China targets Taiwan's chip secrets with $24 billion acquisition plot
The MOEA confirmed on Wednesday that it has not yet received a formal application from Source Photonics concerning the rumoured buyout but has already informed the company that any such deal would be subject to regulatory review, Focus Taiwan noted.
Under Taiwanese regulations governing Chinese investments, prior approval from the MOEA is mandatory for any ownership changes involving Chinese capital, the ministry reiterated. According to Focus Taiwan, the MOEA has been closely monitoring the company's operations and last month issued a formal letter requesting updated details about its shareholding structure.
As reported by Focus Taiwan, once an application is submitted, the MOEA plans to coordinate with the National Security Bureau (NSB), the Mainland Affairs Council (MAC), and relevant industrial technology bodies to determine whether the deal poses national security risks or could negatively impact Taiwan's industrial development. If such risks are identified, the investment permit may be revoked in accordance with current laws.
Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislator Hsu Chih-chieh raised alarms over the potential transfer of sensitive technology, noting that Source Photonics holds advanced 3-nanometer chip technology. He urged the government to act with caution and proposed the development of a national list of critical technologies to safeguard against Chinese acquisitions, an issue highlighted in Focus Taiwan's coverage.
Focus Taiwan further reported that the MOEA has been tracking the situation since 2016, when Source Photonics' top shareholders were first categorised as Chinese capital.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
38 minutes ago
- Time of India
Textiles exporters face fresh trade uncertainty amid Trump's latest announcements
NEW DELHI: US President 's latest tariff announcements have resulted in fresh uncertainty, with buyers expected to go slow on new orders. While textiles exporters seem to have got an advantage over Bangladesh, which has been slapped with 35% duty by Trump, industry is keeping close tabs on India's bilateral trade deal with the US as the American president has claimed the agreement with Vietnam allows him to impose a 20% tariff, although there may be product-specific concessions. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now In any case, the final word is not out on where tariffs settle in the coming weeks, with countries, including Bangladesh, once again rushing to Washington to rebalance the equations. "We need to watch how tariffs move. Buyers are a little confused at the moment," said V Elangovan, managing director of Tirupur-based SNQS International. What is adding to the complications is China. "Retailers have to fill their shelves. Last week, our merchandisers were in Shanghai, we could not compete because the Chinese were quoting better prices this year than last year. It is not clear how they can do so when the tariff for them is higher. We need more hand-holding from govt," he added. Govt and industry has been pushing for zero duty for garments and home textiles, where Indian products are competitive, although it is unlikely even if a trade deal is worked out as the Trump administration has refused to remove the 10% baseline tariff applicable on all countries. At 10%, Indian exporters are seen to be better off than rivals, provided subsidies are not doled out to Chinese manufacturers. In natural garments, where India has traditional strength, the cost disadvantage is relatively small, 3-4%. However, in synthetic garments, the gap widens to 10-11% due to higher production costs, Apparel Export Promotion Council (AEPC) said. "India, even with the existing reciprocal tariff rate (26% announced in April), will gain in export competitiveness vis-a-vis major garment exporting competing countries. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Besides, we are quite hopeful of India striking a favourable trade deal which will further improve the competitiveness of India's apparel exports in all important US market... even a moderate reduction in the reciprocal tariff to around 15% could significantly improve our competitiveness across both natural and synthetic garment categories, thereby opening infinite export possibilities for India amid shifting global sourcing trends," said AEPC CEO Mithileshwar Thakur. With current tariff levels - India at 26%, Vietnam at 20%, and Bangladesh at 35% - India is seen to be competitive against Bangladesh in natural garments but faces pressure in the synthetics segment. "It is looking good for us and a trade deal will help," said K M Subramani, president of Tirupur Exporters' Association. The big question is the ability of Indian garment makers to manufacture on a scale, especially given their reluctance to invest in capacity addition.
Economic Times
an hour ago
- Economic Times
Mass job cuts, layoffs soon in U.S? Check who will be fired?
Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads FAQs U.S. Supreme Court cleared the way on Tuesday for President Donald Trump's administration to resume carrying out mass job cuts and the restructuring of agencies, elements of his campaign to downsize and reshape the federal government. The justices lifted San Francisco-based U.S. District Judge Susan Illston's May 22 order that had blocked large-scale federal layoffs called "reductions in force" affecting potentially hundreds of thousands of jobs, while litigation in the case proceeds. Trump in February announced "a critical transformation of the federal bureaucracy" in an executive order directing agencies to prepare for a government overhaul aimed at significantly reducing the federal workforce and gutting offices and programs opposed by the administration. Workforce reductions were planned at the U.S. Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Health and Human Services, State, Treasury, Veterans Affairs and more than a dozen other wrote in her ruling that Trump had exceeded his authority in ordering the downsizing, siding with a group of unions, non-profits and local governments that challenged the administration. "As history demonstrates, the president may broadly restructure federal agencies only when authorized by Congress," Illston judge blocked the agencies from carrying out mass layoffs and limited their ability to cut or overhaul federal programs. Illston also ordered the reinstatement of workers who had lost their jobs, though she delayed implementing this portion of her ruling while the appeals process plays ruling was the broadest of its kind against the government overhaul being pursued by Trump and the Department of Government Efficiency, a key player in the Republican president's drive to slash the federal spearheaded by billionaire Elon Musk, DOGE has sought to eliminate federal jobs, shrink and reshape the U.S. government and root out what they see as wasteful spending. Musk formally ended his government work on May 30 and subsequently had a public falling out with San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in a 2-1 ruling on May 30 denied the administration's request to halt the judge's 9th Circuit said the administration had not shown that it would suffer an irreparable injury if the judge's order remained in place and that the plaintiffs were likely to prevail in their lawsuit."The executive order at issue here far exceeds the president's supervisory powers under the Constitution," the 9th Circuit wrote, calling the administration's actions "an unprecedented attempted restructuring of the federal government and its operations."The 9th Circuit's ruling prompted the Justice Department's June 2 emergency request to the Supreme Court to halt Illston's the personnel of federal agencies "lies at the heartland" of the president's executive branch authority, the Justice Department said in its filing to the Supreme Court."The Constitution does not erect a presumption against presidential control of agency staffing, and the president does not need special permission from Congress to exercise core Article II powers," the filing said, referring to the constitution's section delineating presidential plaintiffs urged the Supreme Court to deny the Justice Department's request. Allowing the Trump administration to move forward with its "breakneck reorganization," they wrote, would mean that "programs, offices and functions across the federal government will be abolished, agencies will be radically downsized from what Congress authorized, critical government services will be lost and hundreds of thousands of federal employees will lose their jobs."The Supreme Court in recent months has sided with Trump in some major cases that were acted upon on an emergency basis since he returned to office in cleared the way for Trump's administration to resume deporting migrants to countries other than their own without offering them a chance to show the harms they could face. In two cases, it let the administration end temporary legal status previously granted on humanitarian grounds to hundreds of thousands of also allowed Trump to implement his ban on transgender people in the U.S. military, blocked a judge's order for the administration to rehire thousands of fired employees and twice sided with his Department of Government Efficiency.A1. The full form of DOGE is Department of Government Efficiency.A2. President of USA is Donald Trump.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Mass job cuts, layoffs soon in U.S? Check who will be fired?
Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads FAQs U.S. Supreme Court cleared the way on Tuesday for President Donald Trump's administration to resume carrying out mass job cuts and the restructuring of agencies, elements of his campaign to downsize and reshape the federal government. The justices lifted San Francisco-based U.S. District Judge Susan Illston's May 22 order that had blocked large-scale federal layoffs called "reductions in force" affecting potentially hundreds of thousands of jobs, while litigation in the case proceeds. Trump in February announced "a critical transformation of the federal bureaucracy" in an executive order directing agencies to prepare for a government overhaul aimed at significantly reducing the federal workforce and gutting offices and programs opposed by the administration. Workforce reductions were planned at the U.S. Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Health and Human Services, State, Treasury, Veterans Affairs and more than a dozen other wrote in her ruling that Trump had exceeded his authority in ordering the downsizing, siding with a group of unions, non-profits and local governments that challenged the administration. "As history demonstrates, the president may broadly restructure federal agencies only when authorized by Congress," Illston judge blocked the agencies from carrying out mass layoffs and limited their ability to cut or overhaul federal programs. Illston also ordered the reinstatement of workers who had lost their jobs, though she delayed implementing this portion of her ruling while the appeals process plays ruling was the broadest of its kind against the government overhaul being pursued by Trump and the Department of Government Efficiency, a key player in the Republican president's drive to slash the federal spearheaded by billionaire Elon Musk, DOGE has sought to eliminate federal jobs, shrink and reshape the U.S. government and root out what they see as wasteful spending. Musk formally ended his government work on May 30 and subsequently had a public falling out with San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in a 2-1 ruling on May 30 denied the administration's request to halt the judge's 9th Circuit said the administration had not shown that it would suffer an irreparable injury if the judge's order remained in place and that the plaintiffs were likely to prevail in their lawsuit."The executive order at issue here far exceeds the president's supervisory powers under the Constitution," the 9th Circuit wrote, calling the administration's actions "an unprecedented attempted restructuring of the federal government and its operations."The 9th Circuit's ruling prompted the Justice Department's June 2 emergency request to the Supreme Court to halt Illston's the personnel of federal agencies "lies at the heartland" of the president's executive branch authority, the Justice Department said in its filing to the Supreme Court."The Constitution does not erect a presumption against presidential control of agency staffing, and the president does not need special permission from Congress to exercise core Article II powers," the filing said, referring to the constitution's section delineating presidential plaintiffs urged the Supreme Court to deny the Justice Department's request. Allowing the Trump administration to move forward with its "breakneck reorganization," they wrote, would mean that "programs, offices and functions across the federal government will be abolished, agencies will be radically downsized from what Congress authorized, critical government services will be lost and hundreds of thousands of federal employees will lose their jobs."The Supreme Court in recent months has sided with Trump in some major cases that were acted upon on an emergency basis since he returned to office in cleared the way for Trump's administration to resume deporting migrants to countries other than their own without offering them a chance to show the harms they could face. In two cases, it let the administration end temporary legal status previously granted on humanitarian grounds to hundreds of thousands of also allowed Trump to implement his ban on transgender people in the U.S. military, blocked a judge's order for the administration to rehire thousands of fired employees and twice sided with his Department of Government Efficiency.A1. The full form of DOGE is Department of Government Efficiency.A2. President of USA is Donald Trump.
