Vietnam Casinos Warn of Fallout as Local Entry Fees Set to Double

Written by

Share on social media

Vietnam at night as government threaten to double local entry fees to casinos

Image: Vietnam at Night

Vietnam’s largest casino operators have urged Vietnam’s Finance Ministry to rethink a draft plan to double entry fees for local players, arguing the move would sharply curb domestic visitation and revenue. 

Key Takeaways:

  • Largest operators oppose increased local entry fees and suggest alternatives
  • Industry warns higher costs could hinder post-pandemic recovery 
  • Dispute emerges over whether fees reflect players’ financial capacity

Operators Push Back as Local Entry Fees Debate Intensifies

According to Asia Gaming Brief, the Grand Ho Tram suggested converting the proposed VND50 million monthly levy into an annual pass to reduce effective monthly costs, while Corona Casino suggested lower one-day and monthly rates; both were rejected as the ministry presses ahead. The debate unfolds against a wider reconsideration of Vietnam’s gaming landscape, including new casino proposals under review by the prime minister

As reported by VN Express International, operators contend the ministry’s approach to raising local entry fees risks harming a post-pandemic recovery. Locals have historically made up a large share of patronage and revenue at properties that admit Vietnamese citizens; Corona reported locals were 52% of customers and 88% of revenue over five years, although that share fell sharply after the pandemic.

Policy Rift Emerges Between Finance and Justice Ministries

The ministry says the increases to local entry fees aim to ensure access only by those with sufficient means. They argue that raising entry fees is needed to deter individuals who may not have the financial means to gamble responsibly, according to Hanoi Times.

The Finance Ministry’s draft would raise day tickets to VND2.5 million and monthly passes to VND50 million, replacing income-document checks that authorities say are impractical. The Ministry of Justice, however, has questioned whether price alone accurately reflects a player’s financial status, underlining a policy dispute between ministries.