From 1996 onward, incomes for ordinary Taiwanese have stagnated. All other things being equal, this would result in negligible momentum to drive up property prices. What we have seen, however, is that property prices have not readjusted as might be expected and actually remain high.
The public’s income is usually generated from the domestic (closed) economy, and you would not expect the present average per capita income to support the high property prices we are seeing. At present in Taiwan, however, incomes are not generated entirely from the domestic economy — the overall picture also includes incomes coming into the country from the global (open) economy. As a result, any effort to prevent an imminent bursting of the property bubble by looking only at average per capita domestic income will fail to address the actual circumstances.
In an open economy, the average income figure combines domestic income and income from abroad. Although our domestic incomes have not increased — and indeed have fallen — over the last dozen or so years, income earned overseas has actually increased.
Unfortunately, this is also the cause of the stagnation of per capita domestic income. The conventional wisdom is as follows: Given the stagnation in the average income, there should not have been much potential for major inflation in the property market in Taiwan, and one would have anticipated a burst in the property bubble by now. However, this theory is not borne out by the current trends in the price of real estate in Taiwan. Why should this be?
We know from the central bank’s balance sheets that net income from abroad has gradually increased year-on-year, from US$66 million in 1982 to US$4.36 billion in 1990 and US$4.47 billion in 2000, jumping to US$15.34 billion last year. The figure of US$114.3 billion — the combined total for the period 2003 through last year — is approximately equivalent to NT$3.43 trillion. It follows that, given the stagnation of domestic income, if the additional income from overseas earnings as well as the mass inflow of foreign capital — including the Chinese capital that comes into the country via various channels — is invested in domestic real estate, it stands to reason that the prices would, far from coming down, actually increase, and these inflated prices would be supported by the market.
Simply put, we have a situation in which property prices continue to rise, even by a considerable degree in the major metropolitan areas in the north and the center of the country, even though average incomes for ordinary people have stagnated.
In addition, house buyers using income earned overseas and foreign capital actually spend the majority of their time abroad, meaning that many properties are left empty.
At 20 percent, the housing vacancy rate is higher than in many other countries in Asia — the figure is 14 percent in Japan, 7 percent in Singapore and only 5 percent in Hong Kong.
This shows that, compared with other countries in the region, Taiwan is not steering capital investment into more efficient areas, meaning that capital is either misdirected or underused.
It follows that should there be a rapid exodus of foreign capital from the domestic property market, there will be a danger of the property bubble bursting.
The relevant authorities should, therefore, as a matter of priority, devise effective measures to restrict or otherwise divert foreign capital, to ensure that the problems in the domestic property market do not lead to social disaster.
Chen Chiu-wen is an adjunct assistant professor at the Chinese Culture University.
Translated by Paul Cooper
Taiwanese pragmatism has long been praised when it comes to addressing Chinese attempts to erase Taiwan from the international stage. “Taipei” and the even more inaccurate and degrading “Chinese Taipei,” imposed titles required to participate in international events, are loathed by Taiwanese. That is why there was huge applause in Taiwan when Japanese public broadcaster NHK referred to the Taiwanese Olympic team as “Taiwan,” instead of “Chinese Taipei” during the opening ceremony of the Tokyo Olympics. What is standard protocol for most nations — calling a national team by the name their country is commonly known by — is impossible for
China’s supreme objective in a war across the Taiwan Strait is to incorporate Taiwan as a province of the People’s Republic. It follows, therefore, that international recognition of Taiwan’s de jure independence is a consummation that China’s leaders devoutly wish to avoid. By the same token, an American strategy to deny China that objective would complicate Beijing’s calculus and deter large-scale hostilities. For decades, China has cautioned “independence means war.” The opposite is also true: “war means independence.” A comprehensive strategy of denial would guarantee an outcome of de jure independence for Taiwan in the event of Chinese invasion or
A recent Taipei Times editorial (“A targeted bilingual policy,” March 12, page 8) questioned how the Ministry of Education can justify spending NT$151 million (US$4.74 million) when the spotlighted achievements are English speech competitions and campus tours. It is a fair question, but it focuses on the wrong issue. The problem is not last year’s outcomes failing to meet the bilingual education vision; the issue is that the ministry has abandoned the program that originally justified such a large expenditure. In the early years of Bilingual 2030, the ministry’s K-12 Administration promoted the Bilingual Instruction in Select Domains Program (部分領域課程雙語教學實施計畫).
Former Fijian prime minister Mahendra Chaudhry spoke at the Yushan Forum in Taipei on Monday, saying that while global conflicts were causing economic strife in the world, Taiwan’s New Southbound Policy (NSP) serves as a stabilizing force in the Indo-Pacific region and offers strategic opportunities for small island nations such as Fiji, as well as support in the fields of public health, education, renewable energy and agricultural technology. Taiwan does not have official diplomatic relations with Fiji, but it is one of the small island nations covered by the NSP. Chaudhry said that Fiji, as a sovereign nation, should support
RSS