Fubon Financial Holding Co on Friday last week said it would extend its tender offer for Jih Sun Financial Holding Co by 50 days until March 23, as the company’s hostile takeover of its smaller rival has not yet gained approval from the Fair Trade Commission. The initial offer of NT$13 per share, announced on Dec. 18 last year, surprised the domestic financial sector, and was on Jan. 5 criticized by Jih Sun as too low.
Fubon’s bid has also raised questions from lawmakers and market watchers as to whether one of Jih Sun’s major shareholders has links to a Chinese investment entity, and if Fubon aims to help the rumored Chinese investor dispose of his stake in Jih Sun for cash. Government agencies, including the Financial Supervisory Commission (FSC), the Investment Commission and the Mainland Affairs Council, have reportedly launched probes into whether Chinese investors are involved.
Rumors of the firm’s Chinese funding have been around for years. In 2006, Jih Sun invited Japan’s Shinsei Bank Ltd to become its strategic investor and bring in fresh capital to support the debt-ridden Jih Sun International Bank. In 2009, Jih Sun sold a stake to Capital Target Ltd to fund and improve its banking unit’s financial structure. Capital Target has since become Jih Sun’s second-largest shareholder with a stake of 24 percent, behind Shinsei Bank, which holds a 36 percent stake.
It has been widely rumored in the financial sector that Capital Target, which says it invests in Jih Sun to extend its business from real estate to banking, had in purchased the shares for Chinese tycoon Xiao Jianhua (肖建華), head of Tomorrow Holding Ltd. While the speculation has never been confirmed over the past 11 years, ever since Xiao was reportedly abducted by Chinese security agents in January 2017 from his Hong Kong Four Seasons-serviced apartment to mainland China, news has from time to time emerged that he has sold his alleged Jih Sun stakes to local conglomerates.
Government investigations into covert Chinese investments in Taiwan are a step in the right direction. It is the government’s duty to examine whether Chinese investment enters Taiwan through legal channels or sneaks in via back doors, routed through third parties and disguised as non-Chinese foreign investment.
Regardless of whether Fubon’s tender offer is successful, the government must thoroughly investigate whether stakes held by Chinese entities change hands and clearly explain its findings to the public.
The call for a stricter government review of the Jih Sun takeover comes in the wake of the FSC’s actions last year against illegal Chinese investments in the century-old household appliance maker Tatung Co. The commission imposed heavy fines on Tatung, suspended shareholder rights of Chinese investors and requested the sale of dubious shares within six months. If the FSC could act boldly to set things right in the Tatung case, there is no good reason for it not to apply the same principles and standards in the Jih Sun case.
Some might criticize the government’s stance toward Chinese investment, saying that it is no different from any other foreign investment. Yet it is wrong to regard the issue only from the viewpoint of investment, as it also concerns national security. Therefore, one crucial task is to kick out illegal Chinese investors as soon as possible, because no one knows the actual motive behind their investments. The government must take clear and decisive steps to review shares in Taiwanese firms held by Chinese investors. It should severely penalize those who contravene regulations. A lenient stance in the Jih Sun case could backfire.
US aerospace company Boeing Co has in recent years been involved in numerous safety incidents, including crashes of its 737 Max airliners, which have caused widespread concern about the company’s safety record. It has recently come to light that titanium jet engine parts used by Boeing and its European competitor Airbus SE were sold with falsified documentation. The source of the titanium used in these parts has been traced back to an unknown Chinese company. It is clear that China is trying to sneak questionable titanium materials into the supply chain and use any ensuing problems as an opportunity to
It’s not every month that the US Department of State sends two deputy assistant secretary-level officials to Taiwan, together. Its rarer still that such senior State Department policy officers, once on the ground in Taipei, make a point of huddling with fellow diplomats from “like-minded” NATO, ANZUS and Japanese governments to coordinate their multilateral Taiwan policies. The State Department issued a press release on June 22 admitting that the two American “representatives” had “hosted consultations in Taipei” with their counterparts from the “Taiwan Ministry of Foreign Affairs.” The consultations were blandly dubbed the “US-Taiwan Working Group on International Organizations.” The State
The Chinese Supreme People’s Court and other government agencies released new legal guidelines criminalizing “Taiwan independence diehard separatists.” While mostly symbolic — the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never had jurisdiction over Taiwan — Tamkang University Graduate Institute of China Studies associate professor Chang Wu-ueh (張五岳), an expert on cross-strait relations, said: “They aim to explain domestically how they are countering ‘Taiwan independence,’ they aim to declare internationally their claimed jurisdiction over Taiwan and they aim to deter Taiwanese.” Analysts do not know for sure why Beijing is propagating these guidelines now. Under Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), deciphering the
Delegation-level visits between the two countries have become an integral part of transformed relations between India and the US. Therefore, the visit by a bipartisan group of seven US lawmakers, led by US House of Representatives Committee on Foreign Affairs Chairman Michael McCaul to India from June 16 to Thursday last week would have largely gone unnoticed in India and abroad. However, the US delegation’s four-day visit to India assumed huge importance this time, because of the meeting between the US lawmakers and the Dalai Lama. This in turn brings us to the focal question: How and to what extent