Reform of the preferential interest rates for retired public servants was announced to great fanfare, despite the paltry gains involved. Every year, NT$70 billion (US$2.4 billion) is spent subsidizing interest payments. These reforms will save perhaps NT$2 billion to NT$3 billion, and will neither help the government dig itself out of the financial hole it is in, nor calm public anger.
Monthly pension payments for this privileged group, coupled with the preferential interest rate, mean that these pensions are worth between 75 percent and 95 percent of public servants’ original salary. If the pension is 85 percent of the salary, a person previously earning NT$70,000 a month would then be due a pension of almost NT$60,000 a month. Tax on this is minimal, as no tax is payable on the first NT$65,000 anyway, and then there are various exemptions. If active civil servants get a raise, retired ones get a raise on their pension, while subsidies — costing the government NT$10 billion every year — are handed out to those supporting children in school.
Compare this with the average worker’s NT$12,000 monthly pension from the new system, which amounts to 17 percent of the salary of our civil servant above. Even if a worker contributes the maximum amount of insurance — NT$43,900 a year for a total of 40 years — they would still only get NT$20,000 a month. Under the old system, some workers can also receive a retirement package of up to 45 months’ salary, paid by the employer. With an original salary of NT$50,000, that would mean a one-off payment of NT$2.25 million. Spread over 20 years this is not even 20 percent of the original salary. Factor in the monthly pension payments of the average worker and this still only adds up to less than 40 percent of a civil servant’s salary. Furthermore, the majority of businesses in Taiwan are SMEs, which have a life span of about 10 years. Only around 10 percent of workers even receive a retirement payout from their company anyway.
Is it fair that there is so much disparity in the pension systems for public servants and the rest of us? That sound you are hearing is the death rattle of the principle of trust.
The government’s principle of wealth allocation really only applies to about 100 retired government officials, which will save about NT$30 million. Twenty percent of the 400,000 accounts with the preferential rate have savings of NT$2 million or more. That is NT$30,000 in interest every month. It seems likely anyone that has that much in savings would have been a mid to high-ranking official, already on a high salary. If these people were included in the principle, the government would save the taxpayer NT$30 billion a year.
How ironic it is that the very thing that most harms Taiwan in international competitiveness ratings is the lack of administrative efficiency, while the strength of its SMEs is singled out as one of its strongest competitive edges. Those criticized for inefficiency are given an iron rice bowl, while those praised for their industry are not only paid less, but shoulder the greater tax burden to support the former group of supposedly “special” people. No wonder the public is up in arms. Nobody really paid it much mind in the past, when Taiwan’s economy was booming, but now that salaries have stagnated, and in some cases are falling, patience is wearing thin. Even Examination Yuan President John Kuan (關中) conceded there were failings in the career-based system of civil service in a report submitted after a visit to three northern European countries last year. These failings included the emphasis on fairness over flexibility, the lack of skills testing, poor work/life balance and salaries based on seniority, not performance.
Given the failings of the system, the lack of efficiency and the disproportionately favorable welfare, it’s no wonder public servants have found themselves in the public’s crosshairs.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS