Starting from June 2026, Indonesia has begun moving forward with a major export management policy, legally grounded in Government Regulation No. 24 of 2026 concerning the Governance of Exports of Strategic Natural Resource Commodities. Exports of strategic natural resource commodities, including coal, palm oil, and ferroalloys, will gradually be reported to and supervised through a newly established state-owned entity, PT Danantara Sumberdaya Indonesia (DSI). In later stages, DSI may also become involved in export contracts, transportation, payment and other transaction arrangements.
The implementation is expected to proceed in two phases. Phase 1 (June 1–December 31, 2026): mandatory data submission and reporting to DSI; existing export contracts and buyer relationships may continue. Phase 2 (from January 1, 2027): all exports must pass through DSI’s centralized digital trading platform. DSI assumes direct role as export intermediary. The official purpose of the policy is to strengthen export supervision, reduce under-invoicing, prevent transfer pricing abuse and ensure that export proceeds properly return to Indonesia. According to public reports, the Indonesian government believes that some resource exports have historically been declared at artificially low prices, resulting in losses of tax revenue, fees and foreign exchange income. The policy is not aimed specifically at Chinese enterprises. However, because Chinese companies are deeply involved in Indonesia’s coal, nickel, ferroalloy, palm oil, and related trading chains, the impact on Chinese enterprises may be direct and significant.
1. Existing Contracts May Be Re-Examined
The most immediate impact is that long-term purchase contracts, offtake agreements and related-party transaction structures already signed by Chinese enterprises may need to withstand renewed scrutiny in Indonesia.
If DSI or the relevant regulators consider that the contract price is significantly below market price, or that the transaction structure may involve under-invoicing or profit shifting, companies may be required to explain the pricing basis. In some cases, the authorities may push for price renegotiation. For Chinese buyers, this means that prices previously locked in under long-term supply contracts may not necessarily continue to operate in exactly the same way.
This does not mean that all existing contracts will become invalid. Indonesian authorities have also indicated that existing long-term contracts will be respected. In practice, however, whether a contract can continue to be performed smoothly may depend on three points: whether the contract price can be justified against market benchmarks, whether the payment route is transparent, and whether the export documents can pass review under the new system.
2. Transaction Procedures May Slow Down, Increasing Performance Risk
Previously, many Chinese enterprises and Indonesian exporters arranged loading, customs declaration, payment and shipping directly based on their bilateral contracts. Under the new policy, export reporting, document review and price verification may need to go through DSI or a designated platform.
This creates a practical issue: the timing of performance may become less predictable. In coal procurement, for example, shipping schedules, letter of credit validity periods, demurrage at the loading port and payment-against-documents timelines are all time-sensitive. If document approval is delayed due to the new rules, the parties may dispute whether the seller is in breach, whether the buyer has delayed payment, or whether the issue should be treated as force majeure or a change in law.
Chinese enterprises should therefore review the delivery period, shipment period, demurrage clause, force majeure clause and change-in-law clause in their contracts. If the contract does not address government approval delays, changes in export licensing, or the involvement of a designated state-owned entity in the transaction, the risk of future disputes may increase significantly.
3. Payment and Foreign Exchange Arrangements May Face Stricter Supervision
Another important focus of the policy is to ensure that export proceeds are genuinely and fully returned to Indonesia. As a result, the payment account, receiving entity, settlement currency and payment timing for export transactions may all become subject to stricter supervision.
Chinese enterprises should pay particular attention to two types of arrangements.
The first is related-party transactions. For example, there may be multiple layers of sales among a Chinese parent company, a Hong Kong or Singapore trading platform and an Indonesian production company. If the pricing, service fees, commissions or financing costs are not clearly documented, regulators may question whether the structure is being used to shift profits.
The second is offshore settlement. In the past, some commodity transactions may have been paid or resold through offshore trading companies. Under the new policy, if Indonesia requires export proceeds to enter designated accounts or to be monitored by DSI, existing offshore trading structures may need to be adjusted.
Companies should not look at payment arrangements only from the perspective of commercial efficiency. They should reassess them from the perspectives of tax, foreign exchange control, customs compliance, and transfer pricing.
4. Compliance Documentation Will Become More Important
Under the new policy, the biggest risk for companies is often not supervision itself, but the inability to explain the transaction clearly. If a company can prove that the transaction price is reasonable, the contract is genuine, the flow of goods is clear and the payment route is transparent, the risk will be much lower.
Chinese enterprises should focus on preparing the following documents: long-term contracts and amendments, pricing formulas, market price references, related-party explanations, invoices, bills of lading, customs documents, payment records, board approvals or internal approval documents. For related-party transactions, transfer pricing documentation or similar explanations should also be prepared.
These documents should not be prepared only after a problem occurs. They should be created before or during the transaction. Once Indonesian supervision becomes stricter, post-event explanations are often more costly and less effective than pre-transaction compliance preparation.
5. Dispute Resolution Clauses Should Be Revisited
Many contracts between Chinese enterprises and Indonesian companies choose Singapore arbitration, Hong Kong arbitration, or the laws of England, Singapore or another foreign jurisdiction. However, if a future dispute involves Indonesian export permits, review by a state-owned entity, customs clearance or foreign exchange supervision, an offshore arbitration clause alone may not fully solve the problem.
The reason is simple: arbitration can resolve contractual liability between the buyer and the seller, but it cannot replace Indonesian government approval, nor can it directly order an Indonesian regulator to release goods. Companies therefore need to consider two mechanisms at the same time: one for contractual dispute resolution, and another for local administrative communication and compliance remedies in Indonesia.
For high-value long-term procurement or investment projects, it is advisable to include a more specific change-in-law clause. The contract should state how the parties will allocate additional costs, renegotiate prices, suspend performance or terminate the contract if DSI’s involvement causes cost increases, approval delays or mandatory changes to the contract structure.
6. The Impact Will Differ by Type of Chinese Enterprises
For Chinese buyers, the main risks are higher procurement prices, supply delays and re-examination of long-term contracts.
For Chinese investors that own or participate in mines, smelters, or palm oil businesses in Indonesia, the impact may be deeper. Export channels, sales autonomy, cash flow recovery and intra-group trading structures may all need to be adjusted.
For trading companies, especially those relying on price spreads, re-export arrangements and offshore settlement, the impact may be the greatest. This is because the core purpose of the new policy is to increase transaction transparency and reduce the space for intermediated or non-transparent pricing.
7. How Should Companies Respond?
For Chinese enterprises, the most important step now is not to wait passively, but to conduct a contract and compliance health check.
First, review all contracts involving Indonesian coal, palm oil, ferroalloys, and any other commodities that may be included in the strategic commodity category.
Second, check whether the pricing mechanism can be explained with market data.
Third, confirm whether the payment route, receiving entity and invoice arrangements are consistent.
Fourth, include change-in-law, government approval delay, DSI involvement, price renegotiation and cost allocation clauses in new contracts.
Fifth, maintain close communication with Indonesian local counsel, tax advisers and industry associations, and continue to monitor the implementing rules.
Overall, this policy is not merely a trade measure. It is part of Indonesia’s broader effort to strengthen resource sovereignty, tax supervision and foreign exchange control. For Chinese enterprises, the short-term impact is increased transaction uncertainty. The longer-term impact is that Indonesia’s resource trade will place greater emphasis on compliance, transparency and cooperation with local regulators.
Companies that quickly align their contracts, tax arrangements, foreign exchange flows and supply chains will be better positioned to maintain stable supply and stronger bargaining power during this policy transition.
Note: This article is based on publicly available information and does not constitute formal legal advice under Indonesian law. Before formally launching a relevant product, companies are advised to conduct a local counsel review based on the specific product version, publishing path and monetization structure.
Written by: Muhamad Destianto and Yibo Chen
Photo by Yan Krukau: https://unsplash.com/photos/assorted-food-in-socks-c9OfrVeD_tQ
—————————————————————————————————————————————————
印尼出口集中化政策：对中资企业的潜在法律影响
自 2026 年 6 月起，印尼开始推进一项重要的出口管理政策。该政策的法律依据是《2026 年第 24 号政府条例：战略自然资源商品出口治理》。煤炭、棕榈油、铁合金等战略自然资源商品的出口，将逐步通过新设立的国有实体 PT Danantara Sumberdaya Indonesia（DSI）进行申报和监督。在后续阶段，DSI 还可能介入出口合同、运输、付款及其他交易安排。
该政策预计分两个阶段实施。第一阶段为 2026 年 6 月 1 日至 2026 年 12 月 31 日，主要要求出口商向 DSI 提交数据并进行报告，既有出口合同和买方关系可以继续维持。第二阶段自 2027 年 1 月 1 日起，所有出口必须通过 DSI 的集中化数字交易平台进行，DSI 将作为出口中介承担直接角色。该政策的官方目标，是加强出口监管、减少低报价格、防止转移定价滥用，并确保出口收入适当回流印尼。根据公开报道，印尼政府认为，部分资源出口过去存在人为低价申报的情况，导致税收、费用和外汇收入流失。该政策并非专门针对中资企业，但由于中国企业深度参与印尼煤炭、镍、铁合金、棕榈油及相关贸易链条，其对中资企业的影响可能较为直接且重要。
1. 现有合同可能被重新审查
最直接的影响是，中资企业已经签署的长期采购合同、包销协议以及关联交易结构，可能需要接受印尼方面的重新审查。
如果 DSI 或相关监管机构认为合同价格明显低于市场价格，或者交易结构可能涉及低报价格或利润转移，企业可能会被要求说明定价依据。在某些情况下，主管机关还可能推动价格重新谈判。对于中国买方而言，这意味着此前在长期供应合同中锁定的价格，未必能够完全按照原有方式继续执行。
这并不意味着所有现有合同都会失效。印尼主管机关也曾表示，将尊重既有长期合同。但在实践中，合同能否顺利继续履行，可能取决于三个方面：合同价格是否能够通过市场基准证明其合理性，付款路径是否透明，以及出口文件是否能够通过新系统的审核。
2. 交易流程可能放慢，履约风险上升
过去，许多中资企业与印尼出口商之间，会根据双方合同直接安排装货、报关、付款和运输。新政策下，出口申报、文件审核和价格核验可能需要通过 DSI 或指定平台进行。
这会带来一个现实问题：履约时间可能变得更难预测。以煤炭采购为例，船期、信用证有效期、装港滞期费以及付款交单时间都非常敏感。如果因新规导致文件审批延迟，双方可能会产生争议：究竟是卖方违约、买方迟延付款，还是应当将该问题视为不可抗力或法律变化。
因此，中资企业应当审查合同中的交货期、装运期、滞期费、不可抗力条款和法律变化条款。如果合同没有涵盖政府审批延迟、出口许可变化，或指定国有实体介入交易等情形，未来争议风险可能明显增加。
3. 付款和外汇安排可能面临更严格监管
该政策的另一个重要重点，是确保出口收入真实、完整地回流印尼。因此，出口交易中的付款账户、收款主体、结算币种和付款时间，都可能受到更严格监管。
中资企业尤其需要关注两类安排。
第一类是关联交易。例如，中国母公司、香港或新加坡贸易平台与印尼生产企业之间，可能存在多层销售安排。如果价格、服务费、佣金或融资成本没有清楚记录，监管机构可能会质疑该结构是否被用于转移利润。
第二类是离岸结算。过去，一些大宗商品交易可能通过境外贸易公司付款或转售。新政策下，如果印尼要求出口收入进入指定账户，或接受 DSI 监控，现有离岸贸易结构可能需要调整。
企业不应只从商业效率角度看待付款安排，而应从税务、外汇管制、海关合规和转移定价等角度重新评估。
4. 合规文件的重要性将进一步提高
在新政策下，企业最大的风险往往不是监管本身，而是无法清楚解释交易。如果企业能够证明交易价格合理、合同真实、货物流向清晰、付款路径透明，风险会低很多。
中资企业应重点准备以下文件：长期合同及其修订文件、定价公式、市场价格参考、关联关系说明、发票、提单、海关文件、付款记录、董事会批准文件或内部审批文件。对于关联交易，还应准备转移定价文档或类似说明材料。
这些文件不应等到问题发生后才准备，而应在交易前或交易过程中形成。一旦印尼监管趋严，事后解释通常比事前合规准备成本更高、效果更差。
5. 争议解决条款应重新审视
许多中资企业与印尼企业之间的合同，会选择新加坡仲裁、香港仲裁，或适用英格兰法、新加坡法等外国法律。然而，如果未来争议涉及印尼出口许可、国有实体审核、海关清关或外汇监管，单靠境外仲裁条款可能无法完全解决问题。
原因很简单：仲裁可以解决买卖双方之间的合同责任问题，但不能替代印尼政府审批，也不能直接命令印尼监管机构放行货物。因此，企业需要同时考虑两套机制：一套是合同争议解决机制，另一套是在印尼本地进行行政沟通和合规救济的机制。
对于金额较大的长期采购或投资项目，建议加入更具体的法律变化条款。合同应约定，如果 DSI 介入导致成本增加、审批延迟或合同结构被强制调整，双方如何分担新增成本、重新谈判价格、暂停履行或解除合同。
6. 对不同类型中资企业的影响不同
对于中国买方而言，主要风险是采购价格上升、供应延迟以及长期合同被重新审查。
对于在印尼拥有或参与矿山、冶炼厂或棕榈油业务的中资投资者而言，影响可能更深。出口渠道、销售自主权、现金流回收以及集团内部贸易结构，都可能需要调整。
对于贸易公司，尤其是依赖价差、转口安排和离岸结算的贸易公司，影响可能最大。因为该政策的核心目的，是提高交易透明度，并减少中间环节或非透明定价的空间。
7. 企业应如何应对？
对于中资企业而言，当前最重要的不是被动等待，而是进行一次合同和合规体检。
第一，审查所有涉及印尼煤炭、棕榈油、铁合金，以及其他可能被纳入战略商品范围的合同。
第二，检查定价机制是否能够用市场数据解释。
第三，确认付款路径、收款主体和发票安排是否一致。
第四，在新合同中加入法律变化、政府审批延迟、DSI 介入、价格重新谈判和成本分担条款。
第五，与印尼本地律师、税务顾问和行业协会保持密切沟通，并持续跟进实施细则。
总体来看，该政策并不仅仅是一项贸易措施，而是印尼加强资源主权、税务监管和外汇管制的更广泛努力的一部分。对于中资企业而言，短期影响是交易不确定性上升；长期影响则是印尼资源贸易将更加重视合规、透明度以及与本地监管机构的配合。
能够尽快理顺合同安排、税务结构、外汇流向和供应链的企业，将更有可能在这一政策过渡期内维持稳定供应，并保持更强的谈判地位。
