The crisis-struck Miaoli County Government is unable to pay its staff, resulting in the Executive Yuan effectively taking over the county’s finances. This problem is not unique to Miaoli. Yunlin County is also under fiscal pressure and might face a deficit of NT$1 billion (US$31.9 million) in October. If the central government does not find ways to control the situation, this could well be the first in a series of similar events.
That local governments find themselves in difficult fiscal situations is nothing new. Data from the National Treasury Administration show that both Miaoli and Yilan counties have exceeded their debt ceilings. Yunlin, Nantou, Chiayi, Pingtung, Hsinchu and Hualien counties, along with Hsinchu City, are also in dire financial straits, as their debts exceed 40 percent of their respective budgets.
More than half of all counties and municipalities are in financial difficulty. Industry is not sufficiently developed, tax revenue is too low and expenditure continues to rise. Personnel costs for civil servants and public school teachers alone make up over half of county government expenditure. Furthermore, some county commissioners lack fiscal discipline.
Former Miaoli County commissioner Liu Cheng-hung (劉政鴻) is a case in point. He clearly knew the county’s treasury was running low, but he was fond of grandiose projects and used the funds of various government foundations to organize fireworks displays and international concerts and to construct buildings that are underused. As a result, his successor is complaining that the county government cannot pay staff salaries.
Despite Liu’s absurd record, the county council passed the government budget almost untouched year after year, while Liu was given a five-star rating in media polls. He was the role model for Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) local rule, and was praised by the Cabinet on several occasions. Miaoli County Commissioner Hsu Yao-chang (徐耀昌) used to be a KMT legislator representing the county, but he never questioned local-government finances. In other words, while many people might have found the situation odd, everyone played along and in the end the bottom fell out. This is a structural problem, and while it is necessary to pursue Liu’s possible legal liabilities, he is not the only one under suspicion of wrongdoing.
Liu may be a negative example, but in the final analysis, he has contributed to Taiwan: His failure has made the central and local governments pay attention to fiscal controls, perhaps helping to put an end to the deteriorating fiscal situation at central and local government level.
The economic outlook for the next six months is looking worse than last year. House prices may fall, which means local government fiscal income from a variety of property-related taxes would also fall. If local governments want to develop land to increase revenue, low land prices and difficulties in selling would cause their finances to deteriorate further.
If the government fails to initiate pension reform due to election concerns, and perhaps even increases salaries for military personnel, civil servants and public school teachers in an attempt to win votes, this will only add to the fiscal burden of the central and local governments. If that happens, the next president will accuse President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration of destroying government finances and emptying the national treasury.
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
US President Donald Trump last week announced plans to impose reciprocal tariffs on eight countries. As Taiwan, a key hub for semiconductor manufacturing, is among them, the policy would significantly affect the country. In response, Minister of Economic Affairs J.W. Kuo (郭智輝) dispatched two officials to the US for negotiations, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) board of directors convened its first-ever meeting in the US. Those developments highlight how the US’ unstable trade policies are posing a growing threat to Taiwan. Can the US truly gain an advantage in chip manufacturing by reversing trade liberalization? Is it realistic to
The US Department of State has removed the phrase “we do not support Taiwan independence” in its updated Taiwan-US relations fact sheet, which instead iterates that “we expect cross-strait differences to be resolved by peaceful means, free from coercion, in a manner acceptable to the people on both sides of the Strait.” This shows a tougher stance rejecting China’s false claims of sovereignty over Taiwan. Since switching formal diplomatic recognition from the Republic of China to the People’s Republic of China in 1979, the US government has continually indicated that it “does not support Taiwan independence.” The phrase was removed in 2022
US President Donald Trump’s second administration has gotten off to a fast start with a blizzard of initiatives focused on domestic commitments made during his campaign. His tariff-based approach to re-ordering global trade in a manner more favorable to the United States appears to be in its infancy, but the significant scale and scope are undeniable. That said, while China looms largest on the list of national security challenges, to date we have heard little from the administration, bar the 10 percent tariffs directed at China, on specific priorities vis-a-vis China. The Congressional hearings for President Trump’s cabinet have, so far,
RSS