All posts by Oliver Massmann


One of the significant events Vietnam was hoping to occur this June unfortunately did not transpire—being on the Morgan Stanley Capital International (MSCI) watch list for emerging markets. Instead, Vietnam was not upgraded and remained on the frontier-market listing. It is estimated Vietnam could receive up to US $10 billion worth of foreign capital in frontier market-focused funds, but could receive much more from emerging market-focused funds.[1] The Vietnamese Government considers MSCI’s watch list as a top-priority target as it could lure a huge amount of foreign capital to the Vietnamese economy.[2] According to Nguyễn Thị Bích Nga, deputy director of the State Securities Commission’s International Co-operation Department, [Vietnam] has been making the best efforts to improve the legal framework, introduce new securities products and make the market more professional.[3]

One of those “best efforts” is the amendment of the securities law that would make the market fairer between domestic and foreign investors (draft law to amend law on securities; last revised by Decree 60/2015/ND-CP). That 2015 revision eased restrictions on Foreign Ownership Limits (FOL); however, MSCI wants to see even further progress on relaxing those restrictions. According to the draft version (as a general rule), foreign investors are allowed to own 100 per cent of the shares of a Vietnamese company that operates in a non-critical business sector. This applies to listed firms, equitized state-owned enterprises (SOEs), and private non-listed businesses. Shareholders of each company will decide for themselves the amount of foreign-owned shares eligible.[4] This is different from the current Securities Law, which automatically sets the FOL at listed companies in Vietnam at 49 percent. Some sectors, such as banking or aviation, have a stricter limit at only 30 percent.

Experts believe that with the relaxed rules, Vietnam would be likely to attract at least US $5 billion of new capital from abroad and receive the upgrade that it has been waiting for.[5] With fewer restrictions on foreign ownership, Vietnamese firms would become more attractive to major investment funds who are willing to pour millions of USD into Vietnamese businesses. With more foreign-ownership, companies will have a broader, global, perspective and a level of accountability to help drive transparency and change. Mai Le, analyst at PYN Asia Research, noted that out of all the changes in the Securities Law, the [capital] market is most anxiously waiting the FOL rule to take effect.[6]

MSCI Decision and Criteria

Kuwait was upgraded to the MSCI emerging market watch list (and not Vietnam) specifically because of, “…enhancements [that] removed foreign ownership restrictions on listed banks and simplification of requirements for investor registration.”[7] Not coincidentally, those are the areas that Vietnam has not satisfied under MSCIs criteria.[8] Under MSCIs criteria of “Openness to Foreign Ownership”, Vietnam ranks as improvement needed in FOL level, foreign room level, and equal rights to foreign investors. Many experts felt that Vietnam has met more standards of an emerging market than similar markets such as Pakistan and the Philippines (or Kuwait), but also had the best qualitative indicators among frontier markets.[9] While that may be true, it is apparent that MSCI is more concerned with long-term sustainability, which is why “openness to foreign ownership” is MSCIs top criteria for assessing upgrades.

CPTPP, EVFTA, EVIPA and Their Potential Effects on MSCI 2020

If Vietnam rectifies the discrepancies in their laws regarding investments and securities with the trade agreements of CPTPP (Comprehensive and Progressive Trans Pacific Partnership), EVFTA (European Union—Vietnam Free Trade Agreement), and EVIPA (European Union—Vietnam Investment Protection Agreement), they will have a greater chance at making the MSCI watch list upgrade for 2020. Vietnam will most likely not make the list if they continue to table or endlessly debate these critical, progressive revisions. Streamlining the draft laws on investment and securities with CPTPP, EVFTA, and EVIPA, and implementing them expeditiously will give MSCI hard-data to use in their June 2020 evaluation instead of mere speculation.
Moving in that direction, one of the most significant changes in the draft law on securities is the expansion of the foreign holding cap in public companies. Accordingly, public companies would be subject to no restrictions on foreign holdings, unless otherwise prescribed by “treaties to which Vietnam has acceded or a specialized law.”[10] There is a minor legal distinction between “treaties” and “agreements”; however, in the spirt of the law and especially for cementing these new trading relationships, Vietnam should draw no distinction and apply them as such. Under the CPTPP and EVFTA/EVIPA, Vietnam has expressly restricted FOL in specific, listed industries that are of national significance or security[11]; therefore, the government should aggressively restructure their current drafts to mirror that CPTPP, EVFTA, and EVIPA specific language. The CPTPP does have FOL set to what the current Vietnamese law is (currently 30 percent); however, it only states that it is relative to whatever the “current” law is—so, change the law.

This would mean removing the 30 percent FOL cap in the banking industry that is currently in place (even in the draft law to revise the law on securities).[12] According to Long Ngo, associate director at the Research Department at Viet Capital Securities, investment trends in the banking industry will depend on when the government lifts the FOL.[13] As long as the government keeps FOL at the 30 percent level, Vietnam’s capital markets will not expand and MSCI will not consider Vietnam for the watch list upgrade.[14] By maintaining their current operational paradigm, Vietnam is only hampering its own development and future.

If Vietnam would internalize operating from a global perspective, there should be no distinctions between a foreign investor and a domestic one (other than protected industries of national security). CPTPP, EVFTA, and EVIFA create “National Treatment” of any foreign-investor, which grants (in effect) domestic status.[15] Article 9.1 of CPTPP stipulates all “covered” investments (EVIPA is essentially the same list), including: (a) an enterprise; (b) shares, stock and other forms of equity participation in an enterprise; (c) bonds, debentures, other debt instruments and loans;…(f) intellectual property rights; (g) licences, authorisations, permits and similar rights conferred.[16] If Vietnam would stipulate in their draft laws this position already agreed to in CPTPP, EVFTA and EVIPA, it would virtually eliminate all three of MSCIs concerns that it has with Vietnam currently.

With the guarantee of no distinction between a foreign-investor and a domestic one, entities that have been reluctant to invest millions of USD in Vietnamese businesses will now feel much more comfortable about the investment environment; thus creating a large influx into Vietnamese capital markets. MSCI will notice these changes and most likely add Vietnam to 2020s watch list for emerging markets, creating another large inlay to Vietnam’s markets. If the government would match their investment and securities laws with the current trade agreements of CPTPP, EVFTA, and EVIPA, they would realize their self-stated goal of achieving MSCI watch list for emerging-market status.


A major goal of Vietnam’s government was not realized in July. Despite strong economic activity and other positive indicators, MSCI did not place them on the highly anticipated watch list for emerging markets. If Vietnam takes a hard look at the criteria that kept them from the upgrade, it is apparent that the solution for most of the roadblocks cited have already been addressed in the CPTPP, EVFTA, and EVIPA. The government merely needs to incorporate the trade agreement language into their existing laws. The tabling until May 2020 of the passage of the draft law to amend the law on investments through Resolution 8 (July 2019) was not a strategically beneficial move for Vietnam in order to make the 2020 MSCI watch list. Several key provisions in that draft (if in-place and operational) would give MSCI concrete data to observe (rather than speculative) and improve Vietnam’s chances of an upgrade. Additionally, changes to the draft law on the law on securities to be in line with the provisions of CPTPP and EVIPA would also be in Vietnam’s favor. Investor’s (and MSCI) minds would be eased if Vietnam will aggressively pursue regulatory reform and potentially add another US $15 billion to their capital markets.

The best indicator that reform is required to the current draft laws on amending the law on securities and investments came from the government itself. “Some items are unclear while others are unreasonable and no longer fit the Vietnamese market’s conditions,” the Government said in a report submitted to the National Assembly’s Economic Committee.[17] Those issues may “befuddle investors, market members and regulators,” adding that “policymakers must adjust the law [emphasis added] so it matches international standards and agreements to which Vietnam is committed.”[18]

If you have any question on the above, please do not hesitate to contact Dr. Oliver Massmann under Dr. Oliver Massmann is the General Director of Duane Morris Vietnam LLC.

Thank you very much!
[2] Id. Footnote 1.
[3] Id. Footnote 1.
[5] Id. Footnote 4.
[6] Id. Footnote 4.
[9] Id. Footnote 4.
[11] EVIPA, Chapter 2, Article 2.1.2 ; Annex 2


According to the Ministry of Planning and Investment (MPI), in the first 5 months of 2019, foreign direct investment (FDI) projects were US $7.3 billion, up 7.8% as compared to the same period in 2018. In addition, FDI contribution to the state budget rose from US $1.8 billion during 1994-2000 to US $14.2 billion during 2001-10, and to US $23.7 billion during 2011-15. In 2017 alone, FDI contributed US $8 billion to the state budget, accounting for 17% of the total state budget.[1] Phan Huu Thang, Vice Chairman of Vietnam’s Association of Foreign-Invested Enterprises, told Vietnam Investment Review that hi-tech processing and manufacturing, smart agriculture, healthcare, education and training, and renewable energy will be the hottest sectors for FDI in the coming months and years.[2] All these numbers and projections sound fantastic, but there are always impediments to a flourishing FDI program, as well as untapped (or under-utilized) opportunities. More importantly, how can the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) and European Union—Vietnam Free Trade (EVFTA) agreements foster and support FDI?

Two important draft laws affecting FDI originally slated for passage in July 2019 have, unfortunately, been postponed for passage until May 2020 per Resolution 78 (78/2019/QH14) in the Vietnam National Assembly: the Law on Investment in the Public Private Partnership Form [Law on PPP] and the Law Amending the Law on Investment and the Law on Enterprises.[3] There will be more to come on the effect of those laws after passage.

Unintended Effects of CPTPP and EVFTA on FDI

In the first five months of 2019, Vietnam’s FDI attraction reached a total value of US $16.7 billion, up 69 percent over the same period last year.[4] Currently, there are 131 countries and territories with valid investment projects in Vietnam, of which the Republic of Korea (RoK), Japan and Singapore claim the top three places (Japan and Singapore are CPTPP countries).[5] Since the beginning of 2019, however, a new top contender is emerging—China. In the past, China has been the seventh largest investor in Vietnam (with US $15 billion total); however, in the first half of 2019, their FDI alone was US $2 billion.[6] This is not a great surprise as the US—China “trade war” continues, but it does highlight that China is intending to exploit Vietnam’s entrance into the CPTPP and EVFTA (Agreements that China does not currently benefit from). This year, the Vietnamese government licensed the US $280 million ACTR tire-manufacturing project in the southern province of Tay Ninh, and a US $214.4 million project by the Advance Vietnam Tire Co., Ltd in the Mekong Delta province of Tien Giang.

ACTR manufactures steel-radial tires for trucks and busses, and is a joint venture between China’s Sailun Vietnam Co., Ltd, (with 65% equity) and the US’s Cooper Tire and Rubber Co. (35% equity). Because of the more stringent Certificate of Origin (COO) requirements under the CPTPP, China could no longer import tire components from CPTPP countries and process them domestically to obtain CPTPP member-country benefits (or vice versa—export components for assembly). They would need to have a physical processing plant located in Vietnam to claim “Made in Vietnam” COO. With that member-country COO, China now enjoys zero-tariffs on those products exported to member nations. That is a significant counter to the US—China trade tariffs, and a direct result of CPTPP. Advance Vietnam Tire Co. (owned by Guizhou Advance Type Investment co., Ltd, of China) is an almost identical example to ACTR; other than Advance is not a joint venture. China could have invested in other CPTPP countries, but Vietnam is the most attractive and cost-effective venue for FDI compared to others.

The EVFTA contains similar provisions as the CPTPP regarding tariffs and duties. With the EVFTA now in force, China has poised itself to take advantage of this new regulatory environment for the European markets. Using the examples from above, China will now be able to compete (in effect with domestic-preference) directly with Europe’s largest physically domestic producer of tires, Michelin.

Before CPTPP, EVFTA, and the US—China trade tensions, Chinese investors were mainly small businesses with out-dated technology, but now many large corporations are funding large-scale projects. Five of the seven biggest foreign-invested projects in the last five months came from Chinese backers, including not only the ones already discussed, but also a US $260 million electronic equipment and multimedia audio products manufacturing project invested by Hong Kong-based Goertek Co., Ltd.[7] Chinese investors are also increasing merger and acquisition (M&A) activities. Hong Kong topped foreign investors in Vietnam with the US $3.8 billion purchase of Vietnam Beverage Co. Ltd, in Saigon Beer-Alcohol-Beverage Corp (SABECO).

It appears clear from the investment activity in Vietnam since the onset of CPTPP that it has had a substantial positive impact on FDI. With the advent of EVFTA coming in force (and providing similar—if not more—beneficial trade platforms), Vietnam will have a multitude of investors rushing to reap the benefits of those trade agreements. For Vietnam be able to absorb this inevitable expansion of its FDI landscape the government needs to adapt holistically (and quickly) to the new global trade environment they have embarked on to realize its full potential.

EVFTA and CPTPP Vocational Training Market Opportunity

As Phan Huu Thang mentioned, education and training and renewable energy will be some of the hottest sectors in the coming months and years for FDI. An often-overlooked aspect of FDI is Vocational Training Schools. Vocational training will be critical to the long-term success of Vietnam’s infrastructure platforms, especially when operating and maintaining an enhanced energy and power sector. With highly advanced and technologically complex energy platforms (especially renewables) comes a requirement for competently trained personnel to sustain them. Vietnam has a large workforce pool; however, technical training for these opportunities is currently limited.

The EVFTA and CPTPP both have provisions easing the access of engineering and technology support to assist in achieving the required knowledge and training skillsets.[8] Vietnam recognized this also and updated their regulatory requirements regarding vocational schools through Decree 15 (15/2019/ND-CP), which specifies the order and procedures for opening foreign-invested vocational training schools.[9] The FDI project would need to be in line with the national planning of vocational training in Vietnam, but the threshold capital requirements have been lowered to VND 5 billion (US $216,000) to open a vocational training centre, VND 50 billion (US $2.2 million) for a vocational secondary school, and VND 100 billion (US $4.4 million) for a vocational college.[10] In addition, if a project is aligned with an industry of national priority or significance (enter renewable-energy), the Ministry of Labour will be the sole authority on issuing licenses[11]—a departure from the traditional methodology in an effort to streamline the process. This is good news for many renewable energy projects. Not only will a foreign business have more opportunities for development under CPTPP and EVFTA, but they can also add a minimal supplement to that investment and create the necessary workforce to support it.

An example from USA clearly demonstrates the opportunity in vocational training schools. In 2011, Boeing, Inc. opened a final assembly facility for the 787 Dreamliner in Charleston, South Carolina. Along with that came a demand for technically trained personnel to operate the complex facility and to have personnel trained in the intricate technology involved in assembling the aircrafts. Boeing invested US $80 million to have an aeronautical vocational training facility built near Boeing’s assembly plant (completed June 2019).[12] This is a win-win for Boeing. They provided the initial funding to build the vocational facility; in return, they have professionally trained personnel, and the government takes over costs of maintaining the training facility. Boeing also gets guarantees from the government to repay Boeing’s initial investment through tax incentives and bond issuance. This is a textbook case of vocational FDI supplementing an already significant investment.

As many foreign investors establish their presence even more in Vietnam’s infrastructure landscape, this is another opportunity for FDI to affect Vietnam’s (and the investor’s) bottom-line. The EVFTA and CPTPP are enablers as they both allow services to flow less restrictively between the parties. Phan Huu Thang noted that for Vietnam to realize its fourth-industrial-revolution plan (4IR), local enterprises [must] be encouraged to cooperate with foreign-invested enterprises to learn experience, transfer technology, and receive support in training.[13] Vocational training centers will help fill that need.


Vietnam’s FDI has been steadily increasing for decades. FDI has helped transform Vietnam from a poor nation to the verge of a massive middle-class population. CPTPP and EVFTA are two vehicles that will propel Vietnam across that line and perhaps even further. The tangible benefits of CPTPP are already proving themselves as evidenced by the hard-data collected. The unintended effects on FDI from non-member countries, however, have a distinct possibility of compounding those benefits exponentially as others see the potential of CPTPP and EVFTA. Traditionally under-utilized sectors for FDI in education and training are also poised to take advantage of these trade agreements. While not the most high profile, E&T are necessary support vehicles to sustain the larger sectors. Vietnam has been slow, thus far, in aggressively changing their regulatory environment to adapt; however, they need to act expeditiously to fully reform their regulatory environment in order to meet this inevitable influx of FDI.


If you have any question on the above, please do not hesitate to contact Dr. Oliver Massmann under or any other lawyers in our office listing. Dr. Oliver Massmann is the General Director of Duane Morris Vietnam LLC.
Thank you very much!


Vietnam has had major stressors placed upon its power and energy grid for years, and it is only accelerating. At a recent April, 2019 conference on renewable energy in Ho Chi Minh City, experts noted that annual energy consumption in [Vietnam] had risen by 10 per cent in recent years, and the country was at risk of facing power shortages in the 2020s. Several factors have had an impact on this event a 2018 Harvard University study dubbed, “a crisis of success”. The major contributing factor was inefficiencies in the utilization of energy resources and infrastructure. Over time, these inefficiencies have compounded the problem Vietnam faces now with their entry into the European Union—Vietnam Free Trade (EVFTA) and Comprehensive and Progressive Trans Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) agreements. Luckily, those challenges may be alleviated if Vietnam changes their regulatory environment and embraces a new operating paradigm based on a global trade perspective. The transition may at times be turbulent, but necessary for Vietnam to achieve robust, sustainable development to meet their future needs.

Renewable Energy under EVFTA and CPTPP

Both the CPTPP (Chapter 20) and EVFTA (Chapter 13) require the parties to mitigate any damaging effects to the environment by trade practices and to incorporate any other treaties the parties are signatories of into the agreements. As Vietnam and the other parties of both the EVFTA and CPTPP are signatories to the United Nations Paris Agreement of 2015, this means Vietnam is required to reduce its traditional coal-fired power plants in favor of cleaner or renewable energy sources. The EVFTA and CPTPP specifically mention renewable energy as the preferred alternative, and the parties all agree to promote trade to that end.

Vietnam has been making strides to address their energy utilization situation such as the Power Development Master Plan for the 2011-2020 Period with the Vision to 2030 (revised PDMP VII). PDMP VII, for example, sets out to increase energy supply from solar power from the current negligible rate to 0.5% by 2020 and 3.3% by 2030, or, 850MW solar capacity by 2020, increasing to 12GW by 2030. PDMP VII is coal-centric, which is counter to what both the EVFTA and CPTPP call for. One reason for the coal-centric approach is that it is established, known, and cheaper—it is the path of least resistance—which is one reason why Vietnam does not place tariffs on imported coal from the US, but it does place a 20 per cent tax on its own domestic offshore natural gas (which is by-far a cleaner alternative). PDMP VII also sets forth the goal of universal connectivity to the national power grid for all of Vietnam by 2030. It is a lofty goal, but it is achievable. The best chance of success for the 2030 goal is to restructure the regulatory environment to favor and exploit renewable energy sources. PDMP VIII is the next evolution for Vietnam’s energy strategy (slated for year-end 2019) and—keeping with the global investment mind-set—Vietnam should have a blend of private and public sector representation on that advisory board to ensure CPTPP and EVFTA renewable requirements and opportunities are fully integrated.

Against this backdrop, how can the EVFTA and CPTPP help Vietnam achieve sustainable energy development? Concerns from the private sector have always plagued Vietnam’s regulatory framework. Permitting, risk-allocation, land use impediments, financing, and investment protection have been major causes for project derailment in the past. The regulatory environment has been the biggest hindrance to successful exploitation and integration of renewable energy. However, Solar Power holds particular promise.

Solar Renewable Power

Solar power (according to PDMP VII) is to provide the second-largest amount of renewable energy in Vietnam by 2030—at 3.3 per cent. That figure should be adjusted higher with the incorporation of a more aggressive renewable plan in PDMP VIII. On a macro-level, solar farms are becoming more and more prevalent in Vietnam’s southern regions with most of them being developed by foreign investment. Major investors in Vietnam in the approval, construction, or completion stage include
German ASEAN Power, B.Grimm Power Public Co Ltd, Trina Solar, Schletter Group, and JA Solar, to name a few. Twenty-five solar farms have signed power purchase agreements (PPAs) with EVN, not to mention another 221 projects are awaiting approval, with a combined 13,000MW of potential output. Reuters, Inc. suggests that Vietnam’s electricity sector will be bigger than Britain’s by mid-2020s.

EVFTA and CPTPP Impacts on Solar Sector

The driving force behind this level of investment so far has been the CPTPP (notably Japan and Korea); however, with the recent enactment of the EVFTA, further investment and expansion is a realistic expectation as there are no foreign-ownership restrictions placed on investors in those agreements. Furthermore, the European Union—Vietnam Investment Protection Agreement (EVIPA) grants specific safeguards for investors regarding the free transfer of capital based on foreign exchange convertibility as well as dispute resolution governed by international arbitration rules. These have been points of contention in the past for EU investors. On a broader scale, Vietnam, the EU, and the CPTPP signatories will all benefit as reduced tariffs and duties on the machinery and hardware to produce solar facilities will make it more cost-effective to develop that sector. Large-scale investment should be noticeable in the immediate future, and should be the definitive driver after five years when Vietnam removes restrictions on local-content and domestic partnering requirements in the EVFTA. Engineering services from the EU to support renewable infrastructure will also thrive as restrictions on that service in Vietnam are relaxed, promoting technical expertise and experience exchange and cooperation. These services will be especially crucial in upgrading and enhancing Vietnam’s grid capacity to maximize renewable energy integration into it.

Vietnam is making progress on changing their regulatory framework for renewable energy utilizing input from the private sector. An example is the latest change to the Feed-In-Tariff (FIT) regulations for connectivity to EVN national grid. Up until 30 June 2019, there was a flat FIT of US $0.0935/kWh regardless of size or scope of project. The low FIT coupled with high investment costs in newer technologies has always been a point of contention for private developers. As of 01 July 2019, the FIT system was revamped and broken-down by type of solar project and zones of irradiance.

The regional scheme is determined by annual levels of irradiance and is broken-down into four regions. Regions with higher irradiance are imposed a lower FIT while remote regions with lower irradiance are imposed a higher FIT. This is a direct result of government responding to private investors’ concerns.

Rooftop Solar PV (less than 1 MWp)

The FIT schedule also applies to smaller-scale solar rooftop development. According to Vietnam Electricity (EVN), 1,800 customers, including offices, businesses and households, are installing rooftop solar systems with a total capacity of 30.12 MWp. In Ho Chi Minh City, EVN has installed rooftop solar systems with a total capacity of nearly 1,130 kWp and is continuing to deploy other systems. EVN general director indicated this amount was far below the potential of Vietnam, and directly attributed the reason to a lack of specific regulations about electricity purchases when households connect their solar power systems to the national grid. The previous flat FIT applied to rooftop solar generating less than 1 MWp as well, but was a convoluted regulatory situation on how-and-who-gets-paid-when. Now, new rooftop solar constructed or installed on or after 01 July 2019 that generates less than 1 MWp has the option of: 1) negotiating their own price between buyer and seller (as long as the project is not connected to EVN national grid) or 2) accepting the FIT schedule for the region it is located in and connecting to the EVN grid.

This is a major change and development for the solar market. The Direct Power Purchase Agreement (DPPA / PPA) allows for individuals or organizations to install rooftop solar projects and sign their own buy/sell contracts among other individuals or organizations without connecting to the EVN national grid. Any excess power generated may be sold to EVN at the established FIT for the region. This can have an enormous impact on the load capacity of the current EVN grid by reducing demand on it.

The rooftop solar sector will be a key part of the puzzle in rectifying Vietnam’s energy inefficiencies. With EVFTA and CPTPP countries enjoying reduced or no tariffs on hardware and other products to support the rooftop solar sector, coupled with the regulatory reforms, it should only be a matter of time before there is a PV panel on every residential and commercial rooftop in Vietnam.


Vietnam has been struggling with efficiently growing and sustaining its energy and power infrastructure. The regulatory environment has traditionally been one of the major hindrances to private investors in infrastructure development. Although there is always a certain amount of uncertainty in any project of this nature, both the public and private sectors would serve their communities greatly by coming to a reasoned solution that suits both. There has been notable progress by Vietnam on this regulatory-front, such as PMDP VIII and the revised FIT and DPPA. Hopefully there will be much more to come in the latter-half of 2019 and into 2020. The CPTPP and EVFTA agreements have been (and will be) a major factor in Vietnam’s infrastructure development goals. Utilizing those agreements and advice and input from the private sector, Vietnam’s power and energy situation will be poised to efficiently and effectively capitalize on its enormous potential—especially with renewables.

Please do not hesitate to contact Dr. Oliver Massmann under or any other lawyer listed in our office list if you have any questions on the above. Dr. Oliver Massmann is the General Director of Duane Morris Vietnam LLC.

Breaking news: The EU – Vietnam FTA to be signed next Sunday (30th June)

In a notice made by the EU Council on 25 June, EU Commissioner for Trade Mrs. Cecilia Malmstrom, together with Romanian Minister in charge of business, commerce and business Mr. Stefan-Radu Oprea will represent the EU to sign the EU – Vietnam FTA (EVFTA) in Hanoi on 30th June.

On 26 June 2018, the EVFTA was split into two separate agreement, one on trade and one on investment. In August 2018, EU and Vietnam completed the legal review of the EVFTA and the EU – Vietnam Investment Protection Agreement (EVIPA). The EVFTA needs to be ratified by the European Commission and European Parliament while the EVIPA must be additionally ratified by the Parliament of each EU member countries.

The EVFTA and the EVIPA are said to bring the best advantages and benefits ever for enterprises, employees and consumers in both EU and Vietnam. Vietnam’s GDP is expected to increase by 10-15% and exports are predicted to rise by 30-40% in the next 10 years. Meanwhile, the real wages of skilled labourers could rise up to 12%, while the real salaries of common workers could increase 13%.

The EVFTA is the first comprehensive and ambitious trade and investment agreements that the EU has ever concluded with a developing country in Asia. It is the second agreement in the ASEAN region after Singapore and it will intensify the bilateral relations between Vietnam and the EU. Vietnam will have access to a potential market of more than 500 million people and a total GDP of USD15,000 billion (accounting for 22% of global GDP).

Market access for goods

The EU agreed to eliminate duties for 84% of the tariff lines for goods imported from Vietnam immediately at the entry into force of the FTA. Within 7 years from the effective date of the FTA, more than 99% of the tariff lines will have been eliminated for Vietnam.

Vietnam will benefit more from the EVFTA compared with other FTAs since Vietnam and the EU are considered to be two supporting and complementary markets: Vietnam exports goods that the EU cannot or does not produce itself (i.e., fishery products, tropical fruits, etc.) while the products imported from the EU are also those Vietnam cannot produce domestically.

Government procurement

Vietnam has one of the highest ratios of public investment-to-GDP in the world (39% annually from 1995). However, until now, Vietnam has not agreed to its government procurement being covered by the Government Procurement Agreement (GPA) of the WTO. Now, for the first time, Vietnam has undertaken to do so in the EVFTA.
The FTA commitments on Government Procurement mainly deal with the requirement to treat EU bidders, or domestic bidders with EU investment capital, equally with Vietnamese bidders when a Government purchases goods or requests a service worth over the specified threshold. Vietnam undertakes to publish information on tender in a timely manner, allow sufficient time for bidders to prepare for and submit bids and maintain the confidentiality of tenders. The FTA also requires its Parties to assess bids based on fair and objective principles, evaluate and award bids only based on criteria set out in notices and tender documentation and create an effective regime for complaints and settling disputes, and so on. These rules require Parties to ensure that their bidding procedures match the commitments and protect their own interests, thus helping Vietnam to solve its problem of bids being won by cheap but low-quality service providers.

Enforcement of ISDS

This is now covered in the EVIPA. In disputes regarding investment (for example, expropriation without compensation or discrimination of investment), an investor is allowed to bring the dispute to the Investment Tribunal for settlement (Investor-to-State dispute settlement mechanism – ISDS). This means the investors do not need to lobby its Government to file the case on their behalf. To ensure fairness and independence of the arbitration court, a permanent international investment tribunal with 9 members, 3 nationals appointed from each of the EU and Vietnam together with 3 nationals appointed from third countries. Cases will be heard by a 3-member Tribunal selected by the Chairman of the Tribunal in a random and unpredictable way. This is also to ensure consistent rulings in similar cases, thus making the dispute settlement more predictable. The EVIPA also allows a sole Tribunal member where the claimant is a small or medium-sized enterprise or the compensation of damaged claims is relatively low. This is a flexible approach considering that Vietnam is still a developing country.

In case either disputing parties disagree with the decision of the Tribunal, it has another chance to appeal it to the Appeal Tribunal. While this is different from the common arbitration proceeding, it is quite similar to the 2-level dispute settlement mechanism in the WTO (Panel and Appellate Body). We believe that this mechanism could save time and cost for the whole proceedings.

The final settlement is binding and enforceable without question from the local courts regarding its validity, except for a five-year period following the entry into force of the FTA for Vietnam.

Please do not hesitate to contact Dr. Oliver Massmann under or any other lawyer listed in our office list if you have any questions on the above. Dr. Oliver Massmann is the General Director of Duane Morris Vietnam LLC.


Vietnamese Clean Development Mechanism CDM market – The perspective of an emission certificate buyer

Vietnam’s commitments on emission reductions and overview of Vietnam’s CDM market

Vietnam has shown a high level of commitment on green development and environment protection for the past 20 years. It became a signatory party to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in 1994, and ratified the Kyoto Protocol in 2002. The International Cooperation Department of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment was assigned as the focal point for implementing the Kyoto Protocol, which was then taken over by the Department of Meteorology, Hydrology and Climate Change of the same Department in 2008.

Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) is a flexible financing mechanism under the Kyoto Protocol that allows countries with binding reduction targets to develop projects in developing countries. CDM allows emission reduction projects that contribute to the sustainable development objectives of the host country to sell the Certified Emission Reductions (CERs) resulting from CDM projects. Certain projects for the reduction of emissions in Vietnam are suitable for purchasing certified emission reductions (CERs) under the CDM. The buyers sign an agreement with local project owners in order to obtain rights to CERs from the project. Purchasers are usually ultimate consumers and speculators. Most CERs are eventually used by power companies and other purchasers from the EU area that meet the requirements as well as governments of developing countries etc.

In 2012, the Prime Minister issued the National Socio-Economic Development Strategy for 2011-2020 period and emphasized on sustainable development pathway and climate change resilience. Since then, a number of legal guiding documents have been issued to set out the overall targets and strategies for all relevant sectors and responsibilities of each in-charge ministries. The Government has also issued a number of policies to encourage Vietnamese entities to participate in the CDM, including investment incentives for CDM projects. Until May 2019, Vietnam has had 255 CDM projects registered by the Executive Board of UNFCCC, 59 projects of which are from energy sector and 10 projects are from waste sector.

Vietnam’s market potential

For the past few years, Vietnam has made the transition from a predominantly agricultural to a mixed economy with substantial development of commercial and industrial activities. Rapid growth in population and improvements in living standards together with the Government’s effort to improve access to electricity throughout the country have led to growing increase in the demand for electricity. This now poses a major challenge for Vietnam to maintain sustained growth of the power sector and to achieve energy security. Meanwhile, Vietnam’s electricity demand continues growing at double-digit number. Thus, by applying CDM, renewable energy projects present great opportunities to deal with this challenge.

By engaging in CDM, all parties have something to gain. The project owners increase the return on investment on the project by selling the obtained CERs to a buyer. The buyer obtains a cost-efficient way of meeting reduction commitments under the Kyoto Protocol. The supplier of technology and know-how for the project expand their market presence. The project developers improve know-how and contribute to the project by providing consultancy services. In addition, Vietnam gains from the improved environmental conditions, better access to new technology besides the economic benefits. It is a win-win situation.

In Vietnam, the most potential sectors for developing CDM projects are renewable energy, especially wind and solar. These types of renewable power projects have increasingly received interest by foreign investors thanks to the Government’s strong investment incentives and favorable investment conditions/ procedures.

CER portfolio management

Compliance buyers have to administer their portfolio intensively in order to reflect their intended and actually provided loans. Higher prices are paid usually in connection with project types involving high registration and verification risks. Furthermore, higher costs could be incurred within projects which are well advanced in respect of construction, but it will be dependent on this and not on increased registration risks. In case of projects which have already been started, the earlier CDM consideration as part of an additionality analysis has to be proven. Distribution of risk is an important risk management instrument. For example, many buyers may have a big percentage of their portfolio in Chinese CERs, so it is recommendable to have a look at other markets, such as SE Asia etc. Distribution of risk extends right up to technology type.

Most important CDM registered project types in Vietnam

1. Hydropower: most common CDM projects in Vietnam. Validation risks are named as medium and verification risks are low. Although in these projects are a long construction period and often numerous delays.
2. Wastewater used for generate energy: Risk of validation is low to medium, construction time is low (often less than one year) and the risks of validation is medium size.
3. Other renewable energy types: wind is a high potential. So far, 2 CDM projects have been registered. Bio energy projects also have a high potential. Risks of validation and verification are low to medium, even there is a long construction period.
4. MSW-treatment- are only few projects so far, but there is a high potential for composting. Risks of validation are low to medium, medium risks of verification and medium period of construction.

Case studies

30 MW wind farm project in Binh Thuan

This first wind farm project in Vietnam is run by the Vietnam Renewable Energy JSC and EDF Trading Limited. The first turbine group has been already installed on the construction site. In April 2009, Phase 1 of the project has been registered with the CDM Executive Board. A production of electricity of 91.571 million MWh/year is expected, whereas over 59,000 metric tonnes of CO2 emissions/year are to be reduced.

50MW Cam Lam solar project in Khanh Hoa

On 04th December 2018, EVN and Cam Lam Solar Company Ltd. signed the Power Purchase Agreement. The project has a total investment of VND930.022 billion and is expected to generate 78.831 million MWh/ year. About 62,788 metric tonnes of CO2 emissions/year are to be reduced.

Cu Chi 1000t/d MSW processing plant

This project was developed by Tam Sinh Nghia (TSN) and includes composting of 1000 t/d of municipal solid waste (MSW). The expected emissions reduction of CH4 avoidance is estimated at roughly 1 million metric tonnes of CO2 emission/year (more than seven years of credited period).


Please do not hesitate to contact Dr. Oliver Massmann under or any other lawyer listed in our office list if you have any questions on the above. Dr. Oliver Massmann is the General Director of Duane Morris Vietnam LLC.


1. What do you forecast the prospect for FDI attraction in Vietnam in the last 6 months of 2019?

Vietnam continues to attract record foreign direct investment (FDI) in virtually all sectors. In the first five months of the 2019, Foreign Investment Agency (FIA) shows that FDI in Vietnam has reached a four-year high of US$16.74 billion, which demonstrates a year-on-year increase of 69.1 percent. It is expected that FDI investment will continue to grow robustly. The only barrier is to maintain its growth with appropriate strategy for government reforms. Its government has begun prioritizing ‘high-value’ FDI (advanced technology and manufacturing, tourism etc) as well as adequate training for the working population to raise the standards for specialized areas.

2. Which sectors would be the most attracted to foreign investors in Vietnam? Which countries/territories would be the top FDI ones in Vietnam?

The industry and construction sector grows the fastest at 8 percent, followed by services at 7.44 percent and agriculture, forestry and fishery at 2.90 percent. The industry sector grows at 7.85 percent. Accommodation and catering services grows the fastest at 8.98 percent. Others like the financial, banking etc. peak at 8.14 percent. Real estate business grows by 4.07 percent, its highest since 2011. These would be the most attractive sectors to foreign investors in the upcoming time.

FDI inflow from China into Vietnam has been plummeting. Investors from Singapore, Japan, South Korea will continue as top foreign investors in Vietnam.

3. Many China-based manufacturers have moved to Vietnam due to impacts of the US-China trade intensions. Could the trend influence Vietnam’s FDI performance? Why?

With the US-China trade war showing no signs of abating, Vietnam’s free trade agreements, cheap labor, and young working population provide a powerful concoction for it to thrive.
The growth in FDI inflows from China into Vietnam is expected regarding the impact of the ongoing US-China trade war with many Chinese enterprises grasping opportunities by Vietnam’s participation in many new-generation free trade agreements. Therefore, it is necessary for Vietnam to proactively choose to attract FDI projects with high technology content, ensuring the principle of generating high added-value for the economy in accordance with Vietnam’s FDI attraction policy in the new period.

4. Vietnam will not attract FDI at all cost and expects high-quality FDI inflows after CPTPP ratification. What challenges will Vietnam face when pursuing the strategy?

First, the FDI sector’s linkage with other domestic sectors remains weak and its spillover effect on productivity remains low. Second, the attraction and transfer of technology from the FDI sector has not yet achieved the expected results. Third, the attraction of foreign investment into a number of prioritized sectors of the country and from transnational corporations is still limited. Fourth, a small number of FDI projects have not yet strictly observed the laws on environmental protection, employment of foreign workers and tax. Also, the reduction and removal of import tariffs under the deal will lead to a decrease in the state revenue.

5. From your observations, how should the Vietnamese government select appropriate partners and focus on sectors with potential and advantages?

To maintain and develop bilateral investment and commercial relations, trade must be liberal and equal. In terms of geographical areas, foreign investment attraction will suit the advantages, conditions, development levels and plans of each locality and its regional linkages, ensuring economic-social-environmental effectiveness. For sensitive areas related to national defense and security, the foreign investment attraction will be strictly scrutinized, with national defense and security and sovereignty being primary concerns.
Vietnam will step up the diversification of foreign investment attraction from potential markets and partners. It focuses on top developed nations and transnationals with source and advanced technologies and modern governance expertise.

If you have any question on the above, please do not hesitate to contact Dr. Oliver Massmann under Dr. Oliver Massmann is the General Director of Duane Morris Vietnam LLC.

Thank you very much!


1. How will the Fourth Industrial Revolution affect Vietnam garment and textile industry?

Like other industries, industry 4.0 will affect Vietnam garment and textile industry in 3 aspects: productivity, scale and management structure. High technology, including software development, and big data will be used as the main growth force of the industry. By applying high technology and automation in certain stages of the production, productivity increases as well as the owner can better control the operation of the whole production/ distribution system. However, a side effect of Industry 4.0 is replacement of human force by machines, which may cause substantial exuberance in work force, especially in sector that consumes one of the most manual work force like the garment and textile industry.

2. According to you, how should enterprises do to ensure good labor force in such a fierce competition?

Enterprises should encourage innovation spirit among workers. Workers who run high tech machines must be well trained (either via short training courses or high-level education at educational establishments) so that machines are operated to their full use.

3. It is said that upgrading technology and machinery is necessary to survive in Industry 4.0, what do you comment on this?

Technology and machinery play an important role in industry 4.0. However, it is not to say that the more technology is applied in the industry and more modern machines are used, the better productivity a company may achieve. Such application must go together with the improvement of work force quality and adjustment ability to new environment.

4. In order to lessen negative impacts of Industry 4.0 as well as to turn labor force into an advantage, according to you, what should Vietnam do?

Vietnam needs to set a clear vision for Industry 4.0 and work out on how to implement and achieve that vision. It must be aware that education and training is the core condition for business development. Textile and garment industry should not be considered as the industry for low level labor force as it used to be. In addition, Vietnam must invest in research facilities and encourage innovation in the sector. Only by doing so that labor force can be an advantage of Vietnam in terms of quality and knowledge instead of low price.

If you have any question on the above, please do not hesitate to contact Dr. Oliver Massmann under Dr. Oliver Massmann is the General Director of Duane Morris Vietnam LLC.

Thank you very much!


1. It can be said that FDI inflows has become the growth momentum for Vietnam’s banking and finance industry over the past few years. How do you comment on the changes in the local financial services sector recently?

There has been increasing foreign investment in Vietnam’s banking and finance industry, especially via M&A at the end of 2017 and the beginning of 2018. Currently, foreign investors are very optimistic about Vietnam’s steady economic growth and plan to expand their coverage in the market. They believe economic development will drive more demand for banking and finance activities, thus more opportunities for growth in the sector. Moreover, M&A activities have helped local banks improve their financial capacity and competitiveness in the market. Local credit institutions have diversified their products and services, applied more modern technology in their operation. Under competition pressure from foreign credit institutions, local ones have no way but to also enhance banking governance capacity as well as human resources quality. These in turn help local credit institutions grow in a more stable and safe manner.

2. How have foreign financial organizations been contributing to improve Vietnam’s financial services sector so far?

Foreign financial organizations which have track recorded experience in other countries, with wide network and customer resources, when coming to Vietnam have brought in high technology, wide variety of finance and banking products/ services, as well as management/ governance capacity. Vietnam’s financial organizations have learnt a lot from these new players, thus modernizing their own system, creating more products/ services for Vietnamese customers who have not become a major part of customer portfolio of foreign financial organizations. These local organizations and Vietnam’s financial services have somehow developed to a modern, internationally standardized level, thus making them more attractive to foreign investors.

3. A number of free trade agreements (FTAs) that Vietnam will ratify shortly are expected to drive FDI flows into the country’ financial services sector in the coming time. How do you see about this prospect?

Both the CPTPP and the EVFTA have higher level of market access commitments than the WTO. In addition, investors are better protected under the CPTPP and the EVFTA in Vietnam. The Investor State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) will ensure highest standards of legal certainty and enforceability for investors. Under that provision, for investment related disputes, the investors have the right to bring claims to the host country by means of international arbitration. The arbitration proceedings shall be made public as a matter of transparency in conflict cases. Such legal certainties along with the Government’s attempts to improve investment environment drive more FDIs flows into the country.

4. How do you forecast about some investment trends of international financial organizations into Vietnam this year?

Given the Government’s recent encouragement of investing in current banks rather than establishing new ones, M&A in the sector will be very vibrant. It is the fact that in recent years many investors have expressed their interest in becoming shareholders in certain commercial banks, especially weak/ VND 0 banks that need assistance in recovery, handling bad debts and restructuring. Moreover, Basel II standards will begin to apply from 2020, so there will be huge demand for capital to meet such strict requirements. However, as local banks are still looking for appropriate partners, we expect more major successful deals in the upcoming time.

5. What should Vietnamese government do to make the local financial services sector more accessible to foreign investors?

The Government should open more room for foreign ownership in local financial institutions, as most of them have nearly reached the allowed limit. This will lure more foreign participation in the market, thus creating opportunities to local financial sectors to absorb experience, management capacity, technology, etc. to become a stable and promising market in the region. The Government should also continue to complete the legal framework on financial services sector to comply with its commitments under signed FTAs, thus raising investors’ confidence in the system and willingness to invest further.

Please do not hesitate to contact Dr. Oliver Massmann under if you have any questions or want to know more details on the above. Dr. Oliver Massmann is the General Director of Duane Morris Vietnam LLC.


1. What potential do you see in e-sports? Is there future in the betting business for e-sports? Does this carry a risk of illegal activities like other sports?

Online sport betting is a place of unearthed opportunities in Vietnam. You can see Vietnamese people are a big fan of many sports, especially football and volleyball. Economic growth and rise in real wages have led to more and more money ending up being placed on sporting events. Though there is no official number on the amount of money that people bet in online unofficial websites during big football events, I believe the number must not be lower than millions of dollars. Legalizing online betting for sports would help reduce tax losses by the Government, thus reducing public debt. Moreover, we are now in 4.0 industry so it is an unavoidable business trend in the future. It is important that we have sufficient regulations and management capacity to prevent illegal activities in this sector.

2. Vietnam does not yet have regulations on e-sports and betting in this sector. However, the government has issued Decree No. 06/2017/ND-CP on betting business on horse racing, dog racing, and international football. Do you think that this regulatory framework can be extended to include e-sports betting?

Decree 06 sets out a pilot program for betting business on horse racing, dog racing, and international football. It is even uncertain that this activity will continue being permitted after the trial period has lapsed, as it depends on the result of the pilot program. Moreover, I understand that international football betting is currently permitted only via terminal devices and telephones (i.e., sms only). Thus, it may take some other years to implement international football betting via internet, not to mention extension to online betting for other sports.

3. Are there any international regulations on e-sports betting? What regulations could Vietnam use as a basis for the domestic management of to manage betting business in this sector?

There is no international regulations on e-sports betting but each country has its own set of regulations. Vietnam can have a look at China whose lottery market is split into two segments: Welfare Lottery (since 1987) and Sports Lottery (since 1994) or the UK, which is one of the most liberal, and yet highly regulated, gambling markets in the world.

4. It is a widely held view that e-sports target a younger audience than football and especially horse and dog racing. How is this relevant to the regulation of e-sports and betting in this area? Are there other fundamental differences setting e-sports apart from more traditional sports?

I believe the adoption of regulations on e-sports betting does not depend on the coverage of e-sports (young/ old players). As long as e-sports and e-sports betting have potential negative impacts on the society, they need to be regulated. However, it is true that how they are to be regulated depends on the age range of the players. Regulating traditional sports betting must be different from e-sports betting given the difference in their nature, the extent the players can participate in the games, interaction among players, role play, etc.

Please do not hesitate to contact Dr. Oliver Massmann under if you have any questions or want to know more details on the above. Dr. Oliver Massmann is the General Director of Duane Morris Vietnam LLC.

Rechtsanwalt in Vietnam Dr. Oliver Massmann – Die Weltbank fragt Duane Morris nach Geschäften und Regierungsaufträgen- Was Sie wissen müssen: Annahmen der Fallstudie

Ist eines der an der Ausschreibung teilnehmenden Unternehmen und erfüllt alle zahlungsfähigkeits- , technische und administrative Anforderungen zur Wettbewerbsfähigkeit;Ist eine mittelständische Gesellschaft mit beschränkter Haftung, die sich in Privatbesitz und im Inland befindet (oder deren üblichse rechtliche Entsprechung);
Ist in Ho Chi Minh City tätig;
Ist hinsichtlich aller Vorschriften auf dem neuesten Stand und genießt bei allen zuständigen Behörden, einschließlich derjenigen, die mit Steuern im Zusammenhang stehen, gutes Ansehen.
Verfügt über alle erforderlichen Lizenzen und Genehmigungen, um in diesem technischen Bereich tätig zu sein;
Hat bereits an einer öffentlichen Ausschreibung teilgenommen und ist bereits bei der nachstehend definierten Vergabestelleregistriert.

Betrifft die Erneuerung von 20 km Bodenbelag einer ebenen zweispurigen Straße (keine Autobahn und nicht unter Konzession), die Ho-Chi-Minh-Stadt mit einer anderen vietnmeischen Stadt (und gegebenenfalls in demselben Bundesstaat, derselben Region oder Provinz wie Ho-Chi-Minh-Stadt) verbindet. mit einer Asphaltauflage von 40 bis 59 mm (oder dem in Vietnam am häufigsten vorkommenden Äquivalent);
Wert: USD 2,5 Millionen (entspricht VND 57.641.204.415);
Enthält keine weiteren Arbeiten (wie z. B. Baustellenräumung, Entwässerung des Bodens, Brücken oder weitere routinemäßige Wartungsarbeiten).

Ist die mit der Vergabe von Bauarbeiten beauftragte Agentur für die Behörde, die Eigentümerin der oben genannte Straße ist;
Ist der einzige Geldgeber für die Arbeiten, hat ein Budget für diese und ist zahlungsfähig.

Ist eine offene, uneingeschränkte und wettbewerbsorientierte öffentliche Ausschreibung für die Erneuerung einer Straße wie der oben genannten;
Wird ohne Beschwerden / Herausforderungen / Proteste von interessierten Parteien abgeschlossen;
Endet mit der Vergabe des Auftrags an BidCo, dessen Angebot alle technischen und administrativen Kriterien erfüllte und das beste Preis-Leistungs-Verhältnis bot.

1. Welches Organisation führt die Ausschreibung für die Behörde durch, die Eigentümerin der Mehrheit der Straßen ist, die mit der oben genannten vergleichbar ist?
Abteilung für Straßen von Vietnam im Verkehrsministerium („Vergabestelle“)

2. Bitte geben Sie eine Liste der Gesetze, Vorschriften und sonstigen verbindlichen Materialien (einschließlich Richtlinien und Handbücher) an, die das öffentliche Auftragswesen in Vietnam regeln. Bitte fügen Sie Rechtsvorschriften oder andere verbindliche Materialien hinzu, die auf nationaler / Bundesebene veröffentlicht wurden, sowie zusätzliche Rechtsvorschriften, die auf das Vergabeorgan anwendbar sind.

Zivilgesetzbuch von Vietnam Nr. 91/2015 / QH13 der Nationalversammlung von Vietnam vom 24. November 2015, 18. Juni 2014
Baurecht Nr. 50/2014 / QH13 der Nationalversammlung vom 18. Juni 2014
Gebotsgesetz Nr. 43/2013/QH13 vom 26. November 2013
Handelsrecht Nr. 36/2005/QH11 vom 14. Juni2005
Verordnung Nr. 63/2014/ND-CP vom 26. Juni 2014
Verordnung Nr. 37/2015/ND-CP vom 22. April 2015
Verordnung Nr. 46/2015/ND-CP vom 17. März 2015
Verordnung Nr. 30/2015/ND-CP vom 17. März 2015
Verordnung Nr. 63/2018/ND-CP vom 4. Mai 2018
Drucksache Nr. 04/2017/TT-BKHDT vom 15. November 2017
Drucksache Nr. 26/2016/TT-BXD vom 26. Oktober 2016
Drucksache Nr. 10/2016/TT-BKHDT vom 22. Juli 2016
Drucksache Nr. 23/2015/TT-BKHDT vom 21. Dezember 2015
Drucksache Nr. 10/2015/TT-BKHDT vom 31. Oktober 2015
Drucksache Nr. 01/2015/TT-BKHDT vom 15. April 2015
Drucksache Nr. 07/2015/TTLT-BKHDT-BTC vom 8. September 2015
3. Bitte listen Sie alle obligatorischen Standard-Ausschreibungsunterlagen und / oder Standardvertragsbedingungen auf, die die Vergabestelle für einen Vertrag wie den oben beschriebenen verwenden muss
In den Vertragsbedingungen muss Folgendes angegeben werden:

Angewandte Rechtsgrundlagen;
Im Vertrag verwendete Sprache;
Inhalt und Umfang der Arbeit;
Qualität, technische Anforderungen an die Arbeit; Vorabnahme und Übergabe;
Dauer und Zeitplan der Vertragserfüllung;
Vertragspreis, Vorauszahlung, Zahlungswährung und Zahlung für den Vertrag;
Vertragserfüllungssicherheit, Vertragsvorschussgarantie;
Anpassung des Bauvertrages;
Rechte und Pflichten der Parteien des Bauvertrags;
Haftung für Vertragsverletzungen, Prämien und Bußgelder für Vertragsverletzungen
Aussetzung und Beendigung des Vertrages;
Beilegung von Streitigkeiten hinschtlich des Vertrags;
Risiken und Ereignisse höherer Gewalt; Abwicklung und Auflösung des Vertrages;
Sonstiger Inhalt.
4. Kann die Vergabestelle, falls solche Dokumente verwendet werden, eine Klausel ohne Begründung ändern??

5. Haben Sie Kenntnis von Änderungen der Gesetze / Vorschriften / Verfahren im Zusammenhang mit öffentlichen Aufträgen zwischen dem 2. Mai 2018 und dem 1. Mai 2019? Zum Beispiel: Änderungen der geltenden Vergabegesetze, Erlass und / oder Umsetzung neuer Vorschriften, Implementierung oder Verbesserung von E-Procurement-Plattformen, Änderungen des Angebotsicherheits- und Leistungsgarantierahmens usw.
Ja. Erlass des Dekrets 63/2018 / ND-CP vom 4. Mai 2018 anstelle des Dekrets 15/2015 / ND-CP über eine öffentlich-private Partnerschaft.

6. Wenn ein oder mehrere elektronische Vergabeportale (d. h. eine offizielle Website, die speziell und ausschließlich für die öffentliche Auftragsvergabe vorgesehen ist) in Betrieb sind, geben Sie an, welche Plattform am häufigsten vom Vergabeorgan verwendet wird.

7. Welche Informationen über Baustellenverträge, die von der Vergabestelle vermittelt werden, werden öffentlich zugänglich gemacht?

Geschätzte Kosten / Dauer / Ausführungszeit – berechnet zum Zeitpunkt der Bewerbung der Vergabemögichkeit.

8. Wenn die Vergabestelle sich gemäß den gesetzlichen Rahmenbedingungen für die Ausschreibung einer neuen Möglichkeitfür einen Auftrag wie den in Abschnitt 1 beschriebenen vorbereitet, wie wird dann der Auftragswert und die voraussichtliche Bauleistung geschätzt?
Marktanalyse, einheitliche Stückkosten, projektspezifische technische Zeichnungen, ähnliche Projekte aus den Vorjahren und Ergebnis der Preisbewertung durch eine autorisierte staatliche Agentur oder ein Preisbewertungsunternehmen für Vermögenswerte, Waren und Dienstleistungen, die der Preisbewertung gemäß dem Preisgesetz unterliegen.

9. Wird in der Praxis der geschätzte Auftragswert / das geschätzte Budget in der Bekanntmachung / den Ausschreibungsunterlagen veröffentlicht?
Ja, der Vertragswert.

10. Muss die Vergabestelle vor der Ausschreibung bereits einem bestimmten Projekt ein Budget zugewiesen haben?
Ja, es gibt eine spezifische Mittelzuweisung.

11. Wie oft vergibt die Vergabestelle in einem offenen Ausschreibungsverfahren einen Auftrag, ohne bereits alle erforderlichen Mittel bereitgestellt zu haben?
Selten (zwischen10-25%).

12. Wäre im rechtlichen Rahmen das offene Ausschreibungsverfahren (d. h. der Prozess, in dem ein Unternehmen ein Angebot einreichen kann) die vertraglich festgelegte Methode der Vergabe in Vietnam für einen Vertrag wie den in Abschnitt 1 genannten?
Offene Ausschreibungen sind nicht der Standard, sind aber in der Praxis am weitesten verbreitet.

13. Wie viele Tage würde BidCo in der Praxis benötigen, um eine Entscheidung über die Präqualifikation von dem Moment an zu erhalten, in dem es alle erforderlichen Unterlagen eingereicht hat?
30 Tage
14. Kann die Vergabestelle nach der Bekanntmachung eines offenen Ausschreibungsverfahrens vom Bieter verlangen, dass er sich an einem für diesen Auftrag spezifischen Präqualifizierungsverfahren beteiligt, bevor er sein wirtschaftliches Angebot einreichen kann?
Ja. Dies geschieht gelegentlich für einen Vertrag wie den in Abschnitt 1 beschriebenen.

15. Was ist die in der Praxis gebräuchlichste Methode für einen Vertrag wie den in Abschnitt 1 beschriebenen?
Offene Ausschreibungen sind nicht der Standard, bleiben aber in der Praxis am weitesten verbreitet.

16. Sind gesetzlich die Situationen definiert, in welchen die jeweilige Vergabemethode angewendet werden sollte?
Ja, in Abschnitt 2 des Gebotsgesetz.
17. Verbietet der Rechtsrahmen, dass Teilverträge Schwellenwerte für offene Ausschreibungen umgehen?
Ja, Artikel89.6.k des Gebotsgesetzes Nr. 43/2013/QH13.
18. Welche Strategien werden allgemein verwendet, um die Regeln und Schwellenwerte für die offene Vergabe zu umgehen?
Die Vergabestelle legt sehr hohe technische Spezifikationen fest.
19. Gibt es einen rechtlichen Rahmen, der eine Mindestfrist zwischen der Bekanntmachung der Ausschreibung und der Frist für die Einreichung innerhalb einer offenen Ausschreibung wie der in Abschnitt 1 beschrieben, festsetzt?
Ja. Artikel12.1.e des Gebotsgesetz Nr. 43/2013/QH13.
20. Wie viele Tage würde es in der Praxis zwischen der Bekanntmachung der Ausschreibung und der Einreichungsfrist für einen Vertrag wie dem in Abschnitt 1 beschriebenen dauern?
30-40 Tage
21. Wie oft ändert die Vergabestelle die Ausschreibungsunterlagen aus irgendeinem Grund nach der Werbung, jedoch vor Ablauf der Einreichungsfrist?

Gelegentlich (zwischen 25-50%).

22. Wie stellt der rechtliche Rahmen den Mindestinhalt der Bekanntmachung und der Ausschreibungsunterlagen fest?

Ja. Artikel 218-219 des Wirtschaftsrchts Nr. 36/2005/QH 11; sowie Drucksache Nr. 03/2015/TT-BKHDT
Die Bekanntmachung muss Folgendes enthalten:

Name und Adresse des Beschaffenden
kurze Beschreibung des Angebotsinhalts
Frist, Ort und Verfahren für den Eingang der Angebotsunterlage
Anleitung zur Klärung der Ausschreibungsunterlagen
Die Ausschreibungsunterlagen müssen enthalten:
Anforderungen an die Beschaffung von Waren oder Dienstleistungen
Methoden zur Bewertung, zum Vergleich, zum Ranking und zur Auswahl des Bewerbers
andere Anweisungen zum Bieten

23. Welche der folgenden Informationen sind in der Praxis normalerweise NICHT in der Bekanntmachung und / oder in den Ausschreibungsunterlagen enthalten?

Gründe für den Ausschluss von Bietern; Hauptbedingungen des Vertrags; Zahlungsplan unter dem Vergabevertrag.

24. Welche Aspekte der Vergabe von Unteraufträgen werden durch den geltenden Rechtsrahmen geregelt?

Merkmale – der rechtliche Rahmen regelt den Verwaltungsprozess für die Vergabe von Unteraufträgen, die Grenzen der Vergabe von Unteraufträgen, die erforderlichen Genehmigungen usw.
Offenlegung – Der rechtliche Rahmen regelt, wann und wie Unternehmen das Vergabestelle über ihre Absicht informieren sollten, Unteraufträge zu vergeben
Haftung – Der rechtliche Rahmen regelt die Haftung des Auftragnehmers und des Unterauftragnehmers im Falle einer Schlechtleistung

25. Wie werden in der Praxis normalerweise zu klärende Fragen von potenziellen Bietern angesprochen?

Die Vergabestelle spricht alle Klarstellungen in einer öffentlichen Sitzung an.
Die Vergabestelle wird antworten, und die Antwort muss auch allen anderen Bietern mitgeteilt werden

26. Muss BidCo gemäß den gesetzlichen Rahmenbedingungen eine Form der Angebotsgarantie abgeben?

Ja. Artikel 11.1 des Gebotsgesetz Nr. 43/2013/QH13

27. Welches Instrument würde BidCo in der Praxis am häufigsten als Gebotsgarantie einsetzen?
Bargeld / beglaubigter Scheck; Bankgarantie / Akkreditiv; Bietungsgarantie

28. Wird durch den rechtlichen Rahmen ein Zeitrahmen für die Vergabestelle festgelegt, der die Angebotseröffnung abschließt, sobald die Frist für die Angebotsabgabe erreicht ist?

Ja, Artikel14.3(b) Dekret Nr. 63/2014/ND-CP.
29. Auswahlausschuss – Welche der folgenden Merkmale werden durch den geltenden Rechtsrahmen geregelt?

Die Ausbildungserfordernisse der Ausschussmitglieder;

30. Die beruflichen Anforderungen der Mitglieder des Ausschusses.
Müssen die Mitarbeiter einen verbindlichen Verhaltenskodex oder eine Ethik einhalten, die Themen wie Screening-Verfahren, Interessenkonflikte, Schulungsanforderungen usw. umfasst?


31. Welches Vergabekriterium würde nach dem rechtlichen Rahmen für einen Auftrag wie den in Abschnitt 1 beschriebenen verwendet werden?

Der Preis

Preis und andere qualitative Elemente (d. h. bestes Preis-Leistungs-Verhältnis oder die vorteilhafteste Kombination aus Kosten, Zeit bis zur Fertigstellung, Qualität und Nachhaltigkeit oder das wirtschaftlich günstigste Angebot)

Die Wahl liegt im Ermessen des Vergabestelles

32. Erfordert der Rechtsrahmen, dass alle Bewertungskriterien außerhalb des Preises objektiv und quantifizierbar sein müssen?

Dies wird in Gesetzen nicht erwähnt.

33. Ist der rechtliche Rahmen ein Kriterium für die Ermittlung ungewöhnlich niedriger Angebote?


Definiert der Rechtsrahmen, was einen nicht wesentlichen Fehler darstellt?

Ja, Artikel 17, Dekret 63/2014/ND-CP

34. Wird ein Bewerber vor der Auftragsvergabe ausgeschlossen, erhält er eine schriftliche Begründung für den Ausschluss?

Nein, der ausgeschlossene Bewerber wird in der Auftragsvergabe direkt benachrichtigt.

34. Ist BidCo nach dem rechtlichen Rahmen verpflichtet, eine Sicherheitsleistung zu hinterlegen, die eine Entschädigungsquelle für den Fall der Nichterfüllung seiner vertraglichen Verpflichtungen darstellt?

Ja, Artikel 66 und72 des Gebotsgesetz.

35. Welches Instrument würde BidCo in der Praxis am häufigsten als Leistungsgarantie verwenden?

Bescheinigung über die Hinterlegung Bankgarantie / Akkreditiv; Einbehaltung der Zahlung bis zum zufriedenstellenden Abschluss des Vertrages.

36. Welche Aspekte des Vertragsmanagements werden durch den geltenden Rechtsrahmen geregelt?
Nuverhandlungen (Artikel 67 Gebotsgesetz, Artikel 93 Dekret Nr. 63/2014/ND-CP).

37. Gibt es nach dem rechtlichen Rahmen einen Prozentsatz der Preiserhöhung, unterhalb dessen die Vergabestelle keinen Grund für die Neuverhandlung angeben muss?


38. Gibt es entsprechend dem rechtlichen Rahmen einen Prozentsatz der Preiserhöhung, über dem die Vergabestelle nicht neu verhandeln darf und immer eine Neuausschreibung durchführen muss?

39. Sind die Ergebnisse der Vertragsverhandlungen in der Praxis öffentlich zugänglich?


40. Wie viele Tage würden in der Praxis im Durchschnitt vergehen, wenn eine der Parteien eine Neuverhandlung des Vertrags beantragt / initiiert, bis eine neue Vertragsänderung unterzeichnet wird?
Dies hängt vom Umfang der Neuverhandlung ab.
41. Gibt es rechtlich eine Grenze für die Höhe des Betrags, den das beschaffende Unternehmen im Voraus zahlen kann, damit der Auftragnehmer Arbeiter einstellen, Material kaufen und in einem Vertrag wie dem in Abschnitt 1 beschriebenen einen Betrieb beginnen kann?
42. Besteht während der Vertragsabwicklung ein Zeitrahmen, innerhalb dessen die Vergabestelle die Zahlung nach Eingang einer Rechnung verarbeiten muss?

Ja, Artikel 19 des Dekrets Nr. 37/2015/ND-CP.

43. Ist das Unternehmen nach dem rechtlichen Rahmen berechtigt, Verzugszinsen zu fordern, wenn das Vergabeorgan nicht innerhalb der gesetzlich festgelegten Frist bezahlt?

Ja. Artikel 94 des Dekrets Nr. 63/2014/ND-CP

44. Unter der Annahme, dass BidCo Werke erbringt, die den im Vertrag vereinbarten Qualitätsstandards im Rahmen von Budget und Pünktlichkeit entsprechen, welche Strategien wendet das Vergabeunternehmen gegebenenfalls an, um Zahlungen zu verzögern oder zu vermeiden?

Bürokratie / Papierkram Inspektionen / finanzielle Schwierigkeiten

45. Verfügt die Vergabestelle über Richtlinien oder Protokolle, die Kontrollen der Qualität der Werke regeln?

46. Muss BidCo gesetzlichen nach Abschluss der Arbeiten eine Garantie geben?
Ja. Bankgarantie / Akkreditiv; Einbehaltung der Zahlung.

47. Wenn eine Garantie nach Fertigstellung nicht gesetzlich vorgeschrieben ist, wird die Vergabestelle normalerweise einen Vertrag wie den in Abschnitt 1 beschriebenen verlangen?
48. Welches Instrument der Garantie nach Fertigstellung (Gewährleistung) würde das Vergabestelle in der Praxis am häufigsten verlangen?
Ja. Bankgarantie / Akkreditiv; Einbehaltung der Zahlung.
49. Was sind in der Praxis die Hauptgründe dafür, dass die Arbeiten das ursprüngliche Budget übersteigen?
Marktbedingungen (Änderungen der Rohstoffpreise, Wechselkursschwankungen usw.); umständliche Verwaltungsprozesse innerhalb der Vergabestelle; Kapazität des Auftragnehmers (technische / finanzielle / verwaltungstechnische / personelle Beschränkungen); schlechte Planung seitens der Vergabestelle (schlecht konzipierte Projektspezifikationen usw.); Fehlplanung auf der Seite des Auftragnehmers.
Formale Herausforderungen im gesamten Vergabeprozess
Die Vergabestelle veröffentlicht Ausschreibungsunterlagen für einen Straßenbauvertrag.
Vor Ablauf der Frist für die Einreichung der Angebote wenden sich 3 Unternehmen gege die Ausschreibungsunterlagenaus den folgenden Gründen:
Unternehmen 1 argumentiert, dass die Ausschreibungsunterlagen einen bestimmten Bewerber egünstigen.
Unternehmen 2 argumentiert, dass eines der Bewertungskriterien, nach denen der dem Projekt zugewiesene Projektmanager über mindestens 20 Jahre Erfahrung verfügt, willkürlich ist und nicht verwendet werden sollte
Unternehmen 3 argumentiert, dass die Anforderung einer Leistungsgarantie von 10% den Zugang zu SMEs behindere.
Nehmen Sie an, dass alle Anfechtenden ihre Ansprüche innerhalb der gesetzlichen Fristen fehlerfrei einreichen, die mit ihren Anfechtungen verbundenen Gebühren zahlen und ihre Ansprüche geltend machen, bis keine weiteren Rechtsmittel zur Verfügung stehen.

50. Können gesetzlich Ausschreibungsunterlagen vor Ablauf der Frist für die Einreichung von Angeboten angefochten werden?

51. Wer ist nach dem rechtlichen Rahmen rechtlich befugt, Ausschreibungsunterlagen anzufechten?
Potentielle Bewerber.
Erste Instanz

Welche Behörde wäre für die Anfechtung zuständig?

Investor des Projekts

Würde die Anfechtung den Vergabeprozess aussetzen?

Nein, der Vergabeprozess würde fortgesetzt werden.

Zweite Instanz

Bei welcher Behörde wird die Entscheidung in erster Instanz angefochten?

Vergabestelle, Investor des Projekts

Würde der Einspruch den Vergabeprozess aussetzen?
Nein, der Vergabeprozess würde fortgesetzt werden.
Die Vergabestelle hat an BidCo einen Werkvertrag vergeben.
Drei Unternehmen wenden sich aus folgenden Gründen dagegen:
Unternehmen 1 macht geltend, BidCo habe ein rücksichtslos niedriges Gebot abgegeben, das hätte ausgeschlossen werden sollen.

Unternehmen 2 argumentiert, dass eines der Bewertungskriterien von der Vergabestelle willkürlich verwendet wurde, um die endgültige Platzierung des Unternehmens zu verringern.

Unternehmen 3 macht geltend, das von ihnen eingereichte technische Projekt habe die in den Ausschreibungsunterlagen festgelegten Mindeststandards erfüllt und hätte nicht ausgeschlossen werden dürfen.

Nehmen Sie an, dass alle ihre Ansprüche innerhalb der gesetzlichen Fristen fehlerfrei einreichen, die mit ihren Anfechtungen verbundenen Gebühren zahlen und ihre Ansprüche geltend machen, bis keine weiteren Rechtsmittel zur Verfügung stehen.

52- Wer ist laut rechtlichen Rahmenbedingungen berechtigt, den Zuschlag anzufechten?

Erste Instanz

Welche Behörde wäre zuständig?


Würde die Anfechtung den Vergabeprozess aussetzen?

Nein, der Vergabeprozess würde fortgesetzt werden.

Zweite Instanz

Bei welcher Behörde wird die Entscheidung in erster Instanz angefochten?

Verantwortliche im Auswahlverfahren für Bieter / Investoren, Beratender Ausschuss

Würde die Einspruch den Vergabeprozess aussetzen?

Nein, die Aussetzung ist in ähnlichen Fällen dem Ermessen anheim gestellt, in der Praxis jedoch nicht üblich.


Falls Sie Fragen haben oder weitere Informationen zu dem oben Genannten benötigen, zögern Sie bitte nicht Herrn Dr. Oliver Massmann unter zu kontaktieren.
Dr. Oliver Massmann ist der General Director bei Duane Morris Vietnam LLC.