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.
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS