Showing posts with label income. Show all posts
Showing posts with label income. Show all posts

Saturday, December 15, 2012

Wage Stagnation with Numbers

Cricket, 7 am

Huang Tien-lin published an excellent commentary in the Taipei Times on the problem of wage stagnation in Taiwan...lots of juicy numbers.
The first point is that, whereas Taiwanese manufacturers did 12.24 percent of their manufacturing overseas in 1999, that figure grew to 46.23 percent by 2007, with 90.9 percent of offshore production done in China. By last year, the figure had climbed to 50.52 percent, with 92.7 percent of production abroad concentrated in China. After Taiwan’s first handover of government power from the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) to the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) in 2000, the administration of then-DPP president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) abandoned his KMT predecessor, former president Lee Teng-hui’s (李登輝) “no haste, be patient” policy with regard to investment in China, allowing Taiwanese manufacturers to quickly move their operations across the Taiwan Strait. This relaxation of Taiwan’s cross-strait policies led to an exodus of manufacturers on a scale that no other country has ever seen.
It's so nice to see this. Remember how the Establishment media abroad and the pan-Blue media at home  abused Chen Shui-bian for not "opening to China"??? It would be comical if it were a less urgent topic. Basically half of "Taiwan's" manufacturing is now done in China and the results are grim for the local populace. The number of working poor in Taiwan is high -- according to Huang, the DGBAS has 42% of the population making $30,000 NT or less, monthly.

Huang then goes on to point out that the moves kept Taiwan's makers "competitive". Profits shot up. But labor's share of GDP has fallen over the last decade from 50% to 44.5% of GDP. Last month I posted some charts from the US Bureau of Labor Statistics which showed, starkly, what has happened in Taiwan, especially since 2007. If you look at this chart you can plainly see that in the period 2000-07 Taiwanese workers experienced very slow wage growth and then, between 2007-10 experienced negative wage growth even though the very next chart shows that productivity growth has slowed slightly but continues to rise. This gap between falling wages and rising productivity, ironically makes Taiwan very "competive" which is neoliberal slang for a place where capital can make tons of money while the workers get screwed. For the last decade, but especially the last three years of the data, gains from rising productivity have gone to the firms, not to the workers.

Huang's next point is even more brutal:
The third point is that while Taiwanese manufacturers have spent more than a decade chasing cheap labor in China, they have paid scant attention to research, development and innovation. The overall value-added rate for the Taiwanese manufacturing industry as a whole slid from 26.3 percent in 2000 to 21.3 percent in 2010 — the biggest drop in Asia.
This is a point I've been making for several years on this blog -- Taiwanese firms moved to China so that they could continue to pursue Taiwanese-style family firm management and avoid having to upgrade to professionally run firms. But also, as they moved to China, they cut themselves off from the flow of government produced R&D innovation that Taiwanese SMEs have traditionally relied on (bike industry example). Several years ago on this blog I posted on a speech from Lee Teng-hui in which he predicts that this would happen -- even then it was obvious that moving to China had dumbed down Taiwan's firms. As Huang observes, the fall in value-added offsets the advantages of lower wages, harming "competitiveness."

Lots of other things involved -- weak unions, feeble taxes on the wealthy and on large corporations, poor regulation of wages and hours... the list goes on.
_______________________
Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums! Delenda est, baby.

Wednesday, October 31, 2012

KMT Wants Stock Transaction Tax "postponed"

There is nothing so permanent as a temporary emergency -- Robert A. Heinlein

The KMT moves to protect one of its most important constituencies, the nation's wealthy non-taxpayers, by mooting a delay in the implementation of the stock transaction tax.
Several legislators called on the government to postpone levying a capital gains tax on stock transactions because the stock market continues to remain sluggish. KMT legislator Sun Ta-chien (孫大千) proposed raising the stock transaction tax from the current 0.3% to 0.35% and postponing the effective date of the recently passed capital gains tax on stock transactions. Moreover, as the capital gains tax on stock transactions would take effect on January 1, 2013, a high- ranking KMT official stated that the Legislative Yuan and the Cabinet could jointly propose a "sunrise clause" to postpone its implementation.
As I've noted a few times since the election (and before), I suspect a key hidden factor in the election was the support of the class of non-taxpaying holders of capital wealth for Ma. Now they are getting their money's worth out of the KMT.

Another factor here is the role of the stock market as an indicator of the nation's economic performance. Obsessive interest in rankings are a key cultural trait of the Taiwanese; playing with the stock market is playing with a major component of the national psyche.
_______________________
Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums! Delenda est, baby.

Friday, June 01, 2012

Capital Gains Tax Dominates the News

Time for Vietnamese food.

Two days ago, in the post below this one, I blogged on the three-ring circus that the capital gains affair has become. The news is coming thick and fast....

First, the Premier formally accepted Finance Minister Christina Liu's resignation over the stock tax issue this week. Liu was apparently cast as the fall guy in this script; the same role her mother Shirley Guo played when she resigned as Finance Minister two decades ago over a similar issue. The various media reports say that people in the executive branch began to distance themselves from her as this issue went into high gear. People don't get into such positions without highly developed antennae to tell them who is political carrion.....

The capital gains tax proposal is slowing taking shape, pixel by pixel. Yesterday the cabinet revised the legislative proposal which Ma had accepted the other day. That proposal had been slammed by civic groups and by analysts as a set of sops to the wealthy and big business, as I noted in my post two days ago. The cabinet revisions are described in the Taipei Times as....
Three major revisions were made at last night’s meeting to the KMT caucus’ version.

First, the tax payment method based on the index level would be eradicated in 2017.

Second, rich people would not be allowed to use the index-based tax payment method.

Rich people are defined as shareholders who own more than 3 percent of the shares of a company, people whose annual income excluding income earned from shares transactions exceeds NT$5 million, and people who live in the country less than 183 days a year.

And third, starting in 2017, only four categories of individual investors need to pay a securities capital gains tax: people who hold more than 1 percent of the shares of a company, people whose annual income excluding income derived from securities transactions exceeds NT$3 million, people who sell shares annually valued at more than NT$1 billion, and people who live in the country less than 183 days a year.
The "index level" refers to the Taiex stock exchange index exceeding 8,500. Hahaha. In the last 120 months, that has happened for precisely 18 months, according to the civic groups cited in the Taipei Times.

But let's look at this. First, the new law really takes effect in 2017 -- 2016 is a Presidential election year, so obviously the year is a deliberate choice.

Who is taxed? Well, not many people. People with more than a 1% share of a company -- does this category cover only individuals, or does it include institutional investors?

I love the third category -- everyone who makes money from securities income provided their non-securities income EXCEEDS $3 million NT, or roughly $90,000 US. This appears to exclude precisely that category of parasites that I've discussed in the past -- wealthy individuals whose sole income is derived from securities trading and thus, have no paper income. In other words, under this regime, if you can manage to live your life solely by securities, you will pay no taxes. At least, that's the way it looks to me. Under this regime, this category pays no taxes until its transactions reach the NT$1 billion mark, or roughly US $30 million. It will not be difficult for such individuals to set up shell companies or trade through relatives so that they can trade without violating this rule; Taiwanese are past masters at evading tax laws in this manner. Under the "rich people" definition that operates until 2017, the NT$3 million exclusion is an NT$5 million exclusion.....

The final category of 183 day people is loud and clear.

As the staunchly pro-KMT China Post put it in an editorial the other day, Christina Liu's failure dooms any genuine stock gains tax. Not much more to say than that. It is hard to avoid the conclusion that Ma and his party never meant for a real reform to take place....

The Taipei Times editorialized similarly:
First, Liu’s resignation opens a new chapter in the crisis facing the Ma administration as the president struggles to recover from record-low approval ratings. The controversial tax proposal that has sparked strong opposition from the business sector and legislators across party lines since late March, culminating in Liu’s resignation, highlights the Ma administration’s long-standing weaknesses in decisionmaking and crisis management.
Quite true. But let me suggest that the appearance of bumbling was possibly deliberate, part of the smokescreen, with Minister Liu the sacrifice (We're so inept, that capital gains tax just slipped through our fingers. Sorry!). The TT editorial also observed that the widening wealth gap and debt problems will hinder national development and cause social problems. The wealth gap and debt issues are really two sides of the same coin: a large slice of wealth in Taiwan goes untaxed, creating a revenue gap. Nor does it look like it will ever be taxed.

WSJ's China RealTime column ran a piece by Jenny Hsu on Ma's declining popularity....
According to various polls, Mr. Ma’s popularity has fallen to 15-35%, a steep drop from his 51% victory in January’s election.

“With the 2014 local elections and the 2016 combined legislative and presidential elections down the pipeline, KMT lawmakers are trying to disassociate themselves from the power center, making Mr. Ma a lame duck president much sooner than expected,” said Joseph Wu, a political science professor at National Chengchi University.
Jonathon Manthorpe has a comprehensive review with much history of Ma and what all this might mean for Taiwan's democracy. Unfortunately he cites mostly pro-Green voices. Although it's certainly way cool that Peng Ming-min was important for the development of international aviation law.

While it makes great news to watch Ma's popularity plummet, it doesn't mean much of anything. Ma also took a plunge after Morakot and remained low in popularity throughout his tenure. He won re-election however and more importantly, the KMT holds the legislature and won 3 of 5 municipal elections. The 2014 local elections are still two years away and the party remains wealthy and entrenched in the major institutions of society. This all may prove to be as transient as a rain squall on a summer day.

Let's not forget that however botched, the things the Administration has done were things that needed to be done. Fuel and electricity prices have to rise -- Taiwanese have been living in a bubble world thanks to heavy subsidies for fuel and electricity. The national health insurance system must be revised and fees raised. A capital gains tax is a necessity. Regrettably, the Ma Administration has failed to give the nation a meaningful capital gains tax. If the DPP wins the next Presidential election and takes the legislature, let's see if they do any better.
___________
Daily Links:
_______________________
Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums! Delenda est, baby.

Friday, March 11, 2011

Luxury Tax Finalized

The proposed luxury tax was finalized this week, according to the Taipei Times:
“The purpose of the bill is to slow down the frequency of property sales and address public discontent with rising commodity prices [partly] driven by consumption of high-priced products,” Lee said.

Lee said the implementation of the tax on the sale of non-self-use properties would stabilize the market rather than deal a blow to the real estate industry, because only an estimated 20,000 property transactions would be subject to the tax.

The draft act stipulates that owners of residential units, commercial units or vacant lots owned for less than one year, would be taxed 15 percent of the selling price, or 10 percent if they had owned the property for more than one year but less than two.

Article 5 of the draft act includes 10 exemptions.

Among them are situations when the seller owns only one property that is not leased out for business purposes; when the property is sold to the government or ordered by authorities to be auctioned off; and when an owner sells a property owned for less than two years within one year of buying a new one.

Owners would also be exempt when they sell property that was inherited or given to them and when they are forced by banks to dispose of property used as collateral to secure a mortgage or pledge.

Lee said the draft act also entitled the Ministry of Finance to make exemptions in certain cases as long as the transactions are made in accordance with the principles of “rationality, normality and non-voluntary transfer.”
It isn't difficult to imagine how exemptions could be obtained quite easily: I gift my gazillion dollar property to my son, who promptly sells it and transfers the funds back to me. Intrafamily transactions are common ways to avoid regulations in Taiwan. Law-evading tricks are the meat and milk of the real estate market, as I blogged on a few months ago. The Taipei Times had a nifty commentary the other day that outlined how the government makes it easy for developers and real estate traders to evade taxation:

As far as dealing with high real-estate prices is concerned, the proposed “luxury tax” is no more than a stopgap measure. The key problem behind the unsound market and soaring real-estate prices is that the tax base is not determined according to market prices.

The tax base for land value increment tax is the rise in the price of land based on the current value of land as announced once a year by the government.

The deed tax, house tax and taxes levied on income from property transactions are all based on the assessed current prices of housing.

Land value tax is based on the announced price of land.

None of these are market prices.

The process of setting these prices tends to be divorced from reality and influenced by artificial adjustments. They are called “current prices,” but they are quite far removed from the market prices.

In addition, the fact that these price announcements are made at fixed intervals results in the strange phenomenon of short-term transactions not being subject to land value increment tax. The costs involved in real-estate speculation are therefore very low, so of course house prices keep going up.

Read the whole commentary; the excerpt only gives a taste. The luxury tax is no more than a nuisance, as the Taipei Times reported the other day. Despite the proposed tax developers are proposing a record volume of development projects this year.
Housing Monthly said the total value of new housing projects put forward in the so-called “golden period” for property deals reached NT$261.6 billion, about NT$39.6 billion more than the 2008 figure for the same period, even though the Cabinet approved a “luxury tax” draft bill earlier in the day meant to curb speculative real estate transactions.
It is clear from data like this that complaints from realtors that the new tax would depress the market are, at best, overwrought.

The real purpose of the bill is right out there in the first paragraph: to address public discontent. It is entirely cosmetic, and will probably have little effect on the housing market in Taipei. Famed Japanese economist Kenichi Ohmae pointed out the external wild card that is pressurizing the real estate market here in Taiwan:
However, the problem soaring land prices in Asia is contagious, Ohmae argued. "China, Hong Kong and Macau have been infected. The price craze is just like influenza," he told Taiwan media at a press conference on the sidelines of the forum.
The luxury goods makers and agents here in Taiwan stated that the tax would not affect their business since the wealthy can afford to pay a little more for quality.

Once again, cosmetics where plastic surgery is necessary.
__________________
Daily Links
_______________________
Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums! Delenda est, baby.

Monday, January 31, 2011

Egypt: could it happen in Taiwan?

Drew and I rode along Pinglin Road from Jhuolan to Dahu in Miaoli today. Lovely rolling hill country, an excellent workout. Highly recommended if you are in the area.

Jon Adams dispatches another excellent piece, this one on the tycoon buffoon handing out money to Taiwan's poor, observing:
Taiwan's per-person wealth may still be far higher than China's, at around $18,500 compared to some $4,300. But growth rates have sagged in Taiwan while soaring to double or high single digits in China. And in the last few decades, the island has seen a growing income gap. (Measured by the Gini coefficient, inequality rose from 0.28 in 1980 to 0.34 in 2006.)

Like other advanced economies, manufacturing jobs have shrunk as factories move to China and elsewhere. Lower-paying, non-unionized service sector jobs have taken their place. The service sector is now nearly 70 percent of the economy, compared to 50 percent 20 years ago. And since the global downturn, Taiwan firms have been increasingly relying on "dispatch" or temp workers, like Japan and South Korea.

The result has been a new legion of "working poor" or "new poor," as they're called here. They may not show up on unemployment statistics. But they struggle to make ends meet with two or even three low-paying jobs, but no job security.

"Those people cannot get help because they're not ill, or victims of a disaster, and they're not poor by the government's standards," said Taiwan sociologist Chiu Hei-yuan. "So they are just helpless — and they hope to get some unexpected help from people like Mr. Chen."

Twelve percent of the workforce now earns less than $700 per month, and average monthly wages are at 1998 levels, according to labor groups.

Meanwhile, highly-skilled workers in the technology and other sectors pull in ever-fatter paychecks, sharpening inequality between the haves and have-nots. "Taiwan's social welfare system cannot solve the problem of the gap between the rich and the poor — especially the 'new poor,'" said Chiu.
There is no capital gains tax and Taiwan's wealthiest can easily avoid taxation. Much of this income inequality is the result of the steady drip of accumulation by the wealthy over time -- in the 1980s the difference between top and bottom wasn't that great, but thirty years of accumulation later....

Since everyone is asking whether China could go the way of Egypt (not China, but I bet India has severe problems this year), I thought I'd have a little fun and ask about Taiwan. Taiwan's worsening inequality is a problem, but food prices will likely be more stable here -- as I posted a couple of months ago, Taiwan imports most of its grains and oils, but staples like eggs, vegetables, fruit and seafood are mostly produced locally. Incomes are high enough that food is affordable, unlike Egypt. Taiwan boasts excellent health insurance, a strong manufacturing sector, and relatively low unemployment by global standards. Moreover, its "inefficient" banking sector with strong state interference has minimized the damaged Wall Street has done here. The population has also become an active participant in the democratic process and is getting used to solving problems that way. Further, Taiwan does not suffer from the kind of right-wing religious insanity that Egypt does.

Still, the changes in the working population, income inequality, and so on are likely to have political effects as voters search for a party that can solve them. Political volatility in Taiwan may well translate into swings from one party to the other from election to election.

UPDATE: Anon writes:
Michael, need a correction/update: there's no capital gains tax, true, but the rich generally aren't very good at investing in stocks and the minimum tax law passed in 2006 requires that gains in shares of private companies be counted towards a minimum tax rate of 20%. In other words, investments in hedge funds, private equity funds, venture capital funds, private placement gains, are all taxed at 20%. There may be cheating, but it's exactly that--you're breaking the law, not just merely "avoiding" taxes.


_________
Daily Links:
_______________________
Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums! Delenda est, baby.

Sunday, September 05, 2010

Nathan Novak Rides Again: ECFA's economic dangers

The last few months I've been noticing a series of excellent pieces by one Nathan Novak in the Taipei Times. This week's offering reiterated what many of us have been saying about ECFA....
Taiwan’s manufacturing and services industries are showing signs of slowing down the Taiwan Economic News reported on Tuesday. The Taiwan Institute of Economic Research (TIER) said that manufacturing edged up a mere 0.24 percent in July, while services fell 2.61 percentage points during the same period. Indicators in the construction industry were less than favorable and a construction slowdown is predicted.

TIER has predicted that overall growth will slow down in the second-half of the year. Moreover, the percentage of manufacturers surveyed who foresee a better climate over the next six months fell 4.7 percent from the previous month.
Novak then goes on to make several points:
The numbers simply do not add up. Before the ECFA was even signed, Taiwan’s economy was already showing signs of recovery; trade, with year-on-year growth of over 46 percent, was thriving. The ECFA was imposed as a necessary measure to save Taiwan’s “failing” economy, which was being threatened with marginalization (even though the numbers were already indicating a strong recovery).

The ECFA was then signed after economic recovery appeared certain and trade numbers were growing rapidly. Now, after the ECFA has been signed, second-half growth is expected to slow. What gives?

Reality is finally beginning to rear its ugly head. The ECFA, instead of being purely economic, is almost entirely political. Not only has it served CCP-KMT interests by bringing Taiwan and China closer economically (although it would appear with few actual economic benefits) and politically, it has also served as a tool the KMT can use to continue to force its agenda through the legislature and into Taiwanese homes. The continuous advertisements on television and radio promoting the ECFA even after the agreement has been signed only serve to underscore its political, not economic, consequences.
Second half growth slowing was probably inevitable. In the first two quarters of the year Taiwan grew at over 12%. The DGBAS just raised its forecast from 6.1% to 8.2% growth for the whole year. Note that all that massive growth occurred with the current pre-ECFA level of connection to China -- basically all of it in place under the DPP.

Second half growth is slowing in China, now Taiwan's number 1 market, with the ongoing malaise in the industrialized countries (especially the US where the nation's leaders from both parties appear bent on destroying the economy) and China's own steps to rein in speculation and credit growth. Taiwan will perforce follow.

On many occasions commentators have noted that increasing Taiwan's dependence on China simply makes Taiwan even more marginalized. Meanwhile this year India will grow over 8% and Brazil is booming. It's a big world, but we've tied our economic fate to Beijing.

An Economic Daily News editorial was translated for Focus Taiwan this week:
In a status report released this week, the Ministry of Economic Affairs noted that Taiwan's latest economic recovery was mainly driven by the electronics and information industries, which shows that the country's industrial structure is not sufficiently diversified.

This situation, combined with the increasing percentage of Taiwanese businesses moving their production lines overseas, is likely to lead to high unemployment and widen the wealth gap, according to the report.

The report echoes what we have been emphasizing repeatedly -- the focus of Taiwan's economic policy should be shifted from "pursuing growth" to "adjusting structures."
President Ma has been claiming that the wealth gap will fall because of the rising economy. There might be some marginal improvements but fundamentally the wealth gap in Taiwan is the consequence of the tax regime and the offshoring of manufacturing, as well as government budgetary policies aimed at the local areas. It is not an issue that can be resolved by growing the economy -- during the last four years of the Chen Administration we had solid economic growth, but saw stagnant incomes and a worsening wealth gap. Comprehensive changes in economic structures will not occur until the public votes in politicians ready to pass legislation. And as long as A. Q. Public votes for politicians because they send flowers to funerals and show up at auto accidents, that will not happen.....
__________________
Daily Links
_______________________
Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums!

Monday, August 30, 2010

Income Inequality: CEPA vs ECFA

The DPP has put its finger on a very powerful point, income inequality, and is pushing hard.

Rising income inequality has been an issue in Taiwan since the 1990s. During the 2008 election campaign, the KMT pushed the idea that the economy had been stagnant under the Chen Administration -- an idea it refers to as the "Lost Decade", a piece of propaganda so obvious not even certain blatantly pro-KMT international media organs will touch it. This campaign was successful despite the fact that a simple Google search will show that the economy was growing at around 5% during 2006-7 and during the first six months of 2008, at 6%. The reason that KMT propaganda resonated with the public was the steady rise in income inequality, along with wages that have been basically stagnant for years.

I've discussed some of the causes of income inequality elsewhere. Many factors have been identified as possible culprits. It is also a regional and even global issue. As Craig Meer and Jon Adams observed several years ago in an article that discussed Taiwan's rising income inequality:
The International Monetary Fund’s September Regional Economic Outlook for Asia notes that income inequality increased “dramatically” across Asia in the last decade. In that time, 13 out of 18 Asian countries posted increases in income inequality, as measured by the Gini coefficient. Ten out of 15 have a widening richest-poorest income gap, with South Korea posting the sharpest divergence. And a majority of countries are seeing a shrinking middle class, especially China and Sri Lanka.
One DPP strategy is to use Hong Kong's CEPA agreement to see what will happen to Taiwan once ECFA comes into force. A recent commentary in the Taipei Times noted:
The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) recently broadcast a TV commercial voicing doubts about the benefits of the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA). Its contention was that the agreement would strip Taiwan of its sovereignty and consign it to being another Hong Kong. It would also, according to the ad, contribute to an increase in the disparity between the rich and poor.

In response, Council for Economic Planning and Development (CEPD) Minister Christina Liu (劉憶如) retorted that Hong Kong’s poverty gap had been considerable long before the territory signed the Closer Economic Partnership Arrangement (CEPA) with China. Consequently, Liu asserted, the CEPA had nothing to do with the disparity in wealth. In fact, she added, signing the ECFA would actually reduce the poverty gap in Taiwan.

Such a statement from an official responsible for guiding the country’s economic development leaves one dumbfounded.

Hong Kong signed the CEPA with China in 2003. According to Hong Kong’s Census and Statistics Department, its Gini coefficient (a value between 0 and 1, where 0 corresponds with perfect equality and 1 corresponds with total inequality), determined by the distribution of incomes in Hong Kong, increased from 0.525 in 2001 to 0.533 in 2006, the highest since 1971.

Meanwhile, the differential in revenues between the top and bottom 10 percent of families in Hong Kong increased from 26.9 times in 2001 to 32.5 times in 2006. The concern is that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, and there is no getting away from the fact that this phenomenon does really exist in Hong Kong and that it has worsened since the CEPA was signed.

The CEPA has also had a considerable impact on Hong Kong’s industries and labor market, gradually turning the majority of Hong Kong’s middle to lower-class workforce into marginal workers, those forced to “work more for less.” This is one of the main reasons for the increase in Hong Kong’s poverty gap.

A few examples might well shed a little light on these figures. The number of workers who earn less than HK$5,000 (US$640) a month has increased by more than 70 percent, from 307,000 in 1997 to 528,000 in 2006, and the number of workers who work 55 hours or more per week has increased by more than 80 percent, from 501,000 in 1997 to 934,000 in 2006.

Both the CEPA that China made Hong Kong sign and the ECFA in Taiwan’s case are part of the free-trade system. And in both cases the likely winners in this process of globalization and liberalization are the capitalists and multinationals. The losers, as usual, will be the workers who can’t afford to move away.
The commentary goes on to note a related yet separate issue: the Ma government's as-yet unkept promises to do something to alleviate the gap. In other words the DPP has two separate but related issues here to pound the government with: that ECFA will increase income inequality, and that the government will do nothing about it.

Taiwan News had another one of its hard-hitting editorials on the issue as well:
In 1993, labor earned 51 percent of Taiwan's gross domestic product, while capital received 29 percent, but in 2007, labor's share had dipped to 44 percent while the share going to capitalists climbed to 37 percent, according to DGBAS data.

The former Democratic Progressive Party administration's most effective initiatives was the construction of a broad social safety net which included legislation for unemployment insurance, pensions for farmers and senior citizens, laws to protect employees from sudden plant closings or layoffs and a national pension system, even though many associated measures and economic development programs were boycotted by the KMT's legislative majority, such as a statute to promote renewable energy industries and even the opening of a southern branch of the National Palace Museum.

During its first two years, the Ma government has embarked on a campaign to cut business and "rich" taxes, including inheritance and gift levies and the corporate income tax, as well as lowering barriers to free trade with the authoritarian People's Republic of China.

In the face of charges by labor movement and independent economists and DPP leaders that controversial "Cross-Strait Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement" could exacerbate Taiwan's income and wealth inequalities, KMT government officials have replied with denials.

Typical was a statement issued by State Minister and ex-economics minister Yiin Chi-ming, who last Wednesday lambasted an editorial in the vernacular Liberty Times which expressed concern that ECFA could spur a worsening of income and wealth inequity as had the "closer economic partnership arrangement" between the PRC and its Hong Kong Special Administrative Region in the past seven years by maintaining that Hong Kong was already a highly unequal society before CEPA and that Taiwan did not have a serious problem since was only a 6.05 times gap between the highest earning fifth of Taiwan households and the bottom earning 20 percent of households.

However, the next afternoon, the DGBAS confirmed that Taiwan's income distribution gap had worsened from 7.52 times in 2007 to a record 8.22 times last year or from 5.98 to 6.04 in 2008 and 6.34 last year times if government transfer and welfare payments are considered.

While attention by the KMT government to the question of inequality is welcome, the response issued by KMT Premier Wu Den-yih's Cabinet has been limited to the classic bureaucratic ploys of forming a special task force to improve income distribution was limited to yet another exercise in "ruling by slogans."

Perhaps the most problematic of the seven slogans issued yesterday afternoon was that of "promote economic growth and boost employment" as one of Taiwan's most critical socio-economic problems is the fact that since nearly half of Taiwan's export orders are actually produced in the PRC even if the funds are received in Taiwan, nominal economic growth no longer necessarily leads to increases in either employment or wages.
Not mentioned in any of this is Taiwan's complete lack of tax on capital gains. Since the income of the wealthy goes untaxed (see this post), "Social welfare payments" consist of income transfers from the salaried middle and upper middle classes to the poor, or of increased public debt -- which, since it is borrowed from holders of capital, simply increases their incomes. Taiwan News notes that government borrowing is problematic -- can social welfare payments be sustained? The Ma Administration has vastly increased the public debt both because of the stimulus spending and because it has slashed taxes on the wealthy. However, Taiwan is fortunate in that it has little foreign debt and huge foreign exchange reserves (see here for longer discussion).

ECFA's effects on income inequality, if CEPA is any guide, are likely to exacerbate existing trends. Because the DPP has a better record than the KMT on the public welfare, this issue is likely to hurt the KMT during the run-up to the 2012 election as ECFA comes into force and its effects are felt throughout the economy, from falling wages and job opportunities, to the rising flow of legal and smuggled crap from China in the local markets and shops.
_______________________
Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums!

Saturday, July 03, 2010

Chen Shui-bian Died for Your Sins: Land, Taxes, and Inequality in Taiwan

And Aaron shall lay both his hands upon the head of the live goat, and confess over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions in all their sins, putting them upon the head of the goat, and shall send him away by the hand of a fit man into the wilderness.

Outsiders know Taiwan primarily through its computer industry, but few understand that the local political economy runs on land speculation and development. Commonwealth magazine recently had a great issue that explored some of the links between inequality, land development, taxation, and income in Taiwan. In an article discussing land speculation, it described why government land is auctioned and then developers sit on vacant lots for long periods, observing:
Taiwan's convoluted property tax system also keeps the cost of holding vacant lots quite cheap.

Land in Taiwan has four different values. Aside from the actual market price, there is the "publicly announced land value," which is adjusted once every three years, the "reported current land value," which is the value reported by landowners used to calculate the land tax and can be up to 20 percent higher or lower than the publicly announced land value, and finally the "assessed present land value" on which land value increment taxes (similar to capital gains taxes) are based.

Taiwan's houses also have two prices -- the actual market price and a "standard unit price for housing construction" set by the tax revenue offices of each local government for residential units under their jurisdiction. This publicly assessed price has not been adjusted for 27 years. Legislator Lai Shyh-bao estimates that the current "standard unit price" is roughly only one-fifth of the actual market value.

The lack of transparency in real estate transactions has also contributed to strange practices. Jwo explains that many property transactions in Taiwan involve three contracts. There is a "public contract," drawn up to show government tax offices, a "private contract," which lists the actual terms of the deal, and a "fake contract," to use to apply for a mortgage.

Why are local governments so impoverished in Taiwan? One reason is the 18% interest on government employee retirement accounts, as I have noted before. But another is the low assessed values of property in Taiwan. These cannot be changed because political campaigns in Taiwan are, pound for pound, some of the world's most expensive. The article observes:

An employee of a prominent company, who is active in government-private sector associations, says that in today's political environment, only the profits on land speculation are sufficient to support an elected official. "Any election campaign now requires at least NT$100 million. Politicians won't have enough if they only rely on cuts from public works projects," the source asserts.

Because of these complex symbiotic ties between politicians and the business community, local governments never adjust the standards for the "publicly assessed land value," "assessed present value," or the "housing assessment value," all of which they have the authority to change without amending any laws at all. NTU's Hua vividly recalls the reaction he got when he suggested to a county chief that he increase the publicly assessed values of land and houses to ease the county government's financial woes.

"He shook his head vigorously and said to me, ‘You're an academic who doesn't have to deal with reality. I still have an election ahead. No way. No way.'"

Because local politicians are deeply involved factions that are up to their ears in The System of land speculation and development that underpins Taiwan's local political economy, it cannot be changed. Perhaps when Chinese developers start to muscle in on local land development, Taiwan's local faction politicians will fight for raised taxes as a defensive measure. Yet the effort that the KMT has spent over years in preventing factions from operating at the national level and keeping them confined to their local areas may mean that Taiwan's localities lack the institutional frameworks and skills necessary to carry out national-level politics of this nature.

The article notes that among the regions of Taiwan, in Taipei the tax on land is relatively closer to the actual value...
Chang-I Hua, an adjunct professor at National Taiwan University's Institute of Building and Planning, argues that the problem with Taiwan's land tax system is not low tax rates but rather the tax base. Of all local governments, Taipei City's present assessed values most closely approximate actual market prices but are still about 30 percent below market. The publicly announced land value is 60 percent below market value. Consequently, while land and housing tax rates may seem high, homeowners' tax burdens are only about one-tenth that found in the United States, according to Professor Hua.
One reason Taipei lives high on the hog is that the local government can actually extract something resembling meaningful taxes, in addition to its greater share of the national budget. Out in the less developed areas, not even that is possible. This disparity in institutional and financial power and resources between north and south is an inequality that seldom makes the news, but is one of the most important drivers of the island's political life.

Perhaps the new municipalities of Taichung, Kaohsiung, Tainan, and The City Formerly Known As Taipei County, with the greater power of their mayors -- recall that in the ROC system a municipality is the equalivalent of a province -- may find the wherewithal to bring land taxes up to more rational levels.That would be progress.

Progress, Frank Herbert once wrote, is a concept by which the terrors of the future can be kept at bay.

There is a National Land Planning Act, evolving from laws proposed and drafted in the 1990s, but it has never been made into law due to opposition from developers via the politicians in their pocket. A bill must pass three readings to become law; the Act had its first reading in 2004, nearly a decade later. Several laws have been passed then that have aided land developers, including the 1999 Agricultural Development Act, which allowed developers to annex and build residences on previously off-limits agricultural land. That act is chiefly responsible for the mushrooming of hideous cookie-cutter housing developments all over the island. Now in draft is another law that essentially allows anyone to open their own industrial district and do whatever they like in it, as one Taipei Times commentary interpreted the legislation a couple of months ago.

The absurdly low taxes on land are just half of the problem; the other half is that wealth in Taiwan is not taxed. The underlying tax inequities are a key driver of the island's rising income inequality. Says Commonwealth:

The salaries and wages earned by Taiwan's 9 million workers account for 72 percent of the reported income on which individual income taxes are paid in Taiwan (Table 1), a far higher ratio than the 56 percent in the United States and the 49 percent average across wealthy OECD (Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development) countries.

In Taiwan, there are 7.54 million households, but only 5.38 million, or 71.3 percent, pay taxes. "Many of those that don't pay taxes are actually high-income earners. These people only pay NT$600 a month in health insurance premiums, and in the future, when premiums are calculated based on household income, this one-third that don't pay taxes may not have to pay health insurance premiums," a former financial official in the central government says.

.......

"Taiwan's truly wealthy people are not the ones you see in public. Rather, they are the quietly anonymous individuals who live in exclusive properties like The Palace," says a former financial official. In an unprecedented move a few years ago, the Ministry of Finance released figures on how much tax Taiwan's richest people paid in 2005, providing a glimpse into the severity of the imbalance. Out of Taiwan's 40 wealthiest people, eight paid no taxes five years ago and 17 paid only 1 percent of their income.

"The taxes that many people pay are totally disproportionate to their incomes," says economist Ma Kai. Many households' accumulation of wealth relies on gains from property and stock transactions, the vast majority of which go untaxed. Even if the wealthy have taxable income, there are many legal or "gray area" tax shelters at their disposal to help them reduce their tax liability, Ma explains.

According to the 2009 IMD World Competitiveness Yearbook, corporate income taxes paid by Taiwan's enterprises are only 3 percent of GDP, lower than the ratio in the other Asian Dragons (South Korea, Sinpapore and Hong Kong), China, Japan and the United States. Reported corporate pre-tax earnings, which account for only 18 percent of all taxable income reported in Taiwan, amount to barely 20 percent of the business income listed in Taiwan's national income statistics. In other words, at least 70 percent of Taiwan's taxable corporate income has fallen through the tax system's cracks.

Of course, it hasn't "fallen through the cracks." Rather, the system is designed so that it has many cracks for wealth to fall through. In fact, as the article notes, the more money a company makes, the less tax it pays...

Commonwealth also notes that the Ma Administration has taken the lead in George Bush style tax cuts.....

Over the past two years, the administration of President Ma Ying-jeou has rolled out a number of tax breaks for companies and the wealthy. Only recently, to compensate big businesses for the loss of R&D and other tax breaks when the "Statute for Upgrading Industries" expired at the end of 2009, the government decided to lower the corporate income tax rate from 25 percent to 20 percent. But not wanting to be underbid when the opposition Democratic Progressive Party pushed a 17.5 percent tax rate, the government slashed the proposed rate even further to 17 percent as part of the new Statute for Industrial Innovation passed April 16. The bill also retained tax credits for R&D expenditures by large corporations and subsidies for small- and medium-sized enterprises to hire workers, even though the latter had nothing to do with innovation.

This so-called "17 plus 1 plus 1" package became the biggest tax cut measure in the history of the Republic of China. It was passed at a time when the country's finances are in their worst shape in the past eight years with the budget surplus of NT$40 billion in 2007 being transformed into a deficit of NT$500 billion.
The Commonwealth piece on the incredibly unequal tax systems describes a representative investor who makes over a million NT a year on investments but pays no taxes because it is all capital gains income. His daughter even applied for financial aid at school, the article says. It then links land taxes, income taxes, and inequality:
Taiwan's government has been unable to institute a capital gains tax on stock or real estate income because of a lack of transparent information and fears of rattling the markets. In the property market, those fears have left the government unwilling to replace publicly assessed present values (on which "land value increment" taxes are currently calculated) with actual market prices, which would boost capital gains tax revenues dramatically.

"Other countries have all done it. Can the government tell us why only Taiwan can't get it done?" Chien asks.

"If you say it's hard to get accurate information on real estate, I would agree. But all stock transactions are completely computerized. To say it's hard to get information is simply ludicrous. The real reason is the fear that the stock market will collapse," says stock brokerage worker Ruan Cheng-yuan.

"Taiwan is the only country in the world that uses an assessed present value to calculate housing and land taxes," says the economist Ma Kai. The publicly assessed land and house value usually seriously understates actual market values. "The Palace's apartments are publicly valued at only NT$3 million to NT$4 million," Ma says of the luxury property that reportedly has sold its units for up to NT$ 70 million.

Far from spurring innovation and upgrading by companies, low taxes mean that the government lacks the resources to stimulate upgrades of the educational and research systems, as well as supply the amenities that attract hi-tech businesses. It also means that much of the island's wealth is tied up in speculation in land and stocks rather than chasing investment in innovative new industries. Finally, the lack of a capital gains tax explains why so many locals so obsessively play the stock market and so obsessively buy land -- because if they win, they can live tax-free. In Taiwan, basically only individuals with salaries from registered companies pay taxes.

Why the title of this post? Rene Girard, the brilliant French thinker, argued in Violence and the Sacred that when social chaos threatens, societies resolve the problem of looming disorder by arbitrarily selecting an individual for sacrifice who is portrayed as both the cause of the problem and the actor through which it can be relieved: a scapegoat. Consider the large, and largely invisible, class of non-taxpayers described above, and consider Chen Shui-bian. It should be obvious by now that one of the most important social functions of the whole Chen Shui-bian affair with its lurid and loudly indignant emphasis on the vast sums passing through his family's accounts, was to provide a scapegoat onto which the sins of the island's quietly untaxed wealthy could be noisily unloaded and then sent into the political wilderness to die, silenced and alone.
_______________________
Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums!

Sunday, May 23, 2010

Income Inequality in Taiwan

A commentator in the Taipei Times on ECFA and its probable effects on income inequality in Taiwan noted:
Despite Hong Kong’s per capita GDP exceeding US$30,000, an analysis by the Hong Kong Council of Social Service last year showed that the poverty rate was approximately 17.9 percent and that 1.236 million people in poor households with low incomes live below the poverty line.

The latest statistics show that Hong Kong’s Gini coefficient — a measure of wealth distribution where 0 describes perfect equality and 1 describes perfect inequality — has reached 0.533, the widest income gap among all developed economies.

Looking at Taiwan, Chiu Hei-yuan (瞿海源), an Academia Sinica research fellow, says that if Taiwan does not handle its cross-strait and industrial policies cautiously, the income gap is likely to be even worse than that in the next two or three years.

An ECFA is essentially the same as the Closer Economic Partnership Arrangement (CEPA) China signed with Hong Kong, as they are both free-trade agreements with “Chinese characteristics.”

That also means the approach to informing the WTO is handled with “Chinese characteristics” — that is, Taiwan’s leaders lean toward China. Putting aside any sovereignty concerns, an ECFA will mean increased social contradictions as the rich get richer the poor get poorer.
Taiwan's worsening income inequality has been the subject of much discussion in recent years. Though the Beautiful Island is nowhere near the stratospheric levels of the US or China, it is a key social issue with powerful political effects -- stagnant incomes were a major factor in public subscription to the KMT propaganda claim in the second term of Chen Shui-bian that the economy was getting worse when in fact growth was rising rapidly. Because the fruits of growth largely didn't reach the working and middle classes, they experienced stagnant incomes amid rising prices. Now that the KMT is power, Ma & Co. are the targets of middle and working class discontent over rising living costs and stagnant incomes. Another interesting effect of income inequality is women putting off marriage as male income inequality rises, a situation that has been a political football in recent years as well.
gini
The Gini coefficient is a commonly used measure of inequality -- the higher the number, the worse the income inequality. As the table (source) above shows, the Gini coefficient (the table renders it as an index percent) in Taiwan has been worsening during the last two decades; in reality, since the 1980s when it was in the 20s. The bump in 2001 was due to the nasty recession that year. As the table shows, the Gini has risen despite increased social welfare spending.

There is much debate as to the exact cause of the widening income gap. Is it rising demand for skilled workers in the knowledge-intensive industries leaving out the working class? How could inequality be growing if more and more people are attending college? I suspect that one cause of inequality is the increasing financialization, corporatization, and formalization of the economy. These have shrunk the proportion of income that individuals are able to hide and that is off the books, meaning that informal economy is shrinking in proportion to the economy as a whole: alternative incomes are smaller, an effect felt in many families. Another effect, not often mentioned in studies of inequality, is the problem of the way income is redistributed from rest of Taiwan to keep Taipei living well. This means that the income boosts from public spending are lower in the central and southern areas because less public money is spent there.

The effects of ECFA on the distribution of income in Taiwan will likely be negative, as the author of the commentary observes. Traditional industries are likely to be hard hit, as they have been in places like Indonesia and Thailand, meaning that individuals already experiencing growing inequality will find things even harder, while rewards will go largely to giant firms, financial companies, and similar, who already have money. The inconsistent correlation between social spending and income inequality in Taiwan shown in that paper above suggests that Ma's program of compensating individuals in hard-hit industries, even if sincerely meant and competently executed, may not have much tangible effect.

ECFA effects, aging population, industries leaving for China... it's going to take a lot of imagination and foresight to steer the nation through the next couple of decades.
_______________
Daily Links:
_______________________
Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums!

Tuesday, May 13, 2008

Paper on Parade: Japanese Colonialism and Stature in Taiwan

Last year China Quarterly published a very interesting paper on the standard of living of Taiwanese under Japanese colonialism entitled Was Japanese Colonialism Good for the Welfare of Taiwanese? Stature and Standard of Living by Stephen L. Morgan and Shiyung Liu. The China history blog Frog in a Well mentioned it, so I thought I'd go have a look at it.

The authors begin by noting that there is still some disagreement on the overall effect of Japanese rule on the economic welfare of the Taiwanese themselves. While there is little debate that key indicators rose, and productivity and economic output rose, there is still some disagreement on the effect of the growth on the welfare of the Taiwanese themselves, with a few scholars arguing that Japan's extractive policies took most of the gains, and Taiwanese capitalism was stunted. The problem, scholars realize, is that adequate data of income under the Japanese are lacking.

Enter height.

According to Morgan and Liu, studies of human growth have shown that average population height is "primarily attributable to the environment" in which it lives. All other things being equal, taller populations live better. Height itself is a function of net nutrition over time. A well-fed population will enjoy good growth, and even temporary impairment of nutrition can be made up, but long-term lower nutrition will result in permanent falls in height. The authors observe later in the paper that height cycles similar to the business cycle have been detected. I guess I have Nixon to thank for me not being able to play starting forward for the Pistons....

While height and income are correlated, the relationship is not linear. Incremental rises in height decrease as income rises, and in some cases may even diverge. Moreover, height is more closely related to income distribution, they observe. Not only is the gain affected by public health and other factors, but shifts in consumer preferences may also influence it.
Using several different databases, the authors then explore the changes in the average heights of males during the period of Japanese colonialism in Taiwan. There appear to be some correlations with region (central Taiwan people were taller), occupation (professional and skilled were taller), and education (better-educated were taller). After analysis of the data, the authors found that height rises rapidly through the 1910s and 1920s, and then levels off during the 1930s. In fact, that decade is the only period from the 1880s through the 1970s in which growth in height was not regular, according to the authors. The authors conclude:
"The statistical evidence for the flat trajectory of in height during the 1930s-40s is striking confirmation of the adverse impact on the Taiwanese of the shift in colonial policy in the early 1930s, as Japan increasingly militarized and reoriented development in its colonies to support projection of imperial power."
These gains were driven by improved public health, economic growth, and economic policy. In Taiwan Japan reduced infant mortality, and eliminated tropical diseases. In a footnote there is an impressive quote from George Mackay, the 19th century missionary, on how malaria laid low large fractions of the population, preventing it from doing meaningful work. At the same time incomes nearly doubled in the 1920s, and the income distribution improved, changes confirmed by both the height data and economic data. In the 1930s economic policy changed and the minor industrialization Taiwan was undergoing may have led to drops in the health of the population, as rural laborers shifted to factory employment, even though most people stayed on the farms where subsidies to rice drove rising incomes. Consumer preferences may have changed, promoting purchases of goods that detracted from health. The economic and historical data are not clear, however.

Overall, their conclusion is that whatever you may say about colonialism, there is no denying that it produced gains in the height, health, and lifespan of the Taiwanese. Japanese colonialism in Taiwan was about more than just laying the foundation for the miracle growth during the KMT period; it was about major improvements in living standards for most Taiwanese.

Wednesday, December 26, 2007

Income growth remains stagnant

Income continues to stagnate, says the DGBAS:

Taiwan's average basic pay and substantive regular monthly pay witnessed an annual growth of 2.17% and 1.78%, respectively, in the first 10 months of this year, both were the highest of their kinds in seven years and, according to the statistics released by the Cabinet-level Directorate General of Budget, Accounting & Statistics (DGBAS).

However, if deducting the inflation of 1.35% in the same period, the annual increase in real regular monthly pay was merely 0.43%, even lower than that posted last year to show stagnant employee salaries over the year.

Economic growth and unemployment are doing well, but the income issue makes KMT complaints about the economy credible to voters, since they jibe with everyday experience.