•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
A proposal to allow enterprises to borrow gold from the public has drawn widespread debate in Vietnam. In a memorandum sent to the Prime Minister on policies to manage the production and trade of gold jewelry, the Vietnam Gold Trading Association proposed allowing gold jewelry producers to borrow gold from the public at an agreed interest rate.
The association said there is currently no legal framework to guide the mobilization of domestic gold as an input material, leading to significant resource waste as gold remains in citizens’ possession.
Dr. Nguyen Tri Hieu said the proposal is reasonable, citing that there are about 400–500 tons of gold held by the public, much of which is idle in safes. He argued that gold is both a material for industrial production and craftsmanship and an asset that can be used as collateral when borrowing. In his view, lending citizens’ gold to producers could reduce demand for imported gold and silver.
“If there is ample gold, input costs would fall, gold prices would drop, and domestic craftsmanship would be stimulated,” he said.
Experts said the idea may be reasonable but involves multiple risks. They warned that if not carefully designed, it could “gold-ize” the economy.
Businesses may borrow gold for terms of 3 months, 6 months, or 1 year. However, when selling gold to repay the public, the process could take longer, creating maturity and liquidity risks.
There are also price risks. If gold is borrowed at a lower price but repaid at a higher price, enterprises could be forced to buy gold at a higher price to return it.
Without proper controls, experts cautioned it could also lead to disguised gold mobilization, hidden gold raising, and potential macroeconomic instability.
To implement the proposal effectively, experts suggested starting with careful trials, initially involving a small number of large, transparent, financially strong enterprises.
They also proposed using derivatives such as futures to connect with international financial markets. Banks would need to guarantee the public to ensure settlement at maturity.
The State Bank would issue gold certificates specifying the quantity, type, and brand of gold. The State Bank would hold gold on deposit, and at maturity the public would receive the gold deposited.
Experts noted that citizens may withdraw gold before maturity, so the State Bank would need rules to manage early withdrawals.
They further suggested the State Bank and the Ministry of Finance establish a gold exchange to allow gold traders to transact on an account-based platform. Traders could issue gold certificates meeting the same standards as those issued by the State Bank, which they said would improve transparency and help mobilize gold into the economy.
Mr. Huy argued that the key issue is not only whether to allow it, but how to implement it to ensure safety for the financial system and public trust.
Mr. Nguyen Quang Huy, a lecturer at Nguyen Truong University of Finance and Banking, said that if enterprises borrow gold from the public and pay interest, it functions as a form of credit rather than a simple civil transaction. He said standards, collateral requirements, and market discipline would become mandatory.
He also raised concerns about what would happen if a company faces financial difficulties or stops operations. In such cases, the obligation to return gold could be delayed, while citizens may lack a protection system comparable to a deposit mechanism.
He emphasized strict participation criteria, including financial capacity, compliance history, and risk management capability. He also stressed transparency, including periodic publication of mobilization scale, use of gold, and related risks, along with mandatory independent audits to verify obligations and assets.
Given Vietnam’s current direction of limiting “goldization” of the economy, he said reopening gold mobilization should be considered carefully, potentially through a small-scale pilot with limited participants and tight supervision.
Lawyer Truong Thanh Duc, Director of ANVI Law Firm and a VIAC arbitrator, said issuing separate regulations specifically to “allow” this activity is unnecessary. He argued that under the principle of law, what is not prohibited is allowed, and that new “permission” regulations could reduce business freedom and create misunderstandings that borrowing gold would be government-approved or guaranteed.
On interest rates, he said that because this is not a loan of money, it would not be regulated by the interest rate cap in the Civil Code, and parties can agree freely.
Lawyer Truong Thanh Duc also assessed that the proposal is not a good solution to mobilize resources. Instead, he said people should be encouraged to sell gold to raise funds for business or invest through other channels such as establishing enterprises, buying bonds, shares, real estate, or depositing savings—thereby bringing gold resources into circulation and production.
He added that gold is a high-value, compact, and highly liquid asset that can be used effectively in collateral, deposits, guarantees, and other civil obligations, rather than remaining idle in vaults.
Overall, multiple experts said the goal of mobilizing gold from the public is to utilize social resources, but it is not a “magic wand” to immediately solve the input material problem for the gold jewelry industry. They warned that without consistent legal design, risk controls, and transparency, the policy could increase market instability.
Premium gym chains are entering a “golden era” that is ending or already in decline, as rising operating costs collide with shifting consumer preferences toward more flexible, community-based ways to exercise. Long-term memberships are shrinking, margins are pressured by higher rents and facility expenses, and competition from smaller, more personalized…
