Several legislators have again raised the idea of tax breaks for companies and individuals who repatriate money. Although government agencies have never reached a consensus on the issue and people sense that they vacillate on the topic, whether the government agrees to levy a low, one-time tax on overseas funds to encourage fund inflows is something the nation will continue to discuss after Asia/Pacific Group on Money Laundering members wrap up the third round of mutual evaluations this week.
Lawmakers attending the Oct. 22 meeting of the Legislative Yuan’s Finance Committee asked officials from the central bank, the Financial Supervisory Commission (FSC) and the Ministry of Finance whether the government favors capital inflows to boost local investment and improve the economy; whether it would establish a special law to regulate the repatriation of offshore capital; and whether it would provide a tax break or exemption on investment categories such as the “five plus two” industries — seven development projects proposed by the government to transform the nation’s economic and industrial structure.
While lawmakers reiterated that capital inflows help boost domestic economic activity, employment and wages, FSC Chairman Wellington Koo (顧立雄) said the government is still deliberating policy directions and legislation to address repatriation of overseas funds by Taiwanese businesses.
Koo said that before the government can proceed with a policy that would induce capital inflows, certain structures must be in place: Policies must be consistent with international money laundering control measures; financial institutions would need to offer special accounts through which repatriated money would be regulated; and funds would need to be directed into specific industries to prevent them flowing into the real-estate market.
Taiwanese investors have increasingly opted to repatriate earnings from overseas operations after many countries implemented the Common Reporting Standard, a global framework for excanges of tax data. As Taiwan has not yet adopted the standard, lawmakers and interest groups are likely to step up pressure on the government regarding legislation on fund inflows.
However, as overseas funds might not be repatriated purely based on business considerations — fund flows include the risk of money laundering and financial fraud — encouraging fund repatriation with tax breaks is not an easy decision for the government.
A fundamental issue is that Taiwan is not short of funds. Repatriated funds could contribute to currency fluctuations and increase speculative investment in the local stock and real-estate markets.
Another issue is that the proposed legislation and tax breaks, if enacted, would create an unfair tax environment for those who had repatriated funds earlier and those who have always held their funds in Taiwan, which means they paid local taxes on them.
Even so, as more countries over the past one to two years have worked hard to increase corporate transparency and combat tax evasion, and as rising trade protectionism has reshaped global economic and trade structures, the government must see the repatriation of overseas funds as not solely a taxation or investment issue, but rather as an opportunity to help fine-tune economic and financial policies from the perspective of long-term national development.
The question remains whether the government, in regulating repatriated funds, can effectively control money laundering, introduce fair taxation and safeguard the soundness of capital markets.
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) trip to China provides a pertinent reminder of why Taiwanese protested so vociferously against attempts to force through the cross-strait service trade agreement in 2014 and why, since Ma’s presidential election win in 2012, they have not voted in another Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidate. While the nation narrowly avoided tragedy — the treaty would have put Taiwan on the path toward the demobilization of its democracy, which Courtney Donovan Smith wrote about in the Taipei Times in “With the Sunflower movement Taiwan dodged a bullet” — Ma’s political swansong in China, which included fawning dithyrambs