The issue is increasingly visible across the market. Recently, PV Gas announced that it no longer meets the criteria to be classified as a public company. As of August 29, 2025, PV Gas had 17,495 shareholders, but Petrovietnam held a dominant 95.76% of the voting shares, leaving just 4.24% in the hands of the remaining 17,494 minority shareholders.

Such a structure fails to meet the minimum requirement for public companies, which requires at least 10% of voting shares to be held by a minimum of 100 non-majority shareholders.

A similar picture is unfolding at PetroVietnam Low Pressure Gas Distribution (PV GAS D). Its parent company, PV Gas, controls 50.5% of the capital, while two Japanese strategic partners, Tokyo Gas Asia and Saibu Gas Holdings, hold 25% and 21%, respectively.

Together, these three major shareholders account for 96.5% of PV GAS D’s capital, leaving only 3.5% spread among 1,642 small shareholders.

Legally, these ownership structures do not comply with Article 32 of Securities Law No. 54/2019/QH14, which was amended to strengthen shareholding diversification. If non-compliance persists for one year, companies are required to submit a request to the State Securities Commission to revoke their public company status. This would effectively bar their shares from listing on the Ho Chi Minh Stock Exchange (HoSE), the Hanoi Stock Exchange (HNX) or UPCoM.

The lack of space for minority shareholders is far from an isolated case. Data show that many large enterprises, including several with market capitalisation exceeding 1 billion USD, still fail to meet minimum external ownership thresholds.

This problem is particularly prevalent among state-owned enterprises that have transitioned to public company status while retaining overwhelming state control.

In November 2025, Vinacomin - Minerals Holding Corporation announced it also no longer qualified as a public company, with its parent holding 98.1% of its capital.

Several prominent companies listed on both HoSE and HNX display similarly concentrated ownership. The Bank for Investment and Development of Vietnam has 79.7% of its shares held by the State Bank of Vietnam, while KEB Hana Bank owns a further 14.8%. The Vietnam Rubber Group is 96.8% owned by the Ministry of Finance, and Binh Son Refining and Petrochemical JSC has 92.1% of its shares controlled by Petrovietnam.

On the UPCoM market, large corporations face comparable challenges. Airports Corporation of Vietnam has 95.4% ownership by the Ministry of Finance, while Viettel Global is 99.01% owned by Viettel Group.

The loss of public company status due to insufficient minority shareholding is not new. In 2024, several companies, including Vietnam Electric Cable Corporation, officially lost their public designation after failing to meet ownership requirements.

The pattern continued in 2025, affecting well-known firms such as Bibica, which lost public status when its parent, PAN Group, held more than 98% of its capital. Viwasupco also withdrew from public status, as its largest shareholders, Gelex Group and Gelex Electricity, controlled 62.46% and 35.95%, respectively.

Vinacafe Bien Hoa stands out as an extreme case, with parent company Masan Beverage controlling 98.79% of voting shares, leaving just 1.21% held by 538 other shareholders.

In response, many companies are seeking ways to dilute dominant stakes. At Binh Son Refining, plans are under consideration to divest part of PetroVietnam’s holding to raise the proportion of externally held shares. PV Gas and PV GAS D are pursuing similar strategies to attract strategic partners.

Becamex IDC has previously announced plans to auction 300 million shares to reduce state ownership below 74%. However, unfavourable market conditions have delayed the plan, while an alternative proposal to publicly offer an additional 150 million shares failed to secure sufficient shareholder approval./.