The government and the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) recent efforts to establish a database to publicize and promote the registration of actual real-estate transaction prices are a move in the right direction of making the nation’s real-estate market fairer. However, these efforts are just a first step in fulfilling the many promises that politicians have made the public.
On Thursday, the Cabinet approved amendments to the Land Administration Agent Act (地政士法) and the Equalization of Land Rights Act (平均地權條例), saying it hoped lawmakers would review the revised laws as soon as possible to address public concern about real-estate speculation and surging housing prices.
Along with the Real Estate Broking Management Act (不動產經紀業管理條例), which is currently awaiting review in the legislature, the government said these laws would require that land administration agents, real-estate buyers and real-estate brokers register the actual value of property transactions within 30 days of deals being closed. If the parties involved fail to do so or register inaccurate prices, they would be subject to a fine of between NT$30,000 and NT$150,000, the government said.
As public discontent over high housing prices and widening income disparities has become a major issue ahead of the presidential and legislative elections, the legislature on Friday decided to skip a preliminary review of the DPP legislative caucus’ amendments to these laws, proceeding directly to the second reading.
It remains to be seen whether these amendments will be rushed through this legislative session as politicians have promised, so no one can be sure when real-estate transactions will become transparent. However, heightened competition between the DPP and the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) to devise better laws — and, of course, to win votes — will hopefully serve the best interest of the nation as a whole.
However, information disclosure about home and land transaction prices is only the very beginning of the process to establish fairness in the real-estate market. If buyers and sellers still view actual transaction prices as a secret and withhold that information from land administration agents or real-estate brokers, then public disclosure will end up doing nothing but disguising poorly devised legislation.
In this respect, there is still much work to be done by the government and politicians to devise a mechanism or invite an independent third party to help supervise public disclosure and verify information.
Another problem with Taiwan’s high real-estate prices, especially those in northern Taiwan, is that the nation has a relatively low real-estate transaction tax burden compared with other countries, which has encouraged speculation and further price rises. To contain speculation, the nation should stop using the much lower government-assessed value of real estate as the tax base for land and housing transactions; the actual market price should be used instead.
Moreover, the government needs to make a bold, determined move to help reform the current real-estate tax system, which allows it to collect various land and housing taxes based on assessed values. A better way to promote a more equitable society is to introduce a capital gains tax on the combined sale of land and houses based on actual market price.
While such reforms are likely to be opposed by some groups, the government could adjust tax rates based on the duration of possession and number of properties. It could also exclude the tax increase for people who own only their own home to make the system fairer and ease potential opposition.
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
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.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath