The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is again softening its attitude toward the much-maligned capital gains tax on securities investments, so KMT officials and lawmakers are looking for another excuse to explain their policy flip-flops over the tax.
This time, the concession came from the KMT caucus, which on Friday announced that the removal of the capital gains tax was the “direction” it would be taking, saying that the levy was already part of the securities transaction tax.
If the KMT caucus’ decision passes another round of cross-caucus negotiation today and wins support from opposition party legislators in coming days, it would represent the fifth adjustment to the tax in three years, while returning the capital gains tax policy to where it was in 2012.
For all the arguments that supporters and foes of the tax have made, the key issue is that the tax ensures the principles of social justice and fairness.
A well-designed tax scheme on securities investments should also promote healthy development in capital markets while discouraging speculation.
However, the local stock market is still reeling from the government’s decision to resume the capital gains tax three years ago: A widely expected annual tax revenue of NT$6 billion to NT$11 billion (US$182.33 million to US$334.27 million) from the capital gains tax has not materialized, while total capitalization of the local stock market has shrunk by NT$3 trillion in the past three years and revenue from the securities transaction tax was cut by NT$24.8 billion per year on average due to dwindling turnover.
Several Cabinet officials have voiced their support for abolishing the tax, saying it would alleviate tax burdens on stock investors and help revitalize a listless market. Stock investors have the right to expect something back from the market, but they have been rewarded with much lower returns than China and Hong Kong in recent years.
However, arguments by KMT officials and lawmakers are weak — the regulatory pendulum should not be allowed to swing back and forth when under pressure. Rather, the KMT aims to abolish this tax ahead of January’s presidential and legislative elections in a bid to win votes.
The fiasco over the capital gains tax resembles the situations faced by President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration in pushing for other reforms, ranging from the adjustment of fuel and electricity rates to the pension system overhaul to the fair distribution of wealth, in which the government’s hastiness in pushing through its policy objectives only resulted in serious objections from the public, with the final policies being watered down to a symbolic gesture of promises made by Ma when he came to power in 2008.
A wrong policy is far worse than corruption. However, who made the capital gains tax a bad policy and how has the issue degenerated into a brawl in the legislature?
The path to reform is endless, but along the way, greater space for discussion is necessary to reach a consensus, and a thorough consideration of potential impacts is the key to a successful execution of such reforms.
The pandemonium surrounding the capital gains tax is a case of irresponsible policymaking and careless leadership.
Having lived through former British prime minister Boris Johnson’s tumultuous and scandal-ridden administration, the last place I had expected to come face-to-face with “Mr Brexit” was in a hotel ballroom in Taipei. Should I have been so surprised? Over the past few years, Taiwan has unfortunately become the destination of choice for washed-up Western politicians to turn up long after their political careers have ended, making grandiose speeches in exchange for extraordinarily large paychecks far exceeding the annual salary of all but the wealthiest of Taiwan’s business tycoons. Taiwan’s pursuit of bygone politicians with little to no influence in their home
In 2025, it is easy to believe that Taiwan has always played a central role in various assessments of global national interests. But that is a mistaken belief. Taiwan’s position in the world and the international support it presently enjoys are relatively new and remain highly vulnerable to challenges from China. In the early 2000s, the George W. Bush Administration had plans to elevate bilateral relations and to boost Taiwan’s defense. It designated Taiwan as a non-NATO ally, and in 2001 made available to Taiwan a significant package of arms to enhance the island’s defenses including the submarines it long sought.
US lobbyist Christian Whiton has published an update to his article, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” discussed on the editorial page on Sunday. His new article, titled “What Taiwan Should Do” refers to the three articles published in the Taipei Times, saying that none had offered a solution to the problems he identified. That is fair. The articles pushed back on points Whiton made that were felt partisan, misdirected or uninformed; in this response, he offers solutions of his own. While many are on point and he would find no disagreement here, the nuances of the political and historical complexities in
Taiwan faces an image challenge even among its allies, as it must constantly counter falsehoods and misrepresentations spread by its more powerful neighbor, the People’s Republic of China (PRC). While Taiwan refrains from disparaging its troublesome neighbor to other countries, the PRC is working not only to forge a narrative about itself, its intentions and value to the international community, but is also spreading lies about Taiwan. Governments, parliamentary groups and civil societies worldwide are caught in this narrative tug-of-war, each responding in their own way. National governments have the power to push back against what they know to be
RSS