Fubon Financial Holding Co on Friday last week said it would extend its tender offer for Jih Sun Financial Holding Co by 50 days until March 23, as the company’s hostile takeover of its smaller rival has not yet gained approval from the Fair Trade Commission. The initial offer of NT$13 per share, announced on Dec. 18 last year, surprised the domestic financial sector, and was on Jan. 5 criticized by Jih Sun as too low.
Fubon’s bid has also raised questions from lawmakers and market watchers as to whether one of Jih Sun’s major shareholders has links to a Chinese investment entity, and if Fubon aims to help the rumored Chinese investor dispose of his stake in Jih Sun for cash. Government agencies, including the Financial Supervisory Commission (FSC), the Investment Commission and the Mainland Affairs Council, have reportedly launched probes into whether Chinese investors are involved.
Rumors of the firm’s Chinese funding have been around for years. In 2006, Jih Sun invited Japan’s Shinsei Bank Ltd to become its strategic investor and bring in fresh capital to support the debt-ridden Jih Sun International Bank. In 2009, Jih Sun sold a stake to Capital Target Ltd to fund and improve its banking unit’s financial structure. Capital Target has since become Jih Sun’s second-largest shareholder with a stake of 24 percent, behind Shinsei Bank, which holds a 36 percent stake.
It has been widely rumored in the financial sector that Capital Target, which says it invests in Jih Sun to extend its business from real estate to banking, had in purchased the shares for Chinese tycoon Xiao Jianhua (肖建華), head of Tomorrow Holding Ltd. While the speculation has never been confirmed over the past 11 years, ever since Xiao was reportedly abducted by Chinese security agents in January 2017 from his Hong Kong Four Seasons-serviced apartment to mainland China, news has from time to time emerged that he has sold his alleged Jih Sun stakes to local conglomerates.
Government investigations into covert Chinese investments in Taiwan are a step in the right direction. It is the government’s duty to examine whether Chinese investment enters Taiwan through legal channels or sneaks in via back doors, routed through third parties and disguised as non-Chinese foreign investment.
Regardless of whether Fubon’s tender offer is successful, the government must thoroughly investigate whether stakes held by Chinese entities change hands and clearly explain its findings to the public.
The call for a stricter government review of the Jih Sun takeover comes in the wake of the FSC’s actions last year against illegal Chinese investments in the century-old household appliance maker Tatung Co. The commission imposed heavy fines on Tatung, suspended shareholder rights of Chinese investors and requested the sale of dubious shares within six months. If the FSC could act boldly to set things right in the Tatung case, there is no good reason for it not to apply the same principles and standards in the Jih Sun case.
Some might criticize the government’s stance toward Chinese investment, saying that it is no different from any other foreign investment. Yet it is wrong to regard the issue only from the viewpoint of investment, as it also concerns national security. Therefore, one crucial task is to kick out illegal Chinese investors as soon as possible, because no one knows the actual motive behind their investments. The government must take clear and decisive steps to review shares in Taiwanese firms held by Chinese investors. It should severely penalize those who contravene regulations. A lenient stance in the Jih Sun case could backfire.
China badly misread Japan. It sought to intimidate Tokyo into silence on Taiwan. Instead, it has achieved the opposite by hardening Japanese resolve. By trying to bludgeon a major power like Japan into accepting its “red lines” — above all on Taiwan — China laid bare the raw coercive logic of compellence now driving its foreign policy toward Asian states. From the Taiwan Strait and the East and South China Seas to the Himalayan frontier, Beijing has increasingly relied on economic warfare, diplomatic intimidation and military pressure to bend neighbors to its will. Confident in its growing power, China appeared to believe
After more than three weeks since the Honduran elections took place, its National Electoral Council finally certified the new president of Honduras. During the campaign, the two leading contenders, Nasry Asfura and Salvador Nasralla, who according to the council were separated by 27,026 votes in the final tally, promised to restore diplomatic ties with Taiwan if elected. Nasralla refused to accept the result and said that he would challenge all the irregularities in court. However, with formal recognition from the US and rapid acknowledgment from key regional governments, including Argentina and Panama, a reversal of the results appears institutionally and politically
In 2009, Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) made a welcome move to offer in-house contracts to all outsourced employees. It was a step forward for labor relations and the enterprise facing long-standing issues around outsourcing. TSMC founder Morris Chang (張忠謀) once said: “Anything that goes against basic values and principles must be reformed regardless of the cost — on this, there can be no compromise.” The quote is a testament to a core belief of the company’s culture: Injustices must be faced head-on and set right. If TSMC can be clear on its convictions, then should the Ministry of Education
Legislators of the opposition parties, consisting of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), on Friday moved to initiate impeachment proceedings against President William Lai (賴清德). They accused Lai of undermining the nation’s constitutional order and democracy. For anyone who has been paying attention to the actions of the KMT and the TPP in the legislature since they gained a combined majority in February last year, pushing through constitutionally dubious legislation, defunding the Control Yuan and ensuring that the Constitutional Court is unable to operate properly, such an accusation borders the absurd. That they are basing this