Taiwan might have experienced negative GDP growth during the third quarter, while achieving annual GDP growth of more than 1 percent is looking doubtful.
Why has the nation come to this pass? An opinion piece in the Liberty Times (the Taipei Times’ sister paper) on Oct. 1 last year gives a comprehensive answer to the question. Still, the appearance of negative growth requires additional explanation.
The reason is that during President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) second term in office, the nation’s financial capital has started to flow out, in addition to the outflow of productive capital. The lack of both productive and financial capital has placed the nation in a more precarious situation than ever before.
The outflow of financial capital began in 2010 as the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) began to accelerate financial integration across the Taiwan Strait.
Over the past four years, Taiwan’s major banks and financial holding corporations have acted with blinding speed to establish eight subsidiaries in China, with a core capital of NT$83.8 billion (US$2.57 billion). Three are investing a total capital of NT$21.3 billion in shares. They have also established 23 branches as well as 11 sub-branches in China, with a total investment of NT$119 billion.
In addition to that, they have established 18 leasing companies, with a total capital investment of NT$16 billion.
Together, more than NT$240 billion of Taiwan’s core capital has been invested in the Chinese financial sector over the past four years. The result of the investments is that Taiwan’s credit exposure to China has increased from US$4.26 billion in 2012 to US$81.27 billion in the first quarter of last year.
To cover for this expanded risk, Taiwan’s banks need to raise further capital: Covering an increased credit exposure of NT$2.5 trillion requires a capital infusion of NT$250 billion.
Between 2008 and last year, major Taiwanese banks raised NT$486.5 billion from the domestic capital market, but between 2010 and last year, they invested NT$240 billion in China. That accounts for almost 50 percent of the capital raised domestically. Adding the capital needed for covering Taiwan’s exploding credit exposure to China, it is possible to say that almost all of Taiwan’s financial activities during the period were conducted simply to fill the Chinese financial black hole and only a small amount was used for domestic demand.
Moreover, Taiwan has allowed Chinese yuan deposits since 2013 and the interest rates on yuan deposits are slightly higher than on New Taiwan dollar deposits. By August, total yuan deposits in Taiwan had reached 326.9 billion yuan (US$51.5 billion).
At the same time, the number of Taiwanese investing in the Chinese stock market has grown consistently, while Taiwanese banks have pushed for gradually increasing the qualified foreign institutional investor (QFII) quota. Data showed that the QFII quota might have reached US$9 billion. These local financial resources all end up flowing into China.
The outflow of financial resources has already had various negative impacts. It is more difficult for those needing to borrow money, domestic investment is shrinking, fewer people are starting their own businesses, domestic demand is contracting and other industries are following in the financial sector’s footsteps, moving overseas at an accelerating rate, while momentum in the stock market is weakening.
Although the Financial Supervisory Commission has loosened various measures in order to stimulate the market, its failure to boost trading volume shows how serious the problem really is.
In August, the stock market once dropped by 22.6 percent to 7,203 points, with stock market investors suffering great financial losses, while a group of vultures and certain financial companies benefited from the decline.
The government must make policies based on the well-being of the public. It should not curry favor with special groups for the sake of their preferences or business benefits. There is nothing wrong with major Taiwanese banks entering the Asian market, but they should not do it as if they were Chinese banks.
“Going West” might bring short-term profit to local bank operators, but would it be beneficial to Taiwanese depositors, too? The answer to that question is “No.” It would only bring losses, as increasing numbers of people start depositing yuan.
Have securities investors benefited from going West? Once again, the answer is “No.” Most Taiwanese investing in the Shanghai Stock Exchange have been trapped as the exchange index has dropped.
Have all Taiwanese people benefited from this? No, they have not. They are still struggling with low starting salaries of NT$22,000 per month. As for national security, if Taiwan puts its financial resources completely in Beijing’s hands, then how is it going to survive?
The Chinese saying that best describes the past eight years is: “A general’s fame is established at the expense of numerous people lives.”
Huang Tien-lin is a former presidential adviser.
Translated by Eddy Chang
A response to my article (“Invite ‘will-bes,’ not has-beens,” Aug. 12, page 8) mischaracterizes my arguments, as well as a speech by former British prime minister Boris Johnson at the Ketagalan Forum in Taipei early last month. Tseng Yueh-ying (曾月英) in the response (“A misreading of Johnson’s speech,” Aug. 24, page 8) does not dispute that Johnson referred repeatedly to Taiwan as “a segment of the Chinese population,” but asserts that the phrase challenged Beijing by questioning whether parts of “the Chinese population” could be “differently Chinese.” This is essentially a confirmation of Beijing’s “one country, two systems” formulation, which says that
Taiwan stands at the epicenter of a seismic shift that will determine the Indo-Pacific’s future security architecture. Whether deterrence prevails or collapses will reverberate far beyond the Taiwan Strait, fundamentally reshaping global power dynamics. The stakes could not be higher. Today, Taipei confronts an unprecedented convergence of threats from an increasingly muscular China that has intensified its multidimensional pressure campaign. Beijing’s strategy is comprehensive: military intimidation, diplomatic isolation, economic coercion, and sophisticated influence operations designed to fracture Taiwan’s democratic society from within. This challenge is magnified by Taiwan’s internal political divisions, which extend to fundamental questions about the island’s identity and future
Media said that several pan-blue figures — among them former Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) chairwoman Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱), former KMT legislator Lee De-wei (李德維), former KMT Central Committee member Vincent Hsu (徐正文), New Party Chairman Wu Cheng-tien (吳成典), former New Party legislator Chou chuan (周荃) and New Party Deputy Secretary-General You Chih-pin (游智彬) — yesterday attended the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) military parade commemorating the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II. China’s Xinhua news agency reported that foreign leaders were present alongside Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), such as Russian President Vladimir Putin, North Korean leader Kim
Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Chairman Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌) is expected to be summoned by the Taipei City Police Department after a rally in Taipei on Saturday last week resulted in injuries to eight police officers. The Ministry of the Interior on Sunday said that police had collected evidence of obstruction of public officials and coercion by an estimated 1,000 “disorderly” demonstrators. The rally — led by Huang to mark one year since a raid by Taipei prosecutors on then-TPP chairman and former Taipei mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) — might have contravened the Assembly and Parade Act (集會遊行法), as the organizers had