KMT assets issue not over
There have been reports that Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Culture and Communications Committee director-general Lin Yi-hua (林奕華) on Friday said that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) had investigated, registered and controlled all controversial party assets issue during its first two terms in government, and that handling of such assets had been completed.
She also reportedly said that all KMT assets are legal assets and that they have all been put in a trust. This statement adheres to the party’s official standpoint that it announced prior to last month’s elections that every controversial asset had been returned in accordance with Control Yuan and Cabinet investigations, and it is just as flawed and unrealistic.
We contest this view and want to correct the public’s understanding of the issue.
With respect to the Control Yuan’s investigation, a report published in April, 2001 is restricted to dealing with national assets that were “transferred to” the KMT “without compensation.”
A more complete outline is provided by data and statistics unearthed between 2004 and 2008 by a task force for handling party asset issues that was established in January 2004. The data in a report submitted by the Ministry of Finance to the Cabinet on May 7, 2008, includes concrete figures listing party assets with a total value of more than NT$51.95 billion (US$1.55 billion at current exchange rates) divided into four categories: land — not including 152 buildings — awards and grants, tax exemptions, and retirement funds for party officials and civil servants.
The same report also states that there are “profits from party operated, specially licensed businesses” and “preferential interest rates on loans from publicly owned banks,” the value of which is difficult to verify and quantify.
It is especially difficult to concretely measure and quantify “profits from party operated, specially licensed businesses” due to its excessive scope and the extended period during which it occurred, but according to the ministry’s estimate at the time, this might amount to an even greater sum than the more than NT$50 billion already mentioned.
It should also not be forgotten that the China Youth Corps, the National Women’s League of the Republic of China and other KMT-linked organizations still have not been properly investigated.
The clearest evidence that the KMT’s official stance on the party assets issue is flawed is that the party is misleading the public using old and incomplete reports from the Control Yuan and the Cabinet, while deliberately ignoring later and more complete data from the ministry.
A vast number of documents on the KMT’s ill-gotten party assets have been accumulated, which has been presented in detail in the books Deconstructing Party-state Capitalism (解構黨國資本主義), published in 1997, Selling Off the KMT — the Great Party Asset Liquidation (拍賣國民黨－黨產大清算) from 2000, Party Asset Arrest Warrant (黨產追緝令) from 2008 and Declassifying Party Assets (黨產解密) from 2011.
In addition, there was full and correct information on the Cabinet’s party asset Web site before President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) had it closed down on May 20, 2008.
If the KMT thinks that the handling of its controversial party assets has been completed, the party should publish an itemized list showing how this has been done. If it cannot do that, should people really let the party continue with its sophistry?
Taiwan Association of University Professors
Taipei
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, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth have each given their thoughts on Russia’s war with Ukraine. There are a few proponents of US skepticism in Taiwan taking advantage of developments to write articles claiming that the US would arbitrarily abandon Ukraine. The reality is that when one understands Trump’s negotiating habits, one sees that he brings up all variables of a situation prior to discussion, using broad negotiations to take charge. As for his ultimate goals and the aces up his sleeve, he wants to keep things vague for
RSS