Digital transformation in tax administration: A one-size-fits-all approach should be avoided

From the beginning of 2025, the application of electronic invoicing for all household businesses, under Decree No. 123/2020/ND-CP, was officially launched. This is a sound step in the long term, aimed at increasing transparency and modernising the tax administration system. However, within just a few months, a troubling silent phenomenon has emerged at traditional markets such as Binh Tay and An Dong (Ho Chi Minh City), Dong Xuan (Ha Noi), and even in many provincial markets: traders have been returning their stalls, halting their businesses, or shifting to informal trading in areas with looser oversight.

The cause does not lie in reduced consumer demand, but primarily in technical barriers. Not everyone is ready for or capable of accessing smartphones, invoicing software, QR code printers, or a stable internet connection. Vendors of dried fish, fabrics, sweets, and other small-scale goods, more adept with their hands than with machines, are suddenly placed in a position of “digitise or disappear”, prompting many to quietly withdraw.

According to the General Department of Taxation, by the end of Q1 2025, only about 35% of small traders had fully implemented electronic invoicing, mainly those engaged in larger-scale trade with better capacity to adapt to technology. Meanwhile, the remaining group — small vital "cells" of daily economic life — has become the most vulnerable during the transition process.

When the policy is misunderstood as a "tax collection campaign,” a chain reaction follows. Many traders leave traditional markets, resulting in a noticeable decline in commercial activity in long-established market areas. Some switch to informal business activities, thereby rendering the effort to expand the tax base counterproductive. Local tax officers find themselves caught between performance pressures and a lack of practical support tools. Public scepticism grows, with many perceiving the policy as a “tax raid” rather than a step towards transparency and development.

In fact, several Asian countries have undergone similar transitions but chose more flexible approaches. For example, in the Republic of Korea, before enforcing mandatory electronic invoicing, the government provided free software and waived penalties during the first two years to help the public adjust. Indonesia fully exempted households with annual revenue below a certain threshold from e-invoicing requirements, while simplifying the tax reporting process. Thailand piloted a “smart market” model with supporting equipment, accompanying staff, and user-friendly software for small vendors. The common denominator among these nations is that they did not enforce abrupt or one-sided mandates, but instead patiently built capacity before making the policy compulsory.

At the same time, it must be acknowledged that the e-invoicing policy has shown positive results in some areas. For instance, recently, several eyewear shops, once famed for their ability to assemble any globally renowned brand without producing a single component, have quietly shut down as these operations relied on floating or smuggled components, mainly from China, and issuing transparent invoices was never an option.

Now, with the requirement to prove the origin of input materials before issuing output invoices, such businesses can no longer legitimise counterfeit or imitation products. This demonstrates that e-invoicing, if correctly applied, can serve as an effective “filter” to cleanse the market, a benefit that should be broadened and strengthened, especially in the fight against fake goods and products of unknown origin.

Based on these realities, the author wishes to offer a number of specific proposals to help build greater consensus and effectiveness in the digital transformation of the tax sector:

First, household businesses should be categorised, and the implementation schedule should be extended. Specifically, those with annual revenue below 100 million VND should be completely exempt from e-invoicing obligations. Businesses earning 100–300 million VND annually should be allowed to submit simplified reports until mid-2026. The mandatory implementation should follow a regional roadmap, prioritising urban areas first, followed by rural areas.

Second, a community-based technology support network should be established in markets. Collaboration with youth s and tech enterprises is essential to form “community tech groups” at marketplaces. Market management boards should serve as focal points to support vendors in installing software and registering tax codes. Initial support should include mini printers and free data SIM cards for six months.

Third, the tradition of compassion and building trust should be promoted, while mass campaigns that cause fear should be avoided. Instead, communicate a clear message: this reform aims at transparency and protecting citizens' economic rights. Clearly explain the benefits of participating in the tax system: easier access to loans, credit history records, and legal protection in the event of risks.

Fourth, “smart market” models integrated with financial technology (Fintech) should be piloted, which involves applying technology to financial activities including payment, lending, and bookkeeping. For small traders, fintech tools are user-friendly and help them sell faster, manage records more effectively, and access better financial resources.

Select a few wholesale markets as pilot locations: use simple invoicing software, handheld printers, and QR code payment methods. Provide micro-loan packages, risk insurance, and simplified digital accounting services. Organise training in basic financial literacy and smartphone usage skills.

The success of a policy lies not in the number of invoices issued, but in the number of people who feel that they can and want to join the system legitimately.

If a woman selling banh mi at the street corner, or an elderly lady selling sweet soup in the market, feels that she is stepping into a new chapter with hope in her eyes, that is the true measure of successful reform. To make that a reality, we must provide them with tools, build trust, and make them feel accompanied, not abandoned, in the rising tide of digitalisation.

Link to the original article