing BOI-promoted companies that have at least three projects granted promotion under the same juristic person during the past 15 years (2011–2025) with total investment of at least THB 5 billion, excluding the cost of land and working capital. Foreign Shareholding Restrictions For companies to be eligible for BOI promotion in three other categories of business activities, at least 51% of the company’s registered capital must be held by Thai individual shareholders, unless the BOI-promoted activity is located within a special border economic zone as designated by the BOI. These three categories are: Manufacture of bags made of