The areca nut, also known as betel nut, has some medicinal uses. It is claimed to be useful for leucoderma, leprosy, stoke, cough, fits, worms, anemia, dental and oral hygiene and obesity. It also has ceremonial uses in some cultures. More commonly it is used as a stimulant or a recreational drug. Many Web sites proclaim its virtues and say little or nothing about its possible adverse effects.
As reported in a Taipei Times article, betel nuts are addictive and are classified as a carcinogen (“Government losing battle with betel nut addiction,” Oct. 31, page 4).
It is believed to cause cancer of the jaw, esophagus and salivary glands. The incidence of jaw cancer is about 30 times higher in users than in abstainers, and it is said to be more than 100 times higher in users of betel nuts, tobacco and alcohol than in abstainers.
Betel nut use is a substantial problem for Taiwan at several levels. The National Health Insurance Administration (NHIA) has stated that “oral, salivary gland and jaw bone diseases” are the second-most expensive set of diseases in Taiwan, costing NT$41.3 billion (US$1.37 billion) last year — only kidney diseases are more expensive.
That amounts to an annual cost of about NT$1,800 per person, so it is a concern from an economic view.
Beyond the health issue, there are three other potential problems arising from Taiwanese betel nut use.
The first problem is ecological: Betel nut cultivation requires meticulous weeding of the undergrowth. Since these farms are often on steep mountainsides, deforestation and frequent weeding markedly increase the risk of mudslides after heavy rains or typhoons.
The second one is environmental: The multitude of booths that sell the product use very bright LED lights to attract customers, contributing to light pollution.
The third is safety-related: Heavy users of betel nut are believed to include truck and bus drivers and workers who have to move heavy loads. If chewing a large number of betel nuts per day affects mental alertness, then that might affect driving and working skills related to safety.
In addition, the bright lights and betel nut girls used to attract customers to retail outlets might distract drivers from seeing traffic lights and hazards.
As the Taipei Times article says, the government has offered a subsidy of as much as NT$250,000 per hectare to persuade betel nut farmers to convert to other crops, but that has resulted in a meager conversion rate.
Only 435 hectares out of 42,940 hectares dedicated to betel nut cultivation have been switched to other crops since the subsidy program was initiated in 2014.
No data could be found on how many hectares have been deforested or converted from other uses to start new betel nut farms; it is even possible that the subsidy has led to the creation of more new farmland than the 435 hectares lost.
The carrot approach does not seem to be working. Perhaps Taiwan should consider using a stick rather than a carrot.
Taxes and other measures on tobacco have been effective in curbing smoking, both in Taiwan and in other nations, and have led to a leveling and later decline in the incidence of lung cancer.
Taiwan has increased the tax on cigarettes from NT$11.8 per pack to NT$31.8 per pack, signaling that taxation is succeeding. The tax is about 30 percent of the cost of a pack of 20 cigarettes.
Taxes on alcohol have also been used in many countries to try and control the ravages of alcohol abuse.
Could the government consider assessing a tax on betel nut trees?
Information online suggests that a bag of 20 betel quids costs about NT$30 and that one tree produces about 500 nuts per year. If that is correct, then, based on the size of the registered planting areas and the estimated number of trees and their yield, a tax of NT$200 per tree would translate into a tax of about NT$8 per pack of 20.
The tax would then amount to 21 percent of the retail price. The increase in retail cost would be 40 percent, which should encourage users to limit their use and deter non-users from starting.
It would produce revenue of about NT$850 million or about 2 percent of the cost to the NHIA for diseases that are largely due to betel nut use.
Such a stick would have other benefits. It takes five years from the time a palm is planted to the time the fruit can be harvested. The stick would deter creation of new plantations, because the tax could be assessed from the date of germination onward.
By contrast, the carrot might encourage people to start plantations with the expectation that two or three years later they could declare that they are converting to other uses and expect a subsidy.
The stick might also reduce the urge to cut hardy trees from slopes to make room for a crop that is believed to be second only to rice in profitability per hectare, thereby helping with potential ecological issues — the carrot does not.
The administrative burden of determining the location and number of trees could be minimized by having farm owners report the location, size and tree density before the first tax installment is due. Heavy fines and higher taxes could be imposed on farmers who do not self-report. Thereafter, drones and aerial photography could be employed to locate non-compliant plantations.
There are some issues with using the stick.
The first problem is how to deal with Aboriginal tribes who use betel nuts for ceremonial purposes. If it is truly ceremonial, the use would not amount to much, compared with the 200 nuts per day of regular users, so the tax burden would be very low. If, however, the tribal harvests were mostly exported for sale outside the tribe, what could be done would depend on the laws that protect tribal rights.
The second one is that if the stick were successful, the thousands of people engaged in the sale of betel nuts would find it difficult to make ends meet.
Emilio Venezian is a former visiting professor at Feng Chia University.
In the US’ National Security Strategy (NSS) report released last month, US President Donald Trump offered his interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine. The “Trump Corollary,” presented on page 15, is a distinctly aggressive rebranding of the more than 200-year-old foreign policy position. Beyond reasserting the sovereignty of the western hemisphere against foreign intervention, the document centers on energy and strategic assets, and attempts to redraw the map of the geopolitical landscape more broadly. It is clear that Trump no longer sees the western hemisphere as a peaceful backyard, but rather as the frontier of a new Cold War. In particular,
When it became clear that the world was entering a new era with a radical change in the US’ global stance in US President Donald Trump’s second term, many in Taiwan were concerned about what this meant for the nation’s defense against China. Instability and disruption are dangerous. Chaos introduces unknowns. There was a sense that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) might have a point with its tendency not to trust the US. The world order is certainly changing, but concerns about the implications for Taiwan of this disruption left many blind to how the same forces might also weaken
As the new year dawns, Taiwan faces a range of external uncertainties that could impact the safety and prosperity of its people and reverberate in its politics. Here are a few key questions that could spill over into Taiwan in the year ahead. WILL THE AI BUBBLE POP? The global AI boom supported Taiwan’s significant economic expansion in 2025. Taiwan’s economy grew over 7 percent and set records for exports, imports, and trade surplus. There is a brewing debate among investors about whether the AI boom will carry forward into 2026. Skeptics warn that AI-led global equity markets are overvalued and overleveraged
As the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) races toward its 2027 modernization goals, most analysts fixate on ship counts, missile ranges and artificial intelligence. Those metrics matter — but they obscure a deeper vulnerability. The true future of the PLA, and by extension Taiwan’s security, might hinge less on hardware than on whether the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can preserve ideological loyalty inside its own armed forces. Iran’s 1979 revolution demonstrated how even a technologically advanced military can collapse when the social environment surrounding it shifts. That lesson has renewed relevance as fresh unrest shakes Iran today — and it should
RSS