December 6, 2016December 6, 2016 by Dr. Oliver Massmann

La clause La Plus Importante De Tout Contrat Commercial Au Vietnam – Mettez Votre Clause De Résolution Des Conflits En Ordre !

1. Pourquoi l’arbitrage est un choix sensé

Cet article montre clairement aux entreprises étrangères la nécessité des clauses de résolution des conflits et assiste le choix des alternatives appropriées aux tribunaux civils vietnamiens.

Les inconvénients des tribunaux vietnamiens

La plupart des contrats d’Amérique du Nord et d’Europe précisent dans les détails les obligations de toutes les parties et ils seront regardés attentivement pour l’effectivité de ses clauses. La force exécutoire du contrat est néanmoins largement considérée comme allant de soi.

D’autre part, les contrats entre investisseurs étrangers etentités vietnamiennes ou ayant une référence au Vietnam qui établissent la compétence des juridictions vietnamiennes, devraient toujours préciser la question : « quelle institution devra se prononcer quel que soit le conflit et dans quelle langue et selon quel droit applicable ? »

Dans cette circonstance, sans clause de résolution des conflits, les juridictions vietnamiennes seront compétentes pour tout conflit. Mais les parties concernées doivent prendre en compte les particularités des cours vietnamiennes en comparaison avec les tribunaux occidentaux appliquant la règle de droit. D’après Transparency International, le risque de corruption des décisions demeure et presque un cinquième des ménages interrogés ayant été devant un juge ont déclaré avoir payé au moins une fois des pots-de-vin (Baromètre Général de Corruption, 2011). Beaucoup d’entreprises évitent donc d’avoir affaire aux juridictions vietnamienne, l’existence des pots-de-vin les en décourageant (Intégrité Globale 2011 ; USAID sur la compétitivité des provinces vietnamiennes Index 2011). Malgré le risque persistent et fâcheux de corruption et malgré des efforts d’amélioration, la justice vietnamienne continue de lutter contre d’autres problèmes. Beaucoup de juges vietnamiens manquent de pratique juridique adéquate et sont désignés grâce à leurs liens personnels avec les chefs du Parti ou d’après leurs opinions politiques, comme le révèle l’étude menée en 2012 par le ministère des affaires étrangères américain. Des salaires très faibles ainsi que des mandats de cinq ans devant être renouvelés par désignation, accentuent la dépendance du judiciaire à la sympathie du Parti Communiste et à la corruption. De plus, se pose le problème récurrent de l’incompatibilité entre la règle de droit et le système du parti unique, exclusifs l’un de l’autre de par l’absence de séparation des pouvoirs en pratique (Andersson 2012). Le terme de règle de droit, dans sa traduction vietnamienne, signifie règles d’état, soit règles du Parti Communiste gérant l’unique parti d’état. Tenant compte de ces faits, soumettre les éventuels conflits à la juridiction vietnamienne n’est pas conseillable, d’autant que la possibilité de corruption, de pression politique et d’incompétence des juges doit être prise en compte. Il est important de noter que, tel que dans les pays avec un système d’indépendance judiciaire et un attachement profond à la règle de droit, les sociétés peuvent préférer soumettre les affaires sensibles à l’arbitrage plutôt que de voir leurs affaires commerciales devenir de notoriété publique.

Les avantages de l’arbitrage

Le centre d’arbitrage adéquat assure indépendance des décisions et compétence professionnelle. Il est normalement possible de choisir un groupe d’arbitres que les parties reconnaissent comme fiable dans la clause, ce qui peut conduire à une meilleure acceptation de la décision arbitrale. Il est important d’envisager les candidats à l’arbitrage d’après leur compétence dans le domaine de l’entreprise. La majorité des centres d’arbitrage proposent des experts renommés pour certains domaines particuliers.

2. Quelle cour d’arbitrage est la plus adaptée ?

Choisir la bonne cour d’arbitrage est un élément essentiel dans la constitution de la clause de résolution des conflits. Une entreprise peut choisir entre une cour arbitrale vietnamienne, comme par exemple le Centre International d’Arbitrage Vietnamien (VIAC), ou une cour arbitrale à l’étranger telle que le Centre International d’Arbitrage de Singapour (SIAC). Pour choisir le lieu du procès, les éléments suivants doivent être soigneusement pris en compte :

La taille du projet

Pour les projets les plus importants avec un investissement total dépassant plus ou moins 5 millions de dollars, le choix d’une cour arbitrale internationale est généralement recommandé. A ce stade, il est probable que le problème de la pression financière (voir infra) soit négligé. Une décision arbitrale internationale a plus de chances d’être acceptée par les deux parties, puisque l’absence de compétence de l’arbitre ainsi que la moindre possibilité de pression politique peuvent ainsi être éliminées.

L’emplacement des biens saisissables – les risques d’exécution des sentences arbitrales étrangères

Un autre élément déterminant est l’emplacement des biens du partenaire contractant pouvant être saisis en exécution de l’éventuelle sentence arbitrale. Si les biens sont principalement situés au Vietnam, la décision d’une cour arbitrale internationale doit être appliquée – ce qui est plus compliqué que d’exécuter une sentence nationale. En effet, le Vietnam est devenu membre de la Convention de New York sur la reconnaissance et l’exécution des décisions arbitrales étrangères de 1958 (NYC) en 1995, et dès lors les sentences arbitrales étrangères des 149 états membres doivent normalement être appliquées. Cependant, il y a un risque de délai notable dans l’exécution de la décision, puisqu’il est requis de formuler une demande auprès du Ministère de la Justice avec des explications approfondies, et de comparaitre au tribunal dont la décision est susceptible d’appel, en exécution de la sentence arbitrale. En outre, la cour vietnamienne d’application des décisions peut rejeter la sentence. D’après l’article V de la NYC, cela est possible dans le cas où une sentence arbitrale viole le droit national ou l’ordre public. Le Code Civil vietnamien s’y réfère via les « principes de lois vietnamiennes », et la justice vietnamienne en a retenu une interprétation large (Tam Shu Ching et al. 2012). Dans un cas, par exemple, la sentence arbitrale d’une société étrangère avait été rejetée au motif qu’il manquait un permis de construire (Tyco Services Singapore Pte Ltd vs Leighton Contractors Vietnam).

La pression du coût

Il faut également prendre en compte la différence de prix entre un arbitrage national et un arbitrage à l’étranger. Pour un conflit mettant en jeu environ 4 millions de dollars, par exemple, le coût de l’arbitrage au VIAC s’élève à environ 62 000$ si un arbitre est assigné à l’affaire, tandis que le coût atteint 117 000$ au SIAC. Non seulement les coûts d’arbitrage à l’étranger sont considérablement plus élevés, mais cette option peut créer des coûts supplémentaires pour les parties, tels que des frais de déplacement pour les parties, les témoins et les avocats. Par ailleurs, les honoraires des avocats des cours internationales sont souvent plus importants que ceux des avocats vietnamiens (Shouzhi et al. 2009). Cette même constatation s’applique aux opinions d’experts et autres professionnels. Le risque d’un litige onéreux risque de pousser une entreprise avec moins de liquidités à accepter un accord même défavorable. Dès lors, un arbitrage moins coûteux est souvent plus bénéfique aux entreprises avec de moindres ressources financières.

La complexité et la spécialité de l’objet du contrat et les problèmes éventuels

Les cours arbitrales vietnamiennes, telles que VIAC, ont une grande compétence juridique. Toutefois l’arbitrage national ne peut pas proposer des experts de renommée internationale tels que le sont ceux des tribunaux étrangers. La raison principale tient du coût peu élevé des charges d’un arbitre au Vietnam. Aussi les décisions concernant des transactions financières très complexes ou les contrats portant sur un domaine très spécialisé, sont plus à mêmes d’être acceptées par les parties si ces dernières choisissent un arbitre plus coûteux avec une expertise reconnue.

Les entreprises publiques (cachées)

Quand les entreprises publiques sont impliquées, il est conseillé d’intégrer une clause d’arbitrage étranger. Cela assure un arbitrage indépendant de toute forme de pression de l’entreprise publique. En théorie, le problème d’exécution de la décision demeure, cependant le développement actuel tend à montrer qu’une sentence en faveur d’une entreprise renforce sa position vis-à-vis de ses partenaires. La même chose s’applique pour les entreprises publiques : les sociétés qui sont de facto influencées par le gouvernement, par exemple ceux qui se partagent la propriété via les filiales des entreprises publiques. Le caractère public, « state-owned », du partenaire contractuel doit toujours être apprécié avec prudence.

Cas spécial : la propriété intellectuelle

Dans des cas particuliers, concernant la propriété intellectuelle, les contrats doivent s’assurer qu’aucune mesure provisoire officielle ne soit rendue caduque par la clause d’arbitrage. Les cours arbitrales peuvent elles aussi rendre des mesures provisoires. Dans ce cas, une clause d’ouverture est à envisager au lieu où les cours et autorités vietnamiennes telles que le Bureau de Management du Marché, émettent en temps normal des mesures provisoires plus efficaces.

Choice of jurisdiction

Juridictions vietnamiennes

Arbitrage au Centre d’Arbitrage International du Vietnam (VIAC)

Arbitrage à l’étranger

souvent déconseillées

projets de moins de 5 millions $

projets supérieurs a 5 millions $

Seulement dans les cas particuliers de propriété intellectuelle, une clause d’ouverture peut être ajoutée dans la clause de résolution des conflits e.g. pour faire réaliser une mesure provisoire par une autorité telle que le Bureau de Management du Marche

les biens saisissables de l’associé contractant sont situés au Vietnam

pour des questions juridiques moins complexes

le contrat a trait à plusieurs domaines juridiques e.g. le droit de la consommation
le partenaire contractuel n’est pas une entreprise publique
capacité financière propre limitée, la pression du coût peut être une menace

les biens saisissables de l’associé contractant sont situés à l’étranger

pour des questions juridiques plus complexes

le contrat a trait à des domaines nécessitant des professionnels spécialisés

le partenaire contractuel est une entreprise publique

capacité financière propre plus importante, la pression du coût n’est pas une menace

Aucune clause de résolution Clause de résolution Clause de résolution des

des conflits nécessaire des conflits nécessaire ! conflits nécessaire !

3. Comment la rédiger ?

La loi vietnamienne admet explicitement les clauses de résolution des conflits dans les contrats commerciaux dans la Loi 54/2010 sur l’arbitrage commercial (« LCA »). Une clause de résolution des conflits efficace retire la compétence des tribunaux vietnamiens sur l’affaire en question et établit la compétence du tribunal arbitral désigné. La LCA suit le modèle de loi de la CNUDCI comme standard international pour les règles procédurales, d’autant que la volonté du législateur est d’adopter une position pro-arbitrage.

Une fois que la décision est prise de savoir quel tribunal d’arbitrage retenir pour les litiges issus du contrat, les points suivants doivent être clarifiés :

La loi applicable: elle doit être choisie en toute liberté dans les cas comprenant un élément étranger d’après l’article !$ de la LCA. La loi applicable choisie pourra influencer le choix des arbitres, s’ils ont une expérience juridique sur ce droit national en particulier.

La langue de la cour : Cela est choisi librement selon l’article 10 de la LCA.

Le nombre d’arbitres : Plusieurs arbitres peuvent rendre une décision plus équilibrée en tant que formation collégiale. Les couts de l’arbitrage vont néanmoins être accrus en conséquence.

Le choix nominatif d’un arbitre : Cela est important dans le cas où des experts seront nécessaires à l’affaire.

La clause de résolution des conflits devient effective lorsque les requis des articles 16, 18 et 19 de la LCA sont remplis, soit à travers un accord écrit.

Conclusion

La question de savoir s’il faut ou non une clause de résolution des conflits dans les contrats au Vietnam se répond par un oui net. Toutefois, décider au bon moment de la résolution d’un litige peut s’avérer très complexe, puisqu’un certain nombre de facteurs doivent être pris en considération. On peut espérer que la LCA pro-arbitrage de 2010 tienne ses promesses dans sa mise en pratique, et que la justice vietnamienne exécute de façon fiable les décisions arbitrales internes autant qu’internationales. Ainsi serait émis un signal positif à l’égard des investisseurs étrangers qui auraient des réserves dans le fait d’engager un litige au Vietnam.

—

Oliver Massmann est un associé dans le bureau d’ Hanoï du cabinet américain international Duane Morris LLP. Il est spécialisé dans les domaines de fiscalité internationale des sociétés et sur les projets d’eau ou d’énergie, sur les affaires liées aux compagnies pétrolières et gazières et de télécommunications, la privatisation et transformation d’entreprise (pour les entreprises publiques), les fusions-acquisitions et les affaires commerciales de clients multinationaux désirant investir ou établir une entreprise au Vietnam. Massmann est un arbitre officiel du Centre d’Arbitrage International du Vietnam. Oliver Massmann est le Directeur Général de Duane Morris Vietnam LLC.
Il est joignable par mail : omassmann@duanemorris.com

December 2, 2016 by Dr. Oliver Massmann

Vietnam – Wind Power Breaking News – One of the first foreign financed Wind PPAs signed – Duane Morris advised on this transaction – What you must know

EAB New Energy GmbH (“EAB”), a German privately held SME with business activities around the world (Asia, Latin America, South Africa), engaged Duane Morris Vietnam LLC to advise on one of the very first privately financed Wind Energy Power Purchase Agreements for a wind power project in Vietnam – the “Mui Dinh” wind project (SPV el-wind Mui Dinh LLC) with a total investment value at final stage of about 60 Million USD.

EAB, in close co-operation with its subsidiary in Vietnam – WPV Wind Power Vietnam LLC, has received the Construction Permit for the wind power plant in Ninh Thuan province and will start the wind farm construction works in due course. Duane Morris Vietnam LLC advised EAB in the negotiation of the Wind Power Purchase Agreement with the Electricity of Vietnam (“EVN”) to connect into to the national electricity and sell electricity to EVN (the “Project”). The Wind Power Purchase Agreement was signed on 01 February 2016. This is one of the first signed Wind Power PPA in Vietnam and EAB is one of the first foreign companies with this success.

Given the fact that Vietnam’s wind energy potential is highly appreciated by investors in comparison to its ASEAN neighbours, and very good for building large wind power plants, the success of this Project is considered to pave the way for development of another 40 wind power development in Vietnam, roughly 513,360 megawatts.

This is the beginning of a sizeable privately financed wind energy sector in Vietnam.

Please do not hesitate to contact Oliver Massmann under omassmann@duanemorris.com if you want to know more details on the above or need our assistance in your project. Oliver Massmann is the General Director of Duane Morris Vietnam LLC.

November 24, 2016 by Dr. Oliver Massmann

VIETNAM – Vinamilk’s success story – Oliver Massmann in interview with Channel News Asia

The government is planning to fully sell its 45% stake in Vinamilk, starting with 9% this year. What are foreign and local investors saying; how much interest is there?

As you already know, Vinamilk is one of the most profitable SOEs, so both foreign and local investors are very interested in buying shares in the company. However, 9% of the charter capital of the company is a small number and may not attract big investors being corporations in the industry as expected.

Vinamilk is a hugely successful Vietnamese SOE-turned private company. Why do you think it has been able to succeed when so many other SOEs have failed?

There are many reasons but they come down to the following:

Doing business in the dairy products – which are of great demand in the market and still have much room for growth considering Vietnam’s growing population);
Transparency in the business operation (public listing from the very early stage) and efficient management according to best private practice standards, certainly the long term management and CEO deserves credit for this;
Early privatization leading to more efficient and timely decision to grasp business opportunities (compared with lengthy approval procedures by the state);
Its good development and branding strategy, including activities to show social corporate responsibility.

Vinamilk wants to become the top dairy company in Southeast Asia. Do you think Vinamilk can beat the likes of Malaysia¹s F&N and Indonesia¹s Indofood?

F&N is the current biggest foreign shareholder in Vinamilk and its owner is targeting shares in big companies in the sector like Vinamilk. Vinamilk is also investing in many other countries in the region (Myanmar, Cambodia) to open its distribution network. It is now too early to say anything, as whether Vinamilk becomes the top dairy company in Southeast Asia depends much on who are the strategic shareholders and the leadership capacity of the successor of Ms. Mai Kieu Lien – Vinamilk’s CEO for almost 23 years.

Food safety is a big concern and talking point in Vietnam today. How much trust do you think Vietnamese consumers here have in Vinamilk?

The fact that Vinamilk was registered with FDA to export its products to the US shows its high quality. In addition, Vinamilk has access to other big markets such as Japan, Canada, Australia, … In Vietnam, Vinamilk’s yoghurts and condensed milk account for 85-90% of the market share, while liquid milk and milk powder accounts for 44% and 27% of the market share respectively. These numbers say it all. In a survey by Q&ME in 2015, Vinamilk is the most favourite and well-known dairy brand in Vietnam.

Please do not hesitate to contact Oliver Massmann under omassmann@duanemorris.com if you have any questions on the above. Oliver Massmann is the General Director of Duane Morris Vietnam LLC.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH!

November 23, 2016 by Dr. Oliver Massmann

Lawyer in Vietnam Oliver Massmann REAL ESTATE – FOREIGNERS BUYING PROPERTY – WHAT YOU MUST KNOW: GUIDING NOTES ON ISSUES RELATING TO THE CURRENT LAW ON LAND (2013) AND ITS GUIDING REGULATIONS FOR LAND TRANSACTIONS

Certification vs. notarization (C&N) of land-related contracts

For the purpose of State management, C&N is compulsorily required for some special types of land related transactions (e.g. – basically, the transfer, donation, mortgage or capital contribution using the land use rights or the rights to use land and assets attached to land). For other land-related transactions, C&N is however optional.

Please also note the key difference between notarization (công chứng) and certification (chứng thực) under Vietnamese law. Simply put, notarization, done by a licensed notary office, covers both legal validity and authenticity (mainly the signatures) of the transactions. Meanwhile, certification, done by the department of justice at district level/commune cpeople’s committee (CPC), limits to the authenticity of signatures, signing time and location. As such, a notary public may be wholly liable for damage caused to his clients if content of the relevant contract is concluded inconsistent with the laws.

Since 2014, the Ministry of Justice of Vietnam (MOJ) has issued a number of official letters requesting local authorities to direct the formalization of land related contracts from the commune people’s committee (CPC) to the notary offices. Though such official letters are not per se legal instruments and it stops at ‘a request for direction’, many CPC has since refused to certify land-related transactions because of the above instructions.

Principles for applying provisions of the Land Law

Unlike the Civil Codes of Vietnam (2005 and 2014) that adopt the negative approach (i.e. – do whatever not expressly restricted or prohibited by the laws), the Land Law builds a ‘positive approach’ which let entities to do what exactly the laws tell them to do. Even more strictly, the restrictions apply to both sides of a transaction. For example, if a seller has a clear right to transfer LURs but the purchaser is not expressly permitted to receive the transfer of such LURs, no deals can be established. Back to FIEs, they can only acquire under specific circumstances set out by the Land Law, mostly listed in its Article 169.

Any ‘ultra vires’ acts may potentially result in a declaration of invalidity of the relevant land related transaction. This principle of applying laws should be taken into full consideration when FIEs are about to make major decisions relating to land-related issues.

Land acquisition by foreign invested enterprises (FIEs)

Compared with their local counterparts, FIEs have more limited access to land. For example, FIEs cannot receive the transfer of land use rights (LURs) with respect to agricultural land or any types of land from households or individuals. Rather FIEs can only receive the transfer of LURs from land users being enterprises. This may cause some difficulties for FIEs who may want to acquire land from, for example, neighboring individual land users to expand their current production or business sites.

To go around this restriction, a number of FIEs seek to employ a local nominee enterprise which will receive the land from the individual land users and transfer back the same to the requesting FIEs. Even so, another question may arise: Can FIEs receive land directly from, among other, enterprises including domestic and foreign invested ones? Item #4 below discusses more.

Receipt of transfer of land use rights by way of purchasing investment capital

As noted in Item #2 above, it appears that FIEs’ options to access land are limited to what exactly the Land Law lists.

As such, without any guidance under the Land Law, FIEs can only receive the transfer of LURs by way of acquiring investment capital from an enterprise land user. Such investment capital is ‘the value of LURs which has been capitalized into the seller’s capital (vốn hóa vào vốn của doanh nghiệp)’. This provision is relatively unclear and fails to correspond to other related legal instruments. Firstly, while it is possible to carve out value of a specific investment [project] from an accounting perspective, the transfer of such value is not provided elsewhere other than the Land Law 2013 itself. This makes the implementation of the above machenism technically paralyzed. Secondly, questions remains to be seen as to whether the transfer of investment capital could be treated as transfer of ‘investment project’, assets or even equity of the seller(s). Each type of transfer would definitively lead to different legal, business and accounting consequences.

On this, the official of MONRE said the Ministry of Finance will soon issue a detailed guidance. It is also confirmed such ‘investment capital’ transfer has been implemented in some provinces in South Vietnam but we are not provided with more detailed information on how it is arranged in light of the above technical obstacles.

Settlement of land in case of land users’ bankruptcy

The Land Law states that the settlement of LURs of insolvent and dissolved companies will be subject to general provisions of laws. Unfortunately, these ‘laws’ arguably enterprises law and, most critically, the Law on Bankruptcy appear to refer back this issue to provisions of the Land Law (2013) and its guiding regulations. This cross-reference, according to the official of the MONRE, causes difficulties in dealing with land of insolvent companies.

Issuance of LURs for FIEs buying residential houses

Though the Law on Residential Housing (2014) allows FIEs to own some forms of residential houses (e.g. – apartments, villas, etc.), they face problems in acquiring LURs for such houses for many reasons.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

MONRE should actively solve issues and provide detailed guidance on all related aspects to the licensing/acquisition process.

MONRE should work on solutions of some unclear points on land use rights for Foreign Invested Enterprises (“FIEs”) in cooperation with (i) the Ministry of National Defense and (ii) the Ministry of Public Affairs with respect to areas which must be secured in terms of security and national defense in each province and therefore will not allow FIEs or foreign buyers to own house and land there.

Please do not hesitate to contact Oliver Massmann under omassmann@duanemorris.com if you have any questions on the above. Oliver Massmann is the General Director of Duane Morris Vietnam LLC.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH!

November 18, 2016November 18, 2016 by Dr. Oliver Massmann

Corporate Governance – Issues and Solutions

X.1 OVERVIEW

Corporate governance is “the system through which those involved in the company’s management are held accountable for their performance, with the aim of ensuring that they adhere to the company’s proper objectives.”[1] In its strict sense, it is a set of regimes, policies and regulations in order to regulate, organize, manage and supervise operation of a company. The broadest meaning of this concept even expands to how the company interacts with suppliers, customers, creditors or the government agencies. In both senses, effective corporate governance and a sound legal framework on the same are critical for development of not only companies but also the business community in a relevant jurisdiction.

The Law on Enterprises of Vietnam in 2005 can be considered the first ever comprehensive set of legal framework that addresses corporate governance in Vietnam. Over time, the law has been tailored for specific targets (e.g. – Circular No. 121/2012/TT-BTC dated 26 July 2012 of the Ministry of Finance on corporate governance of public companies) or totally replaced with a more detailed and comprehensive law (e.g. – the Law on Enterprises dated 26 November 2014 (EL).

Despite such efforts, problems, always, still exist when it comes down to a better and workable legal framework for corporate governance, especially in light of well-established international standards. This poses investors and their management to a high level of risks which may cost them an ill business, possible claims for compensation and even criminal charges.

We consider some key, not an exhaustive list of, points that need to be addressed for a better legal framework on corporate governance in Vietnam.

X.2 Unclear about how owner of a single-member limited liability company (SMLLC) exercises its power

Relevant Ministries: Ministry of Planning and Investment

Issue description

Most of foreign investors in Vietnam choose the corporate form of SMLLC thanks to obvious advantages of this vehicle. The improvement of corporate governance of this corporate form would definitively add values to their investment in particular and the investment environment of Vietnam generally.

Article 75 of the EL gives owner (analogous to the single shareholder) of an SMLLC supreme power to manage its company. Key examples would be the right to make the most importance decisions of the company’s business affairs, appointment of key officers, restructuring of the entity, etc.

From a legal perspective, it is implied that the EL does not allow the owner to directly exercise these rights. Instead, it must act through either the members’ council (Article 79) or the company’s president (Article 80), depending on how many persons the owner wishes to authorize, to act on its behalf. In other words, though the owner is given the ultimate power, it has no option but to authorize other persons to exercise such power. In fact, what the owner can do is to ‘ratify’ company related decisions already approved by either the members’ council or the company’s president without directly deciding or approving them.

Potential gains/ concerns for Vietnam

Unfortunately, the language of the EL is not that clear and causes confusion for the investors, the management and even the licensing authority. This is even more critical because some guiding regulations of the EL, especially Decree 78 dated 14 September 2015 on enterprise registration (Decree 78) still requires decision of the owner on, for example, the change of the legal representative of the relevant SMLLC.

From a pure business perspective, this status quo may somewhat affect normal operations of an SMLLC in that decisions of offshore owners, which may not be easy to obtain, are always required for a number of decisions of the SMLLC. This also fails to create a level playing field between an SMLLC and a multi-member limited liability company (MMLLC)/joint stock company (JSC) because the latter’s owners may exercise via its authorised representative sitting in either the general meeting of shareholders (in case of a JSC) or members’ council (in case of MMLLC)

Recommendations

The EL should be more specific on only decisions of the members’ council or the company’s president are legally sufficient for approving most important issues of an SMLLC. Guiding regulations such as Decree 78 should be changed accordingly.

X.2 Scope of authorisation of the Members’ Council in an SMLLC

Relevant Ministries: Ministry of Planning and Investment

Issue description

Article 79.1 of the EL provides that the members’ council may act on behalf of an SMLLC to implement rights and obligations of that SMLLC other those granted to the general director.

This provision may not be consistent with the Civil Code of Vietnam (both 2005 and 2014 versions – collectively the ‘Civil Code’). Specifically, the Civil Code only allows an individual or a legal entity to act on behalf of their counterparts with respect to implementing civil transactions, which arguably include the aforementioned rights and obligations. These person/entity can be either the legal or authorised representative (via power of attorney or authorisation contract). It is obvious that the members’ council cannot be treated as any of the above concept and therefore cannot act on behalf of the company.

Potential gains/ concerns for Vietnam

From a legal making’s perspective, the Civil Code serves as the ‘parent’ law the spectrum of which covers other laws including the EL. The above inconsistency indicates shortfalls in law making process in Vietnam which is always among the biggest concern with foreign investors. More critically, such consistency may expose companies’ transactions to the risk of being challenged in terms of their legal validity.

Recommendations

Article 79.1 of the EL and any other similar provisions which grant the authorisation to bodies which are neither individuals nor corporate entities must be changed to reflect provisions of the Civil Code.

X.3 Authorisation Authority of an SMLLC’s (general) director

Relevant Ministries: Ministry of Planning and Investment

Issue description

Pursuant to the Civil Code, only legal representative or authorised representative can act in the name of a legal entity including a corporate entity. Regarding legal representative of an SMLLC owned by an organisational owner, its charter will clearly state who is/are the legal representative(s) of a company. Without such statement, either the chairman of an MC or the company’s president will be the natural legal representative of that SMLLC.

Nevertheless, Articles 64.2e and 81.2.e of the EL allows the (general) director (GD) of an SMLLC to enter into contract in the name of that company.

Potential gains/ concerns for Vietnam

There should be no challenge to this right if the GD is also the legal representative of the company. However, there can be a situation that the charter is totally silent on who is the legal representative of a company or refers person other than the GD of an SMLLC to this position. In such case, the GD’s execution of contracts on behalf of the company may trigger a possible challenge on legal validity of such contract on the ground that the GD should not have such representation authority under both the company’s charter and provisions of the Civil Code.

Foreign owners, who pour their money into Vietnam, are always concerned about the ‘principal – agency dilemma’. This explains why they are given the ultimate power to shape the company’s management by deciding who should be the one to act on behalf of their domestic business. As such, the above power of the GD not only violates principles of Vietnamese law on representation but also affect the freedom to manage its venture.

Recommendations

Articles 64.2(e) and 81.2(e) must be removed to ensure their consistency with the Civil Code of Vietnam.

X.4 Liabilities of Shadow Director(s) or De-factor Directors

Relevant Ministries: Ministry of Planning and Investment

Issue description

Shadow directors (SD) are generally understood as those (possibly shareholders) whose instructions or directions are often followed by the management personnel of the company. A de-facto director (DD) who actually acts as a director of the company without formally being appointed to this position. The reason why laws of many jurisdictions identify SDs and DDs is that they should be held liable for loss and damage caused to the company and third parties due to their influence. Vietnam is not an exception where many current disputes and criminal cases involve with the influence of, very often, SDs and, to a lower extent, DDs. Unfortunately, the EL does not tackle this issue in a clear and comprehensive manner.

Potential gains/ concerns for Vietnam

This lack of clear and comprehensive set of rules on who will be SDs and DDs and their respective liabilities would distort the good practice of transparent corporate governance on one hand. On the other hand, this fact would prompt an unexpected and improper conducts of people whose acts would negatively affect the company. This is critical because these people know that such acts will not be severely punished by the laws. Meanwhile, other duly-appointed directors who do not have actual authority to decide company’s matters may be at the risk of being challenged in terms of liability due to their failure to, among others, exercise their fiduciary duties.

Recommendations

The EL should (i) define who will be considered SDs and DDs and (ii) how they should be held liable on loss caused to the company and third parties.

Please do contact the author Oliver Massmann under omassmann@duanemorris.com if you have any questions on the above. Oliver Massmann is the General Director of Duane Morris Vietnam LLC.

ABBREVIATIONS

EL	Enterprise Law
SMLLC	Single Member Limited Liability Company
MMLLC	Multi-Member Limited Liability Company
JSC	Joint Stock Company
GD	General Director
SD	Shadow Director
DD	De facto Director

[1] Parkinson JE, “Company law and stakeholder governance”. in E Kelly, D Kelly & A Gamble (eds), Stakeholder Capitalism, 1997, Macmillan Publishers Limited, pp. 142 – 154.

November 18, 2016 by Dr. Oliver Massmann

Rechtsanwalt in Vietnam Oliver Massmann Investitionsrecht und Lizensierung

Handel und Vertrieb von Wirtschaftsorganisationen mit ausländischen Investments – Was Sie wissen müssen:

Status

Nach dem Erlass des Investmentgesetzes (2014) beschleunigt die Regierung Vietnams die Ausarbeitung einer neuen Verordnung (Verordnungsentwurf) für den Handel und den Vertrieb von ausländischen investierten Wirtschaftsorganisationen (FIEOs) in Vietnam. Der Verordnungsentwurf wird sobald er in Kraft tritt „Verordnung 23 für Handel und Vertrieb ausländischer Unternehmen vom 12. Dezember 2007“ (Vorschrift 23) ersetzen.

Was ist neu im Verordnungsentwurf?

Im Folgenden einige neue Besonderheiten, die durch den Verordnungsentwurf eingeführt werden:

[Wirksame] Ausweitung der Geschäftsfelder, die der Erteilung Spezialgenehmigungen unterliegen; 2. Ausgliederung von Spezialgenehmigungen aus dem Investitions-Anmelde-Zertifikat (IRC); 3. Betrauung der Provinz-Behörde für Industrie und Handel (DOIT) mit der Genehmigungszuständigkeit in Bezug auf die Erteilung der Spezialgenehmigung; 4. Festlegung von Umständen, unter denen FIEOs von der Spezialgenehmigung ausgenommen sind; 5. Klarstellung der Voraussetzungen zur Errichtung von Einzelhandelsgeschäften einschließlich der Überprüfung des wirtschaftlichen Bedarfs (ENT); 6. Detaillierterer Anmeldeprozess.

Ausführliche Bemerkungen zum Verordnungsentwurf

Allgemeine Grundsätze der Voraussetzungen Spezialgenehmigungen

Grundsätzlich verlangt das Investitionsgesetz, vor dem offiziellen Markteintritt, von bestimmten Branchen ausländischer Investoren und ihrer lokalen Unternehmen zwei Ebenen von Bedingungen zu erfüllen. Die erste ist Investitionsbedingungen (điều kiện đầu tư) und der zweite Geschäftsinvestitionsbedingungen (auch als Geschäftsvoraussetzung oder Spezialgenehmigung bekannt), (điều kiện đầu tư kinh doanh). Ihre Hauptunterschiede sind in der folgenden Tabelle dargestellt:

Kriterien Investitionsbedingungen Geschäftsinvestitionsbedingungen Funktion Marktzugangsbedingungen für ausländische Investitionen Notwendige Voraussetzung, um tatsächlich Geschäfte oder

Investitionen zu tätigen

Zeitpunkt der Investition

Vor der Investition in Vietnam Nach der Investition in Vietnam

Zielgruppe Ausländische Investoren und FIEOs mit 51% oder mehr Eigentümern aus dem Ausland (wenn diese als Investor in einem anderen Unternehmen agieren)

Grundsätzlich alle FIEOs und lokale Unternehmen

Formulare Investitionszulassungsbescheinigungen oder “Genehmigung” des DPI im Falle der Gründung neuer Gesellschaften oder Erwerb bestehender lokaler Gesellschaften

Unterlizenzen wie Lizenzen, Zertifikate, etc. Im Falle von Handel und Vertrieb durch FIEOs, ist es die „Genehmigung zum Verkauf und Kauf von Waren“ des DOIT.

Zuständige Behörde

DPI / Behörde der Industriegebiete auf Provinzebene

Staatliche Organe vieler Ebenen. Im Falle von Handel und Vertrieb, die DOIT

Erweiterte Anwendung der Anforderungen Spezialgenehmigung

Der Verordnungsentwurf enthält eine spezifische Liste des “Kaufs und Verkaufs von Waren” und von “Tätigkeiten, die direkt mit dem Kauf und Verkauf von Waren zusammenhängen” von FIEOs, nämlich:

Handelsrecht (Import und Export); 2. Vertrieb; 3. Kommerziellen Werbemaßnahmen; 4. Kommerziellen Vermittlungsdienstleistungen; 5. Warenverleih Dienstleistungen; 6. Internethandel Dienstleistungen; 7. Logistik Dienstleistungen; 8. Wirtschaftlichen Beratungsdienstleistungen; 9. Warenversteigerungen, 10. Waren- und Dienstleistungs-Ausschreibungen Bieterservice; 11. Warenbörse; 12. Sonstige Tätigkeiten, die direkt mit dem Kauf und Verkauf von Waren zusammenhängen.

Für die Zwecke dieser Anmerkung werden diese genannten Dienstleistungen und Tätigkeiten gemeinsam als “Bedingte Unternehmungen” bezeichnet.

Im Vergleich zu der Verordnung Nr. 23, obwohl diese sich auf eine Vielzahl handelsbezogener Tätigkeiten bezieht (z. B. Werbung, Verkaufsförderung usw.), sind die FIEOs vorwiegend für den Handel und den Vertrieb von Spezialgenehmigungen bestimmt. Daher ist es aufgrund der dargelegten Tätigkeiten wahrscheinlicher, dass Genehmigungsbehörden für alle Bedingten Unternehmungen Spezialgenehmigungen verlangen. Sollte dies der Fall sein, kann dies als Rückschritt bezüglich der Vereinfachung der Lizenzierungen für ausländische Investitionen gesehen werden. Insbesondere würde Genehmigungsbehörden bei der Erteilung von Spezialgenehmigungen ein Ermessen gegeben

werden für Bedingte Unternehmungen, die eigentlich bereits vollständig für ausländische Investitionen geöffnet sind.

Abgrenzung von Spezialgenehmigungen aus der Investitionszulassung (IRC);

Bisher müssen Investoren, die sich für die Einrichtung eines Handels / Vertrieb FIE nur ein IRC beantragen, welches gleichzeitig als Spezialgenehmigung wirkt. Allerdings ist mit der Verschiebung der IRC Lizensierungszuständigkeit, von den Provinz-Volkskomitees hin zu DPIs nach dem Investitionsgesetz, der Genehmigungsprozesses für die Erteilung der Spezialgenehmigungen noch unklar.

Der Entwurf der Verordnung erläutert dies. Die DPIs und die DOITs sind für die IRCs bzw. die Spezialgenehmigungen zuständig. DOITs sind erforderlich, um Genehmigungen der MOIT und den unter bestimmten Umständen zuständigen staatlichen Stellen zu erhalten. Dieses neue Lizenzierungsverfahren wird, wenn es implementiert wird, effektiv ein dreischichtiges Zulassungsverfahren für FIEs schaffen, welches (i) IRCs bei DPI; (ii) Spezialgenehmigung bei DOIT und tatsächliche Zulassungen bei MOIT; sind. Dies ist umso problematischer, denn damit die DPI IRCs einschließlich der der Bedingten Unternehmungen ausstellen, wird in der behördlichen Praxis oft die Zustimmung der DOIT / MOITs eingeholt. Daher würden für einige Dienstleistungsbereiche vier Instanzen für die Erteilung der Genehmigungen erforderlich sein, die in Vietnam für ausländische Investoren seit Jahren im Rahmen ihrer jeweiligen internationalen Verträge bereits geöffnet sind.

Erlass eines Dekrets über Handelsrechte und Vertriebsaktivitäten von ausländischen investierten Wirtschaftsorganisationen (FIEOs) in Vietnam.

Verschiebung der Zuständigkeit für Genehmigungen in Bezug auf das Spezialgenehmigungen der Provinzabteilung für Industrie und Handel (DOIT);

Wie gesagt ist die DOIT verantwortlich für die Ausstellung von Spezialgenehmigungen. Dabei muss es zuerst die Zustimmung des MOITs einholen.

Freistellung von Spezialgenehmigungen

Es gibt möglicherweise vier Szenarien, in denen FIEOs von den Spezialgenehmigungen befreit sind:

FIEOs importieren / exportieren / verarbeiten oder veräußern Produkte nach ihren eingetragenen Geschäften oder in Verbindung mit ihren eingetragenen Dienstleistungen;
FIEOs, die bereits für die Durchführung von Handels- und Vertriebsrechten zugelassen sind;
FIEOs bereits lizenziert, um Logistik-und kommerzielle Assessment-Dienstleistungen; und
FIEOs mit ausländischem Eigentümer mit höchstens 35% stimmberechtigten Aktien (im Falle von Aktiengesellschaften) oder 35% Charterkapital oder einem niedrigeren Stimmrechtsverhältnis in der Satzung (bei Gesellschaften mit beschränkter Haftung).

Hinsichtlich der genannten FIEOs nach b. und c. ist unklar, ob diese Freistellung für FIEOs gilt, die vor oder nach dem Inkrafttreten des Verordnungsentwurfs gegründet wurden.

Einzelverkaufskriterien

Einzelhandelsgeschäfte von FIEs unterliegen nach wie vor den ENT Voraussetzungen, mit Ausnahme von:

dem ersten Einzelhandel;
Einem Einzelhandel, der anders als der Erste eine Fläche von weniger als 500 m2 in Handelszentren beansprucht; oder
Einzelhändlern, die anders als der Erste eine Gesamtfläche von weniger als 500 m2 in denselben Handelszentren beanspruchen.

Der Verordnungsentwurf führt spezifischere Messgrößen ein, um die ENT Voraussetzungen zu messen, einschließlich der Größe des relevanten Gebiets, der Zahl der bestehenden Einzelhandelsgeschäfte, der möglichen Auswirkungen des Einzelhandelsgeschäfts auf die Stabilität des Marktes, der Bevölkerungsdichte und der möglichen Einwirkungen der Einzelhandelsgeschäfte auf die sozio-ökonomische Entwicklung der Region.

Lizenzierungsprozess

Die FIEOs reichen die Antragsunterlagen an die Genehmigungsbehörde für die Ausstellung von Baby-Genehmigungen per Post, online oder direkt vor Ort ein.

Die Lizenzierungsdauer variiert je nach Nationalität der Anleger bzw. FIEOs. Zum Beispiel wird für Investoren aus Staaten, in denen völkerrechtliche Verträge mit Vietnam über den Marktzugang bestehen, der Zeitraum für die Abgabe der Stellungnahme durch MOIT und andere staatliche Gremien, lediglich sieben Werktage dauern. Andere Anleger (z.B. Anleger aus BVI oder anderen Steueroasen) können einen 15-tägigen Lizenzierungszeitraum erwarten. Die zuständige Zulassungsbehörde (z.B. die DOIT) erteilt die Babyzulassung innerhalb von fünf Tagen ab dem Zeitpunkt an dem vom MOIT und gegebenenfalls anderen zuständigen staatlichen Einrichtungen grünes Licht gegeben wird. Im Falle einer Ablehnung ist dies gegenüber der antragstellenden Körperschaft zu begründen.

Bitte kontaktieren Sie den Autor Oliver Massmann direkt unter omassmann@duanemorris.com wenn Sie Fragen haben. Oliver Massmann ist der Generaldirektor von Duane Morris Vietnam LLC.

VIELEN DANK!

November 10, 2016November 10, 2016 by Dr. Oliver Massmann

Position paper on expectation of foreign investors willing to invest in Vietnam and recommendations to improve foreign investment in Vietnam

Considering Vietnam’s recent deep integration into regional and world’s economy, foreign investors are very optimistic about their business development in Vietnam in the upcoming time. Despite having said that, there remain hurdles that discourage foreign investors when deciding to invest in Vietnam or other countries in the region, for example, Thailand, Indonesia and Myanmar. These hurdles are discussed in details below.

Integrity

It is an area of great concern despite recent Government efforts to combat it. Our recent small-scale surveys shows that ratio of unofficial payment or facilitation payment in a firm’s revenue is increasing over the years. Government officials are still causing a lot of troubles in case of refusal to pay the facilitation fee by enterprises. Most of the cases result in delay in receiving Government’s services or even being refused to be provided the services. Enterprises are deeply concerned about these issues, as they have to suffer from loss of business opportunities, which in turn becomes financial loss. Unfortunately, some enterprises participating in our survey express their losing of confidence that the situation will be improved before the next 10 to 20 years.

Access to information

It is of utmost importance that foreign investors get to understand the country they are going to invest in and its surrounding factors. However, public available information is limited while it takes a lot of time and money to get such information, for example, shareholders information, corporate structure, financial status, etc. of a company. In addition, the fact that information is not always available in English or other common languages causes discomfort to investors. While the websites of many Government authorities are in both Vietnamese and English, the English interface is very limited in its contents compared with its Vietnamese one. The same applies for legal documents.

Compliance

Compliance is a burden for not only Vietnamese but also foreign-owned enterprises. The bigger the size of an enterprise is, the more likely and frequently that it is subject to examination and supervision procedures from many levels of several Government authorities. One enterprise could receive at least 2-3 delegations per year to check its operation status, for example, tax, labour, firefighting and prevention, police, etc. In some cases, the scope of examination repeats.

Foreign invested enterprises also face a burden of having to comply with many administrative procedures, especially those in real estate, customs, fire prevention and safety, environment protection, labour and tax sectors.

Infrastructure

Energy production is of key concern, especially renewable energy. There is so much delay by the Prime Minister in issuing guiding documents for foreign investors to develop renewable energy in Vietnam, despite Vietnam’s urgent need of electricity for growth. Feed-in-Tariff rates are not attractive enough to investors. EVN’s monopoly is still a big hurdle.

Intellectual Property (IP)

Enforcement of IP rights is not assured and remains a concern for foreign investors. Legal sanctions must be much more severe and strengthened.

Enforcement of foreign arbitral awards

The reality is that the arbitration law is being ignored in Vietnam. The percentage of annulled foreign arbitral awards is high due to the matter of practice that the recognition and enforcement of foreign awards in Vietnam are almost impossible. When arbitration is being used more frequently in disputes, it is disappointing that the arbitrators’ decisions have not yet been duly respected. It must be made clear in terms of fundamental principles based on which arbitration awards could be set aside.

Investment in education sector

Legal capital for investing to establish high schools and universities are heavenly high (VND50 billion and VND300 billion respectively). This discourages many investors from countries with high educational reputation. This is not good for Vietnam especially when the young now needs better education than ever before.

House ownership and land use right of foreign invested enterprises and foreign individuals

The law is very unclear and inconsistent as to land regime applicable to residential houses sold to foreign invested enterprises. In addition, while the Law on Residential Housing already allows foreign individuals to purchase property in Vietnam, there is no clear procedure to grant the red book to such individuals. We have seen a huge demand from foreigners to buy houses in Vietnam, but their intention is damaged due to lack of procedures to acknowledge their ownership right.

Vietnam’s restrictions on imports of used machinery and equipment

Restrictions on imports of machinery and equipment based on any arbitrary time standard must be removed, administrative procedures to ensure compliance with international standards of safety, energy savings and environmental requirements must be simplified and incorporated into the National Single Window project, and any quality standards must be based on international standards. Otherwise, it would cause delays in customs processing, impact the modernization and industrialization process of supply industries and be not in accordance with the WTO Technical Barriers to Trade Agreement (Article 2.2) or the TPP Chapter on Technical Barriers to Trade.

Privatization of state-owned enterprises – in name only

State-owned enterprises have long played an important role in Vietnam’s economy. These enterprises have operated in an inefficient manner compared with private companies, many enterprises operating at loss for several years. Therefore, the Government has conducted several rounds of state-owned enterprises reform. However, setting aside the ambitious target of 289 state-owned enterprises to be privatized in 2015, the privatization process has been very slow and only by name. Only 5%- 20% of the shares are offered for sale, which is too low to attract foreign investors. They will be reluctant to invest in these enterprises as long as they have no chance to gain decision-making power by purchase of shares. The Government must then show stronger effort and commitment in reforming state-owned enterprises to attract more foreign investment in the process.

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

October 11, 2016 by Dr. Oliver Massmann

Supporting Regime for Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) in Vietnam

In the context of Vietnam’s deeper integration into regional and world’s economy, domestic firms, especially the SMEs, are now facing fierce competition from foreign enterprises. If not timely and sufficiently supported, these SMEs will not grow proportionately to their existing capacity and drive the country’s growth as expected. In an attempt to ease restrictions for SMEs, pave the way for their further development, the Ministry of Planning and Investment has actively coordinated with the Ministry of Finance and other relevant authorities to draft the Law on Supporting SMEs. This Law, being supposed to be officially adopted next year, will introduce a comprehensive set of supporting measures for SMEs based on the country’s development targets, strengths of each province and the national resources, with a final aim of increasing the number as well as operation quality of SMEs sector. Details of the Draft Law can be found below.

SMEs – Who are they?

SMEs are enterprises which meet a criterion on total capital OR an average number of working employees, and can be classified into 3 categories: super small enterprises, small enterprises and medium enterprises.

Category Sector	Super small enterprises	Small enterprises		Medium enterprises
Category Sector	Average number of working employees per year (person)	Total capital (VND)	Average number of working employees per year (person)	Total capital (VND)	Average number of working employees per year (person)
Agriculture, forestry and fisheries	<10	<20 billion	10 – 200	20 billion -100 billion	200 – 300
Construction and industrial	<10	<20 billion	10 – 200	20 billion – 100 billion	200 – 300
Trade and services	<10	<20 billion	10 – 50	20 billion – 50 billion	50 – 100

Supporting mechanism – What are specific measures?

Supporting the entry into and exit from the market

The authorities will adopt measures to improve business environment, administrative reforms, ensure transparency and compliance for the business of SMEs. SMEs will be able to access business resources in a fair manner compared with other types of enterprises.

Access to bank loans

SMEs will have access to various types of bank loans according to their demands at interest rate and terms suitable for their payment capacity and financial status of the banks. With the Government’s support, SMEs will improve the feasibility of their business plans, management capacity and transparency in corporate operations, resulting in better ability to access bank credit.

Access to fund credits

The Fund for developing SMEs will have the function of lending, investing in, sponsoring for SMEs to conduct innovation, putting them in sustainable value chain. In case the activities of the mentioned Fund are caused losses due to force majeure in the business operations of the borrowing entities, relevant persons and organizations will be exempted from criminal penalty.

Corporate income tax

SMEs are entitled to a tax rate of 3% lower than that stipulated in the Law on Corporate Income Tax. Meanwhile, super small enterprises will enjoy a much lower rate, i.e., 5% lower than that in the Law on Corporate Income Tax.

Access to locations for business operation

The Government encourages the development of industrial zones, high-tech zones, economic zones, industrial complex for SMEs to lease. In doing so, enterprises who develop such infrastructure are entitled to a waiver or reduction of land rental according to the Government’s regulations. The more area in the industrial zones, high-tech zones, economic zones, industrial complex the SMEs lease, the more preferential treatment in terms of corporate income tax and land rental is granted to the developers.

Market promotion and expansion

The Government invests in the form of PPP by allocating land and other resources to establish a national supply chain, which prioritizes goods and products by SMEs. These products will enjoy preferential treatment if falling into the list of innovation goods stipulated by the Government. The Government also supports the establishment and operation of organizations supporting export activities to promote and expand market for SMEs.

Participation in public procurement

Small and super small enterprises are granted exclusive access to construction bid of maximum VND 5 billion and goods/ services bid of maximum VND 3 billion with state budget. For bids having greater value, small and super small enterprises are also prioritized over others pursuant to Article 14.4 of the Law on Bidding. In addition, in case the contractors sub-contract to the SMEs, the main contractors will also enjoy certain preferential treatment when bidding.

The Draft Law also introduces many other programs to support SMEs. Please do not hesitate to contact Oliver Massmann under omassmann@duanemorris.com if you have any questions or want to know more details on the above. Oliver Massmann is the General Director of Duane Morris Vietnam LLC.

October 7, 2016 by Dr. Oliver Massmann

EU- VIETNAM FREE TRADE AGREEMENT – MARKET ACCESS OPPORTUNITIES

On 02 December 2015, after nearly 3 years with 14 rounds of negotiations, the Minister of Industry and Trade of Vietnam, H.E. Vu Huy Hoang and the European Commissioner for Trade, H.E. Cecilia Malmström have signed the Vietnam-EU Free Trade Agreement (FTA). Both parties will finalize the ratification process as soon as possible for the FTA to take effect from the beginning of 2018.

The FTA is considered one of the most comprehensive and ambitious trade and investment agreements that the EU has ever concluded with a developing country. 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 500 million people and a total GDP of USD15,000 billion (accounting for 22% of the global GDP). The other way around, exporters and investors from EU have further opportunities to access one of the fastest-growing countries of more than 90 million people in the region.

The real wages of skilled laborers may increase by up to 12% while real salary of common workers may rise by 13%. The macro economy will be stable and inflation rate is controlled. Vietnam’s business activities will be booming in the next few years once the EU- Vietnam FTA officially comes into force and Government’s policies as well as institutional reforms start showing their positive effects.

Vietnam’s GDP is expected to increase by 0.5% annually; increase in exports is 4-6% per year. If this trend continues until 2020, Vietnam’s exports to EU will increase by USD 16 billion. Until 2025, the FTA is estimated to generate an additional 7-8% of GDP above the trend growth rate.

Market access for goods

Nearly all customs duties – over 99% of the tariff lines will be eliminated. The small remaining number is partially liberalized though tariff tare quotas. As Vietnam is a developing country, it will liberalize 65% of import duties on EU exports to Vietnam at entry into force and the remaining duties will be eliminated over the next ten years. For some products, EU duties will be eliminated over a seven-year period such as motorcycles with engines larger than 150 cc, car parts, about half of EU pharmaceutical exports. The market will be opened for most of EU food products, i.e. wine, spirits and frozen pork meat after seven years and for dairy products after a maximum of five years. This is unprecedented far-reaching tariff elimination for a country like Vietnam, proving its targets of deeper integration and trading relations with the EU.

From the EU side, it agrees to eliminate duties for 85% 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, there is more than 99% of the tariff lines being eliminated for Vietnam. The EU will eliminate duties for some sensitive products in the textile and footwear sector over a 5-7-year period, with a fabric-forward rule (instead of a strict yarn-forward rule as in the TPP) and allowing Vietnam to import fabrics from South Korea. The EU also offers access to some Vietnamese sensitive agricultural products via tariff rate quotas (TRQs), in addition to a number of main Vietnamese exports such as mobile phones, computer accessories, and sport shoes. Vietnamese exports of textile, clothing and footwear to the EU are expected to more than double in 2020 as a result of the FTA.

We note that besides Vietnam in the region, Singapore also concluded an FTA with the EU in 2014. However, this does not affect the competitiveness of Vietnam in trading with the EU. This is due to the fact that Vietnam mainly exports textiles, footwear, agricultural products, etc. while Singapore’s main exports are machines, chemical products and transport equipment. Moreover, while the EU is accelerating procedures to negotiate FTAs with different countries in the ASEAN region, Vietnam should take advantage of this golden time before FTAs with others in the region are concluded and become effective.

Market access for EU service providers

Although Vietnam’s WTO commitments are used as a basis for the Chapter on Trade in Services and Commitments, Vietnam has not only opened additional (sub)sectors for EU service providers but also commits deeper than in the WTO, offering its EU partners best possible access to Vietnam’s market. (Sub)sectors that are not committed under the WTO but under which Vietnam makes commitments are, for example: Interdisciplinary R&D services; Nursing services, physiotherapists and para-medical personnel; Packaging services; Trade fairs and exhibitions services; Building-cleaning services. Moreover, it is noteworthy that the FTA contains a provision that allows one party to grant the other party the best treatment that the former is negotiating with other partners under other framework (for example, TPP, Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, Vietnam – European Free Trade Association) on 17 July 2015.

We set out below certain Vietnam’s commitments in key sectors with reference to its commitment in the WTO.

Distribution sector

WTO requires an Economic Needs Test (ENT) for establishment of outlets for retail services (beyond the first one). EVFTA requires the same but adds cases for ENT exemption and timeline for ENT abolishment.

processed oil and crude oil by foreign investors are still prohibited

WTO

EVFTA

The establishment of outlets for retail services (beyond the first one) shall be allowed on the basis of an Economic Needs Test (ENT)

In case of establishing an outlet less than 500m² within the area planned for trading activities and already completed construction of infrastructure, ENT is not required.

5 years from the date of entry into force of the Agreement, the requirement of the ENT will be abolished.

Power/ Energy

WTO	EVFTA
N/A	Commitments are made in 3 sub-sectors: (i) Production of electricity; transmission and distribution of electricity on own account; (ii) Manufacture of gas; distribution of gaseous fuels through mains on own account; and (iii) Production of steam and hot water; distribution of steam and hot water on own account.

Maritime Transport

Sub-sectors

WTO

EVFTA

Maritime transport services

Mode 3 Market Access (MA): joint venture with maximum 49% foreign ownership

Mode 3 MA: joint venture with maximum 70% foreign ownership

Internal Waterways transport

+ Passenger transport

+ Freight transport

Mode 1: No commitment

Mode 3: joint venture with maximum 49% foreign ownership

Mode 1: No restriction

Mode 3: joint venture with maximum 51% foreign ownership

Securities services

WTO

EVFTA

Commitments on 6 sub-sectors

Mode 3:

foreign securities service suppliers are permitted to establish representative offices and joint ventures with maximum foreign ownership of 49%.

After 5 years from the date of accession, securities service suppliers with 100% foreign-invested capital shall be permitted.

Same commitments in 6 sub-sectors

Commitments on 2 additional services: Provision and transfer of financial data processing; and credit reference and analysis.

Mode 3: Same as the WTO

Telecommunication Services

Non facilities-based services: WTO/ AFAS: maximum 65% foreign ownership forever but in the EVFTA after 5 years, this could be 75%.
Other services – Virtual Private Network (VPN): maximum 70% foreign ownership forever but in the EVFTA after 5 years, this could be 75%.

Conclusion

Vietnam is a country of changes and currently offering increasing opportunities for foreign businesses. The underlying strength of the economy is reflected in, among others, controlled macroeconomic indicators, strong productivity gains and extensive integration into regional and global economy. It is now exactly time for foreign investors to start their business plans and grasp the upcoming clear opportunities.

***

Please do not hesitate to contact Oliver Massmann under omassmann@duanemorris.com; if you have any questions or want to know more details on the above. Oliver Massmann is the General Director of Duane Morris Vietnam LLC. THANK YOU !

October 6, 2016 by Dr. Oliver Massmann

Vietnam – Building better Investor Protection Framework – What you must know:

Vietnam stock exchange already gained significant milestones in developments, but why it still does not attract big domestic companies to list so far?

Tightened monetary policies leading to limited capital inflow to the securities market, its low liquidity and significant decrease in stock price partly contribute to the low attractiveness of Vietnam’s stock exchange. In addition, although Decree No. 60 loosens foreign ownership in public companies, detailed foreign ownership applicable for conditional business sectors has not been issued. This makes Decree No. 60, which is said to be rather promising to the market, invalid in whole or in part.

Another reason is Vietnam’s stock exchange lacks good stocks. In other words, the number of listed state owned enterprises seems to outweigh private entities. It is the fact state owned enterprises still do not attract foreign / private investment due to their history of bad performance. Meanwhile, successful private entities have not been listed. It seems like a vicious circle, when not many companies want to be listed due to low attractiveness of the securities market and unlikely increase in price of stocks after being listed.

Finally, investors and owners are held back to list at the Stock Exchange in Vietnam as Vietnam has not adopted international Corporate Governance Standard and effective means of implementation and enforcement of those. But latest in mid-2017 Vietnam is obliged to adopt these rules.

Vietnam is currently working with the IFC/World Bank on establishing Corporate Governance standards for investors interests. Thus we believe the situation will improve within the next year once Vietnam has fulfilled this task.

What benefits for companies if they list on Singapore or Hong Kong? But how high is the cost they would endure to comply with stricter regulations?

Singapore and Hong Kong are large capital markets where companies in Vietnam could find it much easier to call for capital. Investors in these countries already have certain knowledge about investment in Vietnam and the companies themselves, so if successfully listed, these companies will become more attractive to the investors there.

However, the cost to comply with very strict listing requirements is relatively high, especially when the Vietnam’s companies have never implemented similar requirements in Vietnam. The barriers are, among others, international standard audited financial statements, detailed foreign ownership, proven record of corporate management and complex tax rules. Considering that the cost could be as high as up to USD 1 million, it is recommended that only big companies with high financial capacity list their stocks on Singapore or Hong Kong stock exchange.

But at the moment, we don’t see any Vietnam firms listed successfully abroad. May be the procedure is a huge obstacle for them to move abroad? What do Vietnam companies need to do for completing listing on Singapore stock exchange?

Procedure and strict requirements as mentioned in Point 2 are huge obstacles for companies who want to list abroad. The first and foremost condition is Vietnam companies must understand very well structure of Singapore stock exchange. Next, be prepared for complying with requirements on financial capacity, assets, corporate management, number of shareholders, etc. It is highly advisable that Vietnam companies seek advice of international lawyer with good local legal knowledge so that Vietnam companies could implement their plans successfully.