This article examines Vietnam’s legal framework for state management of foreign exchange in relation to enterprises’ external borrowing and repayment of foreign debt in a rapidly changing economic and financial environment. It begins from the proposition that the traditional regulatory model—centred on ex ante administrative control, documentary verification, transaction registration, and restrictions designed primarily to contain foreign-exchange risk—has become increasingly misaligned with the speed, complexity, and diversity of contemporary cross-border capital flows. The article argues that the reform orientation expressed in Resolution No. 66-NQ/TW requires a more fundamental change in regulatory thinking: from administrative control toward development-oriented governance; from file-based supervision toward data- and risk-based supervision; and from relatively uniform ex ante screening toward differentiated ex post monitoring combined with flexible macroprudential intervention. The analysis identifies four major groups of shortcomings in the present framework: limited legal coherence and predictability; substantial administrative and compliance burdens associated with registration and amendment procedures; legal and supervisory gaps concerning short-term borrowing, innovative financing, and the use of foreign-currency debt; and practical inequalities in access to international capital among state-owned, foreign-invested, and domestic private enterprises. On that basis, the article proposes a reform agenda comprising risk-based classification of foreign loans and borrowers, end-to-end digitalisation and interoperable databases, near-real-time reporting through commercial banks, enhanced monitoring of short-term external debt, proportionate foreign-exchange hedging obligations, a transparent macroprudential and capital-flow-management toolkit, improved recognition of intangible and contractual assets as collateral, and appropriately designed support mechanisms for private enterprises. The ultimate objective is to develop a transparent and predictable legal corridor that simultaneously protects national monetary and financial security, reduces unnecessary compliance costs, and unlocks international capital for sustainable private-sector development.
This article examines Vietnam’s legal framework for state management of foreign exchange in relation to enterprises’ external borrowing and repayment of foreign debt in a rapidly changing economic and financial environment. It begins from the proposition that the traditional regulatory model—centred on ex ante administrative control, documentary verification, transaction registration, and restrictions designed primarily to contain foreign-exchange risk—has become increasingly misaligned with the speed, complexity, and diversity of contemporary cross-border capital flows. The article argues that the reform orientation expressed in Resolution No. 66-NQ/TW requires a more fundamental change in regulatory thinking: from administrative control toward development-oriented governance; from file-based supervision toward data- and risk-based supervision; and from relatively uniform ex ante screening toward differentiated ex post monitoring combined with flexible macroprudential intervention. The analysis identifies four major groups of shortcomings in the present framework: limited legal coherence and predictability; substantial administrative and compliance burdens associated with registration and amendment procedures; legal and supervisory gaps concerning short-term borrowing, innovative financing, and the use of foreign-currency debt; and practical inequalities in access to international capital among state-owned, foreign-invested, and domestic private enterprises. On that basis, the article proposes a reform agenda comprising risk-based classification of foreign loans and borrowers, end-to-end digitalisation and interoperable databases, near-real-time reporting through commercial banks, enhanced monitoring of short-term external debt, proportionate foreign-exchange hedging obligations, a transparent macroprudential and capital-flow-management toolkit, improved recognition of intangible and contractual assets as collateral, and appropriately designed support mechanisms for private enterprises. The ultimate objective is to develop a transparent and predictable legal corridor that simultaneously protects national monetary and financial security, reduces unnecessary compliance costs, and unlocks international capital for sustainable private-sector development.
