On Wednesday, Broadcasting Corporation of China (BCC) chairman Jaw Shaw-kong (
Jaw claimed he left the BCC because of government pressure, saying that although the National Communications Commission approved the deal, it was annulled by the Cabinet; the Ministry of Economic Affairs did not agree to management changes; the Financial Supervisory Commission checked the company books; the Fair Trade Commission used monopoly concerns to send a letter to more than 200 TV stations causing them to complain to Jaw; and the Criminal Investigation Bureau investigated it.
But Jaw is wrong. The BCC is an inappropriately obtained asset -- just like other assets with unclear ownership that ordinary people would not buy to avoid trouble. Most know that the KMT government gave the BCC its special frequency allotments and that the land where many of the BCC's broadcasting and relay stations stand is national land given to the company by the government. This example of the KMT's direct access to the national treasury is the reason the ownership of much of the BCC's land is being disputed in court.
It is because of these problems that the KMT wanted to dispose of companies such as the BCC, Central Motion Pictures Corp (CMPC) and the China Television Co. Jaw wanted to gain control of BCC frequencies and land at low cost in a bid to dominate the broadcasting industry, and then complained of government intervention when he had to give up his holding.
The KMT was aware of the difficulties it would encounter and therefore sold Hua Hsia -- which owns the three companies -- to Jungli Investment Co and placed Jungli in a Hua Hsia-managed trust. The deal was complex and trod on toes, leading to a number of incidents such as the gun shots fired outside the office of KMT Legislator and CMPC chairman Alex Tsai (
Many KMT assets have been inappropriately obtained and should not be sold. The government has pursued these assets for quite some time, but because the KMT refuses to return them and is accelerating their sale, the issue remains unresolved. A political solution would be for the government to publish information on how the assets were obtained and then put public pressure on the KMT by holding a referendum on the return of the assets in tandem with legislative elections in January.
Although reclaiming these assets through the courts requires time and money, the government must continue trying to do so because a court decision will have a snowball effect; a verdict can be used as a reference in similar cases and influence the way the public views the issue, which in turn will affect the way they vote in a referendum. The way to solving the stolen assets issue lies in a mixture of politics and justice.
Whether in terms of market commonality or resource similarity, South Korea’s Samsung Electronics Co is the biggest competitor of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC). The two companies have agreed to set up factories in the US and are also recipients of subsidies from the US CHIPS and Science Act, which was signed into law by former US president Joe Biden. However, changes in the market competitiveness of the two companies clearly reveal the context behind TSMC’s investments in the US. As US semiconductor giant Intel Corp has faced continuous delays developing its advanced processes, the world’s two major wafer foundries, TSMC and
The first Donald Trump term was a boon for Taiwan. The administration regularized the arms sales process and enhanced bilateral ties. Taipei will not be so fortunate the second time around. Given recent events, Taiwan must proceed with the assumption that it cannot count on the United States to defend it — diplomatically or militarily — during the next four years. Early indications suggested otherwise. The nomination of Marco Rubio as US Secretary of State and the appointment of Mike Waltz as the national security advisor, both of whom have expressed full-throated support for Taiwan in the past, raised hopes that
I came to Taiwan to pursue my degree thinking that Taiwanese are “friendly,” but I was welcomed by Taiwanese classmates laughing at my friend’s name, Maria (瑪莉亞). At the time, I could not understand why they were mocking the name of Jesus’ mother. Later, I learned that “Maria” had become a stereotype — a shorthand for Filipino migrant workers. That was because many Filipino women in Taiwan, especially those who became house helpers, happen to have that name. With the rapidly increasing number of foreigners coming to Taiwan to work or study, more Taiwanese are interacting, socializing and forming relationships with
Authorities last week revoked the residency permit of a Chinese social media influencer surnamed Liu (劉), better known by her online channel name Yaya in Taiwan (亞亞在台灣), who has more than 440,000 followers online and is living in Taiwan with a marriage-based residency permit, for her “reunification by force” comments. She was asked to leave the country in 10 days. The National Immigration Agency (NIA) on Tuesday last week announced the decision, citing the influencer’s several controversial public comments, including saying that “China does not need any other reason to reunify Taiwan with force” and “why is it [China] hesitant
RSS