The ‘Settle Down’ Crisis of the Salaried Working Class in Việt Nam

---

Social housing has long been touted as a “lifeline” for salaried workers amid surging home prices and rising interest rates. However, the 120 trillion đồng credit package has failed to materialize into actual apartments, stalled by four institutional bottlenecks: land funds, administrative procedures, financial models, and misidentified beneficiaries.

As housing policy remains far removed from on-the-ground reality, long-term social fractures are quietly accumulating, eroding trust in public policy and undermining urban stability.

For many urban workers, the day begins with structurally pessimistic calculations. Industrial zone workers measure every square meter of their rented rooms to make ends meet, while young knowledge workers weigh every expense as mortgage interest payments far outstrip their real incomes.

In this context, social housing was designed as a critical regulatory mechanism to narrow the gap for this “in-between” group—those who do not qualify for welfare but cannot afford the commercial real estate market.

To address this, the State Bank of Vietnam launched a 120 trillion đồng preferential credit package in July 2023, one of the most significant initiatives of the past decade. [1] Expected to provide a major stimulus, the package has instead seen sluggish disbursement after more than two years. The number of eligible projects remains limited, leaving the intended beneficiaries—the workers—still standing outside the housing game.

Four Bottlenecks in Social Housing

The first major hurdle involves land funds and planning. While many localities have earmarked land for social housing in their master plans, in practice, this is often not “clean” land. Projects frequently stall at the outset due to high compensation costs, prolonged site clearance, and a lack of support mechanisms.

Additionally, many social housing land plots are pushed far from urban centers and lack transport infrastructure or public services, which diminishes their attractiveness to both buyers and developers. [2] Without proactive and transparent preparation of land—the foundational element of any project—social housing targets are destined to remain “on paper.”

The second bottleneck lies in complex and inconsistent approval procedures. Projects must navigate multiple layers of approval, from investment policy endorsement and design appraisal to beneficiary verification and credit confirmation. Without clear deadlines or accountability, each stage creates delays.

As Lao Động newspaper noted in December 2025 regarding the situation in Hà Nội, “social housing approvals face dual pressure, as citizens wait endlessly while officials must process large volumes of dossiers and shoulder legal responsibility.” [3] Conflicting regulatory interpretations across administrative levels create high legal risks, causing large credit packages to sit unused because few projects can reach the finish line.

Third, the private sector finds the profit margins insufficiently attractive. Under the 2023 Housing Law, the profit margin for developers is capped at 10 percent. [4] In reality, “enterprises can hardly achieve this rate.” [5] Interest is further dampened by low profit ceilings combined with “capital bottlenecks, limited access to finance, rising input costs, while investment, construction, purchase, and sale procedures for social housing remain complex and protracted.” [6]

Consequently, many enterprises participate only nominally or to cross-subsidize commercial projects. Without economic incentives for the private sector, the policy cannot scale.

Finally, there is the issue of misidentified beneficiaries. A persistent paradox exists where workers with genuine needs struggle to access housing, while “ineligible beneficiaries” slip through the screening process. [7]

The root cause is fragmented data: information on income, residency, social insurance, and asset ownership has not been fully integrated. These gaps allow individuals to circumvent eligibility criteria, eroding public trust in the fairness of the policy.

The Risk of Accumulating Social Instability

Despite multiple interest rate cuts, the disbursement rate of the 120 trillion đồng social housing credit package remains low relative to its announced scale. [8] This stagnation creates a dangerous disparity: while rapid urbanization drives surging demand in cities and industrial zones [9], the slow growth of social housing supply widens the gap between policy intent and lived reality.

Furthermore, regulatory weaknesses persist. Although the legal framework has been revised, it lacks the enforcement mechanisms necessary to compel compliance from local authorities and developers. Experts argue that current administrative penalties for violations are simply “not deterrent enough.” [10]

This disconnect was highlighted in November 2025, when Prime Minister Phạm Minh Chính acknowledged the structural shortcomings of the social housing market. He cited capital shortages, prices exceeding affordability thresholds, project locations situated far from city centers, and the limited capacity of developers as key barriers to progress. [11]

***

“Settled living” is the foundation of social stability. For the salaried class powering the urban and industrial economy, housing is not merely an asset; it is a prerequisite for reproducing labor power and a commitment to the city’s future. It is the bedrock of a sustainable middle class.

However, when social housing policy stalls at the implementation stage, the cost is measured in more than just delayed projects. It results in the gradual erosion of workers’ trust in the state’s ability to shield them from market risks. Amidst rapid urbanization and soaring living costs, allowing “settled living” to become a luxury for salaried workers is a grave warning sign of potential social instability ahead.

---

Thuý Liễu wrote this article in Vietnamese and published it in Luật Khoa Magazine on Dec. 30, 2025. Đàm Vĩnh Hằng translated it into English for The Vietnamese Magazine.

---