Taiwan should accelerate setting up detailed regulations for carbon pricing and the creation of a carbon credit exchange to reduce carbon emissions and help local manufacturers cope with the imminent “carbon border tax” levied by the EU.
Taiwan has lagged behind developed countries in implementing policies to cut greenhouse gas emissions. According to a report published by the World Bank in May, 68 countries had carbon pricing initiatives, with 36 levying carbon taxes and 32 having emission trading systems.
Taiwan’s proposed climate change response act (氣候變遷因應法), which would provide key regulations related to reaching the government’s pledge to reduce net carbon emissions to zero by 2050, passed the first reading at the Legislative Yuan in May. The Environmental Protection Administration aims to push through the act during the last legislative session that began this month.
However, the bill lacks substantial content and detailed regulations on carbon pricing or penalties for violations. It stipulates that local companies emitting more than 25,000 tonnes of carbon per year would be required to pay a carbon fee, rather than the commonly adopted carbon tax. It does not clearly say how much those large emitters would have to pay, but fees could range from NT$100 to NT$300 (US$3.26 to US$9.77) per tonne of carbon emitted.
The carbon fee would also not adequately motivate local manufacturers to cut their carbon footprints. The charge is much lower than the carbon tax of more than NT$500 per tonne Singapore intends to levy from 2024. The city-state started collecting carbon taxes in 2019, and in February quadrupled the levy. Local businesses may choose to pay the relatively low carbon fee if there is any.
The carbon fee, to take effect as early as 2024, would initially cover about 287 companies from high-emitting industries such as the steelmaking, semiconductor, cement and petrochemical sectors. Industry leaders such as China Steel Corp, Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co and Formosa Plastics Group would be on the list.
The carbon fee is only a small part of carbon reduction measures implemented by some EU countries, the US, Japan, South Korea, China and Singapore. Other measures usually include carbon trading to help businesses compensate for carbon emissions by funding an equivalent saving of carbon dioxide elsewhere.
Taiwan should set up a carbon credit exchange or trading system to meet growing domestic demand. Local exporters are facing mounting pressure to reduce their carbon footprints to secure orders. Since carbon emissions are included in their customers’ carbon emission reports, businesses with less carbon emissions would have an advantage.
Local businesses need to gear up for the implementation of the carbon border adjustment mechanism by the EU — an import tax designed to corral other countries into tackling climate change.
The carbon border tax could take effect from 2026. About 212 categories worth NT$24.5 billion from Taiwan are expected to be affected by the EU levy.
Since Taiwan does not have a carbon market, businesses are looking overseas. Chimei Corp, which makes polymer materials, synthetic rubbers and specialty chemicals, said it joined Singapore’s global carbon exchange Climate Impact X (CIX) in April and became the first Taiwanese enterprise to complete a carbon credit transaction through the purchase of 10,000 tonnes of carbon credits from the CIX’s Project Marketplace.
As Taiwan’s economy is reliant on exports, government agencies should catch up with the world in setting up a comprehensive carbon emission reduction mechanism that includes carbon fees and carbon trading. This would help local businesses lower costs, secure orders and create new revenue sources by selling carbon savings.
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