Government and Opposition Find Common Ground on Protecting Businesses for Samoans

APIA, SAMOA — Government and Opposition MPs have found common ground on the need to protect business opportunities for Samoan citizens, as Parliament debated major amendments to Samoa’s foreign investment laws.

The debate on the Foreign Investment Amendment Bill 2026, tabled by Minister of Commerce, Industry and Labour Fata Ryan Schuster, developed into a wider discussion about foreign-owned businesses, taxation, licensing compliance and which sectors of Samoa’s economy should remain reserved for Samoan ownership.

The discussion also brought together the responsibilities of two Government portfolios — MCIL, which administers the foreign investment framework, and the Ministry for Revenue, whose Minister, Pauga Teomatavui Talalelei Pauga, addressed concerns over business and tax compliance.

Samoa Still Needs Foreign Investment

Prime Minister Laaulialemalietoa Leuatea Schmidt acknowledged the contribution foreign businesses have made to Samoa’s economy, agreeing with MPs who pointed to the competition and cheaper goods that have resulted from overseas businesses, including Chinese-owned businesses.

The Prime Minister’s comments reflected an important distinction during the debate: the issue is not about shutting foreign investors out of Samoa, but ensuring those who do business in the country operate within Samoa’s laws.

That position is also reflected in Fata Ryan’s prepared address.

The Minister said the Foreign Investment Act was introduced in 2000 with the dual purpose of attracting foreign capital while protecting opportunities and rights for Samoan citizens to participate in economic activity.

After more than 25 years, however, Government believes the business environment has changed considerably and the law needs to change with it.

PM Questions How Some Businesses Are Operating

A major part of the debate centred on Samoa’s Reserved List, covering businesses non-Samoan citizens are prohibited from undertaking, and the Restricted List, where foreign participation is permitted subject to certain conditions.

The Prime Minister pointed to the distinction between retail and wholesale activities and questioned how some supermarkets and foreign businesses are operating in practice.

He noted that while certain retail activities are reserved from foreign participation, foreigners are able to participate in wholesale operations.

But the changing nature of the sector, he suggested, raises questions about whether businesses are actually operating according to the activities for which they have been approved.

“Faʻafefea ona operate supamaketi ia?” the Prime Minister asked during his contribution — essentially questioning how supermarket operations fit within the existing rules.

For the Prime Minister, this went to the heart of why Samoa’s foreign investment laws are being reviewed.

Licence Holder Must Be the Actual Operator

The Prime Minister was also direct about situations where one person appears on a business licence while somebody else actually operates the business.

“E lē mafai ona toe iai ni laisene, e ese le tagata lea e lalo le laisene, ese le operator,” he told Parliament.

In essence, the Government does not want situations where one person is named on the licence while another person is actually running the business.

This directly relates to one of the significant reforms contained in Fata Ryan’s Bill — identifying beneficial ownership.

Under the proposed amendments, foreign investment applications would undergo greater due diligence to determine who is actually behind an investment and who ultimately owns or benefits from the business.

Government also wants checks undertaken on applicants for relevant criminal histories or links to terrorism or other activities that could pose risks to Samoa.

The assessment period for foreign investment applications would consequently increase from 10 days to four weeks.

PM: Identify Businesses That Should Remain for Samoans

The Prime Minister also encouraged MPs to identify additional areas of business that Parliament believes should be operated and owned by Samoans.

Examples raised by MP from Falelatai, Falelupo and Sagaga 4 during the debate included agriculture and morgue or funeral-related businesses.

His contribution broadened the discussion beyond enforcing existing rules.

It raised a fundamental economic policy question for Parliament: which opportunities should Samoa deliberately preserve for its own citizens?

Under the Bill, the Reserved and Restricted Lists would be moved from the principal Act into regulations, together with guidelines governing their review.

The CEO would also be required to review the lists every two years, allowing Samoa to reconsider which industries require protection as the economy develops.

Tuilaepa Backs Protection for Samoan Professions

Opposition Leader and former Prime Minister Tuilaepa Sailele Malielegaoi supported the Prime Minister and other MPs on the principle of protecting certain businesses and professions for Samoan citizens.

Tuilaepa suggested Parliament should also consider areas including accountancy, medicine and law when determining which economic activities should be protected.

He pointed to American Samoa as an example, telling Parliament that Samoan doctors, lawyers and accountants cannot simply establish businesses there because those professional opportunities are protected for its own people.

Tuilaepa’s comments on American Samoa were made as part of his argument to Parliament and are attributed to him.

The agreement between the current and former Prime Ministers highlighted an important area of common ground across the House: Samoa can welcome foreign investment while still deliberately preserving opportunities for Samoans.

Namulauulu Raises Registration and Tax Revenue

MP Namulauulu Sami Leota also raised questions about the number of businesses operating within Samoa’s formal registration and taxation systems.

Namulauulu urged the Government, including Commerce Minister Fata Ryan Schuster, to ensure businesses that should be registered are brought into the system.

His argument was straightforward: properly registering businesses not only ensures they are operating legally, but also allows Government to collect taxes legally due from their activities.

The discussion then drew a response from Minister for Revenue Pauga Teomatavui Talalelei Pauga, whose portfolio is directly responsible for tax administration and revenue compliance.

Pauga: Around 660 Registered, Only 140-Plus Compliant

Pauga told Parliament that around 660 businesses had been registered, but only 140-plus were compliant.

The Revenue Minister said authorities had reviewed why compliance remained low and identified problems around invoices and transactional records among the issues businesses were facing.

His comments shifted the discussion from simply asking whether businesses were registered to whether registered businesses were actually meeting their ongoing obligations.

Pauga also signalled that Government is moving towards stronger enforcement.

He identified problems including expired business licences, differences between the person or name appearing on a licence and the actual operator, and businesses undertaking activities that differ from the nature of business stated on their licence.

Compliance work has already been undertaken in Upolu, according to the Minister, with enforcement also expected to extend to Savaiʻi.

The comments demonstrate why the involvement of both MCIL and Revenue is important.

MCIL is concerned with whether foreign investors and businesses are properly authorised and operating according to the activities permitted under the law, while Revenue has an interest in ensuring businesses are properly within the tax system and meeting their tax and record-keeping obligations.

Stronger Powers to Investigate

The enforcement concerns raised during the parliamentary debate also align with provisions contained in the Foreign Investment Amendment Bill.

The Bill proposes strengthening MCIL’s monitoring powers to cover people suspected of operating businesses without the required foreign investment certificate or carrying out activities in breach of the Foreign Investment Act.

Authorities would also be able to seek search warrants from Samoa’s District Court or Supreme Court to obtain records required for investigations.

New provisions would enable MCIL to exchange information with the Samoa International Finance Authority, other Government agencies and relevant overseas partners.

Directors and shareholders could also potentially face penalties where a company is found to have committed an offence.

Taken together, the changes would give Government greater ability to answer several basic but important questions: Who owns the business? Who is actually operating it? What is it licensed to do? What is it actually doing? And is it complying with Samoa’s laws?

Tougher Entry Checks, Longer Certainty for Investors

Despite the focus on enforcement, the Bill also contains measures intended to provide greater certainty for legitimate foreign investors.

Foreign investment certificates are currently valid for one year.

Fata Ryan told Parliament that businesses had raised concerns that a one-year certificate could create uncertainty, particularly where an investor had already committed substantial capital to establishing an operation in Samoa.

The Bill therefore proposes extending certificates from one year to two years.

Renewal applications would have to be submitted within the three months before a certificate expires, rather than allowing applications after expiry as currently permitted.

An independent reviewer would also be introduced to reconsider decisions made by the CEO when requested by an affected person.

Protecting Samoan Businesses While Keeping Samoa Open

The parliamentary debate ultimately showed that the issue is more complicated than simply being for or against foreign investment.

MPs acknowledged that foreign businesses can bring investment, competition and cheaper goods for Samoan consumers.

At the same time, both sides of Parliament recognised that Samoa has a responsibility to ensure its own people continue to have meaningful opportunities to own businesses and participate in their economy.

There was also a clear message that foreign investors who are permitted to operate in Samoa must operate according to the same rules under which they were approved.

The debate therefore centred on a balance: welcome legitimate foreign investment, protect appropriate opportunities for Samoans, and enforce the law against those who operate outside the conditions of their licences.

For the Government, the Foreign Investment Amendment Bill 2026 is intended to provide stronger tools to achieve that balance.

The message emerging from Parliament was not that Samoa intends to close its doors to foreign investment.

Rather, Samoa is asking a more fundamental question about its changing economy: who should be allowed to operate, in which sectors, under whose name, and under what rules — while ensuring that Samoans themselves are not left standing outside the opportunities created in their own country?