A gradual move toward taxing capital gains on securities transactions — known as a securities income tax — could be just what the Cabinet led by Premier Sean Chen (陳冲) needs in terms of tax reform.
Chen said last week that the government had not decided whether to levy a securities income tax, but would openly discuss all viable options for securities transaction taxation during the next meeting of the national tax reform committee.
Also in the past week, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Legislator Tseng Chu-wei (曾巨威), a National Chengchi University finance professor, said that imposing a capital gains tax “is a road Taiwan must take” and that he would rather resign from his post if the Cabinet does not move forward in this direction, while Financial Supervisory Commission Chairman Chen Yuh-chang (陳裕璋) said the commission would be “actively involved in future discussions of the securities income tax,” a reversal of his previous stance that there were no such plans under consideration by the government.
It seems the odds of the government imposing a securities income tax are increasing and that the public will support the levy without hesitation.
Not so fast: While the good news is that a growing number of people have been willing to consider such a tax, it has to be asked whether the nation — and more importantly, the stock market — is ready for it.
Government data show that many of the nation’s top income earners pay much less individual income tax than the salaried middle classes, because they have a higher proportion of their income derived from securities transaction gains. However, an outright push to impose the tax will look like a rushed move, which could spook investors and increase opposition from groups with vested interests. Political pressure to veto the tax would rapidly emerge.
Three years ago, National Taiwan University associate professor of economics Lee Hsien-feng (李顯峰) proposed a staged introduction of a securities income tax. He suggested that the government could initially tax corporate stock gains to enlarge the nation’s tax base, while exempting individual investors to mitigate any negative impact on the stock market. Lee’s proposal also included other options, such as abolishing the present securities transaction tax and making investment losses tax-deductible.
Lee also had an important suggestion to make on the timing of the new measures — he said the government should introduce the securities capital gains tax when global economic conditions are bad and the domestic stock market is less upbeat.
Lee’s proposal concluded that full introduction of a securities income tax might take time to achieve and the government might end up collecting close to zero revenue from a securities income tax during a market slump, but a measured move to introduce the tax would have much more merit than if it were immediately adopted. It would allow the government to increase communication with the public and propose a sunrise clause to create a grace period before the new tax would take effect, thereby reducing the risk that imposition of the tax would spook the stock market — an overriding concern.
A gradual move to impose a securities income tax would also give the government time to revise the current tax system, which gives overgenerous preferential treatment to certain industries and allows tax deductions or exemptions for the rich; factors which only work to undermine the nation’s tax base.
A comprehensive review of the existing tax system — including the tax base, tax rates as well as various provisions on tax exemptions and deductions — and real action to promote a more equitable society through fairer taxation could all help the government win public support for a capital gains tax, including a securities income tax. Most importantly, it would be a much better alternative than the blunt, abrupt introduction of a securities income tax.
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations