Yilan County Acting Commissioner Derek Chen (陳金德) said he wants to collect a special tax on water resources used for industrial purposes. This is a good idea and Chen’s determination is positive.
It is in sharp contrast with the Changhua County Government, which has advised people who dig illegally on how to apply for water rights and has provided a budget for the purpose, meaning that taxpayers subsidize the digging of illegal wells.
When I was a water official, Yilan County was the model of good water resource management, reaping positive results in banning illegal wells in coordination with the central government.
Now, in tune with the popular local mood, the Yilan County Government wants to set the trend by levying this special tax, which is praiseworthy.
However, the Water Act (水利法) has no such “special tax on water resources.” Although the county government can draw up an ordinance to instate such a tax, get county council approval and put it into practice, the act has provisions for water rights fees and water conservation charges. Why not just combine the two?
A special tax on water resources for industrial use would work similarly to a water conservation charge, in that industrial users would pay most of it.
However, the water conservation regulations offer users reduced rates as a reward for saving water, whereas the special tax envisaged by the Yilan County Government does not.
Another difference is that water conservation charges can only be levied on piped water, whereas the proposed special tax would be based on water consumption allocated by the county government, including surface and groundwater.
However, water rights allocated by the county government only include groundwater and county-managed rivers, but not Yilan County’s main water source, the Lanyang River (蘭陽溪), which is managed by the central government. It seems biased to only levy the special tax on water for industrial use.
The Lanyang River basin is the most abundant of all river basins in Taiwan, but there is only one listed reservoir in the basin, the Luodong Weir (羅東堰), which is just a weir, not a dam.
Therefore, Yilan County rarely experiences water shortages, but groundwater is over-pumped in some parts of the basin, causing groundwater levels to fall, which causes land subsidence.
The situation regarding surface water and groundwater are therefore completely different.
The county government wants to levy a special tax of NT$2 per tonne of surface water and NT$4 per tonne of groundwater, which shows that it fully understands the difference between the two.
Unused surface water flows into the sea, but the Luodong Weir has no storage function, so charges for surface water could be cut further to encourage people to use more of it.
Furthermore, groundwater resources cannot be fully protected by taxing water for industrial use. All groundwater use should be treated the same and included in the scheme, no matter what it is used for.
Water for agricultural use accounts for about 70 percent of the nation’s total water rights allocation and a similar proportion of total actual water use. There is a price adjustment system used to control the quantity of water used for farming.
Water resource management and water-saving measures cannot be discussed without talking about water for agricultural use.
Most farmers earn a relatively low income, so a special tax on water for use in farming could be relatively low, for example NT$0.1 per tonne, and could be subsidized by the government agencies responsible for agricultural affairs.
If farmers were exempt from a special tax or water rights fees, then the only cost of pumping precious groundwater would be the actual cost of pumping it. That would not promote the sustainable use of environmental resources and its ill affects are just as relevant, whether water is pumped for agriculture or industry.
Another question is whether a special tax should be levied based on water rights or actual water use.
If it is levied based on rights, how would authorities go about banning and preventing people who have no water rights from pumping water illicitly?
On the other hand, if it is levied based on actual water use, how can authorities be sure that the metering equipment and records are reliable?
When water is free, everyone pretends there is no problem, but when it is taxed, people value every drop.
Does the Yilan County Government have its peripheral and complementary measures ready?
Chang Yen-ming is a former director of the Water Resources Agency’s Water Administration Division.
Translated by Julian Clegg
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