The draft statute to promote innovative industries that has been hotly debated lately is essentially an extension of the tax incentives and industrial park development plan of the now-invalidated Statute for Upgrading Industry (促進產業升級條例). In addition to revenue losses due to the government’s constant submission to corporations, Article 10 of the draft statute, which deals with the establishment of industrial parks, is even more worrying. The article is basically an extension of Article 5 of the Statute for Upgrading Industry, which dealt with the establishment of industrial districts. If passed, the draft statute will create four major changes to the application process for setting up industrial parks.
First, anyone will be able to apply to set up an industrial park, be they central or local governments or a private individual. Second, the draft statute places no restrictions on land use. Applicants would be able to do as they please, including activities such as building banks and reclaiming land, practically creating their own kingdom. Third, the draft bypasses regulations in other laws such as the Land Act (土地法), Regional Planning Act (區域計畫法), Environmental Impact Assessment Act (環境影響評估法), National Property Act (國有財產法) and the act on handling public property. Lastly, the draft allows for the expropriation of private land and the sale of state-owned land.
Furthermore, the government ignores the high ratio of unused land, low occupancy rates and low plot ratios in existing industrial and science parks and refuses to consider how to make better use of this already-developed land. Instead, the government wastes land and resources by unnecessarily setting up new parks using large plots which will eventually take over all state-owned land.
It is very contradictory, then, that a draft of the National Land Plan is scheduled for review during the current legislative session. The principles and guidelines for national land plans are based on functional land zoning to provide a basis for the management and direction for the land’s proper use and conservation.
The government is thus planning a land plan law to protect land while, on the other hand, using the draft statute for industries to allow applicants to use industrial parks and state-owned land any way they want, essentially turning the former into a joke.
The draft statute allows those applying to set up industrial parks to take over agricultural and coastal land. Furthermore, problems with planning will continue to get worse under this draft and jeopardize attempts to secure land for agriculture, and safeguard our marine environment.
Local governments will also be given more power, making land speculation and the expropriation of large swathes of private land more certain. It is hard to say how much rural land would be expropriated, how rural society would disintegrate, how many farmers would lose their homes and how much land would become idle from this.
Finally, the draft statute highlights two major issues — the Statute for Upgrading Industry made the government serve big business for a long time. Even worse, after being in Taiwan for decades, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government still only serves this group and uses land resources and local factions to establish collaborative relationships with industries, refusing to be humble and identify with Taiwan.
The draft statute to promote innovative industries will have a severe impact and we cannot afford to sit around. We must stand up and take action together.
Liao Pen-chuan is an associate professor in the department of real estate and built environment at National Taipei University.
TRANSLATED BY DREW CAMERON
The US Senate’s passage of the 2026 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which urges Taiwan’s inclusion in the Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) exercise and allocates US$1 billion in military aid, marks yet another milestone in Washington’s growing support for Taipei. On paper, it reflects the steadiness of US commitment, but beneath this show of solidarity lies contradiction. While the US Congress builds a stable, bipartisan architecture of deterrence, US President Donald Trump repeatedly undercuts it through erratic decisions and transactional diplomacy. This dissonance not only weakens the US’ credibility abroad — it also fractures public trust within Taiwan. For decades,
In 1976, the Gang of Four was ousted. The Gang of Four was a leftist political group comprising Chinese Communist Party (CCP) members: Jiang Qing (江青), its leading figure and Mao Zedong’s (毛澤東) last wife; Zhang Chunqiao (張春橋); Yao Wenyuan (姚文元); and Wang Hongwen (王洪文). The four wielded supreme power during the Cultural Revolution (1966-1976), but when Mao died, they were overthrown and charged with crimes against China in what was in essence a political coup of the right against the left. The same type of thing might be happening again as the CCP has expelled nine top generals. Rather than a
The topic of increased intergenerational conflict has been making headlines in the past few months, showcasing a problem that would only grow as Taiwan approaches “super-aged society” status. A striking example of that tension erupted on the Taipei MRT late last month, when an apparently able-bodied passenger kicked a 73-year-old woman across the width of the carriage. The septuagenarian had berated and hit the young commuter with her bag for sitting in a priority seat, despite regular seats being available. A video of the incident went viral online. Altercations over the yielding of MRT seats are not common, but they are
The party of former Czech prime minister Andrej Babis this month won 80 out of 200 seats in parliamentary elections. Combined with the 15 seats of the Freedom and Direct Democracy (SPD) party and the 13 of the Motorists for Themselves (AUTO) party, the result paves the way for the populist leader’s return to power. In addition to Babis’ populist ANO party, the anticipated coalition is expected to include the two anti-system parties, which campaigned on discontinuity with central aspects of the EU policy framework. While the two smaller parties’ main domestic priorities differ — with the SPD focusing on immigration control
RSS