China’s electric vehicle (EV) industry is rapidly rising, with the global market penetration of firms such as BYD Co approaching that of traditional auto manufacturers and even affecting markets in Europe and Southeast Asia.
On Tuesday last week, the Chinese-language Mirror Media magazine reported that Taiwanese lawmakers attended a banquet hosted by Taikoo Motors Ltd, which is seeking to import BYD vehicles manufactured in Thailand. This touches on issues of Taiwan’s economic security, policy direction and competitive market order.
To enter Taiwan, Chinese-made products must comply with the Act Governing Relations Between the People of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area (臺灣地區與大陸地區人民關係條例) and the Regulations Governing Trade Between the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area (臺灣地區與大陸地區貿易許可辦法). Their applications must also be reviewed by the Bureau of Foreign Trade in accordance with the “consolidated list of mainland China products whose importation is prohibited.”
Direct imports of fully assembled vehicles from China are banned, and vehicles assembled locally using Chinese components must meet strict localization thresholds.
By using its Thai factories and rebranding its products under the Denza brand before importing them to Taiwan through Taikoo, BYD would be intentionally operating in a legal gray area. Determining the products’ place of “substantial transformation” — the region in where a product was substantially changed after being imported for a specific manufacturing or processing purpose — and brand ownership would test the government’s policy enforcement capabilities and trade review mechanisms.
If BYD does not build a factory or directly invest in Taiwan, the Department of Investment Review would not intervene. The Bureau of Foreign Trade would have the final say, being responsible for the review of imports and exports.
Taiwan in 1996 adopted a negative list approach to imports, so all products that are not explicitly prohibited are permitted. Chinese-made sedans and station wagons have consistently remained on the prohibited list, illustrating the government’s high sensitivity to and strategic considerations for the domestic automobile industry.
Any attempt by BYD to use transshipment to export its products to Taiwan would inevitably face complex legal scrutiny over determining their origin and brand identification — both of which are issues at the core of the bureau’s review expertise.
“Origin laundering” refers to the deceptive practice of companies misrepresenting a product’s country of origin to make it appear as though it was manufactured somewhere else to bypass tariffs or trade restrictions. It typically involves shipping products to a third country and rebranding the country of origin after repackaging or partial processing.
It is a highly controversial practice, as it often contravenes customs rules and free-trade agreements. Should BYD use Thailand as a springboard for entering Taiwan’s market, the government must decide whether “substantial transformation” occurred. According to internationally accepted standards, simply repackaging or assembling a product in a third country is not sufficient to alter its country of origin.
The bureau has previously investigated certain transshipped Chinese-made products and denied their importation based on the results. If BYD cannot prove that its products undergo a sufficient substantial change in Thailand, they might be categorized as “made in China” and thus prohibited. That means that whether the Denza brand could be sold in Taiwan would depend on highly precise legal and technical judgements.
Taiwan’s EV market is still in its early stages, with intense competition from international brands such as Tesla, Volkswagen and Hyundai. Local companies such as Foxtron Vehicle Technologies, a joint venture between Hon Hai Precision Industry Co and Yulon Motor Co, are working to expand their presence. If BYD were to enter Taiwan’s market and leverage its price advantage, it would inevitably put pressure on Taiwanese EV companies and constrict their space for growth.
From a cross-strait political perspective, the government’s management and control of “made in China” products is closely related to economic security and industrial autonomy.
If the bureau were to adopt a permissive stance on this issue, it would almost certainly spark political and social controversy and might even influence the direction of cross-strait economic and trade policy. Whether BYD can take a “detour” through Thailand and enter Taiwan’s market would ultimately be determined by a comprehensive assessment of legal, economic and political factors. The results of the bureau’s review would become an important indicator for Taiwan’s trade policy, and might affect whether other Chinese companies attempt to follow suit.
Eason Chen is an engineer.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
Taiwanese pragmatism has long been praised when it comes to addressing Chinese attempts to erase Taiwan from the international stage. “Taipei” and the even more inaccurate and degrading “Chinese Taipei,” imposed titles required to participate in international events, are loathed by Taiwanese. That is why there was huge applause in Taiwan when Japanese public broadcaster NHK referred to the Taiwanese Olympic team as “Taiwan,” instead of “Chinese Taipei” during the opening ceremony of the Tokyo Olympics. What is standard protocol for most nations — calling a national team by the name their country is commonly known by — is impossible for
India is not China, and many of its residents fear it never will be. It is hard to imagine a future in which the subcontinent’s manufacturing dominates the world, its foreign investment shapes nations’ destinies, and the challenge of its economic system forces the West to reshape its own policies and principles. However, that is, apparently, what the US administration fears. Speaking in New Delhi last week, US Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau warned that “we will not make the same mistakes with India that we did with China 20 years ago.” Although he claimed the recently agreed framework
The Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR) on Wednesday last week announced it is launching investigations into 16 US trading partners, including Taiwan, under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 to determine whether they have engaged in unfair trade practices, such as overproduction. A day later, the agency announced a separate Section 301 investigation into 60 economies based on the implementation of measures to prohibit the importation of goods produced with forced labor. Several of Taiwan’s main trading rivals — including China, Japan, South Korea and the EU — also made the US’ investigation list. The announcements come
Taiwan is not invited to the table. It never has been, but this year, with the Philippines holding the ASEAN chair, the question that matters is no longer who gets formally named, it is who becomes structurally indispensable. The “one China” formula continues to do its job. It sets the outer boundary of official diplomatic speech, and no one in the region has a serious interest in openly challenging it. However, beneath the surface, something is thickening. Trade corridors, digital infrastructure, artificial intelligence (AI) cooperation, supply chains, cross-border investment: The connective tissue between Taiwan and ASEAN is quietly and methodically growing
RSS