Indonesia has long relied on foreign professionals to support strategic industries—from advanced manufacturing and energy to digital transformation and infrastructure development. But as expatriate numbers rise, the government is recalibrating how foreign talent is managed, placing stronger emphasis on justification, transparency, and local workforce development.
That recalibration took clearer legal form following Constitutional Court Decision No. 168/PUU-XXI/2023, widely referred to in practice as Kepmenaker 168/2023. While not a ministerial decree in the technical sense, the ruling has reshaped how Indonesia enforces expatriate employment rules and has materially changed the compliance landscape for employers in 2024–2025.
At its core, the Court’s decision reaffirmed a principle that has existed in Indonesia’s manpower framework for years but was inconsistently enforced: foreign workers may be hired only when their expertise is genuinely required and when their presence contributes to domestic capacity building.
The ruling strengthens the legal foundation of the Rencana Penggunaan Tenaga Kerja Asing (RPTKA), or Foreign Manpower Utilization Plan. Minister-level approval is once again central, eliminating ambiguity created by overlapping or lower-level administrative practices in prior years. In practical terms, companies must now demonstrate—clearly and defensibly—why each expatriate role is necessary, for how long, and with what contribution to local skills transfer.
For employers, the most immediate impact of Kepmenaker 168/2023 is the heightened scrutiny of RPTKA submissions. Job descriptions must be precise, qualifications must be relevant, and employment duration must be aligned with actual project needs. Generic or copy-pasted justifications are increasingly challenged during review.
This shift reflects a broader move toward traceability. Authorities now cross-reference RPTKA data with immigration records, employment contracts, and company manpower reports. The objective is consistency across systems—and accountability where inconsistencies appear.
Another key aspect of the ruling is the renewed emphasis on prioritising Indonesian workers. Employers are expected not only to assert that a role requires foreign expertise, but to show evidence that local recruitment has been considered or attempted.
In practice, this means maintaining recruitment records, documenting skill gaps, and in some cases outlining training or mentorship plans where expatriates are expected to transfer knowledge to Indonesian counterparts. This approach does not prohibit foreign hiring, but it reframes it as complementary rather than substitutive.
Kepmenaker 168/2023 also clarified how fixed-term employment agreements (PKWT) apply to expatriates. Contracts linked to specific work may not exceed five years in total, including extensions. Importantly, contracts must be executed in Bahasa Indonesia to be legally enforceable.
For multinational companies accustomed to global employment templates, this requirement has compliance implications. English-only contracts or loosely defined terms can expose employers to disputes or administrative sanctions during inspections.
The timing of stricter enforcement is closely linked to expatriate growth. Official manpower data show a sharp year-on-year increase in foreign workers entering Indonesia, particularly in services, industrial projects, and construction. Alongside this growth, the government has expanded requirements for Indonesian “companion workers” assigned to support and learn from expatriates—a clear signal that skills transfer is no longer optional.
Politically and economically, the message is one of balance. Indonesia remains open to foreign expertise, but only where it aligns with national development goals and protects local employment opportunities.
For companies employing or planning to employ expatriates, the post-168/2023 environment requires a more structured approach.
First, expatriate roles should be reviewed strategically, not administratively. Each position should have a defensible rationale tied to expertise, duration, and business necessity.
Second, employment documentation needs to be harmonised. RPTKA approvals, employment contracts, and immigration permits must tell the same story. Discrepancies are increasingly treated as compliance risks rather than clerical errors.
Third, companies should expect inspections. Manpower authorities now routinely audit HR records, immigration status, and reporting compliance. Preparation—not reaction—is the safest posture.
For foreign investors, the tightening of expatriate oversight does not signal hostility to international business. Instead, it reflects Indonesia’s transition toward a more mature labour governance model, similar to those seen in other large emerging economies.
For HR leaders, the shift elevates expatriate management from an operational task to a governance issue. Decisions around foreign hiring now intersect directly with regulatory risk, reputation, and long-term workforce planning.
Advisory firms familiar with Indonesia’s manpower and immigration framework, such as CPT Corporate, are increasingly consulted for guidance on visa and immigration compliance for expatriate employees, particularly where companies are adjusting policies to reflect the tighter interpretation of RPTKA and contract rules.
Kepmenaker 168/2023 marks a turning point rather than a barrier. Foreign professionals can still be hired in Indonesia—but the process now demands clearer justification, stronger documentation, and demonstrable local benefit.
For employers willing to adapt, the framework offers predictability. Those who treat compliance as part of sustainable growth—not merely an administrative hurdle—are better positioned to operate confidently in Indonesia’s evolving labour landscape.
In that sense, the message of 2025 is clear: Indonesia welcomes foreign expertise, but expects it to arrive with purpose, accountability, and a commitment to developing the local workforce alongside it.
This press release has also been published on VRITIMES
