G/C/W/ 801 
G/STR/Q1/VNM/9  
 
8 October 2021  
(21-7643) Page: 1/5 
Council for Trade in Goods  
Working Party on State Trading Enterprises  Original: English  
 
STATE TRADING  
VIET NAM'S REPLIES TO FURTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE UNITED STATES1 REGARDING  
VIET NAM'S STATE TRADING ENTERPRISES  
The following communication, dated  and received on 7 October 2021, is being circulated at the 
request of the Delegation of Viet Nam.  
 
_______________  
 
 
Viet Nam provides the following responses to questions from the United States regarding Viet Nam's 
State Trading Enterprises, as set forth in document s G/C/W/786 - G/STR/Q1/VNM/8, dated 
10 November 2020 , and G/C/W/786/Corr.1 - G/STR/Q1/VNM/8/Corr.1, dated 27 November 2020 . 
Follow -up Question 1  
In its reply to US  Question 1 -2 regarding Vinafood I, Viet Nam stated that Announcement 
No. 78/TB -VPCP (dated 9  March  2009), under which Vinafood I is assigned a special or 
exclusive privilege to export rice to the Iraqi market, "holds no validity during the 
notification period (2012 -14) stated in document G/STR/N/15/VNM of Viet Nam." With 
this reply, Viet Nam appears to  be stating that the special or exclusive privilege assigned 
to Vinafood I did apply for earlier periods. As noted in our 2018 counter -notification2 and 
replies to Viet Nam's responses3, the counter -notification covered the entire period of 
2006 to 2016. Therefore, Viet Nam's reply does not speak to whether Vinafood I should 
have been notified before 2012.  
 
Given Viet Nam's apparent acknowledgment that a special or exclusive privilege did apply 
to Vinafood I before 2012, will Viet Nam be providing a full notification for any of the 
earlier periods for which it has not fulfilled its notification obligation?  
 
Reply:  
The statement that the Announcement No.  78/TB -VPCP dated 9  March  2009 holds no validity during 
the notification period of 2012 -2014 does not constitute an affirmation of the privileges and exclusive 
rights assigned to Vinafood I (if any) applicable to the previous period or any notification periods.  
 
Vinafood I is not included in the list of state -trading enterprises according to Viet Nam's accession 
commitments to the WTO.  
 
On legal basis, according to Decree No.  12/2006/ND -CP dated 23 January 2006  (effective from 
1 May 2006), traders of all economic sectors are allowed to export rice and paddy.  From 
1 January  2011 until now, any enterprises that fully meet the conditions under Decree No.  
109/2010/ND -CP of the Government dated 04 November 2010 on ri ce exportation and  Circular No.  
44/2010/TT -BCT of the Ministry of Industry and Trade dated 31 December 2010 detailing a number 
of provisions of Decree No.  109/2010/ND -CP, are allowed to equally participate in this sector.  
Therefore, Vinafood I is not a sta te trading enterprise, and accordingly Viet Nam is not required to 
notify it to the WTO.  
 
 
1 G/C/W/786 - G/STR/Q1/VNM/8  and G/C/W/786/Corr.1 - G/STR/Q1/VNM /8/Corr.1.  
2 G/C/W/750 – G/STR/Q1/VNM/4 . 
3 G/C/W/760 – G/STR/Q1/VNM/6 . G/C/W/ 801• G/STR/Q1/VNM/9  
 
- 2 - 
 
  Follow -up Question 2  
 
Similarly, in its reply to US  Question 1 -2 regarding Vinafood  II, Viet Nam stated that 
Announcement No.  24/2011/TB -LPQT (dated 18  April  2011), under which Vinafood II is 
assigned a special or exclusive privilege to export rice to The Philippines, "holds no 
validity during the notification period (2012 -2014)." With t his reply, Viet Nam appears to 
be stating that the special or exclusive privilege assigned to Vinafood II did apply for 
earlier periods. As noted in our 2018 counter -notification and replies to Viet Nam's 
responses, the counter -notification covered the ent ire period of 2006 -2016. Therefore, 
Viet Nam's reply does not speak to whether Vinafood II should have been notified before 
2012.  
 
Given Viet Nam's apparent acknowledgment that a special or exclusive privilege did apply 
to Vinafood II before 2012, will Vie t Nam be providing a full notification for any of the 
earlier periods for which it has not fulfilled its notification obligation?  
 
Reply : 
 
The statement that the Announcement No.  24/2011/TB -LPQT of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs dated 
18 April 2011 holds no validity during the notification period of 2012 -2014 does not constitute an 
affirmation of the privileges and exclusive rights assigned to Vinafood II (if any) applicable to the 
previous period or any notification periods.  
 
Vinafood II is not included in the list of state -trading enterprises according to Viet Nam's accession 
commitments to the WTO.  
 
On legal basis, according to Decree No.  12/2006/ND -CP dated 23 January 2006 (effective from 
1 May 2006), traders of all economic sectors are allowed to expo rt rice and paddy.  From 
1 January  2011 until now, any enterprises that fully meet the conditions under Decree No.  
109/2010/ND -CP of the Government dated 4 November 2010 on rice exportation and  Circular No.  
44/2010/TT -BCT of the Ministry of Industry and Trade dated 31 December 2010 detailing a number 
of provisions of Decree No.  109/2010/ND -CP, are allowed to equally participate in this sector.  
Therefore, Vinafood II is not a state trading enterprise, and accordingly Viet N am is not required to 
notify  it to the WTO.  
 
In addition, the rice exportation by Vinafood  II to the Philippines under the Memorandum of 
Understanding between the Government of Viet Nam and the Government of the Philippines is on 
the basis of direct appointment of contractor, not a public bidding mechanism.  
Follow -up Question 3  
In its reply to US Question 1 -2, Viet Nam did not reply to two of our questions. Therefore, 
we will state our questions again:  
(a) Each entity's charter states that it may "[e]njoy subsidies, price supports or other 
state preference policies when undertaking duties for the pu blic interest, defense, 
security, food security, natural disaster prevention or supply of products or services 
according to State price policy."4 For example, in Office of the Government 
Announcement 5159/VPCP -KTN, the Prime Minister stated that "[t]he So uthern and 
Northern Food Companies are required to immediately develop measures to 
purchase approximately 400 -500 thousand tons of rice in August  2008."5 In light of 
these two entities' apparently exclusive or special rights or privileges, could 
Viet Nam please explain why it does not view these entities as STEs?  
(b) Viet Nam asserts that Office of the Government Announcement 78/TB -VPCP and 
Office of the Government Announcement 5159/VPCP -KTN are not legal normative 
 
4 Government Decree 12/2014/ND -CP dated 25  February  2014 on the Charter for the Organization and 
Operations of the Northern Food Corporation; Government Decree 10/2014/ND -CP dated 13 February  2014 on 
the Charter on the Organization and Operations of the Southern Food Corporation.  
5 Office of the Government Announcement 5159/VPCP -KTN on Solutions to promote the purchase and 
consumption of the entire 2008 Summer -Autumn rice harvest in  the Mekong Delta, dated 7  August  2008.  G/C/W/ 801• G/STR/Q1/VNM/9  
 
- 3 - 
 
  documents and that they have no legal eff ect in the period of notification. Is 
Viet Nam representing that orders from the Prime Minister do not carry legal 
authority?6 
Reply : 
 
a) The purchase of rice by Vinafood I and Vinafood II as mentioned in the document No.  
5159/VPCP -KTN is not rice importa tion, but the rice purchase from domestic farmers for the 
Government to fulfil its goals of improving people's living standards and ensuring the 
national food security. This does not affect the rights of other enterprises to purchase rice 
from farmers.  
 
b) According to the Law on the Enactment of Legal Normative Documents , a document issued 
in the form of a "Decision of the Prime Minister" is considered as a legal normative  document. 
However, the document No.  5159/VPCP -KTN is an official letter issued by th e Government 
Office, not a "Decision of the Prime Minister".  
Follow -up Question 4  
In its reply to US  Question 4 regarding Viet Nam National Coal – Mineral Industries 
Holding Corporation Limited, Viet Nam did not reply to one of our questions. Therefore, 
we will state our question again:  
• Office of the Government Announcement 346/TB -VPCP clearly states that two 
companies, including Vinacomin or TKV, are designated by the state as coal 
intermediaries:  
[MOIT ] shall direct Electricity Vietnam, PetroVietnam, and other enterprises with 
a need for imported coal to sign contracts with the TKV and Dong Bac General 
Corporations (the two enterprises designated as coal import intermediaries ) to 
supply coal in accordan ce with the law and international customs; contracts 
should include a guarantee that contracts will be executed, to create conditions 
for these intermediaries to find a stable source of supply with appropriate quality 
and price.7 (emphasis added)  
Viet Nam  asserts that this measure is "not a legal normative document to grant exclusive 
or special privileges to TKV to importing or exporting coal." Again, is Viet Nam 
representing that directives from the Deputy Prime Minister do not carry legal authority?  
Reply: 
 
According to the Law on the Enactment of Legal Normative Documents , a document issued in the 
form of a "Decision of the Prime Minister" is considered as a legal normative  document. However, 
the Notice No.  346/TB -VPCP is a document issued by the Governm ent Office, not a "Decision of the 
Prime Minister".  
 
Regarding the information relating to the TKV and Dong Bac General Corporations mentioned in the 
Notice No.  346/TB -VPCP, Viet Nam is in the process of verification. Due to the Covid -19 pandemic, 
the veri fication process has taken longer than planned.  
 
Follow -up Question 5  
In its reply to US  Question 6 regarding Skypec, Viet Nam stated that, since 2016, "Skypec  
is no longer granted the monopolistic rights to import and export petroleum as fuel for 
civil aircrafts." With this reply, Viet Nam appears to be confirming that a special or 
exclusive privilege (i.e., monopolistic rights) did apply before then. Given thi s 
 
6 The United States notes that Article 4.6 of the Law 80/2015/QH13 on the Promulgation of Legal 
Documents includes Prime Ministerial Decisions within Viet Nam's System of Legal Documents.  
7 Paragraph 3, Section 1, Of fice of the Government Announcement 346/TB -VPCP on the conclusions of 
Deputy Prime Minister Hoang Trung Hai at the meeting on the coal import situation, dated 26  August  2014.  G/C/W/ 801• G/STR/Q1/VNM/9  
 
- 4 - 
 
  confirmation, will Viet Nam be providing a full notification for any of the earlier periods 
for which it has not fulfilled its notification obligation?  
Reply : 
 
According to the Law on the National Reserves No.  22/2012/QH13 dated 20 November 2012, the 
Government of Viet Nam establishes and uses national reserves to proactively respond to 
unexpected and urgent demands for prevention, control, and recovery from the consequences of 
natural disasters, fires and epidemics; as well as for the national defence an d security purposes. 
Civil aircrafts' fuel (Jet A1) is a commodity on the National Reserve List. Before 2016, Skypec was 
assigned by the Government of Viet Nam to ensure the national reserve on Jet A1.  
The Understanding on the Interpretation of Article XV II of the GATT 1994 stipulates that STE 
notification requirement does not apply to imports of products for immediate or ultimate 
consumption in governmental use or in use by an enterprise specified as STE and not otherwise for 
resale or use in the producti on of goods for sale. T herefore, from Viet Nam's point of view, this case 
of Skypec is not subject to notification to the WTO.  
Follow -up Question 6  
In its reply to US  Question 6, Viet Nam did not reply to one of our questions. Therefore, 
we will state our question again:  
• Please clarify the statement that a Prime Ministerial Decision is not a "legal 
normative document". Is Viet Nam asserting that decisions by the Prime Minister 
do not have legal authority?  
Reply : 
 
In the Decision No.  1139/QD -TTg dated 31 July 2009, the Prime Minister approved the Master Plan 
to develop the reserve system of crude oil and petroleum products of Viet Nam until 2015, with a 
vision to 2025. Accordingly, this Decision set out objectives, development orientation, as wel l as 
overall solutions to implement the Master Plan. However, the Prime Minister also assigned ministries 
and agencies to develop relevant legal normative  documents  to concretize and implement the overall 
solutions in order to achieve the objectives set ou t in this Master Plan.  
Follow -up Question 7  
In US  Question 7 regarding General Aviation Import Export Joint Stock Company 
(Airimex ), the United States referred to Viet Nam's revised notification that stated that 
Airimex "is the exclusive importer and distributor of spare parts of airplanes and most of 
[sic] other equipment in the aviation industry." In its reply, Viet Nam stated that , since 
2006, "Airimex has not been granted any exclusive or special privileges by the 
Government in importing and exporting goods." Please confirm whether the earlier 
exclusive right referenced above continues to apply and, if not, what legal measure 
chan ged Airimex's status or otherwise authorized other enterprises to import these 
goods.  
Reply : 
 
The import of spare parts of airplanes and equipment in the aviation industry is not on the List of 
sectors and trades banned from business investment  and the Lis t of sectors and trades subject to 
conditional business investment under the Law on Investment 2014 and Law on Investment 2020. 
Therefore, these products are not subject to state trading enterprise mechanism under WTO 
regulations.   
Follow -up Question 8  
If, in its replies to these follow -up questions, Viet Nam determines that a new or revised 
notification is necessary, please advise as to when such notification will be provided.  G/C/W/ 801• G/STR/Q1/VNM/9  
 
- 5 - 
 
  Reply : 
 
Viet Nam fully respects the WTO's regulations on notification obligatio n and always makes every 
effort to implement these requirements.  
 
In the event that Viet Nam considers it necessary to make notification on state trading activities in 
accordance with WTO regulations, Viet Nam will make such notification as soon as it has  collected 
all relevant information to ensure a full and accurate notification.  
 
__________