Detailed foreign exchange regime for Foreign Invested Enterprises in Vietnam

Circular 19/2014 issued this week is a major regulations on foreign exchange management of foreign-invested enterprises in Vietnam. Circular 19/2014 has filled much of the vacant left by Circular 4/2001 on the same subject. Before Circular 19/2014, foreign invested enterprises (FIEs) can only rely on a few general provisions of Decree 160/2006. Under Circular 19/2014

  • It now seems that Circular 19/2014 only applies to FIEs that have been granted an Investment Certificate. A foreign investor which acquires shares in a Vietnamese company and participates in the management of such company does not need to comply with Circular 19/2014 if the acquisition is not subject to issuance of an Investment Certificate. Instead, in that case, the foreign investor will comply with Circular 5/2014 on foreign exchange regime applicable to “indirect” investment. This is an encouraging news for many M&A lawyers who can now advise with more certainty which bank accounts should be used for acquisition of a domestic companies;
  • Circular 19/2014 also repeals the requirements under Circular 5/2014 that a foreign investor must convert into compliance with the foreign exchange regime applicable to foreign direct investment once the indirect investment by the foreign investor becomes a direct investment.
  • Similar to Decree 70/2014, Circular 19/2014 repeatedly require “an FIE and the foreign investors in such FIE” to open direct investment capital accounts (tài khoản vốn đầu tư trực tiếp) (one in VND and one in foreign currency). 
  • Circular 19 expressly requires all payment for transfer of capital in an FIE to be made through the direct investment capital account. In the past, some foreign investors have preferred to by passing the direct investment capital account and receiving payment for capital transfer offshore. 
  • The direct investment capital account now also receives proceeds from domestic loans both in Vietnamese Dong and foreign currencies. Under the old regulations, this account only receives proceeds from foreign loans. This requirement may restrict the banking operation of many FIEs in case these FIEs have multiple domestic loans at different banks. This is because an FIE can only have one direct investment capital account for each currency;
  • The VND direct investment capital account can receive capital contribution in VND by both foreign investors and Vietnamese investors;
  • The direct investment capital account must be used to transfer proceeds from sale of shares or capital contribution in an FIE by a foreign investor unless the sale of shares or capital contribution results in a “change in the legal entity” of the FIE. It is not clear what change in the legal entity means;
  • Any foreign currencies converted from VND by a foreign investor must be remitted out of Vietnam within 30 working days from the date of conversion. Presumably, this provision is to prevent foreign exchange speculation by foreign investors in Vietnam;
  • A foreign investor is expressly allowed to bring in foreign currency for the preparation of an investment project even before issuance of the Investment Certificate; and

  •  By March 2015, all special foreign currency capital accounts (tài khoản tiền gửi vốn chuyên dùng bằng ngoại tệ) opened under Circular 4/2001 must be closed and converted into direct investment capital account under Circular 19/2014. 

Info
Comment
Written by Nguyen Quang Vu On In

Sale of secured assets without auction in Vietnam

The key to reduce bad debts in Vietnam is to sell or otherwise deal with the assets that are mortgaged or pledged to secure unpaid debts more quickly and effectively. Otherwise, the Government can only either delay the situation (but only up to a point) or use its own depleted budget to remove bad debts from the banking system. Circular 16/2014 jointly issued by the State Bank, the Ministry of Justice and the Ministry of Natural Recourse and Environment in June 2014 should assist creditors including banks and the VAMC  in enforcing the secured assets mortgaged or pledged to them. Circular 16/2014 contains specific and detailed procedures for the enforcement of certain types of mortgages or pledges.

One important point under Circular 16/2014 is that it provides for a process whereby the secured asset can be sold privately without going through a public auction. In particular, If the mortgage/pledge agreement allows the creditor to sell the secured assets through private sale but does not specify the valuation method, then the creditor and the securing party may

(1)          mutually agree on the value of the secured assets;

(2)          if (1) fails, the securing party may appoint a valuer to value the secured assets;

(3)          if the securing party does not appoint a valuer then the creditor may do so;  

(4)          if the assets cannot be sold at the valuation determined by the valuer at (2) or (3), then the creditor may reduce the sale price within 15 days. The creditor may reduce the sale price three consecutive times (up to 10% each). The creditor may only reduce the sale price after 30 days for secured assets being real properties or 15 days for other assets from the last price reduction; and

(5)          if the assets cannot be sold after three times of reducing price, the creditor may take over the secured assets in lieu of the secured obligations at the valuation being the latest sale price being proposed at (4). 

Info
Comment
Written by Nguyen Quang Vu On In

Mortgage of land use rights where land rental is exempted

Under Decree 46/2014, a land user in Vietnam who leases land under lump sum payment for the entire lease term and is exempted from all land rental may have the option to pay the exempted land rental in order to enjoy the rights and obligations applicable to a normal land user including the right to mortgage the relevant land use right with credit institutions.

This is an important new point for many BOT projects which need to be able to mortgage their land use rights in favour of their lenders. Under the old land regulations, investors in a BOT project are exempted from land rental payment. However, this investment incentive has caused considerable difficulties for project sponsors in offering an acceptable security package to foreign lenders. 

Info
Comment
Written by Nguyen Quang Vu On In ,

Foreign borrowing conditions for private companies in Vietnam

Under Circular 12/2014 of the State Bank of Vietnam (SBV), a private company including foreign-invested companies in Vietnam can only borrow from a foreign lender if it satisfies the following requirements, among others:

  • A foreign loan can only be used to (1) implement an investment project of the borrower or of a company in which the borrower has “direct investment” capital; or (2) refinance existing foreign loans without increasing borrowing costs. (1) is a positive development as it allows the borrower to use a foreign loan proceed to make capital contribution or, even possibly, on-lend to another company. (2) seems to be more restrictive than earlier regulations and may make it more difficult for a Vietnamese company to restructure its foreign debt;
  •  A foreign loan with a term of no more than 1 year is considered as a short term loan. A short term foreign loan must not be used for medium or long term use. In practice, a short term foreign loan is not required to be registered with the SBV. However it must be made in writing before draw down;
  • The repayment and disbursement of a foreign loan of Vietnamese borrower being a foreign invested enterprise must be made through a foreign direct investment account in foreign currency opened by such borrower with a licensed bank in Vietnam. The bank will check all supporting documents before making any repayment to foreign lenders;
  • A medium and long term loan together with all other outstanding  long and medium term loans of must not exceed the difference between the total investment capital and the equity capital of the investment project as recorded in the relevant investment certificate. However, a short term loan is not subject to this restriction. This is a positive development as under old regulations a short term loan is also subject to the same funding limit except in limited circumstance;
  •  A medium and long term foreign loan must be registered with the SBV within 30 working days from the signing date of the loan agreement and before disbursement;
  • A foreign loan must be made in foreign currencies except for loans given to micro finance organisations, loans between the foreign investor in a foreign-invested company and such foreign-invested company; or loans approved the SBV; and
  • A foreign loan secured by shares or capital contribution or convertible bonds issued by a Vietnamese issuer must comply with the relevant foreign ownership limits. It is not clear if this means that the parties need to comply with the relevant foreign ownership limits at the time of taking or enforcing the relevant securities.  
Featured
Vietnamese Government’s Decree on Self-Consumption Rooftop Solar Power: A few comments (Part 2)

In light of our earlier analysis of Decree 135/2024, we have further observations regarding the Decree's lack of clarity. This post is written by Le Thanh Nhat.

Firstly, the Decree lacks a clear definition of “self-generation and self-consumption rooftop solar power” (Self-Consumption RSP). This is crucial as only surplus power from Self-Consumption RSP systems may be sold to EVN, Vietnam's national electricity provider. Unfortunately, Decree 135/2024 only offers the rather ambiguous definitions for “self-generation and self-consumption power” and “rooftop solar power” (which are arguably the two ‘components’ of Self-Consumption RSP) separately, without clarifying their integration.

Key Highlights Of Vietnam New Data Law

A new Data Law, passed in late November 2024 and set to take effect on 1 July 2025, focuses primarily on establishing a national general database and data centre for state use. However, it also introduces rules on digital data (data in the rest of this article) that concerns the private sector, such as, data products and services. The Government is also drafting three draft decrees detailing key issues under the Data Law, including Data-Related Products & Services Draft Decree, Core & Important Data Draft Decree and a Master Draft Decree.

This blog will discuss several key points under the Data Law and related draft decrees. This post is written by Ha Thanh Phuc and Trinh Phuong Thao.

1)          The police will review and supervise your data activities

The Ministry of Public Security (MPS) again is authorized to regulate all activities relating to data except for data under the Ministry of Defence. Accordingly, it seems that Vietnam considers data as security issue and violation of data activities could result in significant liabilities. This could raise significant compliance costs for businesses and companies in Vietnam if they want to be fully comply with unclear rules (see discussion below).

1)          Conditional Business Lines

Amendments to the Investment Law 2020 in late 2024 now require businesses involved in (i) data intermediary products and services, (ii) data analysis and synthesis, or (iii) data platform services to meet certain conditions. The Data Law suggests that:

a. data platform services may be restricted to state enterprises and public providers, potentially excluding private companies; and

b. only providers of data analysis and synthesis services that potentially harm national defence, national security, social order, safety, social ethics, or public health, which have been detailed under the Data-Related Products & Services Draft Decree, will be subject to these conditions.

Under the Data-Related Products & Services Draft Decree, businesses in these sectors are subject to strict requirements. Notably, all such businesses must maintain an escrow of at least 5 billion VND at a Vietnamese commercial bank to cover compensation and expenses in the event their licenses are revoked.

Dealing With Civil Liability In A Criminal Case In Vietnam – A Review Of Certain Practical Cases

In a criminal case involving a business, from time to time, the courts will need to decide on the civil liability of the criminal and other persons including those who are not aware of the crime relating to the case. For example, if A commits a fraud against B and uses the monies obtained from B to repay a debt between A and C who is not aware of A’s crime. In addition to deciding on whether A is guilty or not, the court will need to decide whether (1) requesting A to compensate B for the loss that B suffers or (2) requesting C to return the monies C receives from A to B (assuming that A is convicted). However, it appears that the court does not have a consistent approach. In this post, we discuss the approaches that the courts took in some significant criminal cases for the last decade.

Huyen Nhu Case – 2014

Huynh Thu Huyen Nhu was the head of a transaction office of Vietinbank (a large State-owned bank). Huyen Nhu has offered high interest rate (exceeding the interest rate cap provided by law) to various companies to convince them to deposit their monies with a branch of Vietinbank. After those companies made the deposit under instructions of Huyen Nhu, Huyen Nhu used fake documents and payment instruction to cause Vietinbank to transfer the deposit to Huyen Nhu’s designated accounts. Huyen Nhu used most of the amount obtained through her fraud to repay her debts to several individuals. The damages caused by Huyen Nhu is reported to be around VND 4000 billion (about US$ 200 million at such time), being largest bank fraud at the time.

In addition to convicting Huyen Nhu of the crime of committing fraud to appropriate properties (lừa đảo chiếm đoạt tài sản), the court also requested Huyen Nhu to compensate all the relevant companies for the losses that such companies suffer. The relevant companies took the view that they are not victim of Huyen Nhu’s fraudulent acts but Vietinbank is. Therefore, the relevant companies requested Vietinbank to repay them the deposits they made with Vietinbank. However, the court rejected such view and considered those companies to be victims of Huyen Nhu’s fraudulent acts. The court confiscated the amount of interests that Huyen Nhu paid her lenders but did not require these lenders to return the entire amount they received from Huyen Nhu.

Vietnamese Government’s Decree On Self-Consumption Rooftop Solar Power: A Few Comments

On 22 October 2024, the Government of Vietnam issued Decree 135/2024 on mechanisms and policies incentivising the development of “self-generation and self-consumption rooftop solar power” (Self-Consumption RSP). Unfortunately, there is still a great deal of ambiguity in the provisions of Decree 135/2024 that might create unnecessary confusion in applying and administering the implementation of Decree 135/2024. Please see our discussion of a few ambiguous provisions of Decree 135/2024 below.

1)       Potential risk from Decree 135/2024’s scope of application – Decree 135/2024 is said to only govern Self-Consumption RSP [systems] that are installed on the roof of construction works that were invested and constructed in strict compliance with law, including regulations on investment, construction, land, environment, safety, firefighting and fire prevention. As such, any noncompliance of the underlying building may cause the rooftop solar system to not be recognised as a Self-Consumption RSP system and therefore cannot enjoy the incentives policies under Decree 135/2024. It is unclear (i) whether mitigated noncompliance in the past (before the Self-Consumption RSP system is installed) would cause the building to be considered not “invested and constructed in strict compliance with law” and therefore prevents the installation of Self-Consumption RSP system on said building, and (i) whether noncompliance that arises after the Self-Consumption RSP system is installed and operated would affect the applicability of Decree 135/2024 to such system and what the outcome would be.

New Amendments To The Investment Law 2020

The National Assembly of Vietnam adopted a new law (the Amended Investment Law) to amend and supplement several provisions in Investment Law 2020. Most provisions of the Amended Investment Law take effect from 1 January 2025, except certain cases will take effect from 1 July 2025. In this post, we discuss some notable points in this Amended Investment Law.

Special Investment Procedures

The key point in this Amended Investment Law is the introduction of a special investment procedure (Special Procedure) which allows the eligible investors in certain high-tech sectors to obtain the investment registration certificate (IRC) and implement its project in a shorter time and reduces procedures, including waiver of various approvals and procedures.

The project utilizing the Special Procedure are exempt from various standard approvals and procedures, including IPA, technology appraisal, environmental impact assessment report, detail planning, construction permit and other approvals and permits in construction, fire fighting and prevention. The issued IRC serves as document for land lease or conversion of land use purpose. However, before commencing construction, investors are obliged to submit a report on the project's economic-technical construction investment, along with the corresponding appraisal report, to the relevant Authority.

This Special Procedure prevails relevant regulations under other laws enacted before 15 January 2025 when there is any difference between the Special Procedure and such other laws. For projects having IPA or IRC before the effective date of Amended Investment Law and eligible for utilizing the Special Procedure, the investor of such project can choose to apply the Special Procedure. The Special Procedure is still subject to further guidance from the Government and Ministry of Planning and Investment.

Resolution 171: Expanding Land Resources For Commercial Housing Development In Vietnam

Vietnam’s housing market has experienced rapid growth in recent years, driven by urbanization, economic development, and increasing demand. A shortage in housing supply in some big cities currently has prompted policymakers to enhance land policies to unlock resources for housing project development. As new Land Law 2024 seems to fall short in resolving the land supply constraints for residential development, on 30 November 2024, the National Assembly adopted Resolution 171 on piloting implementation of commercial housing projects through agreements on voluntary assignment of land use rights (LUR) or use of existing LUR (Resolution 171).

With its introduction of a more flexible mechanism for commercial housing development, Resolution 171 is anticipated to address the housing supply shortage. However, developers will need to wait for a detailed decree to ensure the feasibility and compliance of their proposed projects.

After The Storm - New Amendments to the Securities Law 2019

In the FLC and Van Thinh Phat cases, the authorities have accused the controlling shareholders of FLC and Van Thinh Phat of various crimes including crimes relating to public issuance of securities, stock manipulation or private issuance of bonds. In an apparent attempt to prevent these crimes to be recommitted, in December 2024, the National Assembly passes some important amendments to the Securities Law 2019 (2024 Amendment). The Amendment takes effect from 1 January 2025 and could impose significant risks to public companies and their shareholders in Vietnam.

Sweeping changes to the liability regime for public companies, their shareholders and advisors

Under the 2024 Amendment, organization or individuals participating in the process of preparing applicable files or reporting documents relating to securities activities and securities market (hoạt động chứng khoán và thị trường chứng khoán) will be responsible for ensuring that:

  • such application files and reporting documents are legal, accurate, true and complete; and

  • such application files and reporting documents have clear and not misleading information and contain all material content which affect decision of the authorities, organisations and investors.

Advisors, who provide advice on the application files and reporting documents relating to securities activities and securities market, must be honest and prudent and must ensure that all analysis is reasonable and prudent.

Before the 2024 Amendment, the Securities Law 2019 only imposes liabilities to issuers, underwriters, auditors and “certifying organisations” when they conduct a public offering of securities or register their securities for listing or trading. However, by referring to all securities activities and securities market, the 2024 Amendment appears to expand the liability regimes to apply to all activities in the market including those which are normally not subject to such liability such as (1) private offering of securities, (3) public disclosures by a public companies or their shareholders, (4) secondary trading of securities by investors, and (4) advisors who are involved in these activities.

In practice, it would be very difficult for public companies and their shareholders and advisors to ensure that all of the documents and information relating to their public disclosures and securities trading activities do not contain misleading information and contain all material information, which affect decision by not only investors but also the authorities and other organisations.

Notable points under the Draft Law on Personal Data Protection (Draft PDPL)

On 24 September 2024, the Ministry of Public Securities (MPS) published the draft law on personal data protection (Draft PDPL). Compared to Decree 13/2023, the Draft PDPL introduces several significant points related to personal data protection. This blog will explore the key highlights and implications of these new provisions.

1)         Expanded scope of application

As compared to Decree 13/2023, the Draft PDPL broadens its scope to cover additional entities, being “agencies, organizations, and individuals collecting and processing personal data of foreigners within Vietnamese territories.” (Article 1.2(dd). This provision appears to enhance the protection of personal data belonging to foreign nationals. However, it remains unclear whether the provision applies solely to foreigners present in Vietnam or also to those residing abroad. The ambiguity lies in the interpretation of the phrase “within Vietnamese territories”. If it extends to foreigners outside Vietnam, it could impose significant compliance burdens on Vietnamese enterprises processing personal data of foreign nationals.

Furthermore, it is confusing that the Draft PDPL does not address the existing ambiguity in the scope of application under Decree 13/2023. Instead, it introduces another type of applicable entity that could potentially create even greater uncertainty.

2)         Definition of personal data associated to “citizen”

Unlike Decree 13/2023, the Draft PDPL defines both basic personal data and, seemingly, sensitive personal data as being specifically associated to “citizens”. It is unclear why Draft PDPL limits its personal data protection to citizens rather than to all individuals, regardless of nationality or status. This approach is not in line with the term “personal data” in GDPR (which refers to that of a natural person). Furthermore, limiting protections to citizens could also infringe on the rights of non-citizens and stateless people, potentially conflicting with Article 21 of the 2013 Constitution, which guarantees privacy rights to "everyone," not just citizens.

Additionally, the term “citizen” is ambiguous, as it is unclear whether it refers to Vietnamese citizens only or also encompasses foreign citizens. If the former interpretation is adopted, this would be inconsistent with the broader scope outlined in Article 1.2(dd) of the Draft PDPL, which governs the personal data of foreigners. If the latter interpretation is adopted, it would not be reasonable for the Draft PDPL and Vietnamese authorities to govern personal data of foreign citizens (especially those who are not in Vietnam).

New Law on Credit Institutions 2024 (Part 3)

This post continues discussing some additional changes of the Law on Credit Institution 2024 (LCI 2024). For changes discussed in our Part 1, please see here, in Part 2, please see here.

1.         More comment on security agent

As discussed in Part 2, LCI 2024 allows security agent operation. However, the relevant provision of LCI 2024 has the following limitations:

1.1.      such provision does not clarify the nature of security agent and whether it is the relation of representative (đại diện) or authorization (ủy quyền) as stipulated under the Civil Code. Under LCI 2024, the activity of security agent is implemented under the provisions of relevant laws, without further clarifying which relevant laws are; and

1.2.      LCI 2024 does not provide any details on what a security agent can do (such as definition of security agent or the role of the security agent).

2.         New classification for letter of credit

LCI 2024 no longer classifies letter of credit operation as a payment service provided via account (dịch vụ thanh toán qua tài khoản). LCI 2024 now defines letter of credit as a form of credit extension through the issuance, confirmation, negotiation, payment and return of letter of credit.

Where in the law foreign investors get better treatment over Vietnamese investors?

One can assume that where possible (i.e., not prohibited by international treaties) Vietnamese law will likely provide better treatment to Vietnamese investors over foreign investor. However, in the examples discussed below, foreign investors do get better treatment over Vietnamese investors:

  • Investor protection - The biggest advantage that many foreign investors have over Vietnamese investors is the ability of the foreign investor to make a claim against Vietnamese Government before international arbitration under various investment treaties that Vietnam has signed with several countries. Vietnamese investors have no ability to do so. The Government of Vietnam has indeed been subject to several investor-State disputes and is well aware of the risk that it can be sued if it mistreats foreign investors.


Info
Comment
Written by Nguyen Quang Vu On In