Decree 327/2025/ND-CP creates a permanent-residence route for specified IFC-linked categories. Article 5 requires long-term work for an agency or organisation having offices in the Centre, including at least three years’ continuous work there, and a recommendation from a Minister, head of a ministerial-level agency, head of a Government-attached agency that performs state management in the relevant professional field, or the Chairperson of the Ho Chi Minh City or Da Nang People’s Committee. Article 6.2 separately gives the decision to the Minister of Public Security.
Then Article 7 lets the immigration agency invalidate the card.
Article 7 names visas, temporary-residence cards and permanent-residence cards. It does not treat a permanent-residence card in isolation.
Correction, 30 August 2026: earlier wording narrowed Article 5’s recommender categories and described the work condition as work ‘inside’ the Centre. It also wrongly excluded visas and temporary-residence cards from Article 7. Those points are corrected below. The signed Vietnamese text remains the authority; the English is a reading copy.
What Article 7 actually says
Two triggers, and the second is the one to notice.
Art. 7.1: the holder is no longer eligible.
Art. 7.2: the Executive Agency asks for it to be invalidated.
Article 8.3 then sets out when the Executive Agency will ask. Three circumstances: the person no longer works for an organisation with offices in the Centre; the person no longer falls within an eligible category; or the Executive Agency "no longer wishes to provide sponsorship or request preferential treatment."
Read that third one again. It is not a test the holder can fail. It is a decision the sponsor can take.
This is the same agency that let you in
Article 4 describes Executive Agency request procedures for visa and temporary-residence contexts.
Article 8 assigns the Executive Agency appraisal and filing roles and permits it to request invalidation.
For permanent residence, Article 5 separately sets eligible categories, a three-year work condition and an official recommendation.
Articles 7–8 add continuing eligibility and Executive Agency request roles. The decree therefore describes a conditional statutory route, not an automatic benefit.
Who can get permanent residence at all
Narrower than the visa track, and the asymmetry is easy to miss because both lists appear in the same article.
| Critical investors | yes | yes |
|---|---|---|
| Experts | yes | yes |
| Senior managers | yes | yes |
| Managers | yes | no |
| Highly qualified workers | yes | no |
| Scientists | not listed | yes |
| People with special talents | not listed | yes |
| Spouse, children under 18 | yes (UD2) | no |
One note on the "not listed" cells. Resolution 222 Art. 20.1(b), the provision this decree implements, opens long-term temporary residence to scientists and people with exceptional talents. Decree 327 Art. 1.1 does not list them in the visa/TRC scope. How the decree and the resolution sit together there is not settled, and I am flagging it rather than resolving it.
A highly qualified worker can hold a ten-year card and have no permanent residence route at all. The decree recruits skilled workers and settles elite ones, and those are different propositions.
Family cards run on the principal's clock too. Art. 4.2 gives a spouse or child a term corresponding to the principal's card, not an independent ten years. If the principal's card is cut short, so is the family's.
The gate nobody mentions
Article 6.1 lists the permanent residence dossier. Item (c): a diplomatic note from your own country's representative mission, requesting that Vietnam settle permanent residence for you.
Article 6.1(c) requires a diplomatic note from the applicant’s representative mission requesting settlement of permanent residence.
The decree states the dossier requirement; it does not establish how an individual mission handles requests or any response time. Applicants must verify mission practice independently.
The dossier also wants a criminal record certificate from your country of citizenship (Art. 6.1(b)), a certified passport copy (6.1(d)), and Form NT-01, which is annexed to the decree in Vietnamese (6.1(dd)).
After that: the Minister of Public Security decides within two months, extendable by one if verification is needed (Art. 6.2). Collect in person within two months (6.3). Renew every ten years (6.4).
The question I cannot answer
Does Article 7 really reach a permanent residence card once that card has been granted?
The text points one way. Article 7 names permanent-residence cards alongside visas and temporary-residence cards without distinguishing between them, and Article 8.3 names them again. But a decree that reads clearly on the page can be applied narrowly in an office, and I have no administrative practice to check against. The decree came into force on 17 January 2026 (Art. 9.1). As of 30 August 2026, I have not located a published case of an IFC permanent-residence card being invalidated.
What would settle it: a Vietnamese immigration lawyer who has filed under this decree, or the first reported invalidation. Until then I am reading drafting, not outcomes — which is why I am putting the question to counsel rather than telling you the route is worthless.
As of 30 August 2026, no summary I have reviewed raises the question at all.
The part that is genuinely good
None of this makes the mobility offer weak. It makes it different from the advertised version.
Article 4 provides a visa or temporary-residence mechanism, including a maximum ten-year term in the stated case and a three-working-day processing period after a complete dossier. Decree 325 Article 5.1(a) separately provides a work-permit exemption for the specified UD1 visa category, and Article 6.2 requires an employer notice at least three working days before work begins, with the stated notice fields. Those provisions do not, by themselves, establish every current operational requirement or a unified individual outcome.
The package is genuinely strong, and stronger than most coverage conveys.
The bounded summary is this: the decree provides conditional visa and residence mechanisms involving Executive Agency requests, specified eligibility conditions and, for permanent residence, the additional Article 5 and Article 6 dossier requirements. The decree alone does not establish ease of access or current operational handling.
Two things this decree does not do
It does not define most of its own terms. Art. 3.2 sends the manager, senior manager, expert and highly qualified worker definitions to Decree 219/2025/ND-CP Art. 3. Art. 3.3 sends scientists and special talents to Decree 221/2025/ND-CP, Appendix I Section II. Both are published national law, and neither is in my corpus yet — they are the next texts I am reading. For critical investors, Art. 3.1 delegates criteria to the Executive Authority's strategic-investor rules. Those rules have not been verified in this corpus, so this record makes no substantive claim about their content.
And be careful about a second test. Decree 324 Art. 7.2(c) sets different criteria again, for the personal income tax exemption. Two tests, overlapping populations, different instruments. Qualifying for the visa does not mean qualifying for the tax break.
It also does not contain the airport lanes. Priority entry and exit areas at the Ho Chi Minh City and Da Nang international airports, and the unique ID card for IFC experts, are Resolution 222 Art. 20.2(b). I have seen them attributed to this decree. Decree 327 does not contain them. As of 30 August 2026, I have not located an implementing instrument for Article 20.2.
Method
Decree 327/2025/ND-CP read in full in the English text published by the Da Nang Executive Agency at vifcdanang.vn/legislation.htm, checked against Resolution 222 Art. 20. The signed Vietnamese text is the citation authority. The English is a reading copy. Decree 325 Art. 5.1(a) read in full. Decree 324 Arts. 1–11 read. Decrees 219/2025 and 221/2025 not read. Full source register at /sources/.
Research and operational planning only. Not legal, tax, immigration, securities, investment, banking, payments, digital-asset, licensing, accounting, labor, or regulated financial advice. The framework is new and moving; engage licensed Vietnamese counsel before acting.
Spotted an error? Tell me — corrections run in the post, with my name on them.