Duane Morris Vietnam

Einleitung Vietnam hat wiederholt gezeigt, dass es bereit ist, über internationale Mindeststandards hinauszugehen, wenn es sein Rechtssystem modernisiert. Von Doi Moi über den Beitritt zur Welthandelsorganisation bis hin zur Umsetzung des EU Vietnam Freihandelsabkommens (EVFTA) und der erwarteten Aufnahme in den FTSE Russell Emerging Market Index hat Vietnam konsequent Reformen eingeführt, die Transparenz verbessern, das Vertrauen von Investoren stärken und die internationale Wettbewerbsfähigkeit erhöhen. Heute eröffnet sich eine weitere Gelegenheit. Vietnam hat das WTO Handelserleichterungsabkommen („TFA“) vollständig umgesetzt, indem es einen Rechtsrahmen für verbindliche Zollauskünfte geschaffen hat. Dies stellt eine bedeutende Errungenschaft dar. Nun hat Vietnam die Möglichkeit, über die WTO Compliance hinauszugehen und sich als eine der weltweit führenden Jurisdiktionen für vorhersehbare und investorenfreundliche Zollverwaltung zu etablieren.
Was ist eine verbindliche Zollauskunft? Eine verbindliche Zollauskunft ist eines der wichtigsten Instrumente der Handelserleichterung für internationale Unternehmen. Bevor Waren eingeführt werden, kann ein Importeur einen Antrag bei der Zollbehörde einreichen, in dem die geplante Transaktion detailliert beschrieben wird. Beispiel: Ein deutscher Stahlhersteller beabsichtigt, 1.000 Tonnen spezialisierte Stahlprodukte nach Vietnam zu exportieren. Vor der Verschiffung übermittelt der Importeur alle relevanten Informationen an den vietnamesischen Zoll, darunter:
• detaillierte Produktspezifikationen;
• Vorschlag zur Zolltarifnummer;
• Ursprungszeugnisse;
• Bewertungsmethodik für den Zollwert;
• technische Dokumentation;
• Handelsverträge;
• vorgesehene Zollverfahren.
Der vietnamesische Zoll prüft den Antrag und erlässt eine offizielle verbindliche Auskunft. Sobald diese erteilt ist, wissen sowohl Zoll als auch Importeur im Voraus, wie die Sendung behandelt wird. Dies schafft Rechtssicherheit, bevor die Waren Deutschland überhaupt verlassen.
Warum verbindliche Auskünfte wichtig sind Internationale Lieferketten sind auf Vorhersehbarkeit angewiesen. Große Investitionen erfordern oft Entscheidungen Monate vor Produktionsbeginn. Importeure benötigen Sicherheit in Bezug auf:
• Zolltarifklassifizierung;
• anwendbare Zollabgaben;
• Präferenzzollsätze;
• Ursprungsregeln;
• Zollwert;
• Einhaltung der Einfuhrbestimmungen.
Ohne Rechtssicherheit sind Investoren unnötigen kommerziellen Risiken ausgesetzt.
Der aktuelle Rechtsrahmen in Vietnam Vietnam verdient erhebliche Anerkennung für die Umsetzung des WTO Handelserleichterungsabkommens. Das Zollgesetz und seine Durchführungsbestimmungen schaffen ein System verbindlicher Auskünfte für Themen wie:
• Zolltarifklassifizierung;
• Warenursprung;
• Zollwert.
Dieser Rahmen verbessert die Transparenz erheblich. Nach geltendem vietnamesischem Recht muss der Zoll jedoch eine schriftliche Entscheidung erlassen, bevor die verbindliche Auskunft wirksam wird. Bleibt der Zoll untätig, hat dies keine rechtlichen Folgen. Der Importeur muss einfach weiter warten.
Die WTO verlangt nicht mehr – erlaubt aber mehr Artikel 3 des WTO Handelserleichterungsabkommens verpflichtet die Mitglieder zur Einrichtung von Systemen für verbindliche Auskünfte. Es verlangt, dass Entscheidungen innerhalb einer angemessenen veröffentlichten Frist erteilt werden. Wichtig ist jedoch: Die WTO verlangt nicht die Einführung einer Genehmigungsfiktion. Die WTO legt Mindestverpflichtungen fest. Es steht den Mitgliedern frei, investorenfreundlichere Verfahren einzuführen.
Lernen aus dem deutschen Verwaltungsrecht Das deutsche Verwaltungsrecht kennt ein interessantes Konzept, die sogenannte Genehmigungsfiktion („deemed approval“). Nach diesem Prinzip gilt ein Verwaltungsantrag automatisch als genehmigt, wenn die zuständige Behörde innerhalb einer gesetzlich vorgeschriebenen Frist keine Entscheidung trifft – vorausgesetzt, das Gesetz sieht dies ausdrücklich vor. Die Rechtswirkung tritt kraft Gesetzes ein. Der Antragsteller erhält keine Gunstentscheidung, sondern Rechtssicherheit, weil die Verwaltung innerhalb der Frist untätig geblieben ist. Obwohl dieses Konzept im deutschen Zollrecht nicht allgemein Anwendung findet, verdeutlicht es ein wichtiges gesetzgeberisches Prinzip: Verwaltungseffizienz kann gefördert werden, indem Untätigkeit rechtliche Konsequenzen nach sich zieht. Mehrere Jurisdiktionen weltweit haben vergleichbare Mechanismen in ausgewählten Regulierungsbereichen eingeführt. Vietnam könnte sein eigenes Modell auf Grundlage dieser international anerkannten Technik entwickeln.
Eine neue Reformchance für Vietnam Vietnam könnte eine ausgewogene Regelung einführen, die besagt: Wenn ein Antragsteller einen vollständigen, genauen und wahrheitsgemäßen Antrag auf eine verbindliche Zollauskunft eingereicht hat und der vietnamesische Zoll innerhalb der gesetzlich vorgeschriebenen Frist keine Entscheidung erlässt, gilt die beantragte Auskunft als genehmigt – es sei denn, der Antrag betrifft Betrug, verbotene Waren, nationale Sicherheit, handelspolitische Schutzmaßnahmen oder andere ausdrücklich ausgeschlossene Fälle. Dieser Vorschlag würde den Zoll nicht schwächen. Vielmehr würde er die Verwaltung disziplinieren und gleichzeitig transparente und regelkonforme Unternehmen belohnen.
Vorteile für Vietnam
1. Größere Rechtssicherheit – Investoren können mit Vertrauen wirtschaftliche Entscheidungen treffen.
2. Schnellere Investitionsentscheidungen – Projekte schreiten ohne unnötige Verwaltungsverzögerungen voran.
3. Stärkere internationale Wettbewerbsfähigkeit – Vietnam würde sich als eine der vorhersehbarsten Zolljurisdiktionen Asiens positionieren.
4. Mehr ausländische Direktinvestitionen – Internationale Investoren bewerten Rechtssicherheit durchweg als einen der wichtigsten Faktoren.
5. Bessere Verwaltungsleistung – Gesetzliche Fristen verbessern Effizienz, Verantwortlichkeit und internes Management.
Empfohlene gesetzliche Schutzmaßnahmen Ein Genehmigungsfiktion Mechanismus sollte geeignete Sicherungen enthalten, beispielsweise:
• vollständige Offenlegung durch den Antragsteller;
• Aussetzung der Frist, wenn zusätzliche Informationen angefordert werden;
• Ausschluss bei Betrug, vorsätzlicher Falschdarstellung und falschen Angaben;
• Ausschluss für verbotene Waren und Angelegenheiten der nationalen Sicherheit;
• Erhalt der nachträglichen Prüfungsbefugnisse des Zolls;
• gerichtliche Überprüfung, wo angemessen.
Solche Sicherungen schützen sowohl den legitimen Handel als auch das öffentliche Interesse.
Vorgeschlagener Aktionsplan
Schritt 1 – Einrichtung einer interministeriellen Arbeitsgruppe Einschließlich:
• Ministerium für Finanzen;
• Vietnamesische Zollbehörde;
• Ministerium für Industrie und Handel;
• Justizministerium;
• Vietnamesische Handels- und Industriekammer.
Schritt 2 – Durchführung einer internationalen Vergleichsstudie Überprüfung gesetzlicher Modelle aus:
• Deutschland;
• Singapur;
• Australien;
• Neuseeland;
• Kanada;
• Südkorea;
• der Europäischen Union.
Das Ziel sollte nicht darin bestehen, ausländisches Recht zu kopieren, sondern geeignete Best Practices für Vietnam zu identifizieren.
Schritt 3 – Änderung des Zollgesetzes Einführung von:
• gesetzlich festgelegten Entscheidungsfristen;
• Regelungen zur Genehmigungsfiktion;
• verfahrensrechtlichen Sicherungen;
• elektronischen Benachrichtigungssystemen.
Schritt 4 – Digitalisierung Integration verbindlicher Zollauskünfte in das Nationale Einheitsfenster Vietnams und die digitale Zollplattform. Anträge, Nachverfolgung, Fristenüberwachung und Entscheidungen sollten vollständig elektronisch erfolgen.
Schritt 5 – Pilotprogramm Einführung des neuen Mechanismus zunächst für risikofreie Kategorien wie Zolltarifklassifizierung und Ursprungsbestimmungen, bevor er auf weitere Zollangelegenheiten ausgeweitet wird.
Schlussfolgerung Vietnam ist nie zu einer der erfolgreichsten Volkswirtschaften Asiens geworden, indem es lediglich internationale Mindeststandards eingehalten hat. Die größten Erfolge des Landes resultierten aus Reformen, die zukünftige wirtschaftliche Bedürfnisse antizipierten.
Die Einführung einer sorgfältig ausgestalteten Genehmigungsfiktion für verbindliche Zollauskünfte wäre eine weitere solche Reform. Sie würde nicht nur die Rechtssicherheit stärken, sondern auch Vietnams Ruf als transparente, effiziente und investorenfreundliche Volkswirtschaft verbessern.
Das WTO Handelserleichterungsabkommen bietet die Grundlage. Vietnam hat nun die Möglichkeit, die nächste Stufe aufzubauen. Anstatt nur zu fragen, was die WTO verlangt, kann Vietnam erneut eine ambitioniertere Frage stellen: Welche Reform wird Vietnam in den nächsten zwanzig Jahren zum bevorzugten Ziel für globale Investitionen machen?
Ein modernes, vorhersehbares und effizientes System verbindlicher Zollauskünfte – unterstützt durch eine sorgfältig ausgestaltete Genehmigungsfiktion – könnte eine der Antworten sein.
Für weitere Informationen zu den oben genannten Inhalten wenden Sie sich bitte an den Autor Dr. Oliver Massmann unter omassmann@duanemorris.com. Dr. Oliver Massmann ist Generaldirektor von Duane Morris Vietnam LLC.

Vietnam’s Consumer Market Has Entered a New Era
For many years, Vietnam was primarily viewed as one of Asia’s leading manufacturing destinations. International investors were attracted by its competitive workforce, expanding export sector and strategic location within global supply chains.
That perception, however, is no longer complete.
Vietnam is rapidly evolving into one of Southeast Asia’s most promising consumer markets. Rising household incomes, accelerating urbanisation, a young population, increasing health awareness and a growing middle class are fundamentally changing purchasing behaviour. Consumers are increasingly seeking high-quality, safe and trusted international products while demonstrating a greater willingness to pay for quality, reliability and brand reputation.
This transformation raises an interesting strategic question for European retailers:
Which German retail concepts are best positioned to benefit from Vietnam’s next stage of economic development?
A Remarkable Observation
Having lived and worked in Vietnam for almost three decades, I have had the opportunity to observe the country’s extraordinary economic transformation firsthand.
During frequent travel between Germany and Vietnam, one recurring observation has stood out.
Many Vietnamese travellers intentionally purchase German consumer products during visits to Germany. Personal care products, cosmetics, baby products, dietary supplements, household products and organic food regularly find their way back to Vietnam through personal purchases, family networks and independent resellers.
Among German retailers, one company appears particularly well represented in these purchasing patterns:
dm-drogerie markt.
This is, of course, an observation from many years of practical experience rather than the result of a formal market survey. Nevertheless, it reflects a broader trend that deserves attention.
The continued demand for German drugstore products suggests that Vietnamese consumers place considerable trust in German quality, particularly in product categories directly connected with health, beauty, personal care and family wellbeing.
Why the dm Business Model Deserves Attention
dm is much more than a traditional drugstore.
Its business model combines personal care, health products, baby care, natural cosmetics, organic food, dietary supplements, household products and attractive private-label brands within a customer-focused retail concept.
This combination aligns closely with several long-term consumer trends currently visible in Vietnam:
• increasing health consciousness;
• growing interest in premium personal care products;
• expanding demand for baby and family products;
• greater appreciation of sustainable and natural products;
• rising interest in organic food;
• strong confidence in European quality standards.
Importantly, these trends are structural rather than temporary.
The EVFTA Creates Additional Momentum
The EU–Vietnam Free Trade Agreement (EVFTA) has significantly strengthened the commercial framework for trade between the European Union and Vietnam.
As tariff reductions continue to take effect, many qualifying EU-origin products benefit from improved market access conditions. While Vietnamese regulatory requirements, product registration, labelling rules and import procedures continue to apply, the EVFTA improves the commercial attractiveness of the Vietnamese market for European businesses.
For retailers offering products manufactured within the European Union and meeting the applicable rules of origin, the agreement can create meaningful competitive advantages over time.
A Market Opportunity Worth Evaluating
Vietnam already hosts a dynamic retail sector with strong domestic and international participants.
However, the specific retail concept developed by dm — combining affordable quality, trusted private labels, health and beauty products, baby care, organic food and sustainability under one roof — appears to have limited direct equivalents in today’s Vietnamese market.
Whether this represents a first-mover opportunity is ultimately a commercial question for retailers themselves.
What is clear, however, is that Vietnam’s consumer market is becoming increasingly sophisticated, and demand for trusted international brands continues to grow.
Looking Beyond Manufacturing
For many years, German business discussions about Vietnam focused primarily on manufacturing, industrial investment and exports.
The coming decade may increasingly be defined by another story:
Vietnam’s rise as one of Asia’s most attractive consumer markets.
Retailers able to recognise this transition early may find opportunities that extend well beyond traditional export models.
As Vietnam continues its remarkable economic journey, it may be time for German retailers to ask a simple but important question:
Is Vietnam ready for the next generation of German retail concepts?
The answer may prove to be one of the most interesting business opportunities of the coming decade.
***
Dr. Oliver Massmann is Partner and General Director of Duane Morris Vietnam LLC. Having advised international investors in Vietnam for nearly three decades, he regularly writes on foreign investment, international trade, regulatory developments and strategic market-entry opportunities in Vietnam.

Giới thiệu
Việt Nam đã nhiều lần chứng minh rằng quốc gia này sẵn sàng nhìn xa hơn các tiêu chuẩn quốc tế tối thiểu khi hiện đại hóa hệ thống pháp luật.
Từ công cuộc Đổi Mới đến việc gia nhập Tổ chức Thương mại Thế giới, từ việc thực thi Hiệp định Thương mại Tự do EU – Việt Nam (EVFTA) đến kỳ vọng nâng hạng thị trường mới nổi FTSE Russell, Việt Nam liên tục thực hiện các cải cách nhằm tăng cường tính minh bạch, củng cố niềm tin của nhà đầu tư và nâng cao năng lực cạnh tranh quốc tế.
Ngày nay, một cơ hội khác lại xuất hiện.
Việt Nam đã thực hiện đầy đủ Hiệp định Tạo thuận lợi Thương mại của WTO (“TFA”) bằng cách thiết lập khung pháp lý cho các quyết định trước về hải quan. Đây là một thành tựu quan trọng.
Tuy nhiên, Việt Nam hiện có cơ hội tiến xa hơn việc tuân thủ WTO và khẳng định vị thế là một trong những quốc gia hàng đầu thế giới về quản lý hải quan minh bạch, có thể dự đoán được và thân thiện với nhà đầu tư.
Quyết định trước về hải quan là gì?
Quyết định trước về hải quan là một trong những công cụ tạo thuận lợi thương mại quan trọng nhất dành cho các thương nhân quốc tế.
Trước khi hàng hóa được nhập khẩu, nhà nhập khẩu có thể nộp đơn lên cơ quan Hải quan mô tả chi tiết giao dịch dự kiến.
Ví dụ:
Một nhà sản xuất thép của Đức dự định xuất khẩu 1.000 tấn sản phẩm thép chuyên dụng sang Việt Nam. Trước khi vận chuyển, nhà nhập khẩu nộp cho Hải quan Việt Nam toàn bộ thông tin liên quan, bao gồm:
• thông số kỹ thuật chi tiết của sản phẩm;
• đề xuất phân loại mã HS;
• giấy chứng nhận xuất xứ;
• phương pháp xác định trị giá hải quan;
• tài liệu kỹ thuật;
• hợp đồng thương mại;
• thủ tục hải quan dự kiến.
Hải quan Việt Nam sau đó xem xét hồ sơ và ban hành quyết định trước chính thức.
Khi quyết định được ban hành, cả Hải quan và nhà nhập khẩu đều biết trước cách thức lô hàng sẽ được xử lý. Điều này tạo ra sự chắc chắn về pháp lý ngay cả trước khi hàng hóa rời khỏi Đức.
Tại sao quyết định trước lại quan trọng
Chuỗi cung ứng quốc tế phụ thuộc vào tính dự đoán.
Những khoản đầu tư lớn thường đòi hỏi quyết định được đưa ra nhiều tháng trước khi bắt đầu sản xuất.
Nhà nhập khẩu cần sự chắc chắn liên quan đến:
• phân loại hải quan;
• mức thuế suất áp dụng;
• ưu đãi thuế quan;
• quy tắc xuất xứ;
• trị giá hải quan;
• tuân thủ nhập khẩu.
Nếu thiếu sự chắc chắn về pháp lý, nhà đầu tư sẽ phải đối mặt với những rủi ro thương mại không cần thiết.
Khung pháp lý hiện hành của Việt Nam
Việt Nam xứng đáng được ghi nhận đáng kể vì đã thực hiện Hiệp định Tạo thuận lợi Thương mại của WTO. Luật Hải quan và các văn bản hướng dẫn thi hành đã thiết lập hệ thống quyết định trước về hải quan, bao gồm các vấn đề như:
• phân loại thuế quan;
• xuất xứ hàng hóa; và
• trị giá hải quan.
Khung pháp lý này đã cải thiện đáng kể tính minh bạch.
Tuy nhiên, theo pháp luật hiện hành của Việt Nam, Hải quan phải ban hành quyết định bằng văn bản trước khi quyết định trước có hiệu lực.
Nếu Hải quan im lặng, sẽ không có hệ quả pháp lý nào phát sinh.
Nhà nhập khẩu buộc phải tiếp tục chờ đợi.
WTO không yêu cầu thêm — nhưng cho phép thêm
Điều 3 của Hiệp định Tạo thuận lợi Thương mại WTO yêu cầu các Thành viên thiết lập hệ thống quyết định trước. Quy định này yêu cầu các quyết định phải được ban hành trong một khoảng thời gian hợp lý đã được công bố.
Tuy nhiên, WTO không yêu cầu các Thành viên phải áp dụng cơ chế “được coi là phê duyệt”.
WTO chỉ đặt ra nghĩa vụ tối thiểu.
Không có gì ngăn cản các Thành viên áp dụng những thủ tục thân thiện với doanh nghiệp hơn.
Học hỏi từ Luật hành chính Đức
Luật hành chính Đức có một khái niệm thú vị gọi là Genehmigungsfiktion, hay “được coi là phê duyệt”.
Theo nguyên tắc này, khi pháp luật có quy định cụ thể, một đơn hành chính sẽ tự động được coi là phê duyệt nếu cơ quan có thẩm quyền không ra quyết định trong thời hạn luật định.
Hiệu lực pháp lý phát sinh theo quy định của pháp luật.
Người nộp đơn không nhận được một sự ưu ái mang tính tùy nghi.
Thay vào đó, sự chắc chắn pháp lý được xác lập vì cơ quan hành chính không hành động trong thời hạn luật định.
Mặc dù khái niệm này không áp dụng chung cho thủ tục hải quan tại Đức, nhưng nó thể hiện một nguyên tắc lập pháp quan trọng:
Hiệu quả hành chính có thể được khuyến khích bằng cách gắn hệ quả pháp lý với sự im lặng của cơ quan hành chính. Nhiều quốc gia trên thế giới đã áp dụng cơ chế tương tự trong một số lĩnh vực quản lý nhất định. Việt Nam có thể phát triển mô hình riêng dựa trên kỹ thuật lập pháp được quốc tế công nhận này.
Cơ hội cải cách mới cho Việt Nam
Việt Nam có thể ban hành một quy định cân bằng, nêu rõ:
Khi người nộp đơn đã nộp hồ sơ đầy đủ, chính xác và trung thực để xin quyết định trước về hải quan, và Hải quan Việt Nam không ban hành quyết định trong thời hạn luật định, thì quyết định trước được yêu cầu sẽ được coi là phê duyệt, trừ trường hợp liên quan đến gian lận, hàng hóa cấm, an ninh quốc gia, biện pháp phòng vệ thương mại hoặc các trường hợp loại trừ cụ thể khác.
Đề xuất này sẽ không làm suy yếu Hải quan.
Ngược lại, nó sẽ khuyến khích kỷ luật hành chính đồng thời tạo lợi ích cho các doanh nghiệp minh bạch và tuân thủ.
Lợi ích đối với Việt Nam
1. Tăng cường sự chắc chắn về mặt pháp lý
Nhà đầu tư có thể đưa ra quyết định thương mại với sự tự tin.
2. Đẩy nhanh quyết định đầu tư
Dự án được triển khai mà không bị trì hoãn về mặt hành chính không cần thiết.
3. Nâng cao năng lực cạnh tranh quốc tế
Việt Nam sẽ nổi bật là một trong những hệ thống hải quan dự đoán được nhất tại châu Á.
4. Gia tăng đầu tư trực tiếp nước ngoài
Nhà đầu tư quốc tế luôn xếp sự chắc chắn pháp lý là một trong những yếu tố quan trọng nhất khi đầu tư.
5. Cải thiện hiệu quả hành chính Thời hạn luật định giúp nâng cao hiệu quả, trách nhiệm và quản lý nội bộ.
Các biện pháp bảo đảm lập pháp đề xuất
Cơ chế “được coi là phê duyệt” cần có các biện pháp bảo đảm phù hợp.
Ví dụ:
• công bố đầy đủ thông tin bởi người nộp đơn;
• tạm ngừng thời hạn luật định khi yêu cầu bổ sung thông tin;
• loại trừ đối với gian lận, cố ý khai báo sai và giả mạo;
• loại trừ đối với hàng hóa cấm và vấn đề an ninh quốc gia;
• duy trì quyền kiểm tra sau thông quan của Hải quan;
• xem xét tư pháp khi cần thiết.
Các biện pháp này vừa bảo vệ thương mại hợp pháp vừa bảo vệ lợi ích công cộng.
Dưới đây là bản dịch tiếng Việt của phần bạn cung cấp, giữ nguyên cấu trúc và giọng văn pháp lý – chuyên nghiệp:
Kế hoạch hành động đề xuất
Bước 1 – Thành lập Nhóm công tác liên bộ
Bao gồm:
• Bộ Tài chính;
• Tổng cục Hải quan Việt Nam;
• Bộ Công Thương;
• Bộ Tư pháp;
• Phòng Thương mại và Công nghiệp Việt Nam.
Bước 2 – Thực hiện nghiên cứu so sánh quốc tế
Xem xét các mô hình pháp luật từ:
• Đức;
• Singapore;
• Úc;
• New Zealand;
• Canada;
• Hàn Quốc;
• Liên minh châu Âu.
Mục tiêu không phải sao chép luật nước ngoài mà là xác định các thông lệ tốt nhất phù hợp với Việt Nam.
Bước 3 – Sửa đổi Luật Hải quan
Đưa vào:
• thời hạn ra quyết định theo luật định;
• quy định về “được coi là phê duyệt”;
• các biện pháp bảo đảm thủ tục;
• hệ thống thông báo điện tử.
Bước 4 – Số hóa
Tích hợp quyết định trước vào Cơ chế một cửa quốc gia và nền tảng hải quan điện tử của Việt Nam. Việc nộp hồ sơ, theo dõi, giám sát thời hạn và ban hành quyết định cần được thực hiện hoàn toàn bằng điện tử.
Bước 5 – Chương trình thí điểm
Triển khai cơ chế mới ban đầu đối với các lĩnh vực rủi ro thấp như phân loại thuế quan và xác định xuất xứ, trước khi mở rộng sang các vấn đề hải quan khác.
Kết luận
Việt Nam chưa bao giờ trở thành một trong những nền kinh tế thành công nhất châu Á chỉ bằng cách tuân thủ các tiêu chuẩn quốc tế tối thiểu.
Những thành tựu lớn nhất của Việt Nam đến từ việc áp dụng các cải cách dự đoán nhu cầu kinh tế trong tương lai.
Việc áp dụng một cơ chế “được coi là phê duyệt” được thiết kế cẩn trọng cho các quyết định trước về hải quan sẽ là một cải cách như vậy.
Nó không chỉ củng cố sự chắc chắn pháp lý mà còn nâng cao uy tín của Việt Nam như một nền kinh tế minh bạch, hiệu quả và thân thiện với nhà đầu tư.
Hiệp định Tạo thuận lợi Thương mại của WTO đã cung cấp nền tảng.
Giờ đây, Việt Nam có cơ hội xây dựng cấp độ tiếp theo.
Thay vì chỉ hỏi WTO yêu cầu gì, Việt Nam một lần nữa có thể đặt ra câu hỏi tham vọng hơn:
Cải cách nào sẽ khiến Việt Nam trở thành điểm đến ưu tiên cho đầu tư toàn cầu trong 20 năm tới?
Một hệ thống quyết định trước về hải quan hiện đại, dự đoán được và hiệu quả — được hỗ trợ bởi cơ chế “được coi là phê duyệt” — có thể chính là một trong những câu trả lời.
***
Để biết thêm thông tin về nội dung trên, vui lòng liên hệ tác giả Tiến sĩ Oliver Massmann qua omassmann@duanemorris.com. Tiến sĩ Oliver Massmann là Tổng Giám đốc của Công ty Luật TNHH Duane Morris Việt Nam.

Introduction
Vietnam has repeatedly demonstrated that it is prepared to look beyond minimum international standards when modernising its legal system.
From Doi Moi to accession to the World Trade Organization, from the implementation of the EU-Vietnam Free Trade Agreement (EVFTA) to the country’s anticipated FTSE Russell Emerging Market upgrade, Vietnam has consistently adopted reforms that improve transparency, strengthen investor confidence and enhance international competitiveness.
Today, another opportunity presents itself.
Vietnam has fully implemented the WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement (“TFA”) by establishing a legal framework for advance customs rulings. This represents an important achievement.
However, Vietnam now has the opportunity to move beyond WTO compliance and establish itself as one of the world’s leading jurisdictions for predictable and investor-friendly customs administration.

What is an Advance Customs Ruling?
An advance customs ruling is one of the most important trade facilitation instruments available to international traders.
Before goods are imported, an importer may submit an application to Customs describing the planned transaction in detail.
For example:
A German steel manufacturer intends to export 1,000 tonnes of specialised steel products to Vietnam.
Before shipment, the importer submits all relevant information to Vietnam Customs, including:
• detailed product specifications;
• tariff classification proposal;
• certificates of origin;
• customs valuation methodology;
• technical documentation;
• commercial contracts;
• intended customs procedures.
Vietnam Customs then examines the application and issues an official advance ruling.
Once issued, both Customs and the importer know in advance how the shipment will be treated.
This creates legal certainty before the goods even leave Germany.
Why Advance Rulings Matter
International supply chains depend upon predictability.
Large investments often require decisions months before production begins.
Importers need certainty regarding:
• customs classification;
• applicable duty rates;
• preferential tariff treatment;
• rules of origin;
• customs valuation;
• import compliance.
Without legal certainty, investors face unnecessary commercial risks.

Vietnam’s Current Legal Framework
Vietnam deserves considerable recognition for implementing the WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement.
The Law on Customs and its implementing regulations establish an advance ruling system covering matters such as:
• tariff classification;
• origin of goods; and
• customs valuation.
This framework significantly improves transparency.
However, under current Vietnamese law, Customs must issue a written decision before the advance ruling becomes effective.
If Customs remains silent, no legal consequence follows.
The importer must simply continue waiting.
The WTO Does Not Require More — But It Allows More
Article 3 of the WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement requires Members to establish advance ruling systems.
It requires rulings to be issued within a reasonable published period.
Importantly, however, the WTO does not require Members to introduce a deemed approval mechanism.
The WTO establishes minimum obligations.
Nothing prevents Members from adopting more business-friendly procedures.
Learning from German Administrative Law
German administrative law contains an interesting concept known as the Genehmigungsfiktion, or “deemed approval.”
Under this principle, where legislation specifically provides for it, an administrative application is automatically deemed approved if the competent authority fails to decide within a prescribed statutory period.
The legal effect arises by operation of law.
The applicant does not receive a discretionary favour.
Instead, legal certainty is created because the administration failed to act within the legally prescribed timeframe.
Although this concept does not generally apply to customs procedures in Germany, it demonstrates an important legislative principle:
Administrative efficiency can be encouraged by attaching legal consequences to administrative silence.
Several jurisdictions around the world have adopted comparable mechanisms in selected regulatory areas.
Vietnam could develop its own model based upon this internationally recognised legislative technique.
A New Reform Opportunity for Vietnam
Vietnam could introduce a carefully balanced provision stating:
Where an applicant has submitted a complete, accurate and truthful application for an advance customs ruling, and Vietnam Customs fails to issue a decision within the prescribed statutory period, the requested advance ruling shall be deemed approved, unless the matter concerns fraud, prohibited goods, national security, trade remedies or other specifically excluded circumstances.
This proposal would not weaken Customs.
Instead, it would encourage administrative discipline while rewarding transparent and compliant businesses.
Benefits for Vietnam
1. Greater Legal Certainty
Investors can make commercial decisions with confidence.
2. Faster Investment Decisions
Projects proceed without unnecessary administrative delay.
3. Stronger International Competitiveness
Vietnam would distinguish itself as one of Asia’s most predictable customs jurisdictions.
4. Increased Foreign Direct Investment
International investors consistently rank legal certainty among the most important investment factors.
5. Better Administrative Performance
Statutory deadlines improve efficiency, accountability and internal management.
Suggested Legislative Safeguards
A deemed approval mechanism should include appropriate safeguards.
For example:
• complete disclosure by the applicant;
• suspension of the statutory period where additional information is requested;
• exclusion for fraud, intentional misrepresentation and false declarations;
• exclusion for prohibited goods and national security matters;
• preservation of Customs’ post-clearance audit powers;
• judicial review where appropriate.
Such safeguards protect both legitimate trade and the public interest.
Proposed Action Plan
Step 1 – Establish an Inter-Ministerial Working Group
Including:
• Ministry of Finance;
• Vietnam Customs;
• Ministry of Industry and Trade;
• Ministry of Justice;
• Vietnam Chamber of Commerce and Industry.
Step 2 – Conduct an International Comparative Study
Review legislative models from:
• Germany;
• Singapore;
• Australia;
• New Zealand;
• Canada;
• South Korea;
• the European Union.
The objective should not be to copy foreign law but to identify best practices suitable for Vietnam.
Step 3 – Amend the Customs Law
Introduce:
• statutory decision deadlines;
• deemed approval provisions;
• procedural safeguards;
• electronic notification systems.
Step 4 – Digitalisation
Integrate advance rulings into Vietnam’s National Single Window and digital customs platform.
Applications, tracking, deadline monitoring and rulings should be fully electronic.
Step 5 – Pilot Programme
Implement the new mechanism initially for low-risk categories such as tariff classification and origin determinations before extending it to additional customs matters.
Conclusion
Vietnam has never become one of Asia’s most successful economies by merely complying with international minimum standards.
Its greatest achievements have resulted from adopting reforms that anticipate future economic needs.
Introducing a carefully designed deemed approval mechanism for advance customs rulings would represent another such reform.
It would not only strengthen legal certainty.
It would enhance Vietnam’s reputation as a transparent, efficient and investment-friendly economy.
The WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement provides the foundation.
Vietnam now has the opportunity to build the next level.
Rather than asking what the WTO requires, Vietnam can once again ask a more ambitious question:
What reform will make Vietnam the preferred destination for global investment over the next twenty years?
A modern, predictable and efficient advance customs ruling system—supported by a carefully designed deemed approval mechanism—could be one of the answers
***
For more information on the above, please do not hesitate to contact the author Dr. Oliver Massmann under omassmann@duanemorris.com. Dr. Oliver Massmann is the General Director of Duane Morris Vietnam LLC.

Could Vietnam’s new Decree 272 be the regulatory breakthrough international energy investors have been waiting for?

On 4 July 2026, the Government of Vietnam officially promulgated Decree No. 272/2026/ND-CP (”Decree 272”), establishing detailed mechanisms and policies for implementing Resolution No. 253/2025/QH15 on national energy development for the period 2026–2030.

Effective immediately until 31 December 2030, Decree 272 introduces a transparent and investor-friendly framework designed to accelerate approvals, reduce administrative burdens, and unlock significant opportunities for foreign investment in offshore wind and power grid infrastructure.

For international developers, financial institutions, EPC contractors, and energy investors, Decree 272 represents an important step towards a more predictable and efficient investment environment.

Key Highlights for Foreign Investors

1. Faster Adjustments to Power Development Plans

Historically, amendments to Vietnam’s power development plans could be time-consuming. Decree 272 significantly streamlines this process through clearly defined statutory timelines.

Key improvements include:

• Fully digital procedures: Applications and amendments are processed through an electronic system, substantially reducing administrative paperwork.
• Accelerated appraisal: Competent authorities must complete the appraisal of complete dossiers within 15 working days.
• Rapid approval: Following completion of the appraisal, the final approval decision must be issued within 3 working days.

These measures provide investors with greater certainty and significantly improve project planning.

2. Greater Certainty for Offshore Wind Projects

Decree 272 establishes clear financial requirements and procedural rules that substantially reduce regulatory uncertainty during project development.

Among the key provisions are:

• Survey qualification: Applicants conducting offshore wind surveys must demonstrate minimum equity of VND 1 billion per proposed megawatt (MW).
• Project equity requirement: Investors must maintain equity equal to at least 20% of the total project investment, while the remaining financing may be supported through bank loans or other institutional financing.
• Facilitated foreign participation: Foreign investors and foreign-invested enterprises are required to contribute a minimum of 15% of the project value, reflecting Vietnam’s continued openness to international investment and expertise.
• State survey reimbursement: Where a wholly state-owned enterprise has previously conducted offshore surveys, successful investors reimburse the audited survey costs before receiving final project approval.
• Priority based on filing order: Where multiple valid applications relate to the same project identified in the national master plan, authorities will process applications according to the order in which complete dossiers are received.

3. Simplified Approval Process for Power Grid Infrastructure

As Vietnam increasingly opens transmission infrastructure to private investment, Decree 272 introduces a more efficient approval mechanism.

Notable improvements include:

• Single-point filing: Investors submit only one application dossier to the relevant Provincial People’s Committee.
• Simplified multi-provincial projects: Transmission projects crossing several provinces require filing only with the province where the transmission line originates.
• Flexible financial evidence: Investors may demonstrate financial capability through audited financial statements, parent company guarantees, or institutional financial commitments.
• Clear processing timelines: Provincial authorities must verify dossier completeness within 10 working days, complete the appraisal within 15 working days, and the Chairman of the Provincial People’s Committee must issue the investment decision within 5 working days thereafter.

Strategic Considerations for Investors

Decree 272 provides the practical implementation framework many international energy investors have been awaiting. Companies considering investments in Vietnam’s energy sector should now:

• review existing offshore wind and transmission projects against the new financial thresholds and investment requirements;
• prepare fully digitized application dossiers to benefit from the accelerated approval procedures;
• assess whether proposed offshore sites have already been surveyed by state-owned enterprises and incorporate any reimbursement obligations into project financial models; and
• review investment timelines to capitalize on the more efficient regulatory framework introduced by Decree 272.

Conclusion

Decree 272 represents another significant milestone in Vietnam’s ongoing efforts to modernize its energy sector and strengthen its attractiveness for international investment. By introducing greater transparency, defined statutory timelines, and clearer financial requirements, the Government has taken an important step toward creating a more efficient and predictable regulatory environment for large-scale energy projects.

For international investors seeking long-term opportunities in one of Asia’s fastest-growing energy markets, Decree 272 offers a timely and encouraging signal that Vietnam continues to welcome foreign investment and expertise in building its future energy infrastructure.

⸻

If you are considering investing in Vietnam’s rapidly expanding energy sector, now is the time to understand how Decree 272 may affect your investment strategy.

For further information or tailored legal advice, please contact Dr. Oliver Massmann at omassmann@duanemorris.com. Dr. Oliver Massmann is the General Director of Duane Morris Vietnam LLC and has advised international investors on major energy and infrastructure projects in Vietnam for more than 25 years.

Introduction
One of the questions I hear most frequently from international manufacturers is:
“What happens if Vietnamese Customs audits our operations?”
The better question is different.
“Are we already operating today as if the audit were taking place tomorrow?”
Customs audits should not be viewed as extraordinary events.
They are an integral part of modern customs administration.
Well-prepared companies generally view audits as manageable compliance exercises.
Poorly prepared companies often discover weaknesses that originated years earlier—sometimes before production even commenced.
The difference is almost always preparation.
Customs Compliance Begins Before the First Shipment
Many companies believe customs compliance begins when goods arrive at the Vietnamese border.
It actually begins much earlier.
Compliance starts when management decides:
• where production will occur;
• how products will be manufactured;
• who owns the goods;
• which customs procedure will be used;
• which contracts will govern production.
Every one of these decisions may later be reviewed during a customs audit.
What Will Customs Authorities Typically Review?
Although every audit is different, manufacturers should expect questions regarding:
• HS classification;
• customs valuation;
• origin of imported materials;
• production records;
• inventory reconciliation;
• manufacturing activities;
• export documentation;
• import declarations;
• accounting records;
• supplier documentation.
The objective is normally to verify that the legal structure accurately reflects operational reality.
The Five Documents Every Manufacturer Should Always Be Able to Produce
Regardless of industry, every manufacturer should be able to produce immediately:
1. Bills of Materials
These demonstrate precisely which components were incorporated into each finished product.
2. Manufacturing Records
Authorities frequently wish to understand what manufacturing actually occurred in Vietnam.
3. Supplier Documentation
The origin and commercial history of imported components should be traceable.
4. Customs Documentation
Import and export declarations should remain consistent with operational records.
5. Internal Procedures
Companies should be able to demonstrate that compliance forms part of normal business operations.
Common Findings During Customs Audits
Experience shows that audit findings frequently involve:
• inconsistent documentation;
• incorrect tariff classification;
• incomplete production records;
• insufficient origin evidence;
• discrepancies between commercial documents and customs declarations;
• poor inventory reconciliation.
Interestingly, many issues arise from documentation rather than intentional misconduct.
How Should Companies Prepare?
Preparation should become part of ordinary business management.
I generally recommend:
• periodic internal customs reviews;
• independent verification of HS classifications;
• regular origin reviews;
• documentation audits;
• supplier compliance reviews;
• employee training.
Waiting until an audit begins is usually too late.
Audits Can Also Be Opportunities
A well-managed audit allows a company to demonstrate the strength of its compliance systems.
Companies that maintain accurate records and transparent procedures often complete audits efficiently and continue operations with minimal disruption.
Preparation therefore protects both legal compliance and commercial continuity.
Final Thoughts
Manufacturing excellence depends upon precision.
The same principle applies to customs compliance.
The companies that consistently succeed in Vietnam are not necessarily those with the largest legal departments.
They are those that recognise that customs compliance is part of operational excellence.
Good documentation.
Good procedures.
Good governance.
Those three principles remain the strongest preparation for any customs audit.
Ultimately, the best customs audit is the one for which your company has already prepared—long before the authorities arrive.
***
For more information on the above, please do not hesitate to contact the author Dr. Oliver Massmann under omassmann@duanemorris.com. Dr. Oliver Massmann is the General Director of Duane Morris Vietnam LLC.

執筆者：Dr. オリバー・マスマン（Oliver Massmann） – Duane Morris Vietnam LLC パートナー兼代表取締役
はじめに
欧州連合・ベトナム自由貿易協定（EVFTA）は、欧州の製造業者のベトナムに対する見方を根本から変えました。多くの企業にとって、ベトナムはもはや単なる競争力のある製造拠点ではありません。適用される原産地規則を満たす製品に対し大幅な特恵関税待遇を提供する、欧州市場への戦略的なゲートウェイとなっています。
しかしながら、製造プロジェクトにおいて、ある誤解が絶えず浮上しています。多くの企業は、ベトナムで製品を組み立てさえすれば、税関の目的上、自動的にベトナム製品になると信じています。残念ながら、国際貿易法はそれよりもはるかに複雑にできています。
原産地規則は、特恵関税待遇が利用可能かどうかを決定するものです。これは国際貿易法において最も技術的に困難な分野の一つであり、製造体制を構築した「後」ではなく、「前」に分析されるべきものです。ベトナムで25年以上にわたり多国籍製造業者にアドバイスを提供してきた経験から、生産拠点を移転する前に、すべての企業が以下の10の質問を自問すべきであると私は考えています。

質問1：実際の製品は何か？
原産地の分析は、完成品を正しく理解することから始まります。製品自体が明確に特定されるまで、法的な分析を開始することはできません。その構成、機能、製造工程、および関税分類のすべてが、適用される原産地規則に影響を与えます。

質問2：製品を正しく分類しているか？
原産地規則は、関税分類に基づいています。誤ったHSコードの使用は、法的な分析全体を無効にしてしまう可能性があります。したがって、原産地分析の前には、常に独立した関税分類を行う必要があります。

質問3：すべての部品の原産地はどこか？
現代の製造業において、単一の国からの部品にのみ依存することは稀です。完全な原産地マップでは、以下を特定する必要があります：
• 中国製部品
• ドイツ製部品
• 日本製部品
• 韓国製部品
• 台湾製部品
• ASEAN製部品
• ベトナム製原材料
すべての主要な投入物の原産地を把握しなければ、製品の原産地を決定することはできません。

質問4：ベトナムで実際にどのような製造が行われているか？
この質問はしばしば決定的な意味を持ちます。単なる組み立て作業だけでは、必ずしも適用される原産地規則を満たすとは限りません。製造業者は、ベトナムで行われるすべての生産活動を慎重に文書化する必要があります。これには以下が含まれます：

• 組み立て
• プログラミング
• キャリブレーション（較正）
• テスト
• ソフトウェアのインストール
• 品質管理
• パッケージング（包装）
• ラベリング

質問5：どの品目別規則が適用されるか？
EVFTAは、普遍的な単一の原産地規則を定めているわけではありません。製品ごとに異なる法的要件が適用されます。したがって、各製品を個別に分析する必要があります。

質問6：5年後にもそれを証明できるか？
原産地に関する主張の有効性は、それを裏付ける文書の信頼性にかかっています。製造業者は、将来の税関監査の際ではなく、生産の進行に合わせて文書を作成・保管していく必要があります。

質問7：製造プロセスは文書と一致しているか？
生産記録、部品表（BOM）、サプライヤー証明書、および税関書類は、すべて整合性が取れていなければなりません。一貫性が不可欠です。

質問8：企業構造は原産地戦略をサポートしているか？
所有権、委託製造契約、輸入手続き、および輸出書類のすべてが、実務的な運用に影響を与えます。原産地分析を企業構造の構築と切り離して考えるべきではありません。

質問9：欧州の税関当局について考慮しているか？
コンプライアンスは、商品がベトナムを出発した時点で終わるわけではありません。欧州の税関当局は、輸入から数年後に原産地証明書類を調査する可能性があります。企業はそれに応じた準備を行う必要があります。

質問10：コンプライアンスを中心にサプライチェーン全体を設計しているか？
最も強固な製造プロジェクトは、当初からコンプライアンスを中心に設計されています。原産地を後回しの課題にすべきではありません。それは製造戦略そのものの一部となるべきです。

結論
原産地規則は、専門的な税関特有の課題と見なされがちです。しかし現実には、ベトナムから欧州へ輸出する製造業者が直面する、最も重要な商業的課題の一つとなっています。

生産開始前に時間をかけて原産地を分析する企業は、概して、EVFTAが提供する機会から利益を得る有利な立場にあり、同時にベトナムおよび欧州連合の双方における税関リスクを軽減することができます。

究極的に、原産地計画の成功とは、書類作業を完了させることではありません。それは、法的に強固で、商業的に効率的であり、世界の双方における税関の精査に耐えうるサプライチェーンを設計することなのです。

お問い合わせ 上記に関する詳細につきましては、著者のDr. オリバー・マスマン（omassmann@duanemorris.com）までご遠慮なくお問い合わせください。Dr. オリバー・マスマンは、Duane Morris Vietnam LLCの代表取締役（General Director）を務めています。

Introduction
The European Union–Vietnam Free Trade Agreement (EVFTA) has fundamentally changed the way European manufacturer’s view Vietnam.
For many companies, Vietnam is no longer simply a competitive manufacturing location. It has become a strategic gateway to the European market, offering significant preferential tariff treatment for products that satisfy the applicable rules of origin.
However, one misconception continues to surface in manufacturing projects.
Many companies believe that once a product is assembled in Vietnam, it automatically becomes a Vietnamese product for customs purposes.
Unfortunately, international trade law is considerably more sophisticated.
Rules of origin determine whether preferential tariff treatment is available. They are among the most technically challenging areas of international trade law and should be analyzed before—not after—a manufacturing structure is implemented.
After advising multinational manufacturers in Vietnam for more than twenty-five years, I have found that every company should ask the following ten questions before relocating production.

Question 1: What Is the Actual Product?
Origin analysis begins with understanding the finished product.
The legal analysis cannot start until the product itself is clearly identified.
Its composition, function, manufacturing process and tariff classification all influence the applicable origin rules.

Question 2: Have We Correctly Classified the Product?
Rules of origin are built upon tariff classification.
An incorrect HS Code can invalidate the entire legal analysis.
Independent classification should therefore always precede origin analysis.

Question 3: Where Does Every Component Originate?
Modern manufacturing rarely relies upon components from one country.
A complete origin map should identify:
• Chinese components
• German components
• Japanese components
• Korean components
• Taiwanese components
• ASEAN components
• Vietnamese materials
Origin cannot be determined without understanding the origin of every major input.

Question 4: What Manufacturing Actually Takes Place in Vietnam?
This question is often decisive.
Assembly alone may not always satisfy applicable origin rules.
Manufacturers should carefully document every production activity performed in Vietnam, including:
• assembly
• programming
• calibration
• testing
• software installation
• quality control
• packaging
• labelling

Question 5: Which Product-Specific Rule Applies?
The EVFTA does not establish one universal origin rule.
Different products are subject to different legal requirements.
Each product must therefore be analysed individually.
Question 6: Can We Prove It Five Years From Now?
Origin claims are only as strong as the documentation supporting them.
Manufacturers should prepare documentation as production progresses—not during a future customs audit.

Question 7: Does Our Manufacturing Process Match Our Documentation?
Production records, Bills of Materials, supplier declarations and customs documentation should all tell the same story.
Consistency is essential.

Question 8: Does Our Corporate Structure Support Our Origin Strategy?
Ownership, contract manufacturing arrangements, import procedures and export documentation all influence practical implementation.
Origin analysis should never be separated from corporate structuring.

Question 9: Have We Considered European Customs Authorities?
Compliance does not end when goods leave Vietnam.
European customs authorities may examine origin documentation years after importation.
Companies should prepare accordingly.

Question 10: Have We Designed the Entire Supply Chain Around Compliance?
The strongest manufacturing projects are designed around compliance from the outset.
Origin should not become an afterthought.
It should become part of the manufacturing strategy itself.

Conclusion
Rules of origin are often viewed as a technical customs issue.
In reality, they represent one of the most important commercial issues facing manufacturers exporting from Vietnam to Europe.
Companies that invest time in analyzing origin before production begins are generally better positioned to benefit from the opportunities offered by the EVFTA while reducing customs risk in both Vietnam and the European Union.
Ultimately, successful origin planning is not about completing paperwork.
It is about designing a supply chain that is legally robust, commercially efficient and capable of withstanding customs scrutiny on both sides of the world.
***

For more information on the above, please do not hesitate to contact the author Dr. Oliver Massmann under omassmann@duanemorris.com. Dr. Oliver Massmann is the General Director of Duane Morris Vietnam LLC.

Introduction
Vietnam has firmly established itself as one of the world’s most attractive manufacturing destinations. Political stability, a highly competitive workforce, an expanding industrial base, and an impressive network of free trade agreements have transformed the country into a strategic production hub for multinational companies.
However, establishing manufacturing operations in Vietnam involves considerably more than identifying a factory, signing a manufacturing agreement and shipping products overseas.
After more than twenty-five years advising international investors and manufacturers in Vietnam, I have observed that the most expensive mistakes are rarely engineering failures. More often, they are legal, regulatory, customs and structural issues that were overlooked during the planning stage.
Most of these mistakes are entirely avoidable.
This article highlights twenty of the most common issues encountered by international manufacturers and offers practical guidance on how to avoid them.

Mistake No. 1 – Treating Vietnam as Simply Another Low-Cost Manufacturing Location
Vietnam is not merely a lower-cost alternative to other manufacturing jurisdictions.
It has its own legal system, customs framework, regulatory authorities and business practices. Strategies that succeed elsewhere cannot automatically be transferred to Vietnam without careful legal analysis.
Best Practice: Design a Vietnam-specific strategy rather than copying an existing manufacturing model from another jurisdiction.

Mistake No. 2 – Selecting the Manufacturing Structure Before Obtaining Legal Advice
Many companies finalise commercial arrangements before consulting legal advisers.
Once contracts have been signed and production has commenced, changing the legal structure often becomes difficult and expensive.
Best Practice: Integrate legal planning into the earliest stage of project development.

Mistake No. 3 – Relying Solely on the Supplier’s HS Classification
Incorrect customs classification can affect customs duties, import procedures, licensing requirements, VAT, statistical reporting and rules of origin.
Supplier classifications should always be independently verified.
Best Practice: Conduct an independent HS classification review before importation.

Mistake No. 4 – Assuming Assembly Automatically Creates Vietnamese Origin
One of the most common misconceptions concerns rules of origin.
Simply assembling imported components in Vietnam does not automatically qualify products as Vietnamese origin.
Origin depends upon detailed legal requirements under applicable trade agreements and customs legislation.
Best Practice: Carry out a comprehensive origin analysis before production begins.

Mistake No. 5 – Underestimating the EVFTA
The EU–Vietnam Free Trade Agreement offers substantial commercial advantages.
However, preferential tariff treatment is available only where the applicable legal requirements are fully satisfied.
Best Practice: Design the manufacturing process with EVFTA compliance in mind from the outset.

Mistake No. 6 – Choosing the Wrong Customs Procedure
Different customs procedures produce different legal consequences.
Selecting an unsuitable procedure may increase administrative burdens, create unnecessary costs or complicate future exports.
Best Practice: Evaluate all legally available customs procedures before selecting the most appropriate structure.

Mistake No. 7 – Separating Customs Planning from Corporate Planning
Corporate structure directly influences customs compliance.
Ownership, contractual arrangements, importation, exportation and taxation should all be considered together.
Best Practice: Develop customs and corporate structures simultaneously.

Mistake No. 8 – Failing to Understand the Entire Supply Chain
Legal advice cannot focus solely on one shipment.
The entire supply chain—from supplier to final customer—should be analysed.
Best Practice: Prepare a complete process map before implementation.

Mistake No. 9 – Neglecting Product-Specific Regulatory Requirements
Certain products require approvals beyond customs compliance.
Examples include radio equipment, telecommunications products, medical devices, batteries and products incorporating encryption technology.
Best Practice: Conduct a comprehensive regulatory review alongside customs planning.

Mistake No. 10 – Inadequate Documentation
Documentation frequently determines whether customs authorities accept origin claims and customs declarations.
Poor documentation creates unnecessary audit risks.
Best Practice: Develop documentation systems before production starts.

Mistake No. 11 – Assuming Customs Compliance Ends After Importation
Compliance continues throughout manufacturing, exportation and post-clearance audit periods.
Best Practice: Treat compliance as an ongoing management function.

Mistake No. 12 – Ignoring Contract Manufacturing Risks
Manufacturing agreements frequently allocate legal responsibility differently from commercial expectations.
Best Practice: Ensure manufacturing contracts accurately reflect operational reality.

Mistake No. 13 – Failing to Clarify Ownership Throughout Production
Questions concerning ownership influence customs declarations, taxation, accounting and liability.
Best Practice: Clearly define ownership at every production stage.

Mistake No. 14 – Overlooking Customs Audit Preparation
Many companies prepare for customs inspections only after receiving an audit notice.
By then, reconstructing documentation may be difficult.
Best Practice: Operate as though every shipment may eventually be audited.

Mistake No. 15 – Ignoring Long-Term Scalability
A structure suitable for one pilot shipment may become inefficient for regular production.
Best Practice: Design systems capable of supporting future growth.

Mistake No. 16 – Focusing Only on Vietnam
International manufacturing projects involve multiple legal systems.
European customs authorities, overseas regulators and international trade agreements all influence compliance.
Best Practice: Consider the entire cross-border legal framework.

Mistake No. 17 – Underestimating Internal Compliance
Legal compliance depends upon people as much as documentation.
Employees should understand their responsibilities.
Best Practice: Establish internal compliance procedures and regular training.

Mistake No. 18 – Waiting Until Problems Arise
Correcting legal issues after production has begun is almost always more expensive than preventing them.
Best Practice: Identify legal risks before implementation.

Mistake No. 19 – Treating Customs as an Administrative Function
Customs decisions frequently determine commercial profitability.
They therefore deserve management attention.
Best Practice: Include customs and international trade specialists in strategic planning.

Mistake No. 20 – Viewing Legal Advice as a Cost Rather Than an Investment
The objective of legal advice is not merely to solve disputes.
Its greatest value lies in preventing disputes from arising.
Well-designed legal structures improve operational certainty, facilitate customs compliance and reduce long-term commercial risk.
Best Practice: Consider legal planning as part of the overall investment in manufacturing success.

Final Thoughts
Vietnam offers exceptional opportunities for international manufacturers.
Companies that combine sound commercial planning with robust legal structuring are well positioned to benefit from Vietnam’s growing role in global manufacturing and international trade.
Experience consistently demonstrates that successful manufacturing projects share one common characteristic.
They are designed—not only engineered.
Careful planning of customs procedures, rules of origin, corporate structures, regulatory approvals and documentation before the first shipment leaves the factory is significantly easier than correcting structural weaknesses after production has begun.
The most successful manufacturers recognise that legal certainty and operational excellence are not competing objectives. They are complementary pillars of a resilient, efficient and internationally competitive supply chain.

About the Author
Dr. Oliver Massmann is Partner and General Director of Duane Morris Vietnam LLC. For more than twenty-five years, he has advised multinational corporations, manufacturers, investors and financial institutions on foreign direct investment, international trade, customs, free trade agreements, WTO matters, manufacturing, energy, infrastructure and complex cross-border transactions in Vietnam.
His practice combines legal analysis with practical commercial implementation, assisting clients in developing legally compliant, customs-efficient and commercially sustainable business models for long-term success in Vietnam.

Executive Summary

Vietnam has entered one of the most important phases of its modern economic development.

The revival of the national nuclear power programme represents far more than another infrastructure project. It is a strategic decision concerning Vietnam’s future energy security, industrial competitiveness, technological development, national resilience and long-term economic growth.

Recent developments indicate that Vietnam is moving steadily towards selecting an international strategic partner for the Ninh Thuan 2 Nuclear Power Project.

This is an important milestone.

However, selecting an excellent partner is only the beginning. History demonstrates that successful nuclear programmes are built not only on outstanding technology, but equally on excellent preparation, sound legal frameworks, bankable financing structures, robust security, efficient government coordination and disciplined project execution. Vietnam now has a unique opportunity to establish a new international benchmark.

A Defining Moment for Vietnam

Few infrastructure projects shape a nation’s future as profoundly as a nuclear power programme.

Ninh Thuan 2 represents:
– long-term national energy security;
– support for Vietnam’s continued industrialisation;
– reduction of carbon emissions;
– diversification of the national energy mix;
– development of advanced technological capabilities;
– increased investor confidence;
– strengthening Vietnam’s international competitiveness.

This project will influence Vietnam’s economic development for decades.

Vietnam Has Strong Foundations

Vietnam is not beginning from the starting line.

The country already possesses:
– decades of institutional preparation;
– extensive work completed during the previous nuclear programme;
– valuable cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA);
– an increasingly sophisticated legal framework;
– internationally recognised experience with complex power infrastructure financed by international lenders;
– a capable public administration with proven experience in delivering strategic infrastructure projects.

These foundations significantly reduce project risk.

International Interest Reflects Confidence in Vietnam

The strong interest shown by internationally recognised nuclear technology providers demonstrates an important fact: Vietnam has become one of the world’s most attractive destinations for long-term strategic investment. Healthy international competition benefits Vietnam. It enables the Government to identify the partner that best serves the country’s long-term national interests. The objective should never be merely selecting the strongest reactor technology. The objective should be selecting the strongest long-term strategic partnership.

Strategic Action Plan

Action 1: Complete Partner Selection with a Long-Term Strategic Perspective

Evaluation should extend well beyond construction capability. The successful strategic partner should demonstrate:
– internationally proven technology;
– an outstanding operational safety record;
– successful delivery of comparable projects;
– commitment to technology transfer;
– comprehensive training of Vietnamese personnel;
– long-term operational support;
– competitive financing capability;
– commitment to developing Vietnam’s domestic nuclear ecosystem.

The relationship will extend over many decades. Long-term partnership should therefore receive the highest priority.

Action 2: Complete the Legal and Regulatory Framework Before Financial Close

International lenders finance legal certainty. Vietnam should continue strengthening legislation covering:
– licensing;
– nuclear safety;
– environmental protection;
– land acquisition;
– radioactive waste management;
– emergency preparedness;
– procurement procedures;
– international safeguards;
– regulatory oversight.

Predictable regulation significantly reduces financing costs and increases investor confidence.

Action 3: Make Nuclear Security and Cybersecurity a National Strategic Priority

A modern nuclear power plant is not merely an energy facility. It is part of a nation’s most critical infrastructure. Accordingly, Vietnam should establish a comprehensive nuclear security framework covering every phase of the project—from design and construction through operation, maintenance and eventual decommissioning. This framework should include:
– cybersecurity by design for operational technology (OT) and information technology (IT);
– protection against state-sponsored cyber threats and advanced persistent attacks;
– secure digital supply chains and rigorous vendor security requirements;
– strict personnel screening, access control and insider threat programmes;
– physical protection of nuclear facilities and supporting infrastructure;
– secure communications and protection of sensitive data;
– continuous cybersecurity monitoring, penetration testing and independent security audits;
– incident response capability, business continuity and disaster recovery planning; and
– close cooperation with the IAEA and international partners on nuclear security best practices.

Cybersecurity must not be viewed merely as an information technology issue. It is a matter of national security. The resilience of Vietnam’s future nuclear programme will depend not only on engineering excellence, but equally on the ability to protect critical infrastructure against increasingly sophisticated physical and cyber threats. The safest nuclear power plant is one that is secure by design from its very first day.

Action 4: Build a Bankable Financing Structure

Experience from internationally financed infrastructure projects demonstrates one fundamental lesson:
– Engineering attracts attention.
– Bankability attracts financing.

Vietnam should therefore complete:
– Government support arrangements;
– transparent risk allocation;
– lender protections;
– currency risk management;
– change-in-law provisions;
– political force majeure arrangements;
– internationally accepted dispute resolution mechanisms.

These elements create confidence among international lenders, export credit agencies and investors.

Action 5: Coordinate Government Decision-Making

A national project of this magnitude requires unified leadership. Close coordination should continue among:
– Ministry of Industry and Trade;
– Ministry of Finance;
– Ministry of Justice;
– Ministry of Science and Technology;
– Ministry of Agriculture and Environment;
– Vietnam Electricity;
– provincial authorities.

Efficient coordination accelerates implementation and reduces delays.

Action 6: Develop Vietnamese Human Capital

A nuclear programme ultimately depends upon people.
Vietnam should continue investing in:
– engineering education;
– regulator training;
– operator certification;
– international exchange programmes;
– university cooperation;
– research institutions.

Human capital remains Vietnam’s greatest strategic asset.

Action 7: Strengthen Domestic Industrial Participation

The project should maximise opportunities for Vietnamese industry.
Preparation should begin immediately for:
– supplier qualification;
– quality certification;
– manufacturing capability;
– specialised construction services;
– maintenance capability.

Every Vietnamese enterprise successfully integrated into the nuclear supply chain strengthens the country’s long-term industrial competitiveness.

Action 8: Accelerate Digital Project Delivery

Modern nuclear projects should utilise:
– digital permitting;
– integrated project management;
– Building Information Modelling (BIM);
– artificial intelligence for project monitoring;
– digital compliance management;
– electronic reporting systems.

Digitalisation improves transparency, efficiency and accountability.

Action 9: Maintain Transparent Public Communication

Public confidence is essential. Communication should remain:
– transparent;
– scientifically accurate;
– timely;
– consistent;
– understandable.
Public trust represents one of the project’s greatest strategic assets.

Action 10: Think Beyond the First Project

Ninh Thuan 2 should become the foundation for a long-term national nuclear programme.

Planning should already begin for:
– future reactors;
– domestic supply chains;
– research capability;
– advanced manufacturing;
– regional centres of excellence.

Great nations think in generations. Learning from Vietnam’s Infrastructure Success Vietnam has already demonstrated its ability to deliver internationally financed infrastructure projects meeting world-class standards. The lessons remain remarkably consistent:

– legal certainty creates investor confidence;
– balanced risk allocation attracts financing;
– transparent government support enhances bankability;
– professional project preparation reduces delays;
– close cooperation between government and investors produces long-term success.

These principles remain equally applicable to nuclear infrastructure. Technology builds reactors. Preparation delivers successful projects.

Conclusion

Vietnam has reached a defining moment. The revival of nuclear power reflects confidence in the country’s future and demonstrates its determination to build a resilient, diversified and sustainable energy system. The strong interest shown by internationally experienced nuclear developers is itself a vote of confidence in Vietnam’s economic prospects, political stability and long-term energy strategy.

The next objective should therefore be clear. Select the strongest long-term strategic partner. Create a world-class legal, financial and regulatory framework. Build security and cybersecurity into every stage of the project.

Prepare thoroughly.
Execute professionally.
Deliver successfully.

If Vietnam follows this path, Ninh Thuan 2 will become far more than a nuclear power plant.
It will become an international benchmark for how vision, preparation, international cooperation, technological excellence, security and disciplined execution can together shape the future of a nation.

In the twenty-first century, the success of a nuclear programme is measured not only by megawatts generated, but equally by safety, security, cybersecurity, resilience and public confidence.

Vietnam’s nuclear future has begun. Now is the time to build it right.

***
For more information on the above, please do not hesitate to contact the author Dr. Oliver Massmann under omassmann@duanemorris.com. Dr. Oliver Massmann is the General Director of Duane Morris Vietnam LLC.