Taiwan faces a rising national deficit and increasing government debt, so it is reasonable that the government proposes new taxes. However, the government has reiterated that it has no plan to re-impose a capital gains tax on investment income, be it from stock or property sales. This shows it is still not ready to create a fair taxation environment.
On Thursday, the Chinese-language United Evening News reported that President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) had allegedly discussed with Minister of Finance-designate Christina Liu (劉憶如) potential adjustments to the nation’s tax system, including the introduction of a capital gains tax on investment profits.
Although it was just media speculation about the “possibility” of such tariffs, both Liu and Financial Supervisory Commission Chairman Chen Yuh-chang (陳裕璋), as well as Presidential Office officials, immediately said the report was inaccurate. They said the matter was still under consideration and there was no rush by the government to implement a capital gains tax without consulting the public.
The question is whether the immediate denials reflected the market’s anxiety over the government’s plan to address the tax exemption on capital gains — one of the most contested issues in the nation’s tax system — or if the reaction showed officials’ fear of repeating the experience of Shirley Kuo (郭婉容), whose announcement of a capital gains tax on securities transactions in 1988, when she was minister of finance, caused the stock market to plummet for 19 consecutive days, or that of Wang Chien-shien (王建煊), who quit as minister of finance in 1992 because he wanted to levy the land value increment tax based on the actual transaction price rather than the officially assessed land value.
Of course, reform is painful and tax reform especially hard. That is why tax experts, academics and the media have been discussing the idea of capital gains tax on and off since the government shelved the capital gains tax on securities in 1990. The good news is that through the years, an increasing number of people have been willing to consider the idea that investors could pay tax on capital gains, but deduct investment losses from taxable income.
The occasion of the appointment of a new finance minister is a good time for a serious discussion of how to promote a more equitable society through fairer taxation, including the capital gains tax.
On Friday, Liu said that once she assumes her new post, she plans to convene a national tax reform committee to draft new tax policies. Liu also said she welcomed suggestions to improve the nation’s financial health, but she made clear that she would not impose a capital gains tax on securities transactions during her term. If Liu meant it and if the government were to deliver on its promise of narrowing the gap between rich and poor, then a capital gains tax deserves public discussion, like a windfall tax or other measures that can enlarge the nation’s tax base and promote fairer taxation rates.
Even so, the idea of convening another national tax reform committee could terrify many people, as not long ago a similar tax reform committee publicly criticized itself as being nothing but a rubber-stamp body for the government’s tax-cut policy, and for helping to widen the nation’s wealth gap and increase government debt.
Whatever options are discussed by the committee and regardless of what conclusions are drawn, the key issue is the government’s determination to implement tax reform. What people need are officials who are professional enough to stand up to political pressure, rather than a government that simply talks but does nothing.
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS