The state recovers land; the Chinese company receives site-clearance compensation — can this money go back to China, and is it taxed? Many investors are surprised: compensation isn’t “profit”, so dividend procedures don’t apply — it’s a separate money flow with its own tax and FX logic. This article traces the full journey of compensation money: from the recovery decision to the Chinese bank account.
Site-clearance compensation: nature and the road home
1. Lawful income — remittable abroad
State-land-recovery compensation and support payments are lawful income — remittable after financial obligations (taxes) are settled. Unlike dividends (needing a dividend resolution), compensation remits on the basis of the land recovery decision + compensation plan/decision — the underlying documents for bank screening.
2. Tax: is compensation subject to CIT?
Compensation is CIT-taxable income (other income) — except amounts used for remediation, relocation or reinvestment under the rules (separate treatment). Real math: 100 received in compensation, minus deductible relocation/remediation costs, the remainder suffers CIT before remittance. Investors assuming “receive X, remit X” face a tax shortfall at the last minute. Note: compensation for on-land assets (factory, machinery) versus relocation support are taxed differently — separate every item.
3. FX: what do banks require?
To remit compensation abroad, banks typically require: (a) the land recovery decision; (b) the compensation/support plan or decision; (c) proof of receipt (statements, minutes); (d) related CIT filings; (e) confirmation of settled financial obligations. Common jam: compensation paid in multiple tranches over years — each remittance needs its own file; and repeatedly adjusted compensation decisions leave bank-held figures mismatched with reality.
Strategy: don’t let compensation run aground
(1) Model tax when the compensation plan issues: don’t wait for receipt — compute the after-tax remittable amount. (2) Separate every item: land / on-land assets / relocation / stabilisation support — each with different tax logic. (3) Tranche-ready files: for multi-tranche compensation, build a standard file process per remittance. (4) Consider reinvestment: if reinvesting in Vietnam is planned, amounts reinvested enjoy friendlier tax treatment than remitted ones — compare both. Principle: compensation is the last chance to recover capital — sloppy handling loses part of it needlessly.
Offshore borrowing — “leverage” and “shackles”
When to borrow offshore (instead of injecting equity)?
Borrow when: (1) flexibility is needed (equity is hard to withdraw — loans end when repaid); (2) tax (interest is deductible for CIT — within limits); (3) ratios (parents wanting to keep ownership ratios while still funding). Don’t borrow when: (1) the project lacks cash flow (repaying interest with what?); (2) FX is unstable (USD loans, VND revenue — FX risk); (3) borrowing caps are full (exceeding regulatory ceilings).
Loan registration — never “forget”
All medium/long-term offshore loans must be registered with the SBV (via banks) — unregistered means unrepayable (banks refuse debt-service transfers). Timing: register before drawdown (never “borrow then register” — messy). Dossier: loan agreement + repayment schedule + use-of-funds purpose.
Interest caps and tax — two “tightening rings”
Ring 1 — Tax: interest exceeding 30% EBITDA (anti-erosion rules) is non-deductible (the excess). Ring 2 — Transfer pricing: related-party loans at abnormally high rates → tax reassesses (treated as disguised profit shifting). Safe path: market rates (bank references) + sensible debt/equity ratios + complete transfer-pricing documentation.
Intercompany loan terms — getting them right
Parent-to-subsidiary loans need arm’s-length terms: (1) written agreements (never undocumented “funding”) — tax authorities recharacterise undocumented flows as equity (non-deductible, non-repayable as debt); (2) realistic repayment schedules (a 10-year “loan” with no repayments looks like equity); (3) actual interest payments (accrued-but-never-paid interest invites challenges). Reality: the most common offshore-loan failure isn’t regulatory — it’s documentation: loans treated casually become tax disasters precisely when the company needs the deductions most.
Remitting site-clearance compensation — only “clean” money moves
Compensation for site clearance (state land recovery) remitted to China — conditions: (1) the recovery decision + compensation plan (state documents); (2) receipt proof (bank); (3) tax (compensation may be taxable — declare fully). Banks check hard (large, one-off sums) — missing papers mean no transfer. Prepare dossiers before needing to move money.
Tax treatment — the overlooked question
Compensation isn’t automatically tax-free: (1) land-use rights compensation (for lost rights — often non-taxable, but verify); (2) asset compensation (for buildings/equipment — gains over book value may be taxable); (3) business interruption (for lost profits — typically taxable income). Structure the compensation breakdown (state documents itemising each component — lump sums invite worst-case tax treatment). Obtain a tax ruling before accepting (negotiating the characterisation is easier before money moves). After-tax proceeds are what actually remit — model net, not gross.
Compensation repatriation checklist
(1) Collect the recovery decision + compensation plan (underlying documents); (2) separate each compensation/support item (land, assets, relocation, stabilisation); (3) compute CIT per item — model the true remittable amount; (4) settle tax duties; (5) prepare bank files per remittance tranche; (6) keep figures matched between compensation decisions and actual receipts; (7) weigh reinvestment (friendlier tax). Principle: compensation is remittable — but only after tax and with full files.
Contact us
FLAT Law Firm advises Chinese investors in Vietnam across the full lifecycle: investment structuring, IRC/ERC procedures, tax, labour, intellectual property and dispute resolution. Contact us for advice tailored to your case.
This article has been quality-reviewed by the FLAW AI Legal Council