Vietnam Proposes Higher Taxes on Vacant Land to Curb Speculation
Vietnam's government is considering implementing higher taxes on vacant land to prevent speculation and

On the morning of August 22, during the first extraordinary session, Vietnam's National Assembly convened to discuss policy directions for amending the Real Estate Law. The session highlighted the urgent need to enhance the management mechanisms to accurately identify price manipulation and market manipulation in the real estate sector. Lawmakers called for improved monitoring of capital flows and the strengthening of data, oversight, and warning systems to proactively respond to market deviations.
Representative Trinh Xuan An from Dong Nai emphasized that the amendment should pursue two main objectives: to eliminate obstacles and simplify procedures for land, projects, and real estate circulation, while also creating a transparent and healthy market that limits speculation, particularly market and price manipulation. He proposed a clear distinction between investments, speculation, and market manipulation, advocating for the encouragement of investments while restricting speculation and imposing strict penalties for manipulative actions.
During the discussions, representatives analyzed that real estate investment is a normal and necessary market activity. However, speculative practices that disrupt supply and demand, leading to unaffordable real estate prices, must be addressed. Trinh Xuan An pointed out that while the Penal Code includes provisions for manipulation in the securities sector, there is a lack of clear definitions regarding manipulation in the real estate market.
Lawmakers argued that manipulating the real estate market is a dangerous and illegal act that can mislead signals about demand, supply, and prices. Examples include creating circular transactions to manipulate prices, colluding in buying and selling to inflate prices, and using misleading information about plans and projects to create real estate hype.
To tackle this issue, representatives suggested incorporating market manipulation into Article 6 of the law concerning prohibited acts. They also urged the government to establish criteria for identifying manipulative behaviors based on specific actions, such as creating false transactions and providing misleading information.
In terms of market management and control tools, Representative Nguyen Khanh Vu from Quang Tri pointed out that the current law outlines eight groups of prohibited actions, but the draft has reduced this to six. He stressed the necessity of restoring the two omitted categories related to brokerage certificates and improper fee management to ensure sufficient legal grounds for prosecuting violations.
Furthermore, lawmakers highlighted that the draft law currently lacks specific provisions to prevent manipulation and price inflation in the real estate market, a significant issue that has caused instability recently. They proposed exploring the addition of more prohibited actions, such as providing false information about projects and creating fictitious transactions to inflate prices.
As for market regulation, Trinh Xuan An suggested improving mechanisms in Articles 55 and 56 by strengthening monitoring and early warning systems. He noted that existing regulations are overly general, and there is a need for mechanisms to proactively prevent risks.
Lawmakers proposed developing a series of indicators for monitoring and early warning of the real estate market, including price fluctuations, transaction volume, short-term transactions, and capital structure. They emphasized that the real estate market should be viewed in relation to credit and capital markets, as speculative price increases can diminish the value of collateral and borrowing opportunities.
In conclusion, the representatives agreed that the state should not dictate real estate prices but must ensure that they are established in a transparent, competitive market that accurately reflects real demand and supply without being susceptible to manipulation. They also stressed the importance of improving the institutional framework to ensure a transparent, stable, and efficient real estate market, including control mechanisms to combat market manipulation and misinformation.