Over the past few decades, there have been frequent reports of city and county councilors being sentenced for embezzling funds through shell accounts for bogus assistants.
As the monthly salary for a councilor assistant is only NT$30,000 to NT$40,000 (US$1,056 to US$1,407), why is the money so alluring to some councilors, even at the cost of their political careers?
During her term, a former Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Tainan city councilor surnamed Yang (楊) embezzled funds by making false reports on expenses, illegally profiting by as much as NT$6.68 million through shell accounts under bogus names.
Neither are cases of councilors embezzling funds over several terms unheard of. From 2010 to 2017, a former DPP Taoyuan city councilor surnamed Chiu (邱) applied for monthly salaries for his “assistants,” who were actually working for his family’s land administration agency during the period.
Not only did he not have to pay them, but he did not have to provide labor and health insurance for them. By doing so, he embezzled as much as NT$8.22 million from the Taoyuan City Government.
More absurdly, a Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Taoyuan city councilor surnamed Shu (舒), who is serving a sixth term, was late last year charged for embezzling funds via shell accounts of bogus assistants in the names of her mother, who had had a stroke, her older brother, who has a mental disorder, and several friends. Prosecutors accused the councilor of embezzling NT$9.8 million.
The monthly salary of a bogus assistant is insignificant, but when a councilor makes relatives and friends bogus assistants, the long-term total of their salaries might be enough to invest in real estate, which is probably why some councilors are willing to take the risk.
Under the assistant fee system, councilors can provide subsidies to assistants, with minimal requirements for personnel data. Therefore, it is not easy for them to get caught if they embezzle funds by such means.
The Ministry of the Interior last year conducted a review of the subsidy system for assistant employment, hoping to curb embezzlement by councilors, but the legislative amendments that the ministry proposed mostly focused on subsidy limits and verification methods.
However, the key lies in how to prevent councilors from turning their jurisdictions into hotbeds of corruption.
The application for assistant fees is not monitored, so it is difficult to catch councilors who are embezzling funds in the names of their relatives and friends.
Given how little an assistant subsidy provides and the lack of monitoring, it is no wonder that some councilors are not even aware that they are breaking the law.
By the time investigations are launched, a councilor might have already embezzled more than NT$1 million, or even NT$10 million.
They not only stole taxpayers’ money, but also crowded out monthly wages of real assistants and hurt the quality of their services.
Therefore, amendments proposed by the ministry should be based on the premise of openness and transparency, and they should require councilors to disclose information about their assistants — including their names, titles and salaries.
After all, the primary goal of most elected representatives is to win re-election, and their supporters and rivals would watch closely to see whether the information they provide is accurate.
Wu Hsiang-chun is chairwoman of the Taiwan City Council Assistant Industrial Labor Union.
Translated by Eddy Chang
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
RSS