The Ministry of Economic Affairs’ recent rejection of two industry consolidation proposals by local computer memory chipmakers raised the question of what role the government should play in helping the country’s struggling DRAM companies.
Given their mounting debt and the uncertain state of the sector, it has become clear that credit banks are unlikely to lend money to local DRAM companies. On the other hand, the government is also hesitant to inject funds into local DRAM companies that cannot gain access to foreign partners’ technological know-how and develop homegrown technology in Taiwan.
ProMOS faces problems repaying US$330 million in overseas convertible bonds that will mature on Feb. 14, only two weeks after the Lunar New Year holiday.
To rescue ProMOS, the Chinese-language Economic Daily News said in a front-page story published on Thursday that credit banks might pump cash into the money-losing company in the form of loans, later converting the loans into shares in the firm.
While this idea gained inspiration from the comeback of Hynix Semiconductor Inc in South Korea a few years ago, the possibility of its success in Taiwan is questionable because ProMOS in no way looks like Hynix, either in terms of production scale or technological strength.
Moreover, this loan-equity conversion will still be subject to the approval of bank shareholders and financial regulators, and that is never an easy job.
On Friday, the director-general of the Industrial Development Bureau — a government agency that is in charge of reviewing DRAM companies’ industry consolidation proposals in exchange for a government bailout — told reporters that the government did not want any local DRAM companies to fail.
The official said that to maximize the effectiveness of government aid, it would like to see local DRAM companies consolidate into one to two groups with independent technology.
Unfortunately, the proposal’s rejection suggested local DRAM companies were experiencing difficulty convincing foreign partners to help develop homegrown technology in Taiwan. The chairman of Powerchip Semiconductor Corp said bluntly that an immediate cash injection was what the companies needed most, with industry consolidation and technological independence being a long-term goal.
Clearly, local DRAM companies desperately need cash. But that money will not come from private investors as long as the companies’ losses continue to grow. Therefore, the government seems to have little option but to play the role of savior.
The problem is whether the government’s goal is to protect the industry or save individual companies. There are reasons to question whether it is a waste of taxpayers’ money if the individual companies receiving government funds are doomed to fail with or without a bailout.
If the collapse of individual companies benefits the industry as a whole, then let it be so. If the government’s bailout effort only perpetuates the sector’s long-term weakness, this effort should be stopped now.
One way or another, the government should prepare for a possible collapse and try to reduce any negative impact while beefing up investors’ confidence.
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