The National Assembly Standing Committee recently provided feedback on a draft resolution of the National Assembly regarding the establishment of an International Financial Center (IFC) in Vietnam. A key new proposal is the Government’s suggestion of a “one center - two locations” model, which replaces the previous plan to establish two separate centers.

One center in two cities Permanent Deputy Prime Minister Nguyen Hoa Binh stated that during international engagements, many foreign partners were surprised by Vietnam’s initial plan to establish two international financial centers. Even major economies like China have only one financial center, which is located in Shanghai, while Singapore leads as the financial hub in ASEAN. Given that Vietnam’s annual gross domestic product (GDP) is currently around US$500 billion, building two financial centers simultaneously would likely be inefficient, particularly in the face of fierce global competition in the financial sector. As a result, the Government has discussed and agreed on a new direction: establishing a single international financial center that operates across two locations—Ho Chi Minh City (HCMC) and Danang City. These cities will function under different strategic orientations but within a unified legal framework, as outlined in the resolution currently under discussion. This approach aims to create mutual support, prevent conflicts, and promote sustainable development between the two cities. According to Minister of Finance Nguyen Van Thang, there are currently 121 financial centers worldwide, but fewer than 10 are considered truly successful. This highlights how “extremely challenging and difficult” it is to build a genuinely successful international financial center, especially considering that Vietnam is a latecomer in this domain. Minister Thang also pointed out that the Government had initially submitted a plan to the Politburo to establish two centers. However, after studying international experiences and evaluating domestic realities, the Government concluded that setting up two such centers simultaneously would present significant challenges and may not yield the desired results. “If we can successfully build just one international financial center, it would be highly valuable, and we can consider expanding the model later,” Minister Thang noted. However, the “one center - two locations” proposal does not fully align with the Politburo’s Conclusion No. 47-TB/TW, which specifies: “Establish a comprehensive international financial center in HCMC and a regional financial center in Danang.” Deputy Prime Minister Nguyen Hoa Binh stated that the Government would report this matter to the Politburo. Clear functional division based on strengths According to the Government’s submission to the National Assembly Standing Committee, the IFCs in HCMC and Danang would develop in harmony, with clear functional assignments based on each city’s and region’s strengths. The two centers would also establish close links with major regional financial hubs such as Singapore and Hong Kong. To capitalize on Vietnam’s time zone and geographical advantages, attract capital flows, and avoid overlapping functions with Singapore or Hong Kong, HCMC could focus on developing the capital market, international banking, financial technology (FinTech), regional supply chain financial services, and green finance. Meanwhile, Danang could specialize in green finance, offshore finance, FinTech, remittances, and regional fund management, particularly in connection with a free trade zone. However, “this division is only indicative; the choice ultimately lies with the investors,” Minister Thang said. Nguyen Van Quang, secretary of the Danang City Party Committee, said that investors are already expressing interest, and the city expects to sign memorandums of understanding (MOUs) with them in the near future. Some investors plan to commit capital for infrastructure development, establish branches, set up trading platforms, or create investment funds, particularly those supporting startup and innovation initiatives. The draft resolution on the IFC in Vietnam is scheduled to be submitted to the National Assembly for approval at its upcoming session in May. Since this is a new issue for Vietnam, the National Assembly Standing Committee believes the resolution should outline only broad principles and stable, well-defined content. Detailed guidelines will be issued by the Government and the Prime Minister to ensure flexibility and timeliness. Additionally, the drafting body must provide a clearer rationale for proposing a new model that differs from the Politburo’s Conclusion 47-TB/TW. It should also clarify the structure, relationships, and degree of independence between the two “branches”—HCMC and Danang—as well as the state management framework overseeing them. Based on the unique characteristics of each city, the resolution could outline general policies, but other sub-laws should specify corresponding regulations to leverage each location’s distinct potential and strengths. Furthermore, clear regulations on coordination mechanisms should be established to ensure overall effectiveness and strengthen management and supervision, fostering healthy competition. The Government’s proposal to adjust the IFC strategy is a natural part of the policy-making process, particularly when based on comprehensive domestic and international analysis. In development planning, strategic adjustments are crucial to ensuring both effectiveness and sustainability. Ultimately, what matters most is not the number of centers but the actual capability of the center to attract international capital flows, offer high-quality services, and create significant ripple effects on the economy. Once the model is finalized, establishing a truly successful IFC will require addressing key questions: Are the current policy frameworks adequate to establish a solid legal foundation for the center’s creation and operation? Are the regulations attractive and competitive enough? Which policies will provide Vietnam with unique, breakthrough advantages? In the face of increasing global competition for capital, every strategic decision must be made with care. Success will depend on our ability to turn aspirations into reality through innovative, non-conventional policies—leveraging the advantages of being a latecomer by selectively adopting successful practices, avoiding past failures, and building strong international competitiveness.