1. The table uses a mix of sources: mainly the banks’ own balance sheets (when available), but also interview statements, data from the SBV and other written sources. For a comparison, and to give an indication of the degree of shakiness in the data, the table gives the deposits in the banking system according to SBV data, and credit in the banking system according to SBV data, a World Bank report, and a statistical publication. The SBV figures are lower than mine (except for credit in 1991). The lower deposit volumes are conceivably due to the SBV’s lower estimates of the deposit volumes in the banks beyond state-ownership. It is also possible that the SBV data deduct the foreign reserves held in the BFTV. The World Bank figures obviously originate from the SBV, although the credit volume deviates from the SBV figures in 1992 and 1993. The SBV made major revisions of their data on several occasions, which could explain why there are differences in the World Bank and the SBV figures. The statistical publication reports lower total credit throughout the period — except for 1992 which is most likely a misprint. Possibly these volumes of working and fixed capital (short-term and long-term credit) refer to credit allocated to the state sector exclusively, which thus partially explains the lower figures.
2. Commercial banks and SBV Annual Reports 1996, and interviews in Hanoi, November 1997.
3. Due to inconsistencies in the data it is hard to say anything about how proportions between individual and enterprise clients have changed in the BFTV. The BFTV was particularly secretive about any data in interviews in 1991 and 1992, while the situation and attitude was significantly altered in 1993 when, for example, a balance sheet was produced (which was however somewhat hard to understand).
4. Far Eastern Economic Review, 16 September, 1993.
5. CIEM in Hanoi, October 22 and 29,1991.