Over the past few decades, there have been frequent reports of city and county councilors being sentenced for embezzling funds through shell accounts for bogus assistants.
As the monthly salary for a councilor assistant is only NT$30,000 to NT$40,000 (US$1,056 to US$1,407), why is the money so alluring to some councilors, even at the cost of their political careers?
During her term, a former Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Tainan city councilor surnamed Yang (楊) embezzled funds by making false reports on expenses, illegally profiting by as much as NT$6.68 million through shell accounts under bogus names.
Neither are cases of councilors embezzling funds over several terms unheard of. From 2010 to 2017, a former DPP Taoyuan city councilor surnamed Chiu (邱) applied for monthly salaries for his “assistants,” who were actually working for his family’s land administration agency during the period.
Not only did he not have to pay them, but he did not have to provide labor and health insurance for them. By doing so, he embezzled as much as NT$8.22 million from the Taoyuan City Government.
More absurdly, a Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Taoyuan city councilor surnamed Shu (舒), who is serving a sixth term, was late last year charged for embezzling funds via shell accounts of bogus assistants in the names of her mother, who had had a stroke, her older brother, who has a mental disorder, and several friends. Prosecutors accused the councilor of embezzling NT$9.8 million.
The monthly salary of a bogus assistant is insignificant, but when a councilor makes relatives and friends bogus assistants, the long-term total of their salaries might be enough to invest in real estate, which is probably why some councilors are willing to take the risk.
Under the assistant fee system, councilors can provide subsidies to assistants, with minimal requirements for personnel data. Therefore, it is not easy for them to get caught if they embezzle funds by such means.
The Ministry of the Interior last year conducted a review of the subsidy system for assistant employment, hoping to curb embezzlement by councilors, but the legislative amendments that the ministry proposed mostly focused on subsidy limits and verification methods.
However, the key lies in how to prevent councilors from turning their jurisdictions into hotbeds of corruption.
The application for assistant fees is not monitored, so it is difficult to catch councilors who are embezzling funds in the names of their relatives and friends.
Given how little an assistant subsidy provides and the lack of monitoring, it is no wonder that some councilors are not even aware that they are breaking the law.
By the time investigations are launched, a councilor might have already embezzled more than NT$1 million, or even NT$10 million.
They not only stole taxpayers’ money, but also crowded out monthly wages of real assistants and hurt the quality of their services.
Therefore, amendments proposed by the ministry should be based on the premise of openness and transparency, and they should require councilors to disclose information about their assistants — including their names, titles and salaries.
After all, the primary goal of most elected representatives is to win re-election, and their supporters and rivals would watch closely to see whether the information they provide is accurate.
Wu Hsiang-chun is chairwoman of the Taiwan City Council Assistant Industrial Labor Union.
Translated by Eddy Chang
China has not been a top-tier issue for much of the second Trump administration. Instead, Trump has focused considerable energy on Ukraine, Israel, Iran, and defending America’s borders. At home, Trump has been busy passing an overhaul to America’s tax system, deporting unlawful immigrants, and targeting his political enemies. More recently, he has been consumed by the fallout of a political scandal involving his past relationship with a disgraced sex offender. When the administration has focused on China, there has not been a consistent throughline in its approach or its public statements. This lack of overarching narrative likely reflects a combination
US President Donald Trump’s alleged request that Taiwanese President William Lai (賴清德) not stop in New York while traveling to three of Taiwan’s diplomatic allies, after his administration also rescheduled a visit to Washington by the minister of national defense, sets an unwise precedent and risks locking the US into a trajectory of either direct conflict with the People’s Republic of China (PRC) or capitulation to it over Taiwan. Taiwanese authorities have said that no plans to request a stopover in the US had been submitted to Washington, but Trump shared a direct call with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平)
Heavy rains over the past week have overwhelmed southern and central Taiwan, with flooding, landslides, road closures, damage to property and the evacuations of thousands of people. Schools and offices were closed in some areas due to the deluge throughout the week. The heavy downpours brought by the southwest monsoon are a second blow to a region still recovering from last month’s Typhoon Danas. Strong winds and significant rain from the storm inflicted more than NT$2.6 billion (US$86.6 million) in agricultural losses, and damaged more than 23,000 roofs and a record high of nearly 2,500 utility poles, causing power outages. As
The greatest pressure Taiwan has faced in negotiations stems from its continuously growing trade surplus with the US. Taiwan’s trade surplus with the US reached an unprecedented high last year, surging by 54.6 percent from the previous year and placing it among the top six countries with which the US has a trade deficit. The figures became Washington’s primary reason for adopting its firm stance and demanding substantial concessions from Taipei, which put Taiwan at somewhat of a disadvantage at the negotiating table. Taiwan’s most crucial bargaining chip is undoubtedly its key position in the global semiconductor supply chain, which led
RSS