Why Resident Directors Have Become Essential for Banking and Tax Compliance in Indonesia

Foreign investors entering Indonesia are often surprised by how quickly operational realities diverge from what is technically allowed under company law. While Indonesia’s Company Law does not explicitly require company directors to reside locally, the practical demands of banking, taxation, and regulatory compliance tell a different story.

For foreign-owned companies (PT PMA), the absence of a resident director frequently becomes a bottleneck—not because the law mandates residency, but because Indonesia’s financial and administrative systems are built around the assumption that someone with decision-making authority is physically present in the country. As Indonesia’s regulatory environment becomes more digitised and enforcement-driven, this assumption has only grown stronger.

Under Law No. 40 of 2007, directors are responsible for managing the company and representing it in dealings with third parties and government institutions. The law does not differentiate between resident and non-resident directors. However, it also does not accommodate fully remote governance.

Banks, tax offices, and licensing authorities operate under internal compliance rules that go beyond the text of company law. These rules routinely require in-person verification, wet signatures, or direct engagement with a locally reachable director. The result is a legal–operational gap: foreign founders may be compliant on paper, but operationally blocked in practice.

Indonesia’s banking sector maintains stringent know-your-customer (KYC) standards, particularly for foreign-owned companies. In most cases, banks expect at least one director who can act as a local signatory and appear in person when required.

Where all directors are based overseas, companies often experience delays in opening corporate accounts. Remote signatures are frequently rejected, additional documentation is requested, or applications are placed on hold until a director travels to Indonesia. Even after an account is opened, routine matters—such as resetting online banking access, responding to flagged transactions, or updating signatory mandates—typically require local action.

A resident director reduces these frictions significantly. With a locally authorised signatory, account opening timelines shorten, and ongoing banking operations become more predictable.

Indonesia’s tax administration has undergone rapid digitalisation, most notably through the rollout of the Core Tax Administration System (CoreTax). While the system enables electronic filing, initial activation and ongoing compliance often still depend on a locally responsible individual.

Corporate tax registration, system activation, and audit responses frequently require verification steps that cannot be completed from abroad. Tax authorities also expect a director to be reachable for correspondence, clarification, or summons. Accountants and tax consultants can assist, but certain approvals and declarations remain the legal responsibility of the company’s directors.

Beyond administration, tax residency principles also come into play. Indonesia applies the “place of management” concept when determining corporate tax residence. Having core management functions—and a director—based locally helps reinforce that the company’s effective management is in Indonesia, reducing ambiguity in cross-border tax structuring.

Indonesia’s licensing framework, including the OSS Risk-Based Approach system, is designed around active local engagement. While many filings are online, authorities still request physical verification or signatures for certain permits, inspections, or post-registration obligations.

Without a resident director, companies often rely heavily on powers of attorney. While legally permissible, this approach introduces delays, dependency risks, and potential questions around authority. A resident director provides continuity, allowing the company to respond promptly to regulatory requests and external stakeholders.

The growing demand for resident directors has led some companies to consider nominee arrangements. This approach carries significant risk. Indonesian law imposes fiduciary duties and potential personal liability on directors, regardless of whether they are “active” or “nominal.”

Regulators increasingly scrutinise arrangements where directors lack real involvement or understanding of the company’s activities. Poorly structured nominee setups can expose both the company and the individual to legal and operational issues.

As a result, many foreign investors now favour structured, contract-based resident director arrangements with clear limitations, reporting lines, and indemnities—rather than informal or name-only appointments.

The growing reliance on resident directors does not reflect a change in statutory law, but a shift in how Indonesia enforces compliance across banking, taxation, and licensing. As systems become more integrated and enforcement more data-driven, the expectation of local accountability has intensified.

Corporate advisors for directorship service with on-the-ground experience, such as CPT Corporate, frequently observe that companies with a resident director face fewer delays in company registration and ongoing corporate compliance, particularly when interacting with banks and tax authorities.

This trend is less about formality and more about operational resilience.

In practice, most PT PMA companies eventually appoint a resident director—not because they are legally forced to, but because operating without one becomes inefficient. Frozen bank accounts, delayed tax filings, unresolved verification requests, and prolonged licensing timelines all point to the same conclusion: remote-only management is rarely sustainable in Indonesia.

A resident director enables smoother banking relationships, clearer tax accountability, and faster regulatory response. More importantly, it aligns the company’s governance structure with how Indonesia’s systems actually function.

As Indonesia continues to modernise its regulatory infrastructure, the role of the resident director is likely to become even more central. For foreign investors, the decision should be approached not as a compliance workaround, but as a governance choice that supports long-term stability.

In Indonesia’s business environment, success increasingly depends not just on market opportunity, but on having the right decision-makers in the right place.