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
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) sits down with US President Donald Trump in Beijing on Thursday next week, Xi is unlikely to demand a dramatic public betrayal of Taiwan. He does not need to. Beijing’s preferred victory is smaller, quieter and in some ways far more dangerous: a subtle shift in American wording that appears technical, but carries major strategic meaning. The ask is simple: replace the longstanding US formulation that Washington “does not support Taiwan independence” with a harder one — that Washington “opposes” Taiwan independence. One word changes; a deterrence structure built over decades begins to shift.
Recently, Taipei’s streets have been plagued by the bizarre sight of rats running rampant and the city government’s countermeasures have devolved into an anti-intellectual farce. The Taipei Parks and Street Lights Office has attempted to eradicate rats by filling their burrows with polyurethane foam, seeming to believe that rats could not simply dig another path out. Meanwhile, as the nation’s capital slowly deteriorates into a rat hive, the Taipei Department of Environmental Protection has proudly pointed to the increase in the number of poisoned rats reported in February and March as a sign of success. When confronted with public concerns over young
Taipei is facing a severe rat infestation, and the city government is reportedly considering large-scale use of rodenticides as its primary control measure. However, this move could trigger an ecological disaster, including mass deaths of birds of prey. In the past, black kites, relatives of eagles, took more than three decades to return to the skies above the Taipei Basin. Taiwan’s black kite population was nearly wiped out by the combined effects of habitat destruction, pesticides and rodenticides. By 1992, fewer than 200 black kites remained on the island. Fortunately, thanks to more than 30 years of collective effort to preserve their remaining
China has long given assurances that it would not interfere in free access to the global commons. As one Ministry of Defense spokesperson put it in 2024, “the Chinese side always respects the freedom of navigation and overflight entitled to countries under international law.” Although these reassurances have always been disingenuous, China’s recent actions display a blatant disregard for these principles. Countries that care about civilian air safety should take note. In April, President Lai Ching-te (賴清德) canceled a planned trip to Eswatini for the 40th anniversary of King Mswati III’s coronation and the 58th anniversary of bilateral diplomatic
RSS