Not long ago, several Tainan residents posted a video on the Internet to promote a wine-making workshop. After somebody reported this to the Tainan Finance and Local Tax Bureau, the authorities issued a fine of NT$50,000 to the instructor/institute in accordance with the Tobacco and Alcohol Administration Act (菸酒管理法).
The bureau said in a press release that the decision was based on an interpretation of the law made by the National Treasury Administration, which says that the instructor/institute should apply for permission first if a wine-making workshop is not free of charge, even if only materials and instructor fees are needed.
Under this interpretation of the law, those who are enthusiastic about offering wine-making courses could be fined unreasonably, and a gap could appear in the handing down of traditional culinary skills.
Those who have participated in such wine-making workshops all know that attendees merely need to pay for their instructors and materials. How could the administration assume that such fees are consciously charged to make profit from alcohol sales?
If officials are able to interpret the law arbitrarily, those who teach others how to make sweet fermented rice should also apply for permission from the government beforehand, since the soup-like dish contains alcohol, and whoever offers such instruction without asking for permission should be punished with a heavy fine.
In terms of wine-making workshops, such courses teach a brewing and fermentation technique to make wine out of fruit or a variety of ingredients. Many housewives and older people are familiar with the technique.
Unfortunately, when you offer lessons on this culinary skill inherited from your ancestors to people for personal use only, you face two options if you charge them. First, you will have to spend time and money to apply for a permit from the related government agencies. If you do not, then you will be fined.
Under such circumstances, older Aboriginal people could be punished for teaching younger generations how to make traditional rice wine, or some government agencies could be punished for teaching the public how to pickle plums, because some home-made fruit wine is derived from such cooking techniques.
Will that result in a ban on alcohol, as the private sector is prohibited from learning how to make wine?
People’s memories in their kitchens, their cooking creativity and use of locally produced ingredients are all intangible skills steeped in tradition.
If instructors who try to pass such skills on to others are heavily fined by the authorities, who assume that all instructors are profit-seeking unethical businesspeople just because their products contain alcohol, gourmet dishes will not be handed down to future generations.
Meanwhile, in an attempt to avoid trouble, instructors could lose the stage on which they are able to shine. If this situation continues, it will not only benefit wine companies, but also cut the roots of traditional culinary arts.
Chang Hsun-ching is a freelance writer.
Translated by Eddy Chang
Why is Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) not a “happy camper” these days regarding Taiwan? Taiwanese have not become more “CCP friendly” in response to the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) use of spies and graft by the United Front Work Department, intimidation conducted by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and the Armed Police/Coast Guard, and endless subversive political warfare measures, including cyber-attacks, economic coercion, and diplomatic isolation. The percentage of Taiwanese that prefer the status quo or prefer moving towards independence continues to rise — 76 percent as of December last year. According to National Chengchi University (NCCU) polling, the Taiwanese
It would be absurd to claim to see a silver lining behind every US President Donald Trump cloud. Those clouds are too many, too dark and too dangerous. All the same, viewed from a domestic political perspective, there is a clear emerging UK upside to Trump’s efforts at crashing the post-Cold War order. It might even get a boost from Thursday’s Washington visit by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer. In July last year, when Starmer became prime minister, the Labour Party was rigidly on the defensive about Europe. Brexit was seen as an electorally unstable issue for a party whose priority
US President Donald Trump is systematically dismantling the network of multilateral institutions, organizations and agreements that have helped prevent a third world war for more than 70 years. Yet many governments are twisting themselves into knots trying to downplay his actions, insisting that things are not as they seem and that even if they are, confronting the menace in the White House simply is not an option. Disagreement must be carefully disguised to avoid provoking his wrath. For the British political establishment, the convenient excuse is the need to preserve the UK’s “special relationship” with the US. Following their White House
US President Donald Trump’s return to the White House has brought renewed scrutiny to the Taiwan-US semiconductor relationship with his claim that Taiwan “stole” the US chip business and threats of 100 percent tariffs on foreign-made processors. For Taiwanese and industry leaders, understanding those developments in their full context is crucial while maintaining a clear vision of Taiwan’s role in the global technology ecosystem. The assertion that Taiwan “stole” the US’ semiconductor industry fundamentally misunderstands the evolution of global technology manufacturing. Over the past four decades, Taiwan’s semiconductor industry, led by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), has grown through legitimate means
RSS