Wild Accusations of "Chinese Capital" and "Red Enterprises"

Wild Accusations of "Chinese Capital" and "Red Enterprises"
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
February 10, 2011

Recently the Liberty Times published a series of news reports. It referred to the head of the Want Want Group as "a Taiwan businessman named Tsai, heavily reliant on Chinese capital." The Liberty Times has repeatedly leveled wild accusations of "Chinese capital" and "Red enterprises." It has given the public a grossly misleading impression. Its conduct is reminiscent of the Cultural Revolution or the White Terror. We feel compelled to clarify the matter for the public, and to refute the distortions created by the Liberty Times.

Strictly speaking, so-called "Chinese capital" refers to strictly controlled Mainland government funds. The most obvious source of "Chinese capital" is of course, Mainland government funds. The next most obvious source is funds from state-owned enterprises. Other sources are less obvious. Most of the funding for some family enterprises may come from the private sector. But some funding may come from the government or state-owned enterprises. Other businesses derive no capital whatsoever from the Mainland government or state-owned enterprises. They merely sell their products on the Mainland. Yet the Liberty Times classifies even their profits as "Chinese capital." This is unheard of. The Liberty Times is the only entity in the world that defines "Chinese capital" in such an absurd manner.

According to the Liberty Times' novel definition, all Taiwan is under the shadow of "Chinese capital." Over 1600 companies are listed on Taiwan, Nearly 1000 have been plants on Mainland China. Technology companies account for nearly 90%. In the past, most Taiwan businessmen investing on Mainland China merely took advantage of the Mainland's cheap land, cheap labor, and other production factors. They manufactured export-oriented products, and turned the Mainland into the "world's factory." But in recent years the Mainland has undergone a transformation, to the global market. Private sector consumption has skyrocketed. All Taiwan-funded businesses have substantially increased their presence in the Mainland domestic market. These companies make money from the Mainland market. According to the Liberty Times' absurd definition, they have all become "businesses heavily reliant on Chinese capital."

These companies earn money selling products on the mainland. Back on Taiwan, they pay dividends to the investing public. Members of the public pay taxes on their dividends. The salaries of everyone in the government, from President Ma at the top, to civil servants at the bottom, come from government revenues. Therefore, according to the Liberty Times unique definition of "Chinese capital," President Ma and every civil servant on Taiwan is funded by "Chinese capital."

Taiwan-funded enterprises have grown strong on the Mainland. They have won a large market share. The public on Taiwan approves. Initially such success stories applied only to Taiwan's small and medium enterprises. The Chicken King grew strong on the Mainland. The Ting Hsing Group had a small food factory in Changhua. It became the largest instant noodle brand on the Mainland. Taiwan's RT-Mart invested heavily in Mainland China for ten years. It has now surpassed French retail giant Carrefour, and become the number one discount store on the Mainland. Others include Taiwan funded service sector industries, Daphne shoes, Natural Beauty, Les Enphants, Ou Difen Kelisiting lingerie, Christine bakeries, 85 Degree Centigrade coffee shop, Yonghe Soybean Milk. These and other large and small enterprises built their own brands on Mainland China. They created new business empires. After establishing themselves on the Mainland, these businesses returned to Taiwan to invest, or list on the Taiwan stock market, allowing investors on Taiwan to share in the profits.

Take global computer brand Acer, "the pride of Taiwan." Acer made a concerted effort to develop new markets on the Mainland. By the end of last year, it was number two in personal computer sales on the Mainland. One can hardly say that Acer made little money on the Mainland. According to the Liberty Times definition of "Chinese capital," Acer is also funded by "Chinese capital." Acer's sales pitch is highly flexible. On the Mainland, Acer stresses that it is "the pride of the Chinese people." It stresses that it is an "international brand, with local values." According to the Liberty Times' closed minded, inward looking definition of "local values," Acer's sales pitch amounts to "selling out Taiwan." But since cross-Strait financial liberalization, the [連合庫] and other public financial institutions have established branches on the Mainland. They are beginning to earn Mainland dollars. According to the Liberty Times' definition of "Chinese capital," aren't these state-owned banks under the influence of "Chinese capital?" Is the Liberty Times' view of the world reasonable and convincing?

The main business of the Want Want Group's Ilan Food Division is rice crackers. It is a 100% Taiwan owned enterprise. During the 90s it began investing in the Mainland, After 20 years of hard work, it successfully captured the hearts of Mainland consumers. After establishing a firm foothold on the Mainland, it returned to Taiwan to invest in the media. It issued TDRs. During 20 years of development, it never received a penny from the Mainland authorities or state-owned enterprises. All of its income was derived from the sale of products in the Mainland market. It returned to Taiwan to invest in the media. Its sources of funding have been closely scrutinized by the government. No "Chinese capital" is involved.

The Liberty Times however, has turned a blind eye to these facts. It persists in leveling risible allegations of "Chinese capital" against the Want Want Group and other businesses that have achieved success in the Mainland market. It persists in painting them as "Reds." It persists in misleading the general public. We are puzzled. These companies work hard. They develop new markets. They earn money from the locals. They send the profits back to Taiwan, to invest in new businesses, Do they really not "love Taiwan?" Do their actions really represent "domination by Chinese capital?" Others shut themselves up on the island of Taiwan. The engage in land speculation. They inflate real estate prices. They profit from local Taiwanese. They make it impossible for ordinary office workers to afford their own homes. Do they really "love Taiwan?" What right do such businesses have to accuse others of being "Reds?" What rigth to they have to accuse others of "domination by Chinese capital?"

胡亂界定中資 惡扣企業紅帽子
2011-02-10 中國時報

日前《自由時報》在新聞報導中，再以「中資色彩濃厚的蔡姓台商」影射旺旺中時集團負責人；對《自由時報》一再以其自行胡亂界定的中資定義，隨意惡扣企業紅帽子，我們認為已嚴重誤導社會視聽，並成為另外一種文革式的白色恐怖。我們在此做一說明並就教社會大眾與《自由時報》。

所謂的中資，嚴格的定義是指大陸官方掌控的資金，最直接者當然是大陸官方的資金，再來則是其國營企業的資金；至於間接一點者，則是指某家企業中，雖然大部分資金來自民間，但仍有部分資金來自官方或國企。至於，把所有資金都毫無來自大陸官方或國企，只是在大陸賣產品，掙得的錢，也列入「中資」行列，則是聞所未聞─全世界只有《自由時報》是如此定義中資。

依照《自由時報》這個新定義，全台都籠照在中資陰影中。全台一千六百多家上市櫃公司中，近千家已在大陸投資設廠，科技業者更達近九成；過去，大部分台商赴大陸投資是利用大陸廉價土地、勞動力等生產要素，產品以出口為主，大陸成為「世界工廠」。但近年大陸轉型為「全球市場」，民間消費力快速成長，所有台資企業、台商全部都轉而大幅增加在大陸的內銷比重。這些賺大陸市場錢的企業，在《自由時報》的定義中，可全都變成「中資色彩濃厚的企業」了。

這些企業在大陸賣產品掙得錢，回台發股息、股利給投資大眾，民眾拿到股利也要繳稅，上至馬總統、下至基層公務員的薪資，都來自政府稅收。所以，依照《自由時報》這種獨樹一幟、特殊的中資定義，豈不成馬總統與台灣公務員領取的薪資，都有中資了？

對在大陸成長、茁壯，搶攻市場成功的台資企業，台灣社會一向不吝給予掌聲喝采。大成長城原本只是台灣的中小企業，在大陸發展成雞肉大王；頂新集團以彰化的小食品廠，成為大陸最大方便麵品牌。來自台灣的大潤發深耕大陸十年，已快超越全球零售業巨擘法國的家樂福，成為大陸第一大量販店。其它如台商投資的服務業中還有如達芙妮女鞋、自然美、麗嬰房、歐迪芬內衣及賣麵包的克莉絲汀、餐飲的八五度Ｃ、永和豆漿等各種大大小小企業，都在大陸以自有品牌闖出一片天，在大陸立穩腳步後，這些企業也陸續回台投資或掛牌上市，與台灣投資人分享大陸投資利得。

我們再以台灣人的驕傲、全球性電腦品牌宏碁為例。宏碁在大陸努力開拓市場，去年底在大陸的個人電腦銷售市占率站上第二名，宏碁賺的大陸錢不可謂少吧？依《自由時報》的定義，宏碁也是中資。宏碁在大陸的銷售非常靈活，強調宏碁是「中國人的驕傲」，強調「國際名牌，本土價值」，依《自由時報》那種封閉、「內視」的本土價值，豈不是「賣台」？而在兩岸金融開放後，連合庫等公營金融機構也赴大陸設點，開始要賺大陸錢，依《自由時報》定義這豈非連國營行庫都己滲入中資了？這種觀點，豈有道理與說服力？

旺旺集團的宜蘭食品，以販賣米果為本業，是百分之百的台灣企業；在九○年代開始赴大陸投資，經過廿年的耕耘，以自有品牌成功擄獲大陸消費者的心；在大陸立穩腳步後，回台投資媒體及發行台灣存託憑證（ＴＤＲ）。在廿年的發展過程中，從來沒有一分一毫的資金來自大陸官方、國企，完全是在大陸市場銷售產品之所得。回台投資媒體時，也經政府嚴格審核資金來源，其中完全沒有所謂的中資。

不過，《自由時報》對這一切卻視而不見，不斷以其滑天下之大稽的「中資定義」，為包括旺旺集團在內所有在大陸市場成功的企業，大玩戴紅帽子的把戲，錯誤引導社會視聽。我們很疑惑，難道去海外─包括大陸在內打拚，開拓市場、賺當地人錢，再把所得盈餘匯回台灣投資的企業，是不愛台灣、是「中資色彩濃厚」；那些關在台灣島內，惡炒地皮、拉升房價、大賺台灣人錢、讓上班族望屋興嘆的企業，才是愛台灣嗎？這種企業，憑什麼、而且有什麼臉到處為人家戴帽子，亂扣中資帽子？