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

June 9, 2020

Government of Vietnam Issues Resolution to Boost Post-Pandemic Economy

Subscribe to Updates

On May 29, 2020, the government of Vietnam issued Resolution No. 84/NQ-CP, which mandates a number of economic relief and recovery measures in light of the COVID-19 pandemic. These measures include, among others, the reduction of certain government fees and charges and the easing of some regulations on foreign employees, trade, and construction. Some highlights of Resolution 84 are discussed below.

Reduction of Government Fees

To alleviate the hardship faced by companies affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, the government will temporarily reduce or suspend some fees and charges, including the following:

  • Land rent: 15% reduction of the 2020 rent for land plots leased directly from the state, applicable to renters making annual rent payments who were forced to suspend their operations due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
  • Auto industry: 50% reduction of vehicle registration fees until the end of 2020 for cars manufactured or assembled in Vietnam, in order to encourage domestic consumption.
  • Water resources: Exemption from the fee for granting the right to exploit water resources in 2020 for companies exploiting water resources for manufacturing and business activities.
  • SME loans: 2% reduction of interest rates on loans disbursed to eligible SMEs from the Small and Medium Enterprise Development Fund.
  • Tax: Contributions to COVID-19-fighting activities can be deductible expenses when calculating corporate income tax. The government also plans to seek approval for a 30% reduction of corporate income tax for 2020 for small and extra-small enterprises.

Foreign Employees

Foreign experts, company managers, investors, and high-tech workers working in investment and business projects in Vietnam will be allowed to enter Vietnam to maintain the operations of their companies while ensuring compliance with preventative measures against the epidemic. Foreigners entering on this basis are still subject to mandatory quarantine (currently, 14 days) and subsequent monitoring by the local health authority.

Work permits will be renewed for foreign experts, company managers, and technical workers currently working for companies in Vietnam, and new work permits will be issued to foreign experts, company managers, and technical workers who replace those who are unable to enter or will not return to Vietnam.

Manufacturing and Trade

The Ministry of Industry and Trade is tasked with implementing measures to overcome any disruption of the supply of raw materials for manufacturing facilities and businesses; to diversify export markets, facilitate trade promotions, and seek new markets for goods whose delivery has been canceled or delayed due to the pandemic; and to fully utilize the benefits brought about by free trade agreements, especially the EVFTA and CPTPP.

Certificates of origin (C/O) with electronic signatures or electronic seals, or scanned C/Os, will be accepted for submission to the customs authority for customs clearance to reduce difficulties for import/export companies. Furthermore, the HS codes for import and export goods are to be unified with those of other countries, especially the EU.

Personal Protective Equipment

The Ministry of Health is responsible for coordinating with relevant authorities to facilitate production of medical masks, sanitizing products, and other medical supplies to meet the demand for domestic consumption and export; as well as to simplify the evaluation and approval procedures for manufacturing, importing, and exporting personal protection equipment and medical devices.

Construction

The government will propose that the National Assembly allow certain provisions of the amended Law on Construction (currently available for public comments) to be applied as soon as the amended law is passed, including an exemption from construction permits for construction projects that meet certain conditions (e.g., those for which the construction design has been approved), and the transfer of authority to grant construction permits for special-classification projects from the Ministry of Construction to the provincial People’s Committees.

Outlook

In order to implement the measures stated in Resolution 84, the government as well as relevant ministries and local authorities will need to formulate and issue implementing decrees, circulars and official guidance. Thus, it will take some time for all the measures to take effect in practice.

If you have any questions or concerns, please reach out to us at [email protected] for our further assistance.

Related Professionals

Practices

Corporate/M&A

Dispute Resolution and Litigation

Real Estate

Tax

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

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
August 20, 2026
Thai law contains no provision that speaks directly to what happens to an arbitration when one of the parties becomes insolvent. The interaction between arbitration and insolvency is derived instead from the general operation of two separately drafted laws: the Bankruptcy Act B.E. 2483 (1940) and the Arbitration Act B.E. 2545 (2002). Because Thai courts have had few opportunities to interpret how these two statutes apply together, the practical answer to many questions, such as who represents an insolvent party in arbitration, whether an award will be enforced, and what happens to a foreign proceeding, depends on inference from general principles of insolvency, arbitration, and procedural law rather than on settled rules. Liquidation and Restructuring The Bankruptcy Act governs both liquidation, which winds up a debtor’s affairs, and restructuring (rehabilitation), which aims to preserve a business. The consequences for arbitration differ accordingly. In liquidation, the debtor’s assets vest in the official receiver, who alone can conduct or continue any arbitration affecting the estate; the debtor loses the authority to act on its own behalf. In restructuring, the plan preparer or administrator takes over that role, but there is more room for the debtor to remain involved, since the objective of rehabilitation is to keep the business operational. Restructuring carries an automatic stay that takes effect once the Bankruptcy Court accepts the restructuring petition. This stay can halt an arbitration regardless of where it is seated. In contrast, liquidation does not work through a stay; instead, the debtor’s loss of authority over its own assets and disputes is what constrains the arbitration. Neither proceeding provides a party a formal route to apply for permission to continue arbitrating—the Bankruptcy Act contains no such mechanism—though in restructuring cases the Bankruptcy Court may allow proceedings to continue where doing so will not prejudice
Read More
August 20, 2026
As part of its membership in Lex Mundi, Tilleke & Gibbins has released the latest edition of its Guide to Doing Business in Thailand, providing an overview of the legal, regulatory, and commercial considerations for companies establishing or expanding operations in Thailand. The 2026 edition offers practical insight into the country’s business environment, investment framework, and operational requirements. The guide covers a wide range of topics relevant to foreign and domestic investors, including: Investment incentives and promotion schemes Financial facilities and banking regulations Exchange controls and money transfers Import and export regulations Business structures and incorporation options Requirements for establishing a business Operational and compliance considerations Business cessation and insolvency procedures Employment and labor laws Taxation Immigration and visa requirements Prepared by Tilleke & Gibbins lawyers across multiple practice areas, the publication outlines key aspects of doing business in Thailand, including foreign investment restrictions, regulatory compliance obligations, corporate structures, employment requirements, and recent legal and economic developments affecting investors. The publication forms part of Lex Mundi’s Country Guides series, a global collection of jurisdiction-specific reference materials prepared by member firms around the world. Together, these guides help companies evaluate opportunities, compare regulatory environments, and plan international business activities across multiple markets. The full Guide to Doing Business in Thailand 2026 is available through the button below.
Read More
August 19, 2026
Arbitration clauses and national court jurisdiction have long existed in a delicate equilibrium, and nowhere is that equilibrium tested more often than in the drafting of multitier dispute resolution clauses. Such clauses—requiring negotiation before arbitration—are ubiquitous in international construction contracts, and they frequently employ permissive vocabulary at the arbitration tier. The formulation “either party may submit the dispute to arbitration” is intended to signal that either side is entitled to initiate proceedings. Yet it is periodically seized upon by claimants who prefer national courts, on the theory that “may” preserves a parallel right to litigate. Each apex-court pronouncement on this question is therefore significant for drafting practice and forum predictability. In 2019, the Thai Supreme Court delivered Thailand’s clearest answer to date (Judgment No. 3427/2562). Reversing an appellate court decision, the Supreme Court held that permissive wording at the point of commencement does not dilute the parties’ antecedent agreement to withdraw their disputes from the courts—doing so in regard to an International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) arbitration clause seated in Singapore, a configuration typical of foreign-invested projects in Thailand. This article examines the court’s reasoning, situates the decision within comparative jurisprudence, and draws out its practical lessons for parties and drafters operating in the Thai market. Background of the Dispute The dispute arose from a subcontract for civil engineering and architectural works concluded on September 25, 2014. Clause 19 of the subcontract governed dispute resolution. Clause 19.1 required the parties, at the request of either, to seek to resolve any dispute “in connection with, arising out of, or relating to” the subcontract through mutual consultation within sixty days of written notice. According to clause 19.2.1, if the dispute could not be resolved within that period, “either party may submit the dispute to arbitration,” to be conducted under the ICC
Read More