An FDI enterprise in Bac Kan has been fined three times for missing investment activity reports and fears the next violation will cost its Investment Registration Certificate (IRC). This article separates the money penalties from the project-termination threshold, and the steps the registration agency must take before any revocation.
Applicable Legal Framework
Two sanction systems must be kept apart: (1) administrative money fines under Article 15 of Decree 122/2021/ND-CP for each reporting violation – repeated fines are the product of multiple independent conducts; (2) project termination and IRC revocation are project-management measures under Clause 1, Article 36 of the Investment Law 143/2025/QH15, applying only where the project falls in statutory cases – typically the investor not implementing the project for a long period, being uncontactable, or failing to remedy violations after competent decisions and urging.
Non-reporting itself is not a listed termination case; but it is the signal that moves a project into tight monitoring, and if checks show the project is in substance inactive or unimplemented, the handling chain proceeds toward termination. What decides is not the number of fines but the project’s real state and the investor’s remediation attitude.
Detailed Answers to Practical Questions
Can repeated fines for missing reports lead to IRC revocation?
Not directly and not automatically. IRC revocation attaches to project termination under Article 36 of the Investment Law 143/2025/QH15 – cases such as the investor deciding to terminate, the project term expiring, or the agency terminating where the project is unimplemented and the investor fails to remedy after urging. Repeated reporting violations raise monitoring intensity and form an adverse backdrop, but a termination decision must rest on the project falling in a statutory case, not on a mechanical ‘number of fines’ threshold.
At what level of reporting violation is the licence revoked?
The law sets no threshold of fine counts or amounts for revocation. The substantive threshold is: the project is suspended or unimplemented for a long period, the investor is uncontactable, or fails to perform remediation duties after the registration agency has notified, urged in writing and given a remediation deadline. An enterprise producing normally, merely weak on reporting and actively back-filing, will in management principle stop at fines and monitoring – not termination for reporting faults alone.
Is there warning and a chance to remedy before revocation?
Yes, a protective sequence exists: the agency monitors, builds the file, notifies and requires remediation within a set period; the investor may explain and evidence the project’s real state. A termination decision is an administrative decision that must be grounded and notified to the investor – who may complain under the Law on Complaints 02/2011/QH13 or sue administratively under the Law on Administrative Procedures 93/2015/QH13 if in disagreement.
After revocation, can we apply for a new certificate?
A terminated project gets no ‘re-issuance’ of the old IRC: continuing requires a new project with investment registration from scratch (plus settling the old project’s consequences: asset liquidation, tax duties, land). A history of termination for non-implementation is a factor agencies weigh when assessing capacity and feasibility of a new project at the same site or sector – so preserving the current project by early remediation is far cheaper than restarting.
Action Checklist
- Back-file every outstanding reporting period immediately and keep filing confirmations.
- Answer every urging letter from the registration agency fully and on time – silence is the most dangerous signal.
- Prepare evidence the project is substantively active: revenue, headcount, utilities, taxes.
- If the project is objectively suspended: file the suspension notice on time instead of leaving a blank.
- Put reporting status into a quarterly compliance review so fined conducts never repeat.
Frequently Asked Questions
Facing a third fine – should we proactively meet the registration agency?
Yes. A proactive session with a remediation plan and proof of back-filing shows good-faith cooperation – recorded in the monitoring file and a mitigating factor for later handling.
If the project is terminated for other reasons, are past reporting violations still pursued?
Conducts that already occurred remain sanctionable within the limitation period under the Law on Handling of Administrative Violations; termination does not erase financial duties and violations arisen before it.
What happens when the overseas investor becomes uncontactable?
That is one of the typical situations leading to project termination under Article 36 of the Investment Law 143/2025, after the agency has notified the registered address without response and the project shows no real activity.
This article has been quality-reviewed by the FLAW AI Legal Council
