The Ministry of Economic Affairs last week reported that Taiwanese firms’ outbound investments approved by the Department of Investment Review last year reached a new high, totaling US$48.59 billion, led by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s huge investments in the US and Japan. The data also showed that approved outbound investments to China were US$3.65 billion, which for the third consecutive year was lower than those to countries covered under the government’s New Southbound Policy at US$8.72 billion. The figures show that Taiwanese companies are continuing to reposition themselves amid the reorganization of global supply chains, while increasing their investments in the US, Europe, Japan and New Southbound Policy countries to diversify risk.
China-bound investments have been on a downward trend in the past few years. Last year’s US$3.65 billion was not only lower than the US$4.1 billion recorded in 2019 following a US-China trade spat, but its proportion of the total approved outbound investment was also substantially down to 7.51 percent, from 11.42 percent in 2023 and 33.62 percent in 2022. More Taiwanese firms are pursuing a “China Plus One” investment strategy to realign supply chains and avoid overconcentration on China, where political and economic risks have increased due to a slowdown in its economy, a rise in production costs and stricter national security controls. Countries in South and Southeast Asia, along with the North American market, are poised to be prime destinations for Taiwanese firms adopting the strategy.
Several Taiwanese firms are also following in the footsteps of their foreign peers in speeding up their withdrawal from China. For example, on Dec. 30 last year, silicon substrate maker Kinsus Interconnect Technology Corp announced the sale of an 80.5 percent stake in its Chinese substrate unit, Kinsus Interconnect Technology Suzhou Corp, and 100 percent of its Chinese printed circuit board business, Piotek Computer (Suzhou) Corp. It said it would use the proceeds to pursue new investments in Taiwan and elsewhere in Asia.
The withdrawal of Taiwanese and foreign companies from China can be seen as part of a global business restructuring triggered by US-China disputes. This is also one of the reasons China’s unemployment rate remains high. If the trade spat between the US and China escalates during a second term of US President Donald Trump — who was to take office after press time last night — the Chinese economy would only worsen and more foreign companies would choose to move elsewhere. However, Beijing might intervene, and Taiwanese businesses would likely be the first to bear the brunt of any restrictions.
Foreign media recently reported that Taiwanese contract electronics maker Hon Hai Precision Industry Co, known internationally as Foxconn Technology Group and which is a major assembler for Apple Inc, has paused dispatching Chinese workers to its iPhone manufacturing plants in India, while those already there have been instructed to return to China. The company has also delayed shipping specialized manufacturing equipment from China to India, reports said. Some sources said that the Chinese government was behind the changes. If that is true, then clearly the Chinese Communist Party is starting to take measures to stop the “Chine Plus One” trend.
The disruptions at Foxconn’s operations in India come against the backdrop of long-standing border disputes and economic rivalry between China and India. If China seeks to limit Taiwanese businesses’ transfer of labor, technology and equipment to other countries, it would affect their operations in Vietnam, Thailand and Malaysia, where they have been gearing up for expansions. Besides considering how to adjust their global deployment, Taiwanese businesses operating in China also need to think about how to respond to this new challenge.
Elbridge Colby, America’s Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, is the most influential voice on defense strategy in the Second Trump Administration. For insight into his thinking, one could do no better than read his thoughts on the defense of Taiwan which he gathered in a book he wrote in 2021. The Strategy of Denial, is his contemplation of China’s rising hegemony in Asia and on how to deter China from invading Taiwan. Allowing China to absorb Taiwan, he wrote, would open the entire Indo-Pacific region to Chinese preeminence and result in a power transition that would place America’s prosperity
A few weeks ago in Kaohsiung, tech mogul turned political pundit Robert Tsao (曹興誠) joined Western Washington University professor Chen Shih-fen (陳時奮) for a public forum in support of Taiwan’s recall campaign. Kaohsiung, already the most Taiwanese independence-minded city in Taiwan, was not in need of a recall. So Chen took a different approach: He made the case that unification with China would be too expensive to work. The argument was unusual. Most of the time, we hear that Taiwan should remain free out of respect for democracy and self-determination, but cost? That is not part of the usual script, and
All 24 Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers and suspended Hsinchu Mayor Ann Kao (高虹安), formerly of the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), survived recall elections against them on Saturday, in a massive loss to the unprecedented mass recall movement, as well as to the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) that backed it. The outcome has surprised many, as most analysts expected that at least a few legislators would be ousted. Over the past few months, dedicated and passionate civic groups gathered more than 1 million signatures to recall KMT lawmakers, an extraordinary achievement that many believed would be enough to remove at
Behind the gloating, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) must be letting out a big sigh of relief. Its powerful party machine saved the day, but it took that much effort just to survive a challenge mounted by a humble group of active citizens, and in areas where the KMT is historically strong. On the other hand, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) must now realize how toxic a brand it has become to many voters. The campaigners’ amateurism is what made them feel valid and authentic, but when the DPP belatedly inserted itself into the campaign, it did more harm than good. The
RSS