The Taiwan Banker

On October 22, 2025, following rounds of back-and-forth negotiation, public messaging, and repeated political pressure from Taipei City councilors, Shin Kong Life Insurance convened an extraordinary board meeting and submitted a settlement letter to the Taipei City Government: “In consideration of safeguarding the greater public interest…and on the condition that the Taipei City Government agrees to reimburse the related costs already paid by the Company, both parties agree to terminate the land rights agreement to facilitate NVIDIA’s entry.” With that, the long-running dispute over NVIDIA’s plan to establish operations in Taiwan reached a temporary conclusion. The T17 and T18 plots in the Taipei Technology Park, which Shin Kong Life originally won at auction to develop an office complex, will now be handed over to the global AI giant. The Taipei City Government has withstood political pressure and successfully attracted investment, while Shin Kong Life has finally stepped away from what had become a month-long ordeal and is expected to recover its sunk costs. At first glance, the outcome appears to be a “win-win-win” – but it sends a less reassuring signal for domestic and foreign investors who intend to participate in long-term public-private partnership (PPP) projects. Throughout this process, the critical asset of trust was repeatedly sacrificed in the name of national interest. Trust is the foundation upon which modern capital markets grow and thrive. Whether in transaction between private parties or between them and the government, business cannot function without trust. Contracts must be strictly honored by all parties, grounded in the trust embedded in legal frameworks. No party disputes the importance of national interest, nor the strategic value for Tiawan in hosting NVIDIA’s overseas headquarters, but the Taipei City Government adopted an overly conservative stance during the contract-termination process, refusing to revisit the contract itself for potential solutions. Instead, it repeatedly urged Shin Kong Life to “look at the bigger picture” and “name its price,” pushing the company, which initially resisted a forced renegotiation, toward accepting a “consensual” agreement under political pressure. Thus, the five-point statement released on October 22, while written in calm language, was laden with unspoken grievance. Where does this sense of grievance come from? In the original agreement, the government and Shin Kong Life stood as equal contracting parties. But once policy needs emerged, the City shifted roles from contract partner to public authority, damaging the trust mechanism which once underpinned the partnership. Such policy unpredictability will inevitably become a concern for private investors evaluating future participation. How would government officials responsible for investment promotion respond if a foreign institutional investor raised the following question at an investment promotion briefing: “If we sign a contract with you now, how can we be sure we won’t someday face the same ‘forced consensual termination’ that Shin Kong Life experienced?” NVIDIA’s decision to expand its presence in Taiwan is unquestionably good news for the public. But even positive developments must uphold due process and preserve trust. Contractual issues should be resolved within the framework of agreements and ROC law, not through media pressure framed as “public interest,” which ultimately plants seeds of uncertainty for long-term investment. As Milton Friedman wrote in Free to Choose: “One of the great mistakes is to judge policies and programs by their intentions rather than their results.” I hope that all stakeholders will take this episode as a lesson in the principle of equality in public-private cooperation. Future regulatory amendments and contract designs should incorporate more robust protection mechanisms, so that this case becomes the last example of blurred boundaries between the public and private sectors.