Although Resolutions 66 and 68 firmly call for abandoning the “ban what can’t be managed” mindset and eliminating administrative barriers and discretionary mechanisms, this spirit has not yet been fully embraced in several sectors, including rice exports.

General Secretary To Lam has directed that, in the immediate term, efforts must focus on building a favorable, transparent, safe, and low-compliance-cost legal environment. There must be a thorough reduction and simplification of irrational conditions for investment, business operations, and administrative procedures.

The emphasis should be on encouraging innovation and improving the investment and business climate, ensuring genuine freedom of business, property rights, and contract freedom. Equal treatment for all enterprises, regardless of ownership form, must be guaranteed, with private businesses recognized as one of the most important drivers of the national economy.

Prime Minister Pham Minh Chinh has also issued clear instructions to ministries, sectors, and localities to accelerate digital transformation, cut time, costs, and business conditions to the minimum. Officials and public employees must shift from a control mindset to one of support, viewing businesses as "clients to serve" rather than "subjects to manage." It is crucial to uphold the principle of “saying and doing,” strictly prohibit the abuse of discretionary mechanisms, and eliminate local or sectoral protectionism in policy implementation.

Nationwide conferences have been held to promote the spirit of legislative reform under this new mindset.

However, concerns are mounting as the “ban what can’t be managed” mentality seems to persist - and in some cases, re-emerge - in various sectors. Rice exports are a prime example.

Rice exports: Freed from one barrier, entangled in another

Over seven years ago, rice exports were tightly constrained by strict regulations from the Ministry of Industry and Trade, which created significant obstacles for businesses and stifled the growth of a key export sector.

Following numerous petitions from the business community, in August 2018, the government issued Decree 107, removing many unnecessary barriers. The most pivotal change was eliminating the requirement for traders to own storage facilities with a minimum capacity of 5,000 tons and rice mills with a minimum capacity of 10 tons per hour.

Instead, businesses only needed to have at least one specialized storage facility and one rice mill meeting technical standards - without scale requirements. These could be either owned or leased under a contract lasting at least five years. This created a more open and stable legal framework, enabling small and medium enterprises to participate and boosting the competitiveness of Vietnamese rice in global markets.

However, this progress is now under threat. The draft amendment to Decree 107 by the Ministry of Industry and Trade proposes two controversial changes: requiring businesses to own storage facilities instead of leasing them, and mandating that new exporters hold over 1,250 tons of rice within 45 days of receiving their license, even if they have no export contract yet.

Critics argue that these proposals represent a regression, potentially reinstating old barriers, excluding smaller businesses, and distorting the market. Just as the rice sector had begun to flourish after being freed from restrictive conditions, it now faces a renewed risk of constraint through rigid new rules.

Tightening requirements may force businesses out of the game

The Ministry’s draft amendment mandates that rice exporters must own, rather than lease, rice and paddy storage facilities. This provision has drawn significant criticism as a potential reversal of reform and a breach of Resolution 68’s call to discard the “ban what can’t be managed” mindset.

First, the purpose of storage requirements is to ensure operational capacity and reserves - both of which can be met through ownership or leasing. Forcing businesses to own these facilities infringes upon the right to conduct business freely and misrepresents the issue. Regulatory enforcement should target violations, not erect new entry barriers.

Second, ownership demands significantly increase market entry costs, especially for small and medium enterprises. This not only stifles competition but negatively impacts the entire rice value chain - from traders to farmers.

Third, the notion that businesses leasing storage have unfair price advantages is unconvincing. Rental expenses are a legitimate business cost, and pricing disparities are natural in market economies unless they stem from illegal practices. Administrative interference in such differences is unwarranted.

Many argue that the regulation lacks economic justification and contradicts the reformist and anti-monopoly principles that the Party and Government are championing.

New reserve requirement burdens new rice exporters

The proposed amendment to Decree 107 also mandates that new traders must reserve at least 1,250 tons of rice within 45 days of receiving their export license and maintain it until they achieve export activity. This has raised multiple concerns.

First, such a large reserve requirement before securing an export contract forces businesses to mobilize significant capital, incurring additional storage and preservation costs and unnecessarily raising market entry barriers. Moreover, they cannot accurately predict the licensing date, making them vulnerable to timing mismatches.

Second, arguments that new exporters might distort domestic rice prices through aggressive purchasing are weak, as these new entrants represent a small market share.

Third, claims that non-purchasing during harvest seasons harms farmers are vague. If only a few new businesses are responsible, the issue is minor; if widespread, this regulation still fails to address the root cause.

The Vietnam Chamber of Commerce and Industry (VCCI) has proposed removing this rule due to its cost burden and obstructive nature.

A genuine shift in regulatory mindset is imperative

While the entire political system is mobilizing to reform the investment environment - from promoting digital transformation to simplifying administrative procedures - adding new barriers to a flagship sector like rice exports is indefensible.

Legal frameworks must serve as growth enablers, not obstacles. Without firm oversight and a decisive break from old habits, reform efforts risk being undermined at the policy drafting stage.

Rice exports are more than a commodity story. They are a litmus test for institutional reform: Are we truly ready to change how we govern, or are we still trapped in the shadow of “ban what can’t be managed”?

Failure to abandon outdated protectionist thinking risks not just market share but also public confidence in the reform agenda launched by the Party and Government.

Lan Anh