•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
On April 21, 2026, Deputy Director of the Drug Administration (Ministry of Health) Ta Manh Hung signed and issued a decision imposing an administrative penalty of 75 million dong on BB Vietnam Trading and Service Co., Ltd. (headquartered in Hanoi). At the same time, it required the recall and destruction of 37 cosmetic products registered under the company's name. According to the Drug Administration, the violation is selling cosmetics without or failing to present the product information file (PIF) within the time limit specified by law when requested for inspection by the competent authorities, violating Decree No. 117/2020/ND-CP of the Government on penalties for administrative violations in the health sector, amended and supplemented by Decree No. 124/2021/ND-CP. The aggravating factor for the company, according to the Drug Administration, is that there are 37 cosmetic products violating the same act at the same time of inspection. With this violation, the enterprise was fined 75 million dong under Decree 117/2020. This is the penalty for organizations and taking into account the aggravating factor due to the number of products violating the same act at the same time. In addition to the fine, the authorities required the company to recall and destroy all 37 cosmetic products registered under the company's name. The list of recalled products spans familiar brands such as Hatomugi, Rosette, Skin Aqua, Senka, Shiseido, Hada Labo, Aqua Label... Among them, Anessa sunscreen, widely used by consumers, is also subject to recall due to violations of legal documentation, not due to conclusions about quality or safety. The Drug Administration urged the company to coordinate with related units to implement the recall, destruction and report results within 30 days from the date of the decision. The penalty decision of the Drug Administration takes effect from the signing date. The company must pay the fine within 10 days; otherwise, enforcement will be applied. The company also has the right to complain or initiate administrative cases against this decision.
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…
