The question arises: Could the casino market in Vietnam—although operating outside the legal framework—actually be an underground “gold mine” of revenue for cross-border betting networks?
Casino Corona tại Phú Quốc (Kiên Giang) – nơi duy nhất hiện cho người Việt vào chơi – Ảnh: HẢI KIM
In recent years, during major matches of the English Premier League — the most exciting football league on the planet — advertising boards along the stadiums have surprisingly displayed sports betting service promotions not only in English and Chinese but also in… Vietnamese.
This has left many people surprised and asking: Why is a country with just over 100 million people, not among the top globally in population, GDP, or the scale of its legal betting market, targeted by global betting corporations using the local language?
The question arises: Could Vietnam’s casino market — despite being outside the legal framework — actually be a “gold mine” of hidden revenues for cross-border betting networks?
Banning pushes activities into the “dark zone”
During Lunar New Year 2024, a viral video circulated on Vietnamese social media showing hundreds of Vietnamese crowded into a casino in Bavet (Cambodia), carrying suitcases full of cash and even borrowing money for gambling.
Despite bans at home, Vietnamese people still find ways to cross borders or gamble online via illegal platforms. Meanwhile, casinos in Vietnam — which could be controlled and taxed — only allow foreigners or operate under very limited pilot schemes.
Since 2017, the government has allowed Vietnamese citizens to enter some casinos such as those in Phu Quoc or Van Don but under strict conditions. After seven years, the pilot policy has neither expanded nor been backed by specific laws, and its revenue potential remains untapped.
Meanwhile, Vietnamese continue gambling — but abroad or on illegal online platforms. The reality shows that banning does not reduce demand but pushes activities into the “dark zone.”
According to a report by the Ministry of Public Security, in 2023 alone, over 2,000 cases related to online gambling were detected, involving transactions worth tens of thousands of billions of VND.
Black credit organizations, football betting, and online casinos have become increasingly sophisticated. Meanwhile, if managed transparently, casinos could be a major revenue source.
According to the Ministry of Finance, the Corona Casino in Phu Quoc — the only casino currently allowing Vietnamese to play — has contributed over VND 1,700 billion to the state budget since 2019, creating thousands of local jobs.
This figure comes from a pilot model and shows great potential if expanded and properly managed.
International experience: Setting the rules proactively
International experience shows that no country manages casinos by outright banning. Singapore is a prime example. The island nation said no to casinos for many years but changed its approach upon recognizing strong social demand and economic potential.
Since 2010, Singapore has allowed two high-end casino complexes — Marina Bay Sands and Resorts World Sentosa — under strict management policies: local residents pay a hefty entry fee (SGD 100 per day or SGD 2,000 per year), face limits on the number of visits, and can be denied entry if abnormal behavior is detected.
Player data is monitored via intelligent surveillance systems. Thanks to this, Singapore collects billions of dollars in casino tax annually while controlling social risks and attracting international tourism.
In the US, states like Nevada and New Jersey have developed the casino industry as a pillar of their local economies, integrated with tourism and entertainment ecosystems.
In Australia, casinos are overseen by independent commissions focusing on anti-money laundering, using AI technology and behavioral analysis to prevent risks.
Clearly, no country chooses to “ban it and be done.” Instead, they proactively set strict “rules of the game” for professional management.
What can Vietnam do?
First, Vietnam needs to move from pilot models to a full legal framework by enacting a specialized law on casino business.
This law should clearly define authorized areas linked to tourist zones or special economic zones; allow Vietnamese players under controlled conditions regarding income, frequency, and behavior; require investors to deploy player identification systems and transaction reporting per international standards; apply technology to limit losses, monitor playtime, and issue automatic warnings; and link social responsibility through funds supporting addicts, financial counseling, and public awareness campaigns.
Second, the law must clearly distinguish between legal casinos and illegal gambling. Instead of applying the same moral prejudice, casinos should be seen as conditional businesses — similar to alcohol, tobacco, or finance — where the key issue is not “to have or not” but “how to manage.”
Third, revenue and expenditure from casinos — including tax payments, job creation, and social impact — must be transparent and public to build trust and reduce public skepticism. Above all, the mindset of banning because of lack of control must be changed, as it is not a sustainable solution.
A modern state is one that dares to face reality, sets clear rules, and controls via law, technology, and responsibility. If managed transparently, tightly, and responsibly, casinos are not a threat but can become a crucial link in Vietnam’s strategy for tourism, finance, and urban development.
Banning has never been a long-term solution. Proactive management is the right path.
