The government’s latest measure to allow local governments to reinstate a tax on idle land that was announced last week is an alternative way to deal with rampant property speculation, following previous measures on housing loans, stricter rules on mortgages and the ban on sales of state-owned properties, but will the idle land tax help curb land hoarding and hence bring down housing prices?
Probably not.
Other options such as imposing a capital gains tax on the sale of real estate within a year of its purchase or raising insurance companies’ risk-based capital ratio may be better ways to help discourage speculative investment.
Even the Ministry of Finance did not want to place unrealistic hope on the idle land tax measure. Speaking to reporters on Monday, Minister of Finance Lee Sush-der (李述德) said the measure might “more or less” help rein in rising property prices. He said the tax was only one of many measures the government could use to help cool the property market — other measures, such as financial and monetary policy, as well as land supply and welfare policies that are under the jurisdiction of other government agencies are also crucial in tackling the issue, he added.
Many property experts have also downplayed the significance of reinstating the idle land tax, which was suspended in 1985. They say it will not have a significant impact on financially strong property developers and owners, because the tax — two to five times the land value tax — is tiny when compared with the surge in property prices.
So, the main problem is that the tax poses little concern to developers because it represents such a small amount. The land value tax is calculated based on the so-called “publicly announced land value” that is calculated by local governments, with the rate ranging from 0.55 percent to 1 percent. As the publicly announced land value is so far below the actual market value of land, the levy on idle land, even if it is two to five times that of the land value tax, does not appear to be a very heavy financial burden on property speculators.
It is not enough for the government to just reinstate the idle land tax, other measures are needed, such as publicly disclosing land transaction prices and using actual market prices as the basis when levying the land value tax and calculating the idle land tax.
There is also another problem associated with the idle land tax — how land is defined as vacant or underused.
The government defines plots of land as vacant if construction projects have not started within two years in special municipalities and three years in other areas, while viewing land with buildings worth half the land’s value or lower as underused, but what about vacant plots that have been turned into temporary parking lots, plazas, green spaces or small parks for public use before construction work begins?
Many developers and landowners use these measures not only to accumulate land, but also to cut their tax bill under the Regulations Governing the Reduction or Exemption of Land Tax (土地稅減免規則).
The government must amend the regulations to stop property developers abusing the preferential tax treatment system and prevent the hoarding of plots of land.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with