The Ministry of Economic Affairs on Tuesday announced it would continue to relax the restrictions on investments in China by local flat-panel makers. Under the new policy, firms such as AU Optronics and Chimei Innolux will be able to apply for a permit to buy a stake in or merge with their Chinese counterparts, as well as invest in Chinese fabs using the same level of technology they currently employ in Taiwan.
The ministry said the liberalization would enable local manufacturers to compete with their global rivals on an equal footing in China to take advantage of the Chinese market’s business potential. With this move, the ministry would have people (including businesses) believe that the government is not inhibiting business investment, but rather helping it.
However, the truth is that local flat-panel makers have been asking for greater relaxation since February last year, when the government first lifted bans on their China-bound investments. Manufacturers were calling on the government to drop the so-called “N-1” policy, which required flat-panel makers to employ technology in their Chinese fabs that was at least one generation behind that of its Taiwan fabs, while they nervously watched their South Korean rivals gaining ground in the LCD TV market in China, operating under no such restriction.
It looks like the government was finally able to take the pulse of the nation’s flat-panel industry with the latest policy, and to the local companies, the move is better late than never. Unfortunately, we have seen the government’s industry policy regarding investment in China swing between two extremes — forbidding and relaxing — through the years depending on the whim of political sentiment.
So the question remains, does the government have a long-term and far-sighted policy to meet the needs of industry?
We have seen only a government that is reactive rather than proactive to the needs of the local technology sector and a government that cannot provide a forward-looking blueprint for industrial development. It is always catching up to the needs of businesses and offering a patchwork of belated measures to specific industry sectors — some measures for the semiconductor sector here, some for the flat-panel sector there and others for the petrochemical sector.
It is clear that the government’s biggest problem is its persistent incompetence in outlining a policy for the development of the high-tech sector. How will it tackle future challenges as other local technology heavyweights seek permission to invest in China?
The relaxation of the investment policy also opens the door to the possibility of job losses and the loss of the nation’s edge in technology, as the whole supply chain could relocate as suppliers mirror the moves by the benchmark players.
Even though all applications for investment in China must be reviewed on a case-by-case basis and local companies are still subject to certain conditions in order to start their Chinese fabs with the same generation of technology that they use in Taiwan, both the government and businesses need to learn a hard lesson from the relocation of the local notebook computer manufacturing sector to China during the past decade.
Taiwanese companies face a dilemma: They can move overseas to pursue cheaper production costs or face losing their competitiveness. However, without sufficient investment in brand building, innovative design and research and development, overseas manufacturing, in China or anywhere else, does not guarantee sustainable profitability and growth.
In the long run, moving overseas only guarantees one thing: a low-margin business.
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
The arrest in France of Telegram founder and CEO Pavel Durov has brought into sharp focus one of the major conflicts of our age. On one hand, we want privacy in our digital lives, which is why we like the kind of end-to-end encryption Telegram promises. On the other, we want the government to be able to stamp out repugnant online activities — such as child pornography or terrorist plotting. The reality is that we cannot have our cake and eat it, too. Durov last month was charged with complicity in crimes taking place on the app, including distributing child pornography,
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers
RSS