Transfer Pricing in Vietnam: A Guide for Foreign Investors

Vietnam has emerged as a key destination for foreign investment, particularly in manufacturing, services, and technology. As multinational enterprises expand their operations in the country, they must navigate an increasingly complex regulatory landscape. Among the most critical areas of focus is transfer pricing compliance — a factor that can significantly affect both tax exposure and operational risk.

With enforcement trends tightening and local regulations evolving to align more closely with international standards, foreign investors need a clear understanding of how Vietnam’s transfer pricing rules apply. More importantly, they must develop strategies that not only ensure compliance but also integrate seamlessly into their global tax and financial planning.

The importance of transfer pricing compliance

Understanding local interpretations of the arm’s length principle, documentation requirements, and the enforcement environment is vital to avoid costly penalties and reputational damage. For foreign investors, this is not merely a compliance exercise but a strategic necessity.

This foundation sets the stage for exploring the key technical aspects of Vietnam’s transfer pricing regime.

Core principles shaping Vietnam’s transfer pricing rules

At the heart of Vietnam’s framework lies the arm’s length principle, which requires controlled transactions between related parties to be priced as if they were conducted between independent entities. Vietnam’s regulations draw heavily from the OECD Guidelines, though local interpretations add specific nuances.

To apply these rules effectively, companies must first identify which transactions fall under transfer pricing scrutiny — including sales of goods, provision of services, financial arrangements, and use of intellectual property.

Building on these principles, companies must also understand the robust documentation requirements set by the authorities.

Navigating Master File, Local File, and Country-by-Country reporting

Vietnam requires multinational groups that meet certain thresholds to prepare the Master File, Local File, and, in some cases, the Country-by-Country (CbC) Report.

The Master File offers a global overview of group operations, policies, and income allocation. The Local File focuses on the Vietnamese entity’s specific controlled transactions. Both must comply with detailed content and format requirements, prepared in Vietnamese and submitted according to General Department of Taxation (GDT) deadlines.

For larger groups, CbC reporting obligations introduce additional layers of compliance, often requiring close coordination with the ultimate parent entity’s global reporting practices.

With the documentation structure in place, the next step is selecting the right pricing methods to defend intercompany transactions.

Selecting the right transfer pricing method

Vietnam recognizes several transfer pricing methods, including the Comparable Uncontrolled Price (CUP) method, Resale Price method, Cost Plus method, Profit Split method, and Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM).

Companies are expected to follow a “best method” approach, weighing the nature of the transaction, data availability, and reliability of adjustments. Although the regulatory framework broadly aligns with OECD standards, local enforcement can favor certain methods, making careful selection and justification critical.

Method selection is particularly important in sectors with heightened regulatory attention, where industry-specific risks must also be considered.

Sector-specific issues that foreign investors should know

Different industries in Vietnam present unique transfer pricing challenges. Manufacturing operations often face scrutiny over contract manufacturing arrangements and risk allocation. In distribution and marketing, setting fair margins and discounts between related parties is essential.

Shared services, management fees, intellectual property licensing, royalties, and intercompany loans all come under special focus, especially when foreign investors control valuable intangible assets or finance local operations. Sectors such as textiles, electronics, and food processing are particularly prominent and require tailored strategies.

Given these risks, many companies explore proactive options such as Advance Pricing Arrangements to reduce uncertainty.

Leveraging advanced pricing arrangements

Vietnam’s unilateral APA program allows companies to secure an upfront agreement with tax authorities on transfer pricing methods and parameters over a fixed period. While the process involves detailed applications and negotiations, it offers certainty and significantly reduces the likelihood of future disputes or audits.

Find Business Support

Partner with Dezan Shira & Associates to meet Vietnam’s transfer pricing requirements. Our experts help develop tailored strategies, ensure strong documentation, and manage cross-border compliance risks. Contact us today to safeguard your operations.

Even with strong preparation and APAs in place, companies must remain vigilant as audits can still arise, especially if operational conditions change.

Understanding Vietnam’s audit and enforcement landscape

The GDT has expanded its transfer pricing enforcement, deploying advanced data tools and focusing on high-risk sectors and transactions. Audits frequently target companies reporting persistent losses or large intercompany dealings, particularly in industries known for transfer pricing risks.

Consider the case of a foreign-owned electronics manufacturer operating in Vietnam that reports several consecutive years of low profits due to high management fees charged by its overseas parent. Even though the fees align with internal group policies, the GDT may view the arrangement as aggressive profit shifting and initiate an audit to reassess the arm’s length nature of the charges.

Notably, companies that secure APAs or maintain well-prepared documentation are better positioned to navigate or even avoid audit challenges.

However, if disputes arise, companies must be ready to navigate Vietnam’s available resolution pathways.

Managing transfer pricing disputes effectively

Foreign investors facing transfer pricing disputes can pursue several resolution routes. Administrative reviews allow companies to challenge tax determinations, while the Mutual Agreement Procedure (MAP) under tax treaties provides a forum for addressing cross-border disputes.

Suppose a Vietnamese subsidiary faces an adjustment on intercompany royalty payments, where the same royalty income has already been taxed by the parent company’s jurisdiction. Without MAP, the group could face double taxation — but by activating the MAP process, the company opens a dialogue between the two tax authorities to negotiate relief and avoid economic harm.

While court proceedings remain an option, they can be time-consuming and expensive. In some cases, alternative resolution methods such as negotiation or settlement may provide more efficient outcomes. Here again, proactive strategies — such as APAs or strong internal compliance policies — can reduce the likelihood of entering formal disputes.

Ultimately, managing transfer pricing risks effectively demands an integrated, forward-looking approach.

Developing practical compliance strategies

Effective transfer pricing management requires embedding compliance into the organization’s broader financial and tax approach. This includes maintaining robust internal policies, ensuring accurate and timely documentation, conducting benchmarking analyses, and aligning local practices with global frameworks.

• Previous Article Leveraging the Laos-China Railway for Trade
• Next Article Indonesia’s Consumer Stimulus: Impacts for Foreign Investors