Using tax revenue surplus as justification, legislators from the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) on July 11 joined hands to pass the third reading of the Special Act for Strengthening Economic, Social and National Security Resilience in Response to International Circumstances (因應國際情勢強化經濟社會及國土安全韌性特別條例), which included the approval of a universal cash handout of NT$10,000 that must be distributed before Oct. 31. The move was neither constitutional nor reasonable, yet it was pushed through just before a mass recall vote tomorrow. It was obviously a political ploy to buy votes.
Article 70 of the Constitution clearly stipulates that the Legislative Yuan “shall not make proposals for an increase in the expenditures in the budgetary bill presented by the Executive Yuan.” This was reiterated in 1990 with constitutional Interpretation No. 264 and is further supported by Article 63 of the Budget Act (預算法), which stipulates that, while interaccount use is permitted under certain conditions in the event of a surplus, the transfer amount cannot exceed 20 percent of the original budget and that “there shall be no interaccount use of any budget items deleted or cut down by the Legislative Yuan.”
The KMT insists that the special act is a statutory bill, and is therefore not subject to the aforementioned legal constraints. However, the act involves budget allocations, yet it was proposed by the Legislative Yuan rather than the Executive Yuan, and imposes a deadline for implementation. This not only usurps the Executive Yuan’s authority to propose budgets and interferes with its power to execute them, but also clearly exceeds the Legislative Yuan’s role in reviewing budgets — a severe contravention of the separation of powers.
A tax revenue surplus occurs when economic growth exceeds expectations, leading to higher revenue from business tax, customs duties, commodity tax, securities transaction tax, land value tax, deed tax and so on. A surplus does not necessarily indicate that citizens paid more in taxes.
The government typically uses tax revenue surplus to repay national debt, reduce interest expenditures, replenish funds for its programs, such as labor insurance and national health insurance, or in special budgets to support public infrastructure, relief programs or tax refunds — measures to prepare for future financial risks, rather than instantly depleting the funds through cash handouts. The economic effects of universal cash handouts are limited and often wasted on groups that have no need for financial assistance, such as high-income earners.
The KMT and the TPP knew that proposing this bill was unconstitutional, unlawful and unreasonable, yet they insisted on forcing it through. It was ultimately a tactic to manipulate public opinion, emotionally blackmail voters and weaken support for the recalls.
Since the first round of recall voting is to take place tomorrow, the Executive Yuan had to hold off on allocating a budget to avoid giving the KMT an opportunity to use it as propaganda to fuel anti-recall sentiment. However, this is only a temporary suspension that does not fundamentally resolve the problem at hand.
What matters now is whether voters can break free from the KMT’s and the TPP’s emotional manipulation and not allow short-term benefits to sway their decision in the recall vote. In this regard, Switzerland is a valuable example to learn from.
Switzerland is one of the most advanced democracies in the world. In June 2016, a referendum initiated by left-wing advocates proposed that all adult Swiss citizens and foreign residents who had lived in the country legally for at least five years would be paid an unconditional monthly income of 2,500 Swiss francs (US$3,145), while children would receive SF625 each month.
The results of the referendum showed that 77 percent of voters opposed the proposal, while only 23 percent supported it — an overwhelming rejection. Swiss voters demonstrated a high level of rationality by choosing to reject a welfare proposal that would increase the country’s collective fiscal burden, rather than readily supporting it simply because it would expand their benefits. Even when a proposal is framed around increasing citizens’ personal income, voters might still decide against it, citing concerns over long-term fiscal pressure or doubts over the system’s legitimacy and economic efficiency.
For more than a year, KMT and TPP legislators have continuously undermined the Constitution and sowed chaos in the government, including by promoting legislation to give themselves powers of inquiry, investigation and summoning witnesses for testimony, along with special hearing powers that undermine the separation of powers and infringe on people’s basic rights.
They have forced through amendments to the Public Officials Election And Recall Act (公職人員選舉罷免法), the Constitutional Court Procedure Act (憲法訴訟法) and the Act Governing the Allocation of Government Revenues and Expenditures (財政收支劃分法), disrupting the nation’s judicial structure and paralyzing the Constitutional Court. They have arbitrarily cut the central government’s budget, weakening national defense and diplomacy. Now, they have passed an unconstitutional, unlawful and unreasonable bill to universally distribute cash handouts.
It is up to voters to punish them at the polls tomorrow. If the Swiss can do it, we Taiwanese can, too.
Huang Ching-lung is director of the Taipei Trust in Democracy Association.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
A failure by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to respond to Israel’s brilliant 12-day (June 12-23) bombing and special operations war against Iran, topped by US President Donald Trump’s ordering the June 21 bombing of Iranian deep underground nuclear weapons fuel processing sites, has been noted by some as demonstrating a profound lack of resolve, even “impotence,” by China. However, this would be a dangerous underestimation of CCP ambitions and its broader and more profound military response to the Trump Administration — a challenge that includes an acceleration of its strategies to assist nuclear proxy states, and developing a wide array
Twenty-four Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers are facing recall votes on Saturday, prompting nearly all KMT officials and lawmakers to rally their supporters over the past weekend, urging them to vote “no” in a bid to retain their seats and preserve the KMT’s majority in the Legislative Yuan. The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), which had largely kept its distance from the civic recall campaigns, earlier this month instructed its officials and staff to support the recall groups in a final push to protect the nation. The justification for the recalls has increasingly been framed as a “resistance” movement against China and
Jaw Shaw-kong (趙少康), former chairman of Broadcasting Corp of China and leader of the “blue fighters,” recently announced that he had canned his trip to east Africa, and he would stay in Taiwan for the recall vote on Saturday. He added that he hoped “his friends in the blue camp would follow his lead.” His statement is quite interesting for a few reasons. Jaw had been criticized following media reports that he would be traveling in east Africa during the recall vote. While he decided to stay in Taiwan after drawing a lot of flak, his hesitation says it all: If
Saturday is the day of the first batch of recall votes primarily targeting lawmakers of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). The scale of the recall drive far outstrips the expectations from when the idea was mooted in January by Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) caucus whip Ker Chien-ming (柯建銘). The mass recall effort is reminiscent of the Sunflower movement protests against the then-KMT government’s non-transparent attempts to push through a controversial cross-strait service trade agreement in 2014. That movement, initiated by students, civic groups and non-governmental organizations, included student-led protesters occupying the main legislative chamber for three weeks. The two movements are linked
RSS