Several lawmakers have proposed legislation to offer tax breaks for money repatriated by Taiwanese individuals and companies. Although the details have yet to be finalized, the basic idea is to levy a low, one-time tax on overseas funds to encourage local investment and improve the economy.
Since similar attempts have ended up with Taiwanese businesses pouring funds into the real-estate market instead of making actual investments, lawmakers this time have proposed restrictions on real-estate investments for three years.
To stress the legitimacy of their proposal, the lawmakers cited the net asset increase of US$16.42 billion in the nation’s financial account — which includes direct and portfolio investments — in the first quarter of this year: the 31st consecutive quarter of capital outflows, which brought aggregate net outflows to US$367.78 billion as of March 31.
According to their rationale, Taiwanese businesses have continued to shift funds abroad to cope with global supply-chain needs or to seek higher investment returns elsewhere.
If part of that money was returned home, it would help boost domestic economic activities, increase employment and raise wages, the lawmakers said.
The proposal comes at a time when many nations are adopting tax breaks or exemptions to attract foreign funds. For instance, the Indonesian government in 2016 launched a tax amnesty scheme in a bid to plug a large budget deficit, and a tax overhaul in the US early this year has seen several US multinational companies bring back money from abroad. Similar measures have been introduced by Japan, ASEAN members and some European nations.
However, Taiwan is not exactly short of funds. The central bank’s latest figures show that the monetary authority has increased sales of negotiable certificates of deposit to drain excess funds, exceeding NT$7 trillion (US$227.89 billion) early this month, from the money market.
The costs for corporate borrowers might not be higher than those of bringing money back home, given the already low interest rates here.
The nation has excess domestic savings, but faces other difficulties, such as obstacles to the domestic investment environment, weak corporate sentiment to increase local investment and a lack of good investment targets.
There is still no consensus on whether a tax break or a tax exemption on selected investment categories would attract capital inflows and spur economic growth.
In addition, the Ministry of Finance and the central bank have expressed concern that the proposed legislation, if enacted, could create an unfair tax environment, adding that the fund inflows could contribute to currency fluctuations and become a speculative investment on the local stock and real-estate markets.
However, the National Development Council, the Ministry of Economic Affairs and the Financial Supervisory Commission seem to be going along with the proposal, as far as long-term industrial development is concerned.
As more nations have over the past two years supported closing corporate tax loopholes and endorsed a common reporting standard to increase transparency, it is time for Taiwan to attract overseas funds back home.
The Ministry of Finance and the central bank have good reason to be skeptical of lawmakers’ wisdom in devising the legislation, but President Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) government as a whole does need to reach a workable policy to induce capital inflows and help invigorate economic activity.
The Cabinet must establish an inter-ministerial department to encourage the repatriation of offshore capital and devise complementary measures to curb speculation in property and other non-productive markets.
For the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), China’s “century of humiliation” is the gift that keeps on giving. Beijing returns again and again to the theme of Western imperialism, oppression and exploitation to keep stoking the embers of grievance and resentment against the West, and especially the US. However, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) that in 1949 announced it had “stood up” soon made clear what that would mean for Chinese and the world — and it was not an agenda that would engender pride among ordinary Chinese, or peace of mind in the international community. At home, Mao Zedong (毛澤東) launched
With a new White House document in May — the “Strategic Approach to the People’s Republic of China” — the administration of US President Donald Trump has firmly set its hyper-competitive line to tackle geoeconomic and geostrategic rivalry, followed by several reinforcing speeches by Trump and other Cabinet-level officials. By identifying China as a near-equal rival, the strategy resonates well with the bipartisan consensus on China in today’s severely divided US. In the face of China’s rapidly growing aggression, the move is long overdue, yet relevant for the maintenance of the international “status quo.” The strategy seems to herald a new
To say that this year has been eventful for China and the rest of the world would be something of an understatement. First, the US-China trade dispute, already simmering for two years, reached a boiling point as Washington tightened the noose around China’s economy. Second, China unleashed the COVID-19 pandemic on the world, wreaking havoc on an unimaginable scale and turning the People’s Republic of China into a common target of international scorn. Faced with a mounting crisis at home, Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) rashly decided to ratchet up military tensions with neighboring countries in a misguided attempt to divert the
Toward the end of former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) final term in office, there was much talk about his legacy. Ma himself would likely prefer history books to enshrine his achievements in reducing cross-strait tensions. He might see his meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Singapore in 2015 as the high point. However, given his statements in the past few months, he might be remembered more for contributing to the breakup of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). We are still talking about Ma and his legacy because it is inextricably tied to the so-called “1992 consensus” as the bedrock of his