HÀ NỘI — Việt Nam is considering tighter controls on the resale of social housing to preserve its role for low-income residents, under a proposal that would restrict buyers even after the current five-year holding period.

The Ministry of Construction has proposed limiting resale of social housing to eligible buyers beyond the existing five-year restriction, to ensure subsidised homes continue serving their intended beneficiaries.

Under a draft amendment to the Law on Housing 2023, now open for public consultation, owners would no longer be allowed to sell their apartments freely on the open market after the five-year period. Instead, resales would be permitted only to buyers who meet the eligibility criteria for social housing support.

Under current regulations, once owners have fully paid for their property and obtained ownership certificates after five years, they can sell without restrictions on the buyer.

According to the ministry, the existing mechanism has contributed to a shrinking pool of social housing, as many units are later traded like commercial property rather than retained for low-income earners.

With limited land resources and strong demand from lower-income residents in major cities, the proposed changes are aimed at safeguarding the social welfare purpose of the policy.

Market data indicate that prices at many social housing projects have risen sharply over time, in some cases approaching those of commercial housing.

Several developments initially priced at VNĐ13–17 million per sq.m are now offered at around VNĐ75–80 million per sq.m, or more than VNĐ5 billion per unit, levels comparable to some commercial housing.

Even newly launched projects are setting higher price benchmarks, narrowing access to home ownership for low-income buyers.

Earlier, the Vietnam Association of Real Estate Brokers’ Institute for Real Estate Research and Evaluation proposed that after the five-year restriction period, resales should prioritise eligible buyers and require approval from authorities. If homes are sold to buyers outside the target group, sellers should return the incentives they received.

Mixed opinions

 

The proposal to tighten resale rules for social housing is drawing mixed reactions, as policymakers seek to balance social welfare objectives with property rights and market realities.

While some support stricter controls to curb speculation, others say the policy must strike a careful balance between welfare goals and ownership rights, supported by clear and detailed implementation rules.

Ngô Gia Hoàng from HCM City University of Law described the proposal as a “bitter but necessary medicine” to restore the true purpose of social housing as support for low-income households rather than a vehicle for speculation.

However, he cautioned that overly rigid application could reduce asset liquidity and narrow the pool of potential buyers, affecting homeowners’ legal rights, and called for a more flexible policy design.

International experience has also been cited. In Singapore, restriction periods vary depending on project location and incentives and are calculated based on actual occupancy rather than the date of full payment.

Under Singapore’s Minimum Occupation Period system, buyers must live in subsidised flats for a fixed period, typically between five and 20 years, before resale is permitted.

Even after this period, transactions remain subject to conditions including buyer eligibility and approval from housing authorities.

Hoàng said social housing units should be allowed to be resold at market rates, with sellers paying income tax on the difference between the original purchase price and the resale price, allowing the State to recover part of the added value generated by policy incentives.

According to Phạm Thanh Tuấn, a lawyer, restricting transfers to eligible buyers is necessary to preserve the social welfare function and ensure the housing stock continues to serve low-income groups.

Social housing is not purely a market commodity since access is already limited by policy criteria, so maintaining restrictions in secondary transactions is consistent.

"The draft amendment does not remove the right to transfer ownership. Owners can still resell their homes, but buyers must meet eligibility requirements. The right to transfer still exists, but within a defined legal framework. It is a conditional limitation on transaction partners, not a removal of property rights,” he said.

He added that transparent mechanisms, a reasonable transition roadmap and a balance between regulatory control and flexibility would be essential for the policy to be workable.

A representative from social housing developer Viglacera said clearer guidance on resale pricing and implementation procedures would be needed to ensure practicality.

However, while the proposed rules may suit markets such as Hà Nội and HCM City, they could slow the development of social housing in other localities, as buyers may become more cautious.

Alongside tighter resale rules, the draft also proposes raising income thresholds for eligibility.

Under the proposal, single applicants earning up to VNĐ25 million per month could qualify, compared with around VNĐ20 million previously. For single parents, the ceiling could rise to VNĐ35 million per month, while the combined monthly income threshold for couples could reach about VNĐ50 million.

The adjustment aims to address a growing group of urban residents whose incomes are too high for social housing yet insufficient to afford commercial property.

As of February 2026, Việt Nam had 220 social housing projects under development nationwide, with a total of 215,000 units.

The draft amendment is expected to be submitted to the Government by the end of June 2026 and to the National Assembly for approval in October. — VNS