The visa system stinks
Dear Johnny,
I read with some amusement the story in the Taipei Times about the mission led by Minister Without Portfolio Lin Ferng-cheng (
Oh, the absurdity of the time and money spent by the government in touring Silicon Valley, Los Angeles, Boston and New York trying to attract talent.
From the article: "Lin said that Taiwan needs more overseas professionals to participate in a project aimed at building the country into an `innovation, research and development center in the Asia-Pacific region' by 2008."
Well, the first thing you need to do to attract talent is not treat them like criminals the second they step foot on Taiwanese soil.
I am referring to the government's visa and work permit policies.
According to the American Institute in Taiwan's Web site (the government's Bureau of Consular Affairs' Web site is next to useless on the subject), a person must apply for a 60-day visitor's visa in order to enter Taiwan.
Once in the country, the employer applies for the work permit (and has control of it -- more on that later) for the employee. The work permit takes an average 60 days to be issued and, from what I have read in other places, sometimes longer depending on the department that issues it. For those 60 days, the "employee" is not allowed to work, or else he faces possible arrest and deportation.
Seeing as the average time to grant a work permit is 60 days, that's cutting it awfully close. The "employee" can file for an extension but there is no guarantee it will be granted.
Once the employee has a work permit, he must file for a resident's visa. Once this visa is granted, he must apply for an Alien Resident Certificate (ARC). Now, if the person enjoys Taiwan and wishes to make it his home, after seven years (five if married to a Taiwanese), he may apply for permanent residency. However, for the rest of his life, if he stills want to work he has to continue to apply for work permits. Of course, every permit and visa application carries a fee.
One more thing about work permits. As mentioned before, the company, not the employee, owns the permit. This results in a form of servitude, because if the company does not keep the promises it has made to the employee when hiring him, the employee can't simply quit and seek employment elsewhere. If he quits or is fired -- which the company can do at will -- he has seven days to leave the country. If you are not married to a Taiwanese and your contract is up, you must leave the country within seven days.
That's hardly enough time to interview with another company and be hired to avoid deportation.
So on the one hand the government is trying to lure professionals to Taiwan (the worst treated are those who want to teach English, another national priority), but on the other hand they are slapping professionals in the face once they arrive.
In essence, the government is saying:
1. Come to our country, but don't try to earn any income for two months. If you dare try to earn some money to feed or house yourself -- jail time and deportation.
2. If you like Taiwan and wish to make it your home, you will always be in servitude to your employer.
When will the government learn that the way to attract people is to treat them well and give them incentives to want to come to their country instead of antagonizing them?
What the government needs to do is revise its visa and work permit rules for professionals who want to work in the country. A very simple thing it could do is issue a conditional work permit on issuance of the visitor's visa so that the person can go to work immediately without fear of breaking the law. After all, isn't that why the government wants them there?
Mike Cunningham
Greenville, South Carolina
Johnny replies: Believe me, I sympathize with you and understand the frustrations of people in your position. All I can say is keep writing to let the authorities know of your concerns. Also, please give us some credit: We're still shaking off the residue of martial law and that takes time, especially when it comes to bureaucrats and government regulations.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS