Abstract: This article examines the legal framework of real estate trading platforms in a modern market economy, with a focus on the organizational and regulatory model in China. Based on this analysis, it proposes directions for legal reform in Vietnam aimed at enhancing transparency, digitalization, and the effectiveness of State management of real estate transactions. Drawing on the theoretical foundations of New Institutional Economics, Transaction Cost Theory, and the Digital Rule of Law, the article argues that real estate trading platforms are not merely intermediary technical tools, but essential legal instruments that enable the State to maintain public order, prevent fraud, and promote the healthy and efficient development of the real estate market.
Keywords: Legal framework, real estate trading platform, China
The development of the real estate (RE) market is an important indicator of the processes of industrialization, urbanization, and modernization of the economy. However, for the RE market to operate transparently, efficiently, and sustainably, a robust intermediary legal framework is required. One of the core regulatory instruments is the real estate trading platform, which consolidates functions such as brokerage, contract formation, information verification, risk control, and market transparency.
In the context of digital transformation and the Fourth Industrial Revolution (Industry 4.0), real estate trading platforms are no longer merely intermediaries for buying, selling, leasing, or lease-purchasing. They have become legal-technological frameworks that play a crucial role in digitizing the market, integrating cross-sector data (land registration, banking, taxation, notarization), and assisting the State in market regulation. In developing countries like China, the legal framework for RE trading platforms is organized by the State under public, public-private partnership models, digitalized, and linked to the State management system. In contrast, in Vietnam, although the 2023 Law on Real Estate Business has marked a step forward in awareness, in practice, the role and transparency of platform operations remain limited. Problems such as “ghost” platforms, price manipulation, contract fraud, and lack of reliable databases continue to be persistent issues. Therefore, studying the Chinese model of RE trading platforms and gradually establishing an effective legal and technological mechanism for such platforms is highly imperative. This article aims to: clarify the theoretical basis of RE trading platform institutions from a legal-economic perspective; analyze public and private RE platform models in China and evaluate their effectiveness; compare platform organization policies between China and Vietnam; and propose a modern legal framework for RE trading platforms in Vietnam today and in the future, with the orientation of a proactive State and a transparent, modern market.
Currently, around the world, national laws define the concept of real estate trading platforms differently, and scholars also hold varying perspectives. In Vietnam, pursuant to Clause 10, Article 3 of the 2023 Law on Real Estate Business, a real estate trading platform is defined as follows: “10. A real estate trading platform is a place where transactions of buying, selling, transferring, leasing, subleasing, and lease-purchasing real estate are conducted, established, and operated in accordance with the provisions of this Law.” Thus, a real estate trading platform is a place where transactions of buying, selling, transferring, leasing, subleasing, and lease-purchasing real estate are conducted, established, and operated under the provisions of the 2023 Law on Real Estate Business[1]. In China, according to the Measures on the Administration of Real Estate Trading Platforms issued by the Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development of China (MOHURD) in 2015, a real estate trading platform is defined as: a system of information established or guided by the housing and urban-rural development authorities, used to uniformly manage the process of real estate transactions, disclose information, and provide supervisory services[2]. Moreover, according to Chinese scholar Liu Jiayuan in Reform and Development of Urban Housing Transaction Platforms in China: “A real estate transaction platform is not only a trading medium but also a public governance tool that integrates administrative, financial, and legal oversight in urban land markets.” (A real estate trading platform is not only a trading medium but also a public governance tool integrating administrative, financial, and legal supervision in urban land markets[3]). In developed countries like South Korea, the concept is as follows: “A real estate trading platform is a digital infrastructure operated by state authorities or licensed brokers, aimed at enhancing transparency, traceability, and consumer protection in the real estate market.”[4] In essence, a real estate trading platform is not merely a service business entity but also a market-supporting tool with functions such as serving as an information bridge, verifying legal conditions, supporting pricing, and contributing to the enforcement of contracts. Scholar Douglass C. North asserts that trading platforms should be viewed as institutional components within the real estate market ecosystem, where legal, technological, and informational rules converge to minimize legal risks and transaction costs (North, 1990; OECD, 2015)[5]. These perspectives indicate that trading platforms serve multiple functions and roles, including assisting the State in real estate management and helping consumers verify the legality of products through technology. The author considers these views to be fully legally grounded and consistent with the context and functions of real estate trading platforms.
In summary, although interpretations vary, it can be basically understood that a real estate trading platform (real estate trading floor/real estate exchange platform) is a system of intermediary regulations serving the buying, selling, transferring, leasing, and lease-purchasing of real estate, organized under a commercial-legal model to provide services, store data, and ensure the transparency of transactions, managed by organizations or individuals.
In a modern institutional economy, trading platforms serve as mechanisms to reduce transaction costs and information asymmetry—two fundamental obstacles in large and complex asset markets such as real estate. According to Ronald Coase and Douglass North, markets only operate efficiently when intermediary rules exist to minimize negotiation costs, control risks, and enforce contracts (Coase, 1937; North, 1990)[6]. George Akerlof emphasized that information asymmetry between buyers and sellers leads to a “market for lemons,” where bad products drive out good ones. Trading platforms play a role in ensuring information is public, authentic, and traceable (Akerlof, 1970)[7]. Eugene Fama, with his Efficient Market Hypothesis, also posits that an efficiently functioning market requires prices to fully reflect available information—a role that trading platforms can support through public, transparent, and standardized data systems[8]. From a legal perspective, trading platforms should operate under a strict regulatory framework ensuring: (i) clear conditions for establishment and operation; (ii) mechanisms for transparent data disclosure; (iii) legal obligations for monitoring and storing information; (iv) joint liability in case of disputes; (v) reference and basic assessment of real estate product prices.
A real estate trading platform (RETP) functions as an intermediary organization ensuring transparency, legality, and legal safety for transactions in the real estate market. Specifically:Ensuring legal compliance for transactions: verifying the legal status of traded assets, including ownership, legal conditions, and financial obligations (taxes, fees, mortgages).
Providing legal services: contract consultation, legal status verification, notarization or certification, or connecting with organizations performing these functions.
Implementing State policy: RETPs can act as an extension of the State to enforce market regulation policies such as price control, market information management, and supply management. For example, China uses public trading platforms to require enterprises to disclose transactions, thereby reducing speculation, money laundering, and tax fraud.
Trading platforms also serve as intermediary economic organizations, facilitating the circulation of real estate assets through mechanisms such as:
Increasing market liquidity: platforms centralize supply and demand, enabling faster transactions and limiting asset “freezing.”
For example, according to the Efficient Market Hypothesis[9], complete and transparent information is necessary for proper asset pricing—a role that platforms can provide. They also reduce transaction costs in markets where excessive, unverified information increases search, negotiation, contracting, and legal risk prevention costs. Platforms centralize data on prices, transaction volumes, property types, and transaction scales, thus forming a database for State policy-making and market forecasting. They can further support market signal analysis, aiding businesses and the State in making better investment and regulatory decisions.
In the model of a market-based rule of law state (Rule of Law in Market Economy), the existence of a trading platform as an independent, transparent, and technologized institution reflects the process of market institutionalization (as observed in China). Conducting transactions through such platforms enables the State to perform functions such as: (i) managing and supervising civil transactions with significant economic elements; (ii) preventing tax loss through traceable cash flows and standardized pricing; (iii) preventing economic crimes, particularly money laundering and market price manipulation; (iv) protecting consumers in transactions involving high-value assets with complex legal issues. From a Law & Tech perspective, modern trading platforms are no longer merely physical spaces but digitalized platforms where legal rules are integrated into digital operational systems, such as smart contracts, digital signatures, centralized databases, and AI-driven automatic pricing mechanisms.
A real estate trading platform is an intermediary regulatory system that plays a key role in ensuring transparency, efficiency, and legal safety in transactions concerning property rights. Legally, it functions as an intermediary legal framework that connects supply and demand, establishes and executes transactions, ensures information disclosure, and supports dispute resolution through verification and transaction monitoring tools. According to modern institutional theory, trading platforms are instruments of regulatory governance, similar to stock exchanges or centralized commodity exchanges. When constructed and operated under legal standards, trading platforms reduce “underground” transactions, minimize risks of fraud, price manipulation, and money laundering in the real estate market. A trading platform may operate as an independent legal entity, or it may be a legal entity under the investor providing real estate trading services. If the platform is a legal entity under the owner, the responsibilities, obligations, and rights are intertwined, indicating that business registration for trading services must clearly stipulate rights and obligations. Conversely, if the platform is a non-legal entity fully dependent on the service provider, as is the case in Vietnam, representation and legal accountability fall entirely on the owner of the real estate trading service. Additionally, acts such as providing false information, price manipulation, and fraud constitute violations of market legal order and the rule of law; thus, trading service operators must be legally accountable and strictly sanctioned.
Currently, there is no specialized multilateral international treaty specifically regulating the organization of real estate trading platforms. However, several related international legal standards have been recognized by organizations such as: Based on these recommendations, a modern real estate trading platform should operate on the basis of: transparent legal frameworks, digitalized processes, integration of registration–tax–judicial data, independent supervision, and accountability mechanisms. In the transition from an administrative economy to a regulated market economy, transparent, efficient, and stable operation of the real estate market is essential for sustainable growth and social welfare. In this context, real estate trading platforms emerge as crucial legal–technical instruments to regulate the market, ensuring legality, enforceability, and traceability of high-value asset transactions.
From an academic perspective, real estate trading platforms can be analyzed through three theoretical axes: (i) New Institutional Economics (NIE), emphasizing the role in reducing transaction costs and controlling risks; (ii) Information Asymmetry theory, where the platform provides transparent information to protect participants; (iii) Digital Rule of Law approach, integrating technology into legal institutions to enhance transparency, accountability, and market governance efficiency. Using the Law & Tech model, the Digital Rule of Law theory asserts that public institutions such as courts, administrative agencies, and trading platforms must integrate technology to ensure access to justice, fairness, and transparency. Digital real estate trading platforms can interface with land, banking, tax, and notary databases to create a complete legal–technical platform for secure transactions. The integration of AI and Big Data further facilitates fair property valuation, transaction risk alerts, and effective fraud prevention.
The following international organizations provide valuable reference standards for developing countries, including Vietnam:
The legal framework regulating real estate (RE) trading platforms in Vietnam currently comprises numerous key legal documents, mainly including the Real Estate Business Law 2023 (replacing the 2014 Law), the Land Law 2024, the Civil Code, the Housing Law, the Investment Law, together with guiding decrees and circulars. These regulations provide the legal foundation for the establishment, operation, supervision, and handling of violations by real estate trading platforms. However, real estate trading platforms in Vietnam are not considered independent institutions and do not have legal entity status in legal relations. This is entirely different from neighboring China and several other countries, where trading platforms operate as legal entities in legal relations and are independently responsible for their activities.
According to the Real Estate Business Law 2023, trading platforms are no longer mandatory for every real estate transaction as previously required but are instead developed under an incentive mechanism. Nevertheless, the Law still stipulates certain establishment conditions, operational standards, and information obligations for trading platforms, including: personnel and facility requirements; obligations to disclose project information, legal information, and pricing; responsibilities for storing and securing information and transaction data. Despite improvements compared to the 2014 Law, the current legal system still lacks clear regulations on technology standardization, digitalization of transaction activities, and data integration mechanisms between platforms and state management agencies. The 2024 real estate market, although showing positive signals, still faces difficulties, and recovery remains uneven across market segments. These challenges are mainly due to persistent legal obstacles in the real estate market[11].
Current Status of Real Estate Trading Platforms in Vietnam
In practice, the operation of real estate trading platforms in Vietnam has many limitations and has not yet fulfilled the role of an important tool ensuring transparency, openness, and legal safety in the real estate market. Many platforms have been established but do not fully comply with legal conditions, operating spontaneously or set up by developers to legitimize sales processes without fully performing project verification, legal due diligence, or protecting buyers’ rights. Statistics show that across the country, approximately 1,600 real estate trading platforms have been established and are operating. However, the majority primarily engage in advertising and brokering developer projects rather than fully performing their intended functions.
Additionally, the Real Estate Business Law 2023 still mainly focuses on corporate real estate brokerage, leaving legal gaps for individual real estate brokerage, particularly independent or informal agents[12]. Oversight and management by state authorities remain limited, making it ineffective to evaluate the capacity and quality of platform operations[13]. The market also records the existence of “ghost platforms,” unregistered or unlicensed platforms, posing significant risks to customers. Disclosure of information, price listing, and transaction data on platforms remain largely formal, lacking verification and independent supervision.
The prevailing operational model is private platforms established by real estate enterprises to distribute internal products, while public or state-backed platforms are almost absent. Large corporations such as Vingroup, Novaland, Dat Xanh have established their own distribution systems with integrated platforms, but transparency and connection to the national data system remain limited.
From a legal perspective, the current regulatory system does not mandate all transactions to go through platforms, resulting in fragmented and loose management. Policies on real estate market development are inadequate, particularly regarding transparency and openness, which are weak and insufficient. If information remains unclear, the market cannot develop healthily, and management becomes challenging[14]. Moreover, there are no mandatory technical standards for digital infrastructure, electronic authentication, data security, or transaction record storage. State management responsibilities are fragmented across ministries (Ministry of Construction, Ministry of Agriculture and Environment, Ministry of Public Security, Ministry of Finance…), complicating coordination for supervision and violation handling. Post-transaction inspection mechanisms are weak, there is no automated monitoring system, and a unified national transaction database is lacking. From the market perspective, citizens remain hesitant to transact via platforms due to complex procedures, high costs, lack of trust in data accuracy, and insufficient legal protection. Digital technology has not been widely adopted among real estate agents, limiting the implementation of digital trading platforms. Furthermore, there is a lack of regulation on e-platforms; the law has not kept pace with online platforms, blockchain, or smart contracts. Operational quality varies significantly between professional and smaller platforms, with limited capacity, weak supervisory mechanisms, and insufficient tools for regulatory authorities to control virtual transactions, price inflation, or market manipulation through real estate trading platforms. These are critical limitations that need to be addressed promptly in the near future.
The legal framework for real estate trading platforms in China is designed to control the market, ensure transaction transparency, and protect the rights of relevant parties. China does not have a separate law exclusively regulating RE trading platforms, but the related legal system is relatively comprehensive, spanning multiple legal documents and administrative management policies.
First, the Urban Real Estate and Housing Management Law 1994, amended in 2009, is the foundational legal document governing the sale, lease, transfer, mortgage, and other real estate business activities in China. It establishes the responsibilities of provincial and centrally-administered municipal governments in managing trading platforms and the real estate market. Articles 12 and 27 explicitly state that local authorities have the right to establish public real estate trading centers to inspect, verify, and publish transaction information. Additionally, the Property Law 2007 contains provisions related to RE trading platform activities: Article 15 – Property Law of China (2007): “Real estate registration is effective from the time it is recorded in the registration book. After registration, third parties have the right to access this information under legal regulations.”
Second, the Real Estate Business Law (substantive law not yet independent but regulated through administrative regulations and civil law) governs the operation of real estate enterprises, including private trading platforms, under the Enterprise Law, E-Commerce Law, and relevant administrative decrees for the construction and real estate sectors. State-operated RE trading platforms function as illustrated by the “Hangzhou Public Asset Trading Center,” where all rights to public land, public assets, and social housing must be transacted via the platform. This mechanism facilitates oversight by tax authorities, treasuries, and banks to prevent tax evasion.
Third, regulations issued by the Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development (MOHURD) govern the real estate transaction management system and property registration (2001, amended multiple times). They require local authorities to establish electronic RE trading platforms and integrated data systems among construction, land, tax, finance, and banking agencies. The 2011 MOHURD guidance (Circular No. [2011] 53) mandates that all provincial-level cities establish public real estate trading centers (“Real Estate Trading Centers”) to: pre-register transactions, publish selling and transfer prices, verify legal contracts, provide notarization services, and connect banking, tax, and cadastral systems.
Fourth, local regulations in major cities such as Beijing, Shanghai, Shenzhen, Guangzhou, and Chengdu have issued specific rules to strictly manage platform operations:
Example: Beijing Municipal Regulation on Real Estate Transaction (2017) requires all real estate transactions to be confirmed through an electronic system managed by the government. Shenzhen operates the Shenzhen Real Estate Exchange Center as a semi-public authority overseeing all urban property transactions
Fifth, technical guidance and digital transformation: China promotes the digitalization of RE transactions through digital trading platforms, integrating AI & Blockchain, electronic signatures, contract encryption, and asset identifiers. The 2019 MOHURD and Ministry of Natural Resources notice (Notice on Accelerating the Construction of an Integrated Real Estate Information Platform, issued 26 December 2019) mandates the connection of RE trading platforms with land registration systems, e-taxation, and digital banking systems.
All information regarding real estate transactions—including ownership, legal status, current condition, planning, and price—must be publicly disclosed, accurate, and verified.
Transaction data, pricing, and service fees must be clearly listed and equally accessible to all participants. For example, public trading platforms in Beijing and Shenzhen are required to publicly disclose winning bids, ownership history, and land planning information (MOHURD 2011 regulations).
Platforms act as intermediaries connecting buyers and sellers without interfering or distorting transactions. They are responsible for verifying documents and property information and supporting parties to comply with legal procedures.
All participants have the right to access the platform and use its services without discrimination. Transaction procedures follow a standardized process without favoritism. Many platforms in China are established through collaboration between local authorities and private enterprises.
Transactions must be documented and stored according to regulations, ensuring authenticity. Personal data, financial information, and legal documents of clients must be kept confidential.
Modern platforms operate on digital data management systems with traceability and integration with land registration, banking, taxation, and government systems. Transactions can be executed via digital platforms with electronic authentication, digital signatures, and smart contracts. OECD (2021) and UNCITRAL emphasize this principle as key to improving market transparency. Modern RE trading platforms are not just transaction venues but institutional infrastructures integrating, tracing, and publishing information to ensure legal security for high-value transactions.
All platform operations must comply with national laws on land, real estate business, commerce, taxation, and anti-money laundering. Platforms operate under the management, inspection, and supervision of authorities (in Vietnam, the Department of Construction; in China, MOHURD and local governments).
China’s RE platforms are organized into three main types:
Government-Run Exchange Platforms – Established and managed directly or delegated by city, district, or provincial governments. Examples: RE trading platforms in Shanghai, Guangzhou, Beijing, Shenzhen. Functions include transaction registration, ownership confirmation, information disclosure, and market oversight. Semi-Public Platforms – Operated by state-owned enterprises, public utility corporations, or joint ventures between the state and private enterprises. They follow market regulations while fulfilling public service obligations as directed by authorities. Private Exchanges – Established by private enterprises but must be licensed, operating as digital brokerage platforms (e.g., Lianjia, Fang.com, Beike). They are strictly controlled regarding information, cybersecurity, and taxation.
According to the Urban Real Estate Management Law (1994, amended 2009) and RE Transaction Management Measures, operational conditions include:Clear legal status, registered under Enterprise Law or as public legal entities. Adequate infrastructure: headquarters, IT systems, transaction management software. Professional staff: managers, appraisers, brokers, lawyers, accountants approved and supervised by authorities (construction/land management departments at provincial/city levels). Internal regulations for risk management, document storage, information verification, and dispute resolution.
The activities of real estate trading platforms are relatively specifically regulated, including:
- Registration and confirmation of transactions, verification of the buyer and seller, type of real estate, price, and payment method.
- Appraisal and listing of information, asset valuation, publication of public information, and verification of legal documents.
- Transaction consultancy and brokerage, provision of legal services, brokerage, and negotiation support.
- Supervision and anti-money laundering: verification of capital sources, reporting of large transactions in accordance with regulations.
- Administrative data integration, connection with tax authorities, land registration, banks, and identification systems.
- Provision of market reports, price statistics, supply-demand trends, and market analysis.
These activities can be conducted directly at a physical platform or through a digital platform (E-platform).
Thus, the operational content of real estate trading platforms in China is more diverse and comprehensive compared to real estate trading platforms in Vietnam, with prominent features including price statistics, market analysis, supply-demand trends, capital verification, and supervision and anti-money laundering functions.
a. Synchronized and Rigorous Legal Framework
China has established a relatively comprehensive legal system to regulate the operation of real estate trading platforms. The most important among these are: the Real Estate Law (2007), which provides the legal foundation for transactions, transfers, registration, and ownership of real estate; the Real Estate Registration Law (2015), which establishes a centralized registration mechanism and ensures transparency of ownership information; and the Regulations on the Management of Housing and Real Estate Transactions issued by MOHURD[17], which provide detailed guidance on conditions, procedures, and processes for real estate transactions via trading platforms. Local regulations allow provincial and municipal authorities to promulgate detailed rules on platform operations appropriate to local circumstances. Notably, this legal framework is continuously updated to align with market fluctuations and technological development. According to Zhang (2020)[18], China maintains synchronization between central laws and local implementation, ensuring uniform regulations without being rigid.
b. Diverse Organizational Models
China has established three main types of trading platforms:State-run platforms: Usually under the Provincial/Municipal Bureau of Natural Resources and Real Estate. They perform functions such as organizing auctions, publicizing planning information, tax-related matters, and providing legal support. Enterprise-operated platforms: Established by financial institutions, corporations, or real estate brokerage companies, operating under state licensing and supervision. Electronic platforms (online): Emerged strongly after 2015, integrating big data and artificial intelligence (AI) to support property search, valuation, and recommendations. Each platform is required to have a risk management system, a legal appraisal unit, and transparent disclosure of asset information.
c. Standardized Transaction Procedures
The basic steps for real estate transactions via platforms in China include: listing asset information (legally and technically verified); appraising value and legal status; organizing auctions or direct transactions; signing purchase-sale contracts (through the platform); declaring taxes and transaction fees; registering ownership transfer with government authorities. These steps are all managed via software or digital platforms, ensuring transparency and accuracy (Chen & Hao, 2020).
d. Information Transparency and Data Integration
China requires that all transactions disclose full information regarding: area, location, planning; legal status (ownership, mortgage, etc.); transaction history; valuation and taxes payable. Transaction data are connected with banking systems, tax authorities, and real estate registration offices, reducing procedural burdens and preventing fraud. Zhang (2020) emphasizes the role of AI and big data in forecasting real estate values and supporting tax and urban planning policies.
Despite the above-mentioned advantages, real estate trading platforms in China also have certain limitations: overreliance on the state and local regulations; in some localities, mandatory transactions via state-run platforms reduce market flexibility and may create “guanxi”-based or monopolistic mechanisms. High operating costs, including verification, information disclosure, valuation, and legal procedures through the platform, increase transaction costs. Citizens may bear additional fees for brokerage, services, or intermediary deposits. Competition with private platforms is limited, as state-run platforms are favored, potentially leading to unfair competition and hindering innovation in private/PropTech platforms. Furthermore, digitalization is not yet fully synchronized; although E-government has been implemented, many localities still use manual or semi-automated procedures, causing delays. There is a risk of price and information manipulation: in some cases, state platforms in combination with large enterprises can influence market prices, distorting competition. In addition, the lack of independent supervision, the dispersion of platform management across multiple agencies, and the absence of a transparent evaluation system for platform performance remain challenges.
Based on the current legal framework governing real estate trading platforms in Vietnam and by referencing the Chinese model through an assessment and analysis of its advantages and disadvantages, several insightful lessons can be drawn and some issues suggested to promote a healthy and sustainable development of Vietnam’s real estate trading market.
First, it is recommended to define real estate trading platforms as independent legal entities with full legal capacity to operate autonomously and bear legal responsibility. Establish a “mandatory trading via platform” mechanism (amend Clause 7, Article 7 of the Law on Real Estate Business – KDBS: “The State encourages organizations and individuals to carry out transactions of buying, selling, transferring, leasing, lease-purchase, and subleasing of houses, constructions, and land use rights via real estate trading platforms”), clearly stipulate the legal capacity of platforms, ensuring that platforms are not only places for listing information but also responsible intermediaries with clear legal obligations, making transactions through the platform to increase market transparency.
Second, standardize electronic platform models.
Develop mandatory technical standards applicable to all platforms (according to OECD recommendations). Allow operation of digital PropTech platforms interconnected with tax authorities, notaries, and land registration offices. Supplement clear regulations on the legal validity of electronic transactions via platforms. Develop a legal framework ensuring data integrity and recognizing the legal validity of electronic contracts and digital signatures. Permit fully online real estate transactions under secure conditions (smart contracts).
Third, strengthen state management and enhance transparency of information.
Establish a national data center on real estate transactions integrating data from all platforms, managed by the Ministry of Construction. Require platforms to disclose reference prices and historical transaction data to prevent price manipulation. Apply strict sanctions against “ghost platforms” and unregistered brokers.
Fourth, study the development of a real estate trading platform model interoperable with tax authorities, banks, and land registration offices to facilitate transactions and simplify management. Encourage a “public platform” model operated by the state in major urban areas. Pilot a “Public Real Estate Exchange” model in Hanoi, Ho Chi Minh City, and Da Nang following the Beijing–Shanghai model. Public platforms will ensure transaction monitoring, support legal verification, and prevent money laundering and tax evasion. Encourage the development of new models: specialized real estate platforms (logistics, industrial, resort); Green Real Estate Exchange.
Fifth, link platforms with the national digital transformation strategy. Integrate AI, Big Data, and Blockchain into platform operations to support valuation, risk warning, and contract management. Blockchain, fundamentally a chain-of-block technology, functions to transmit data within an encrypted system, where all transactions are peer-to-peer[19]. Encourage the formation of a PropTech ecosystem involving tech startups, banks, and regulatory authorities. These recommendations are proposed based on the potential values they can bring.
From a theoretical perspective, this study contributes to strengthening the legal foundation for the establishment of real estate trading platforms in the digital era, aligning with the principles of the rule of law, modern market economy, and digital transformation. It clarifies the objective necessity of trading platforms as legal instruments to ensure market transparency, prevent legal risks, and enhance state governance capacity. Moreover, it helps fill the domestic research gap regarding the institutional design of real estate trading platform laws toward modernization and international integration.
The core practical value of this study lies in proposing feasible recommendations, such as establishing a mandatory trading mechanism via platforms for certain types of real estate, thereby contributing to effective market control. In addition, standardizing electronic trading platform models and connecting data with public and banking systems, developing public trading platforms in major cities, and applying the Beijing–Shanghai model in Vietnam’s context. Proposals also include integrating digital technologies into the legal framework, in line with the national digital transformation strategy toward 2025 and oriented toward 2030. These recommendations can serve as a foundation for legislative, executive, and academic institutions to continue research and institutionalization in the near future.
This study demonstrates that real estate trading platforms are not merely venues for buying and selling assets, but constitute a legal–technical framework enabling the State to manage the market effectively and protect citizens’ rights. The Chinese experience in establishing public real estate trading platforms provides valuable reference for Vietnam in policy formulation. Amending the 2023 Law on Real Estate Business toward digitization, transparency, and technology integration is imperative to ensure the sustainable development of the real estate market. Furthermore, referencing and adopting models from advanced countries such as China, which shares many similarities with Vietnam, can help shorten the implementation timeline for reforms while enhancing the effectiveness of market management and real estate development in the digital era.
1. Land Law 2024, No. 31/2024/NA15
2. Law on Real Estate Business 2023, No. 29/2023/NA15
3. Housing Law 2023, No. 27/2023/NA15
4. Civil Code 2015, No. 91/2015/NA13
5. Investment Law 2020, No. 61/2020/NA14
6.http://www.mohurd.gov.cn/zcfg/jsbwj_0/jsbwjcsjs/201508/t20150805_22398html
7. Liu Jiayuan, Reform and Development of Urban Housing Transaction Platforms in China, URB. PLAN. F., no. 6, 2018, at 45. (Urban Planning Forum)
8. (North, 1990; OECD, 2015) Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Policy Framework for Investment 2015 Edition 18 (OECD Publishing 2015), https://www.oecd.org/investment/pfi.htm.
9. Eugene F. Fama, Efficient Capital Markets: A Review of Theory and Empirical Work, 25 J. Fin. 383 (1970).
10.Ronald H. Coase, The Nature of the Firm, 4 Economica (n.s.) 386, 390–91 (1937). Douglass C. North, Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance, Cambridge Univ. Press, 3-6 (1990).
11.George A. Akerlof, The Market for “Lemons”: Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism, 84 Q.J. Econ. 488 (1970).
12.Eugene F. Fama, Efficient Capital Markets: A Review of Theory and Empirical Work, 25 J. Fin. 383 (1970).
13.Xem, https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/32436
14.Tran Thi Kim Chi, The Real Estate Market in Vietnam and the Impact of the Amended Land Law, Finance Magazine (12/09/2024 01:16) https://tapchitaichinh.vn/thi-truong-bat-dong-san-o-viet-nam-va-tac-dong-cua-luat-dat-dai-sua-doi.html
15.Phan Thi Lan Phuong, Regulations on Real Estate Brokerage – Current Situation and Some Recommendations, Court Magazine (06/06/2024 08:30) https://tapchitoaan.vn/quy-dinh-ve-moi-gioi-bat-dong-san-thuc-trang-va-mot-so-kien-nghi11078.html
16.Bui Hong Nhung, Perfecting the Exchange Model to Ensure Transparency in the Real Estate Market, Luat Su Viet Nam (20/04/2022 15:38) https://lsvn.vn/hoan-thien-mo-hinh-san-giao-dich-nham-bao-dam-tinh-minh-bach-cua-thi-truong-bat-dong-san1650469133-a117834.html
17.Nguyen Quang Tuyen, Nguyen Thi Phuong Lan, Legal Obstacles of the Current Real Estate Market, Dan chu & Phap luat (10/09/2024) https://danchuphapluat.vn/vuong-mac-cua-thi-truong-bat-dong-san-hien-nay-nhin-tu-goc-do-phap-ly
18.Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Principles of Good Governance for Land Administration 17–24 (2021), https://www.oecd.org/gov/land-governance/.
19.United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL), Legislative Guide on Secured Transactions 145–169 (2016), https://uncitral.un.org/en/texts/security.
20.Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development (MOHURD), Real Estate Transaction Management Measures [房地产交易管理办法] (2015, amended 2019), available at http://www.mohurd.gov.cn.
21.Zhang Wei, Legal Synchronization in China: Central-Local Coordination in Real Estate Governance, 38(2) China Legal Science 115, 118 (2020).
22.Hong Hanh, Legal Framework for Blockchain Real Estate Investment, Luat su Viet Nam (28/12/2021 11:00) https://lsvn.vn/hanh-lang-phap-ly-doi-voi-hinh-thuc-dau-tu-bat-dong-san-blockchain1640689215-a113510.html
* Master’s degree Phan Van Lam. Approved for publication on 19/5/2025. Email: Phanlamplxh@gmail.com
[1] Clause 10, Article 3, Law on Real Estate Business No. 29/2023/NA15
[2] http://www.mohurd.gov.cn/zcfg/jsbwj_0/jsbwjcsjs/201508/t20150805_223984.html
[3] Liu Jiayuan, Reform and Development of Urban Housing Transaction Platforms in China, URB. PLAN. F., no. 6, 2018, at 45. (Urban Planning Forum)
[4] https://rt.molit.go.kr (Korea National Real Estate Portal)
[5] (North, 1990; OECD, 2015) Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Policy Framework for Investment 2015 Edition 18 (OECD Publishing 2015), https://www.oecd.org/investment/pfi.htm.
[6]Ronald H. Coase, The Nature of the Firm, 4 Economica (n.s.) 386, 390–91 (1937).
Douglass C. North, Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance, Cambridge Univ. Press, 3-6 (1990).
[7] George A. Akerlof, The Market for “Lemons”: Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism, 84 Q.J. Econ. 488 (1970).
[8] Eugene F. Fama, Efficient Capital Markets: A Review of Theory and Empirical Work, 25 J. Fin. 383 (1970).
[9] Eugene F. Fama, Efficient Capital Markets: A Review of Theory and Empirical Work, 25 J. Fin. 383 (1970).
[10] Xem, Worldbank Group, Publication: Doing Business 2020: Comparing Business Regulation in 190 Economies,https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/32436
[11] Tran Thi Kim Chi, The real estate market in Vietnam and the impact of the amended Land Law, Tai Chinh Journal (12/09/2024 01:16) https://tapchitaichinh.vn/thi-truong-bat-dong-san-o-viet-nam-va-tac-dong-cua-luat-dat-dai-sua-doi.html
[12] Phan Thi Lan Phuong, Regulations on real estate brokerage – Current situation and some recommendations, Toa An Journal (06/06/2024 08:30) https://tapchitoaan.vn/quy-dinh-ve-moi-gioi-bat-dong-san-thuc-trang-va-mot-so-kien-nghi11078.html
[13] Bui Hong Nhung, Improving the exchange model to ensure transparency of the real estate market, Vietnamese Lawyer (20/04/2022 15:38) https://lsvn.vn/hoan-thien-mo-hinh-san-giao-dich-nham-bao-dam-tinh-minh-bach-cua-thi-truong-bat-dong-san1650469133-a117834.html
[14] Nguyen Quang Tuyen, Nguyen Thi Phuong Lan, Current obstacles in the real estate market from a legal perspective, Democracy & Law (10/09/2024) https://danchuphapluat.vn/vuong-mac-cua-thi-truong-bat-dong-san-hien-nay-nhin-tu-goc-do-phap-ly
[15] Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Principles of Good Governance for Land Administration 17–24 (2021), https://www.oecd.org/gov/land-governance/.
[16] Xem, United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL), Legislative Guide on Secured Transactions 145–169 (2016), https://uncitral.un.org/en/texts/security.
[17] Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development (MOHURD), Real Estate Transaction Management Measures [房地产交易管理办法] (2015, amended 2019), available at http://www.mohurd.gov.cn.
[18] Zhang Wei, Legal Synchronization in China: Central-Local Coordination in Real Estate Governance, 38(2) China Legal Science 115, 118 (2020).
[19] Hong Hanh, Legal framework for blockchain real estate investment, Luat Su Viet Nam (28/12/2021 11:00) https://lsvn.vn/hanh-lang-phap-ly-doi-voi-hinh-thuc-dau-tu-bat-dong-san-blockchain1640689215-a113510.html
Tags:
Tags:
(L&D)-This article will analyze the two main scholarly perspectives on this issue, clarify the author’s viewpoint, and simultaneously assess the applicability of the ITS in Vietnam.
(L&D)-The article proposes legal solutions and multi-layered strategies to enhance the effective implementation of these rights. The main recommendations include harmonizing economic development with water resource protection, improving enforcement efficiency, monitoring and establishing accountability mechanisms, strengthening cooperation, and developing effective transboundary dispute resolution mechanisms. The article affirms that the protection of blue rights constitutes an important legal obligation to achieve the sustainable development goals and ensure a sustainable future.
The article analyzes the shift of corporate social responsibility from a voluntary commitment to a legal requirement in order to balance economic interests with social and environmental responsibilities.
(L&D) - This article focuses on analyzing and clarifying the new developments in U.S. economic law under the impact of the Fourth Industrial Revolution in the following areas: commercial law regarding e-commerce, consumer protection, competition law, and intellectual property law.
(L&D) - This article analyzes the legal provisions on civil litigation for the recovery of assets derived from corruption and provides examples from the practices of several countries, thereby offering certain recommendations for Vietnam.
(L&D) - The article discusses issues that Vietnam needs to pay attention to when completing its national legal framework to ensure the effective implementation of obligations under the Convention.
(L&D) -The article emphasizes the importance of codifying confrontation in civil proceedings to enhance transparency, fairness, and adjudicative efficiency. Confrontation is an essential process for examining and verifying the accuracy and legality of evidence.
The article proposes legal and multi-level strategic solutions to enhance the effectiveness of implementing these rights. The main recommendations include harmonizing economic development with the protection of water resources, improving enforcement and monitoring as well as establishing accountability mechanisms, strengthening cooperation, and building effective mechanisms for resolving transboundary disputes. The article affirms that protecting Blue Rights is a critical legal obligation for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals and ensuring the future.
