Publicly listed firms repatriated NT$114.4 billion (US$3.72 billion) of investment gains from China last year, a 175.7 percent surge from NT$41.5 billion in 2021 and the most since 2013, data released last month by the Financial Supervisory Commission showed. That came as listed firms posted a combined profit of NT$454.1 billion from their Chinese investments last year, a NT$98.2 billion decrease from 2021, but still the second-highest total over the past decade, driven mainly by the semiconductor and electronic components sectors.
Previously, listed firms rarely repatriated their investment gains from China, as Beijing imposes strict foreign-exchange controls to curb capital outflows. Taiwanese firms also tend to keep most of their profits in China for further investments. However, this has changed in the past few years as they have been scaling back new investments in the world’s second-largest economy amid US-China trade disputes as well as escalating tensions across the Taiwan Strait.
There are three main reasons for Taiwanese listed firms to repatriate their investment gains. The first is to meet funding needs and business planning. Firms remit their investment income and proceeds from share sales to their parent companies to bolster working capital and align with their business groups’ capital planning strategy.
Second, the fund repatriations were in response to firms’ deployment strategies, as more Taiwanese businesses shifted their investment targets to the US or countries covered by the government’s New Southbound Policy, introduced in 2016 and aimed at boosting interactions with ASEAN and South Asian nations, as well as Australia and New Zealand.
Third, China’s economic outlook has become more worrying for Taiwanese businesses, and nervousness over geopolitics has limited their investments there. For example, there are growing concerns over the transparency and accuracy of China’s economic data, making it harder for businesses to make investment plans. The Chinese National Bureau of Statistics last week reported that profits at industrial firms continued to plunge in the first three months of the year, down 21.4 percent year-on-year, even though the same agency just 10 days earlier reported that China’s first-quarter GDP expanded 4.5 percent annually, which was the fastest in the past year.
In other words, demand for China’s goods is still weak, despite a rebound in overall economic growth that has been driven largely by the services sector following the end of strict COVID-19 restrictions at the end of last year. As the recovery in China’s economy is still patchy and the strength of its rebound is closely linked to the global trade environment, it is not surprising that listed firms repatriated about one-quarter of their profits made in China last year.
The latest data also showed that businesses remain wary of China’s investment environment and firms have started to evaluate the ramifications of geopolitical risks, despite messages from senior government officials that China welcomes foreign investment. On one hand, US-China trade tensions have continued to escalate, with the dispute shifting from trade to investment and technology. In March, Beijing launched a cybersecurity review of US chipmaker Micron Technology, a move that followed Washington’s efforts to contain China’s access to strategic semiconductor technologies.
On the other hand, relations between Taiwan and China have become even tenser in the past few years, with little room for any breakthrough in the short term as some people have suggested. Just two weeks ago, China launched an investigation into so-called trade barriers that Taiwan has imposed on more than 2,400 Chinese imports spanning from agricultural products and textiles to minerals and petrochemicals. The changes were similar to many of those Beijing has imposed on Taiwanese goods over the years, which suggests the unpredictability of China as an export market.
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Acting Chairman Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌) has formally announced his intention to stand for permanent party chairman. He has decided that he is the right person to steer the fledgling third force in Taiwan’s politics through the challenges it would certainly face in the post-Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) era, rather than serve in a caretaker role while the party finds a more suitable candidate. Huang is sure to secure the position. He is almost certainly not the right man for the job. Ko not only founded the party, he forged it into a one-man political force, with himself