Although calls for relaxation of restrictions on two-way investment between Taiwan and China are becoming de rigueur, concerns remain about how far and how fast the ban should be lifted. Other concerns include the nature of the international capital, the structure of China's foreign investments and the cross-strait relationship.
Recently, sovereign wealth funds worth up to US$2.5 trillion have been set up by China, Russia, Persian Gulf countries and Singapore and have acquired financial assets in other countries -- particularly in developed countries -- and merged with well-known enterprises or invested in strategically important industries. Such investment behavior has raised economic and even national security concerns in free and open countries such as the US.
Former US Treasury secretary and noted economist Lawrence Summers has described this phenomenon as "cross-border nationalization." He has called on the IMF and other international organizations to work out a code of conduct. It is therefore clear that the problems are serious.
In recent years, China has become the largest recipient of foreign direct investment (FDI) among developing countries and the fourth largest in the world, after the US, the UK and France.
In 2006, China alone saw an FDI of US$78.1 billion, 6 percent of the global share. With accumulated foreign exchange reserves of approximately US$1.5 trillion -- mainly from the nation's trade surplus -- China has gradually been willing and able to invest abroad.
In 2006, China's foreign investment reached US$20 billion, ranking 13th in the world. Investments were mainly in Asia and Latin America, concentrated in the fields of energy and strategic materials.
Although investment performance has been pretty good for a beginner, we can say China's foreign investment is still relatively small. It is because many countries are still wary of the "China threat" and, most importantly, because China still maintains strict controls on capital transfers and capital accounts, especially for private capital.
For instance, China bans residents from directly investing abroad. In addition, private enterprises are still not active enough to support the relatively delicate overseas investments. In 2004, for example, non-government enterprises only accounted for one-fifth of the nation's listed companies. Despite their limited international experience, state-owned enterprises still play a primary role in China's foreign investment, while non-government enterprises only make up one percent of the nation's total investment.
China's blatant state control of the foreign investment structure has led several US lawmakers to urge the US Committee on Foreign Investment to be highly vigilant of Chinese investments as they could pose a threat to the nation's economic security.
In particular, China's political motivation is likely to be greater than its business concern, which usually serves as a good cover for officials initiating an investigation. The US government is concerned about not only Chinese investment, but also China's industrial espionage, which could result in US state-of-the-art military technology being leaked to a third country if a company were later bought out.
However, this has led China to change its investment strategy when acquiring US enterprises. For example, Chinese companies intentionally grab less than 10 percent of market share to avoid holding management rights. They may have a third partner involved in the investment to diminish US concerns.
As far as Chinese capital investment in Taiwan is concerned, the real estate, securities and equities and real business sectors have received a great deal of attention in recent years. Since August 2002, Taiwan has officially opened up to China capital investment in real estate. Yet tedious application procedures for Chinese investment and strict restrictions on outgoing capital from China have hampered the process. As a result of these barriers, fewer than 10 transactions have been successfully completed over the years.
Until now, Taiwan has not deregulated short term Chinese investment in stocks and bonds and long term investment in the manufacturing industries. Since two-way communication plays an important role in economic activities, it is expected that Taiwan will move toward further liberaliza-tion. Ideally, Chinese investment in Taiwan may cause personnel movement, services and trade opportunities, profit repatriation or taxation, and thus perhaps balance the situation.
However, looking at global trends and past experience in cross-strait relations and the nature of China's economy, we should impose strict regulations on Chinese investments through state-run enterprises and sovereign wealth funds. It is even more essential that we learn from how the US has handled foreign and Chinese investments through legislation and policies.
Honigmann Tsai-lung Hong is an associate research fellow at the international affairs division of the Taiwan Institute of Economic Research.
Translated by Ted Yang
US President Donald Trump created some consternation in Taiwan last week when he told a news conference that a successful trade deal with China would help with “unification.” Although the People’s Republic of China has never ruled Taiwan, Trump’s language struck a raw nerve in Taiwan given his open siding with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression seeking to “reunify” Ukraine and Russia. On earlier occasions, Trump has criticized Taiwan for “stealing” the US’ chip industry and for relying too much on the US for defense, ominously presaging a weakening of US support for Taiwan. However, further examination of Trump’s remarks in
It is being said every second day: The ongoing recall campaign in Taiwan — where citizens are trying to collect enough signatures to trigger re-elections for a number of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — is orchestrated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), or even President William Lai (賴清德) himself. The KMT makes the claim, and foreign media and analysts repeat it. However, they never show any proof — because there is not any. It is alarming how easily academics, journalists and experts toss around claims that amount to accusing a democratic government of conspiracy — without a shred of evidence. These
China on May 23, 1951, imposed the so-called “17-Point Agreement” to formally annex Tibet. In March, China in its 18th White Paper misleadingly said it laid “firm foundations for the region’s human rights cause.” The agreement is invalid in international law, because it was signed under threat. Ngapo Ngawang Jigme, head of the Tibetan delegation sent to China for peace negotiations, was not authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the Tibetan government and the delegation was made to sign it under duress. After seven decades, Tibet remains intact and there is global outpouring of sympathy for Tibetans. This realization
Taiwan is confronting escalating threats from its behemoth neighbor. Last month, the Chinese People’s Liberation Army conducted live-fire drills in the East China Sea, practicing blockades and precision strikes on simulated targets, while its escalating cyberattacks targeting government, financial and telecommunication systems threaten to disrupt Taiwan’s digital infrastructure. The mounting geopolitical pressure underscores Taiwan’s need to strengthen its defense capabilities to deter possible aggression and improve civilian preparedness. The consequences of inadequate preparation have been made all too clear by the tragic situation in Ukraine. Taiwan can build on its successful COVID-19 response, marked by effective planning and execution, to enhance
RSS