In her New Year’s Day speech, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) said she had instructed the Executive Yuan to propose measures that would allow low-income people to benefit from the nation’s economic growth, as the economy has steadily risen over the past two years and tax revenues have exceeded government targets.
“This is just like a profitable company, which should make it a priority to share those profits with its employees, and a nation should do likewise,” Tsai said on Tuesday during her first-ever New Year’s Day address.
The idea immediately drew criticism from the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislative caucus, which labeled it a politically motivated move designed to help Tsai’s 2020 re-election bid.
Any attempt by the DPP administration to shore up voter support before the next elections — especially after the party’s big losses in the Nov. 24 nine-in-one elections — and help low-income households as the economy seems to be slowing would doubtless be interpreted as political maneuvering, but redistributing wealth is better done later than never — as long as it truly benefits the needy.
However, two issues need to be addressed before Tsai’s idea is implemented: First, extra tax revenue does not necessarily translate into a fiscal surplus. Second, before higher-than-expected tax revenue can be passed on to low-income people, the government must clearly define who is eligible and how the money would be accessed.
Although excess tax revenue totaled NT$365.2 billion (US$11.83 billion at the current exchange rate) from 2014 to 2017, according to Ministry of Finance statistics, the central government’s balance sheet continues to show a deficit. National debt reached NT$5.3 trillion as of November last year and would total NT$22 trillion if the government’s NT$17 trillion in unfunded liabilities — including public and military retirement pensions, national health and labor insurance programs, and road subsidies — were counted.
Even though a local tax reform alliance has over the past two years been calling on the government to return tax money to the public, excess taxes are not truly excess, but a discrepancy between actual tax revenue and the budgeted revenue estimated by the government.
The higher-than-expected revenue should prompt the government to reflect on its errors, understand how the discrepancy happened and correct future tax revenue estimates. The government should prioritize using any excess tax revenue to pay off public debt, rather than returning tax money to low-income people. Paying down debts would provide the nation with an extra cushion for external risks.
The idea of redistributing excess tax money to Taiwanese is still in the discussion phase, Executive Yuan spokeswoman Kolas Yotaka said last week, but local media reports have speculated that the government is mulling the possibility of distributing “red envelopes” to the needy.
Giving money to the needy raises the question of whether a one-time handout or a subsidy program, as part of the central government’s budget, would best address the perennial financial problems of low-income earners.
Helping the disadvantaged and people with a low income should not simply be a spontaneous government campaign. Any plan to lighten the economic burden on low-income earners is welcomed, but the government must be prudent in its approach.
The government might also consider whether excess tax revenues could be rerouted to fund long-term care services, used to help small and medium businesses or directed to rural and remote areas so that their wealth gap with urban areas could be narrowed.
George Santayana wrote: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” This article will help readers avoid repeating mistakes by examining four examples from the civil war between the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) forces and the Republic of China (ROC) forces that involved two city sieges and two island invasions. The city sieges compared are Changchun (May to October 1948) and Beiping (November 1948 to January 1949, renamed Beijing after its capture), and attempts to invade Kinmen (October 1949) and Hainan (April 1950). Comparing and contrasting these examples, we can learn how Taiwan may prevent a war with
A recent trio of opinion articles in this newspaper reflects the growing anxiety surrounding Washington’s reported request for Taiwan to shift up to 50 percent of its semiconductor production abroad — a process likely to take 10 years, even under the most serious and coordinated effort. Simon H. Tang (湯先鈍) issued a sharp warning (“US trade threatens silicon shield,” Oct. 4, page 8), calling the move a threat to Taiwan’s “silicon shield,” which he argues deters aggression by making Taiwan indispensable. On the same day, Hsiao Hsi-huei (蕭錫惠) (“Responding to US semiconductor policy shift,” Oct. 4, page 8) focused on
Taiwan is rapidly accelerating toward becoming a “super-aged society” — moving at one of the fastest rates globally — with the proportion of elderly people in the population sharply rising. While the demographic shift of “fewer births than deaths” is no longer an anomaly, the nation’s legal framework and social customs appear stuck in the last century. Without adjustments, incidents like last month’s viral kicking incident on the Taipei MRT involving a 73-year-old woman would continue to proliferate, sowing seeds of generational distrust and conflict. The Senior Citizens Welfare Act (老人福利法), originally enacted in 1980 and revised multiple times, positions older
Nvidia Corp’s plan to build its new headquarters at the Beitou Shilin Science Park’s T17 and T18 plots has stalled over a land rights dispute, prompting the Taipei City Government to propose the T12 plot as an alternative. The city government has also increased pressure on Shin Kong Life Insurance Co, which holds the development rights for the T17 and T18 plots. The proposal is the latest by the city government over the past few months — and part of an ongoing negotiation strategy between the two sides. Whether Shin Kong Life Insurance backs down might be the key factor
RSS