The government is hell-bent on seeing the proposed capital gains tax on securities pass through the legislature. No matter what shape the tax finally takes, it is unlikely to bear much resemblance to what was originally intended. Having gone through numerous revisions, the initial purpose of the tax has all but evaporated, and yet it still promises to suppress the market.
With the world’s attention squarely focused on the EU debt crisis and countries battling to save their flagging economies, the government is trying to push through a capital gains tax that will see only limited tax revenue and now serves primarily as a face-saving exercise for President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九).
Taiwan’s economy has taken a turn for the worse in the first half of this year, almost certainly because of the global economic situation. World markets, even China, which weathered the financial crisis so well a few years back, have been almost universally affected by the EU debt crisis and the parlous state of the global economy. Even so, things have been made worse by the government’s poor handling of the economy, first with the fuel and electricity price hikes, and now by forcing through the capital gains tax. The result has been soaring consumer prices, stagnating growth and a stock market slump. Between March and this month, the TAIEX hemorrhaged NT$3 trillion (US$99.6 billion).
The government would have us believe that this tax will make the system more equitable, arguing that if someone makes money on a transaction, it is right that they pay a percentage of that gain in tax. This did not help former minister of finance Christina Liu (劉憶如) to sell the policy, meaning Ma had to step in. OK, so this ran counter to the spirit of the legislature. OK, the current revision is barely recognizable from the original proposal. OK, Ma lost his minister of finance in the process. OK, the finance world, tax reform groups and the opposition have all lambasted the KMT’s proposals, arguing that the tax would not achieve its policy objectives and that the discussion should be shelved until the economy improves. Yet, the government still wants to see it pass. However, with all its revised conditions and limits, it is unlikely to generate much revenue and it will certainly not promote social equality. Not that Ma cares about the financial sense of levying the tax — he is concerned only with the political significance of its passage.
Ma won the presidential election with over 50 percent of the vote. After a litany of major gaffes, his popularity rating now lumbers along at below 20 percent. If he were to fail to pass this tax, his political reputation would be in tatters. He does not want to be hobbled so early on in his second term, and if he wants to keep any semblance of political integrity, he has little choice but to soldier on, regardless of outside resistance.
He was also obliged to bring forward the announcement of his intention to seek re-election as Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) chairman. To cover up for its ineptitude, the Ma administration has been saying that it is impossible to satisfy everybody all of the time.
Last year, the government championed the idea of levying a luxury tax, intending to use it to suppress rising property prices, increase tax revenue and promote social fairness. Property prices have continued to rise, but property market transactions have slowed. The government originally forecast revenues from the luxury tax of over NT$15 billion, but has so far only generated NT$3 billion, and society does not seem to be appreciably fairer. Also, as local government tax revenues have fallen, the division of tax revenue between central and local governments is actually less fair.
Because of the government’s incompetence we are going to see a repeat performance of the luxury tax fiasco with the implementation of this capital gains tax. This will have repercussions for the economy, government finances and the lives of ordinary people.
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