In December 2010, while property prices were on the rise, the Ministry of Finance implemented a preferential housing loan program with favorable mortgage rates for first-time homebuyers in an effort to lessen the pressure on young people and meet real demand for self-occupied homes. Eight state-run banks have participated in the program, and anyone without a property registered under their name could apply for the loans regardless of their earning ability.
As home prices continued to soar, a lack of affordable housing remained a top complaint among young people. The ministry in August last year instructed the state-run banks to refine four major areas of the preferential loan program. The revisions offer more flexible conditions for applicants, such as increasing the maximum loan amount from NT$8 million to NT$10 million (US$245,806 to US$307,257), extending the loan period from 30 to 40 years and expanding the grace period for repayment from three years to five years. In addition, the government and the banks provide additional loan interest subsidies lasting three years until July 31, 2026.
From August last year to May, the revised program had alleviated the financial burden on many young families, assisting in the purchase of 57,980 homes by people who previously did not own a house. About 73 percent of the people who took out the loans were aged 40 or younger, ministry data showed. The revised program has helped support the local housing market, driving average prices to rise more than 10 percent year-on-year during the first four months of this year and ushering in the start of a new housing boom since the COVID-19 pandemic.
However, it has also prompted the central bank to introduce a sixth round of selective credit controls to cool the housing market as well as raise the reserve requirement ratio by 0.25 percentage points to soak up about NT$120 billion of liquidity in the market. Meanwhile, critics have raised concerns over the misuse of the program, such as borrowers using dummy bank accounts to apply for preferential housing loans or leasing their houses for investment purposes.
The renewed surge in home prices might stem from the recovering growth in the economy, the wealth effect of a bullish stock market or an imbalance between supply and demand in the housing market. It might also be caused by people’s inflationary expectations or investor speculation. The preferential loan program is not solely to blame for rising housing prices and should not be discredited as a tool of real-estate speculators; rather, it helps those in need.
Nonetheless, the negative sentiment toward the preferential loan program indicates that there is still room for improvement, from drafting new measures to conducting process simulations and executing a revised program. The government must also work harder to crack down on abuse. The Executive Yuan’s decision to conduct a comprehensive review of the program is a good start, and its announcement last week to tighten rules for borrowers shows that this administration remains committed to promoting housing justice, combating real-estate speculation and taking care of young people.
However, to facilitate the healthy development of the overall housing market, the government needs to go further and conduct a comprehensive review of the nation’s real-estate policies, accounting for key elements such as population and family structure, regional and industrial development, transportation and quality of life. A crisis can serve as a turning point, and complaints about the preferential loan program could hopefully be a good start for the government to refine its real-estate policy.
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