Last week, the Taichung City Government received NT$8.62 billion (US$274.19 million) by auctioning off plots of public land in the city’s phase 13 and phase 14 zoning areas. The result was not as good as expected, with only 54 of 123 plots receiving bids, and the total amount raised being much lower than the floor price of NT$20.46 billion.
The city government’s announcement late last month that it would auction off 28,000 ping (9.26 hectares) of land in the city’s prime areas to repay debts attracted the central government’s attention and triggered discussion between parties. The Ministry of the Interior even asked to postpone the auction to help curb real-estate speculation, but to no avail.
No one is opposed to the Taichung City Government’s decision to auction off public land to repay debts. At issue are the huge areas of land to be sold at one time and the floor price being set much higher than the market expected, which might have a spillover effect, increasing land and housing prices in neighboring areas.
The ministry was concerned that setting a floor price at least 20 percent higher than the market price might further increase land and housing prices in the city. It even suggested buying the land from the city government to construct social housing. The plots at auction were not reserved for social housing and there was nothing wrong with selling them to repay debts, the city government said in response.
Should public land be put up for sale?
This issue is controversial and has persisted for a long time in Taiwan. Mayors and county commissioners have used urban planning and zoning to drive local development and obtain financial resources, which, at the same time, has made land more profitable and benefited local developers.
In theory, the central government or local governments could either raise funds from disposing of public land to bolster their finances or do it for other purposes. However, they should avoid contributing to the problem of rising housing prices. The city government did not directly respond to such worries, saying only it could not sell public land too cheaply.
In the past, state-owned land sales repeatedly hit sky-high prices, making the government a target of criticism for taking the lead in promoting real-estate speculation. In 2012, the Ministry of Finance revised laws to ban sales of state-owned plots measuring less than 500 ping in Taipei to avoid aggravating rampant property speculation and price gouging by construction firms. Last year, it started suspending sales of state-owned land measuring more than 200 ping in residential and commercial zoning areas in the nation’s six special municipalities, with priority given to the construction of social housing. The ministry only auctions off superficies rights for state-owned land instead of selling the land outright.
Unaffordable housing in Taiwan has been a top public grievance for many years. Unlike private enterprises which mostly focus on financial returns, government agencies must bear the responsibility of stabilizing housing prices and consider the impact on the market when disposing of public land. While implementing housing justice is a consensus in Taiwan, it depends on the concerted efforts of the central and local governments. After all, public land is not just an ordinary commodity that can potentially bring in a large financial return; it has embedded interests and value for the public. The allocation and utilization of public land should be in line with the principles of fairness, reasonability and sustainability.
Last week’s public land auction raised concerns about its rationality. The Taichung City Government should revisit its mechanism for setting floor prices. If the city government is still unwilling to sell the land to the central government, it should consider other options and put the interests of the public first.
The Chinese government on March 29 sent shock waves through the Tibetan Buddhist community by announcing the untimely death of one of its most revered spiritual figures, Hungkar Dorje Rinpoche. His sudden passing in Vietnam raised widespread suspicion and concern among his followers, who demanded an investigation. International human rights organization Human Rights Watch joined their call and urged a thorough investigation into his death, highlighting the potential involvement of the Chinese government. At just 56 years old, Rinpoche was influential not only as a spiritual leader, but also for his steadfast efforts to preserve and promote Tibetan identity and cultural
Former minister of culture Lung Ying-tai (龍應台) has long wielded influence through the power of words. Her articles once served as a moral compass for a society in transition. However, as her April 1 guest article in the New York Times, “The Clock Is Ticking for Taiwan,” makes all too clear, even celebrated prose can mislead when romanticism clouds political judgement. Lung crafts a narrative that is less an analysis of Taiwan’s geopolitical reality than an exercise in wistful nostalgia. As political scientists and international relations academics, we believe it is crucial to correct the misconceptions embedded in her article,
Strategic thinker Carl von Clausewitz has said that “war is politics by other means,” while investment guru Warren Buffett has said that “tariffs are an act of war.” Both aphorisms apply to China, which has long been engaged in a multifront political, economic and informational war against the US and the rest of the West. Kinetically also, China has launched the early stages of actual global conflict with its threats and aggressive moves against Taiwan, the Philippines and Japan, and its support for North Korea’s reckless actions against South Korea that could reignite the Korean War. Former US presidents Barack Obama
The pan-blue camp in the era after the rule of the two Chiangs — former presidents Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) and Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國) — can be roughly divided into two main factions: the “true blue,” who insist on opposing communism to protect the Republic of China (ROC), and the “red-blue,” who completely reject the current government and would rather collude with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to control Taiwan. The families of the former group suffered brutally under the hands of communist thugs in China. They know the CPP well and harbor a deep hatred for it — the two
RSS