On July 7, President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) announced that he would ease restrictions on foreign investment in the stock market. This included relaxing the qualifications of "qualified foreign institutional investor" (QFII), cancelling the US$3 billion limit on each QFII in the stock market and removing the restrictions requiring QFIIs to remit money into the country within two years of their investment application's approval.
This is a giant leap for the government in promoting economic liberalization. Unfortunately, the Cabinet's response causes us to worry about whether Chen's announcement is yet another economy-boosting slogan that is sensational but superficial.
For years, the central bank has restricted foreign investment because it worried that the free flow of foreign capital could affect the stability of the stock market or the effectiveness of the government's monetary policy. Foreign investors believe that Taiwan's market has not been completely liberalized. As a result, the Taiwanese companies benchmarked on Morgan Stanley Capital International (MSCI) indices can not really increase their weightings, while the total extent of foreign investment in the country has steadily declined.
Opening up to foreign investment was a consensus reached by the ruling and opposition camps at the Economic Development Advisory Conference (EDAC) a few years ago. But the Cabinet delayed implementing this policy because it worried that it could bring Chinese capital into the stock market or destabilize the foreign-exchange market.
In fact, the principle by which an economic society survives and prospers is to face challenges squarely, to bring in new competitors and to coexist and prosper. Judging from the president's announcement, the spirit of this policy is to replace the conservative attitude that exaggerates national security to the maximum with a more aggressive and rational one in response to the inevitable risks of the country's economic liberalization.
The Cabinet plans to regulate Chinese capital through legislation, as well as to negotiate with foreign investors whenever the foreign-exchange market is unstable. But it never mentioned its admin-istrative responsibility in delaying the EDAC's conclusions. I can't help but wonder if these the only methods the government can think of? Shouldn't the Cabinet's stance on the issue and its decision-making efficiency also be reviewed?
Learning from South Korea's transformation after the 1997 financial crisis, we know that only a liberal financial-security market with multiple overlapping interests can effectively attract capital, bringing in new management systems and strategic thinking, while avoiding being manipulated by specific forces.
At first, the IMF's demand for South Korea to financially reform was condemned. However, after South Korea's market was opened, such transparency has attracted capital from around the world. Nearly-bankrupted enterprises were able to bring in the latest management techniques and technologies. Moreover, the nation's improved international image and the fruitful results of developing the Chinese market have stirred up a new wave of "South Korea fever."
A social consensus has been reached that we must strive to boost the economy. However, under the highest principle of economic liberalization, the government will discover that only when slogans such as "boosting the economy" are no longer reasons for it to relax the various restrictions will foreign capital flow into the country. At that time, the economic vitality of Taiwan's society will be completely expressed.
Lu Hsin-chang is an associate professor in the department of international business at National Taiwan University.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US