Imagine driving in the outside lane only to suddenly realize that it had become a left-turn-only lane. You want to move to the right lane, but vehicles block your way. You have to stay in the left lane, but if caught, you could be fined. Now picture yourself riding a scooter. Some cars stop ahead of you. You cross the double white line while passing the vehicles. If caught, you could receive a traffic ticket.
Here are a few more scenarios: You stop your car temporarily to unload some goods or pick someone up. You could be fined for parking at the red lines.
You accidentally exceed the speed limit while driving on a wide downhill road. It is captured by traffic cameras and you get fined.
When you return home at night, you leave your car in an area for temporary parking. Even without disturbing anyone, you could be fined for illegal parking.
If you turn on your car’s underglow lighting by accident, you might be fined.
In some places, traffic signs can be unclear or ambiguous, but you might break the rules and receive a traffic ticket simply for turning left or right. At the same time, many unreasonable people who — either for no good reason or with vicious intent — like to report traffic infractions.
In densely populated Taiwan, those who drive a car or ride a scooter must have received at least one traffic ticket.
How do agencies distribute and use the revenue that comes from traffic fines? The local governments where the traffic contraventions occur receive 75 percent of the revenue from fines, while law enforcement agencies get 24 percent. Only 1 percent is allocated to the national treasury.
In other words, local governments are the major beneficiaries of traffic fines.
However, the public tends to blame the central government and the ruling party for traffic fines. While the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has a good record on governance, it has suffered two consecutive major setbacks in local elections. Perhaps it has something to do with traffic tickets and fines.
My job requires me to drive to work every day. For almost three decades, I have been a law-abiding driver, but in Taiwan, it is easy for a driver to receive traffic tickets.
In 2016, people reported 1.53 million cases of traffic contraventions. Last year, that number reached 7 million.
When local governments make their annual budgets, traffic fines are considered a significant source of revenue.
For example, in 2018, the administration of Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕) forecast about NT$480 million (US$15.47 million) in revenue to come from traffic fines.
Since then, that figure has drastically increased. From 2020 onward, the Taichung City Government expected to receive NT$1.58 billion in revenue from traffic fines. As it turned out, the city has received more than NT$2 billion from traffic fines for three consecutive years. Last year, that revenue was nearly NT$3 billion, almost twice the expected amount.
Taichung is not the only example. This is happening in other local governments as well.
However, local governments are not for-profit organizations. Is it appropriate for them to consider traffic fines an expected part of their budgets? In doing so, local governments are essentially targeting vehicle users, waiting for them to break the law, while drivers and scooter riders are becoming ATMs for governments.
Moreover, is it appropriate for people who are not law enforcement officers to report traffic contraventions? Dashboard cameras are intended to protect drivers, providing evidence when traffic disputes occur. Now, dashcam videos are often used to report drivers, which should be the work and responsibility of the police, not civilians.
The Ministry of Transportation and Communications should define clearer rules concerning traffic tickets and fines. Amendments should be made if necessary. If further regulations regarding the usage of traffic fines are needed, the ministry should create them. Central and local governments should work together and agree on those terms.
Drivers should not be considered cash cows for local governments.
It is fortunate that DPP legislative candidate Wang Yi-chuan (王義川), a popular TV political pundit and chief strategist at the Taiwan Thinktank, is a specialist in traffic matters. Wang has proposed revising traffic reporting regulations and policy, suggesting that road users’ experiences should be considered when formulating traffic laws.
In this way, traffic rules can be more grounded and reasonably implemented. This is the change that many drivers want to see.
Traffic policy should be aimed at enhancing road safety. Traffic tickets should only be issued when necessary, and fines should not be considered as an official agency’s major source of revenue. Resentment from drivers would only increase if they are treated unfairly.
Lin Chin-kuo is a business manager at a technology company.
Translated by Emma Liu
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
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS