Many people have said that with wage levels in China rising, our government should offer incentives to encourage Taiwanese businesspeople to come home. Of course, in order to attract investment and create jobs, it would be necessary to provide them with information and promote the benefits of investing in Taiwan. However, there is no need to give these businesspeople incentives to do so. This would, in fact, only cause problems.
First, Taiwan is the important thing here: It’s about investment and the creation of jobs. Investment by Americans would have the same effect as investment coming from the Taiwanese, so long as there were no political motive or conditions attached.
Second, it is not necessary to hand out awards to people for being “patriotic.” If we suppose that it is a sign of patriotism by Taiwanese businesspeople if they invest in Taiwan, shouldn’t it follow that US citizens who invest here love Taiwan even more? What’s more, if we look at things from the perspective of supporting Taiwan’s sovereignty, we really cannot say that Taiwanese businesspeople are all that patriotic anyway.
Third, in today’s age of globalization, businesspeople invest wherever they can maximize profits. Once Taiwanese businesspeople make profits in Taiwan, they will not necessarily be more inclined to keep investing in Taiwan than other foreign investors. The way in which Taiwanese businesspeople moved into the China market years ago is a prime example of this.
Fourth, it is against the WTO’s principle of non-discrimination to favor investment from one country over that of another. It would therefore be necessary to exploit loopholes in WTO regulations if discriminatory policies were to be enacted. We can already see this happening with the special trade zone between Taiwan and China currently being planned. Furthermore, investment and the setting up of factories are carried out via legal or juristic persons and not natural persons. The identity of stockholders — legal or juristic persons — can change at anytime as stocks change hands. It is therefore very easy for the creation of manmade incentives to become an excuse for collusion between government and enterprise.
Fifth, even given the rules laid down by the principle of non-discrimination, Taiwanese businesspeople already have an advantage over foreign companies because they are familiar with Taiwan’s geographical, cultural and political environment. There is therefore no need whatsoever to give them additional incentives.
As salaries and costs in Taiwan and China gradually converge, the major impediments to Taiwanese businesspeople returning will be unavailability of land in industrial and science and technology parks, making it hard for companies to set up factories, as well as breaks in the production chain and incomplete industrial clusters.
Therefore, land usage in industrial and science and technology parks should be made more efficient. The government should review the current rent and sale policies and facilities should be offered at different price levels depending on their nature. This would see businesses who under-use facilities, or which do not use them at all, moving out, freeing them up for companies that do need access to them.
Next, the government needs to evaluate how integrated and comprehensive domestic production chains and industrial clusters are. In places where the gaps are not too serious, the government can provide help, getting in contact with other industries and companies and getting them to invest in Taiwan. This would minimize the barriers to investment that breaks in the production chain and clusters can cause.
Lin Kien-tsu is a member of the Taiwan Association of University Professors.
TRANSLATED BY DREW CAMERON
As the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA) reach the point of confidence that they can start and win a war to destroy the democratic culture on Taiwan, any future decision to do so may likely be directly affected by the CCP’s ability to promote wars on the Korean Peninsula, in Europe, or, as most recently, on the Indian subcontinent. It stands to reason that the Trump Administration’s success early on May 10 to convince India and Pakistan to deescalate their four-day conventional military conflict, assessed to be close to a nuclear weapons exchange, also served to
After India’s punitive precision strikes targeting what New Delhi called nine terrorist sites inside Pakistan, reactions poured in from governments around the world. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) issued a statement on May 10, opposing terrorism and expressing concern about the growing tensions between India and Pakistan. The statement noticeably expressed support for the Indian government’s right to maintain its national security and act against terrorists. The ministry said that it “works closely with democratic partners worldwide in staunch opposition to international terrorism” and expressed “firm support for all legitimate and necessary actions taken by the government of India
The recent aerial clash between Pakistan and India offers a glimpse of how China is narrowing the gap in military airpower with the US. It is a warning not just for Washington, but for Taipei, too. Claims from both sides remain contested, but a broader picture is emerging among experts who track China’s air force and fighter jet development: Beijing’s defense systems are growing increasingly credible. Pakistan said its deployment of Chinese-manufactured J-10C fighters downed multiple Indian aircraft, although New Delhi denies this. There are caveats: Even if Islamabad’s claims are accurate, Beijing’s equipment does not offer a direct comparison
To recalibrate its Cold War alliances, the US adopted its “one China policy,” a diplomatic compromise meant to engage with China and end the Vietnam War, but which left Taiwan in a state of permanent limbo. Half a century later, the costs of that policy are mounting. Taiwan remains a democratic, technologically advanced nation of 23 million people, yet it is denied membership in international organizations and stripped of diplomatic recognition. Meanwhile, the PRC has weaponized the “one China” narrative to claim sovereignty over Taiwan, label the Taiwan Strait as its “internal waters” and threaten international shipping routes that carry more
RSS