{"id":142138,"date":"2026-06-10T09:07:00","date_gmt":"2026-06-10T09:07:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/?post_type=comparative_guide&#038;p=142138"},"modified":"2026-06-10T09:33:43","modified_gmt":"2026-06-10T09:33:43","slug":"taiwan-bribery-corruption","status":"publish","type":"comparative_guide","link":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/chapter\/taiwan-bribery-corruption\/","title":{"rendered":"Taiwan: bribery &amp; Corruption"},"content":{"rendered":"","protected":false},"template":"","class_list":["post-142138","comparative_guide","type-comparative_guide","status-publish","hentry","guides-bribery-corruption","jurisdictions-taiwan"],"acf":[],"appp":{"post_list":{"below_title":"<div class=\"guide-author-details\"><span class=\"guide-author\">Formosa Transnational Attorneys at Law<\/span><span class=\"guide-author-logo\"><img src=\"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/1\/2019\/12\/formosa_logo.jpg\"\/><\/span><\/div>"},"post_detail":{"above_title":"<div class=\"guide-author-details\"><span class=\"guide-author\">Formosa Transnational Attorneys at Law<\/span><span class=\"guide-author-logo\"><img src=\"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/1\/2019\/12\/formosa_logo.jpg\"\/><\/span><\/div>","below_title":"<span class=\"guide-intro\">This country specific Q&amp;A provides an overview of bribery &amp; Corruption laws and regulations applicable in Taiwan<\/span><div class=\"guide-content\"><div class=\"filter\">\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t<input type=\"text\" placeholder=\"Search questions and answers...\" class=\"filter-container__search-field\">\r\n\t\t\t<\/div>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t<ol class=\"custom-counter\">\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What is the legal framework (legislation\/regulations) governing bribery and corruption in your jurisdiction?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>In Taiwan, the legal framework governing bribery and corruption is primarily set out in the following laws and regulations:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Acts: The Criminal Code of the Republic of China and special criminal statutes, such as the Anti-Corruption Act and the Securities and Exchange Act, principally regulate bribery and corruption Violations of these acts may give rise to criminal liability and penalties.<\/li>\n<li>Guidelines\/ Principles: Certain guidelines and standards, including the &#8220;Integrity and Ethics Directions for Civil Servants&#8221; (IEDCS) and the Ethical Corporate Management Best Practice Principles for TWSE\/TPEx Listed Companies, have been promulgated to regulate the conduct of public officials and companies. Violations of such guidelines or principles may result in administrative sanctions, disciplinary measures, or internal corporate actions.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Which authorities have jurisdiction to investigate and prosecute bribery and corruption in your jurisdiction?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The prosecutors of the District Prosecutors Office have the authority to investigate and prosecute bribery and corruption offences. Other authorities may also assist during the investigation, such as the Agency Against Corruption (\u201cAAC\u201d), the Investigation Bureau, Ministry of Justice (\u201cMJIB\u201d), and police agencies.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">How is \u2018bribery\u2019 or \u2018corruption\u2019 (or any equivalent) defined?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Bribery, as a form of corruption, is the act of \u201cdemanding, agreeing to accept, or accepting a bribe or other improper benefits for an official act or a breach of official duties\u201d. Nonetheless, corruption is not expressly defined in statutory provisions; however, various forms of corrupt conduct are set out under applicable laws. For instance, stealing or misappropriating public equipment or property, or fraudulently making others to deliver personal property or a third person&#8217;s property by exploiting an opportunity arising from official duties, constitute corruption offences.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Does the law distinguish between bribery of a public official and bribery of private persons? If so, how is 'public official' defined? Is a distinction made between a public official and a foreign public official? Are there different definitions for bribery of a public official and bribery of a private person?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The applicable laws distinguish between bribery of a public official and bribery of private persons.<\/p>\n<p>There are three categories of \u201cpublic officials\u201d: (1) persons who, empowered with legal functions and powers, serve in an agency of the country or a local self-governing body; (2) persons who, empowered with legal functions and powers, are engaged in public affairs in accordance with law; and (3) persons who, having been entrusted by an agency of the country or a local self-governing body, are engaged in public affairs within the authority of the entrusting agency.<\/p>\n<p>Although the applicable laws do not specifically distinguish between domestic public officials and foreign public officials, they prohibited any person from offering, promising, or deliver bribes or other improper benefits to public officials of foreign nation, China, Hong Kong, Macao in connection with trade, investment or other commercial activities, in exchange for acts performed or omitted in breach of their official duties.<\/p>\n<p>The applicable laws prescribe different forms of bribery of a public official and bribery of a private person. Examples are as follows:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>With respect to bribery of a public official: A public official who demands, promises, or receives bribes or improper benefits in connection with acts performed either in breach of their official duties or within the scope of their official duties would be subject to criminal liability. A person who offers, promises, or delivers bribes or other improper benefits to a public official in connection with acts performed either in breach of their official duties or within the scope of their official duties would be subject to criminal liability.<\/li>\n<li>With respect to bribery of a private person: A person who demands, promises, or receives bribes or improper benefits and breaches his\/ her duty to the company may be subject to the criminal offence of breach of duty. Moreover, a director, supervisor, or managerial officer of a company that has issued securities, with the intent to obtain a benefit for themselves or a third party, engages in conduct in breach of their duties or misappropriates company assets, thereby causing damage to the company in an amount of TWD 5 million (approximately USD 159,335) or more, would constitute a more serious criminal offence stipulated in Securities and Exchange Act.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Who may be held liable for bribery?  Only individuals, or also corporate entities?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Individuals (including public officials or private persons such as directors, supervisors or managerial officers of companies) who demand, promise to accept, or accept bribes or other improper benefits may be held liable for bribery.<\/p>\n<p>Individuals who deliver bribes or other improper benefits to public officials may also be liable for bribery. However, there is no clear provision that criminalizes individuals who deliver bribes to private persons.<\/p>\n<p>Corporate entities are subject to criminal liability only where such liability is expressly provided for by law. For instance, under Article 92 of the Government Procurement Act, where a representative, agent, employee, or other personnel of a supplier, in the performance of their duties, commits specified offences, such as disclosing or delivering confidential documents, drawings, information, items, or other procurement-related data with the intent to obtain unlawful personal benefits and thereby obtaining benefits, the offender is subject to the punishment prescribed under the relevant provisions; in addition, the supplier shall also be subject to the fine prescribed therein.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What are the civil consequences of bribery and corruption offences in your jurisdiction?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>In Taiwan, bribery and corruption offences may result in the following civil consequences:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Tort liability: If bribery or corruption conduct causes harm to others, the injured party may seek compensation pursuant to the provisions governing tort liability.<\/li>\n<li>Contract liability: If such conduct constitutes a breach of contractual obligations, the contractual counterparty may also assert its rights in accordance with the relevant contractual terms. For example, where a contract expressly provides that if either party engages in bribery or corruption, the other party shall be entitled to claim punitive liquidated damages in the event of such breach.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What are the criminal consequences of bribery and corruption offences in your jurisdiction?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>In Taiwan, applicable laws impose different types of criminal penalties for bribery and corruption offences, including imprisonment, detention, fines, and confiscation, depending on the nature and severity of the illegal conduct. For example, where a public official demands, accepts or promises to accept bribes or other improper benefits by the acts that violate the official duties, the offence shall be punished by imprisonment for life or a term of no less than ten years, and may also be fined up to TWD 100 million (approximately USD 3,185,982). In addition, where the offender holds a special status, such as the person who is in charge of investigation, pursuit or trial of a case, the applicable penalties shall be increased by a half if they commit specified offences.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Does the law place any restrictions on hospitality, travel and\/or entertainment expenses? Are there specific regulations restricting such expenses for foreign public officials?  Are there specific monetary limits for such expenses?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>According to the &#8220;Integrity and Ethics Directions for Civil Servants&#8221; (IEDCS), public official shall not demand, solicit or accept financial or material gratuities from parties with interests related to the performance of their official duties. However, such gratuities may be accepted under certain regulated conditions, provided that they are occasional in nature and are not likely to influence the recipient\u2019s exercise of official authority or performance of official duties. The above-mentioned Guidelines is not applicable to foreign public officials.<\/p>\n<p>The specific monetary limits for the gratuities are as follows:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>The market value of the gratuity does not exceed TWD 500 (approximately USD 16), or, where the gratuity is given collectively to multiple persons within the same agency or institution, the total market value does not exceed TWD 1,000 (approximately USD 32).<\/li>\n<li>In instances where the gratuity is given in connection with engagement, marriage, childbirth, housewarming, promotion or transfer, retirement, or other regulated occasions; and the market value of the gratuity does not exceed TWD 3,000 (approximately USD 96), or, where the gratuity is received from the same source within a single year, the total value does not exceed TWD 10,000 (approximately USD 319).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Are political contributions regulated? If so, please provide details.<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Political contributions are regulated under the Political Donations Act. The relevant limitations are listed below:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Recipients of political contributions: Only political parties, political associations and prospective candidates may accept political contributions.<\/li>\n<li>Prohibited donors: Certain entities are prohibited from making contributions to the above-mentioned recipients; for example, public enterprises or the civil enterprises in which the government holds 20% or more of the capital, religious associations, and the enterprises operated or invested in by political parties.<\/li>\n<li>Donation limits: The total amount of donations is subject to different caps depending on the type of donor. For instance, the annual aggregate donation limits to the same political party or political association are TWD 300,000 (approximately USD 9,558) for individuals, TWD 3,000,000 (approximately USD 95,579) for for-profit enterprises, and TWD 2,000,000 (approximately USD 63,720) for civil associations.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Are facilitation payments prohibited or regulated? If not, what is the general approach to such payments?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Although applicable laws do not explicitly prohibit or regulate so-called \u201cfacilitation payments,\u201d they expressly provide that no person shall offer, demand, promise to accept, accept, or deliver bribes or other improper benefits. In practice, the term \u201cimproper benefits\u201d includes any tangible or intangible advantage, whether material or non-material, that is sufficient to satisfy human needs or desires. Accordingly, offering, demanding, promising to accept, accepting, or delivering facilitation payments may be deemed to constitute bribery offences.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Are there any defences available to the bribery and corruption offences in your jurisdiction?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>In Taiwan, anti-corruption defences primarily focus on challenging the existence of a &#8220;quid pro quo&#8221; (consideration). Defendants frequently argue that payments or benefits were not intended to induce specific official acts but were instead rooted in normal social courtesy, traditional festival gifts, or life events. Supreme Court precedents emphasize that a &#8220;quid pro quo&#8221; must be assessed based on the contents of the duty, the relationship between parties, and the timing and value of the benefit; simply labeling a payment as a &#8220;gift&#8221; or &#8220;political contribution&#8221; does not negate bribery intent. Statutorily, voluntary surrender or confession during investigations, coupled with returning all illegal proceeds, serves as a legal pathway to secure sentence reduction.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Are compliance programs a mitigating factor to reduce\/eliminate liability for bribery and corruption offences in your jurisdiction?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Currently in Taiwan, relevant regulations of the punishment of corruption, including the Anti-Corruption Act and others, do not explicitly list compliance programs or regulatory compliance as statutory grounds for exemption from liability.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Has the government published any guidance advising how to comply with anti-bribery and corruption laws in your jurisdiction?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The Taiwanese government provides extensive guidance for both the public and private sectors to ensure compliance with anti-corruption laws. For public officials, the Executive Yuan enacted the &#8220;Integrity and Ethics Directions for Civil Servants&#8221; (IEDCS), which sets specific monetary thresholds for gifts and entertainment. For the business community, the Ministry of Economic Affairs published the &#8220;Integrity Management Handbook for SMEs and Listed Cos. &#8221; using case studies to illustrate legal risks like breach of trust and commercial bribery. Furthermore, the Agency Against Corruption (AAC) periodically releases specialized &#8220;Anti-Corruption Guidance&#8221; and practical manuals\u2014covering areas such as medical procurement and infrastructure projects\u2014to help entities identify institutional loopholes.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Are mechanisms such as Deferred Prosecution Agreements (DPAs) or Non-Prosecution Agreements (NPAs) available for bribery and corruption offences in your jurisdiction?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Although Taiwan&#8217;s legal system lacks formal mechanisms specifically titled &#8216;Deferred Prosecution Agreements&#8217; (DPAs) or &#8216;Non-Prosecution Agreements&#8217; (NPAs), the &#8220;Deferred Prosecution&#8221; mechanism under the Code of Criminal Procedure serves a similar purpose. Prosecutors may stay prosecution for cooperative defendants, contingent on fulfilling specific conditions such as paying settlement fees, compensating victims, or establishing internal compliance systems to prevent recidivism.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Does the law in your jurisdiction provide protection to whistle-blowers? Do the authorities in your jurisdiction offer any incentives or rewards to whistle-blowers?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Taiwan has established a comprehensive framework for whistleblower protection and incentives. The Public Interest Whistleblower Protection Act, implemented in July 2025, serves as the primary legal shield, strictly prohibiting retaliatory personnel measures such as dismissal, demotion, or salary reductions. It guarantees identity confidentiality and personal safety while offering immunity from civil, criminal, and administrative liability for disclosing classified information. For participants in the crime, sentence reductions are available if they cooperate. Furthermore, Article 8 of the Anti-Corruption Act mandates sentence reductions for those who confess and return illegal proceeds during investigations.<\/p>\n<p>Regarding incentives, the Anti-Corruption Informant Rewards and Protection Regulation offer substantial monetary rewards for reports leading to convictions. These rewards are tiered based on the sentence severity, with a maximum cap of TWD10 million.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Does the law in your jurisdiction enable individual wrongdoers to reach agreement with prosecutors to provide evidence\/information to assist an investigation or prosecution, in return for e.g. immunity or a reduced sentence?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Under Article 14 of the Witness Protection Act, a defendant in specific serious crimes\u2014including bribery\u2014who provides critical information enabling the prosecution of major co-conspirators may receive a reduced sentence with prior prosecutorial consent. This mechanism, often called the &#8220;Turncoat Clause,&#8221; is essential for dismantling secretive criminal structures. Additionally, Article 8 of the Anti-Corruption Act mandates sentence reduction for those who confess and surrender illegal proceeds during investigations; if their cooperation leads to the discovery of other perpetrators, may be eligible for a further reduction in sentence. These regulations aim to encourage defendants to reveal criminal evidence through the incentive of sentence reduction.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">How common are government authority investigations into allegations of bribery? How effective are they in leading to prosecutions of individuals and corporates?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>According to official statistics from July 2009 to October 2025, Taiwan&#8217;s district prosecutors offices handled a total of 13,099 corruption cases and indicted 17,613 individuals, with an overall conviction rate of 78.6%. Cases referred by the Agency Against Corruption (AAC) reached a 94.17% conviction rate by the end of 2025. These investigations target high-ranking officials, local leaders, and public enterprise personnel exercising public authority.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What are the recent and emerging trends in investigations and enforcement in your jurisdiction?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Recent trends focus on tech-driven enforcement and enhanced transparency. Authorities have deployed the &#8220;Smart Anti-Corruption Analysis System,&#8221; utilizing AI and big data to target illicit networks precisely. Legislation has evolved with the addition of &#8220;Offences of Obstruction of Justice&#8221; to criminalize witness tampering and the implementation of the &#8220;Public Interest Whistleblower Protection Act&#8221; in 2025 to safeguard reporters. Regarding emerging risks, law enforcement is strengthening oversight of virtual assets and third-party payments under the <em>Money Laundering Control Act<\/em>. Furthermore, the expansion of &#8220;Government Procurement Integrity Platform&#8221; promotes public-private collaboration and OCDS standards to identify risks early.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Is there a process of judicial review for challenging government authority action and decisions? If so, please describe the key features of this process and remedy.<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Taiwan provides judicial review as a remedy for challenging government actions. For administrative sanctions faced by enterprises\u2014such as government procurement debarment, blacklisting, or heavy monetary fines\u2014legal persons may sequentially file administrative appeals and administrative litigation to request the revocation of illegal dispositions, in criminal matters, there are procedures for ex-ante review and post-hoc rescue regarding coercive measures, defendants can file interlocutory appeals or quasi-appeals to the court against measures that significantly infringe on human rights, such as detention, searches, or seizures, finally, the Constitutional Court conducts constitutional review. This ensures that legal norms and judgments align with constitutional principles, and that government actions and decisions comply with due process and fundamental human rights, preventing the abuse of public power while providing substantial safeguards for the rights of individuals and legal entities.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Have there been any significant developments or reforms in this area in your jurisdiction over the past 12 months?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Over the past year, Taiwan has implemented several anti-corruption reforms. The Public Interest Whistleblower Protection Act officially took effect on July 22, 2025, providing a comprehensive legal framework to safeguard reporters against retaliation. Furthermore, the <em>Criminal Code<\/em> was amended in 2025 to include a new chapter on &#8220;Offences of Obstruction of Justice,&#8221; criminalizing the bribery of witnesses and obstruction of judicial proceedings. Corporate transparency also improved through the <em>Securities and Exchange Act<\/em> amendment, which lowered the substantial shareholding disclosure threshold from 10% to 5%, in alignment with international standards for private sector governance.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Are there any planned or potential developments or reforms of bribery and anti-corruption laws in your jurisdiction?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>At present, there are no publicly announced major amendments to anti-bribery or anti-corruption laws in Taiwan. However, Taiwan continues to promote relevant reforms. According to ROC\u2019s Third Report under the United Nations Convention against Corruption, the Executive Yuan included the conclusions and recommendations of the international review committee in the \u201cNational Integrity Building Action Plan\u201d for the first time in 2023, and established a mechanism of annual tracking and continuous adjustments of performance targets to enhance the effectiveness of policy implementation.<\/p>\n<p>At the legislative level, Taiwan is taking steps to promote the draft Whistleblower Protection Act to strengthen the overall protection mechanism for whistle-blowers.<\/p>\n<p>In terms of international cooperation, although Taiwan faces limitations due to its unique diplomatic status, Taiwan is pursuing actively seek judicial assistance treaties or agreements with foreign countries based on the principles of equality and reciprocity, and also provides appropriate and timely judicial assistance to countries that do not yet have formal judicial assistance agreements with Taiwan.<\/p>\n<p>Overall, Taiwan\u2019s current direction focuses more on strengthening institutional mechanisms and international cooperation, rather than conducting major legislative reforms.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">To which international anti-corruption conventions is your country party?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Although Taiwan is not a member of the United Nations and therefore is not an official State Party to the United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC), Taiwan remains committed to anti-corruption and anti-bribery efforts. In 2015, Taiwan proactively enacted the Act to Implement United Nations Convention against Corruption, giving the UNCAC the effect of domestic law in Taiwan and promoting related reforms accordingly. Since then, Taiwan has published several national reports and invited international review committee members to conduct reviews in order to examine its domestic legal framework and enforcement practices in accordance with UNCAC standards. Overall, although Taiwan cannot formally become a State Party to international conventions due to its international status, Taiwan continues in practice to promote anti-corruption policies and institutional development in line with the UNCAC framework.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Do you have a concept of legal privilege in your jurisdiction which applies to lawyer-led investigations? If so, please provide details on the extent of that protection. Does it cover internal investigations carried out by in-house counsel?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Taiwan law does not recognize a complete and independent legal privilege system comparable to that in common law jurisdictions. Therefore, in internal investigations led by lawyers, it cannot automatically be asserted that all investigation documents, interview records, or legal analyses generated during the investigation process are absolutely protected. Under the current legal framework, lawyers are still subject to confidentiality obligations under the Attorney Regulation Act and, in principle, may not disclose confidential information learned in the course of their practice without justification. In criminal proceedings, lawyers may also refuse to testify regarding matters entrusted to them under the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure relating to the right to refuse testimony in certain circumstances. In addition, in 2023, the Constitutional Court held that documents and materials generated from communications between lawyers and criminal defendants in exercising the right to communication shall be excluded from the scope of search and seizure by prosecutors. Furthermore, although Taiwan currently has no explicit legal provisions extending such protection to corporate internal investigations, the foregoing rules do not expressly exclude their application to in-house counsel.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">How much importance does your government place on tackling bribery and corruption? How do you think your jurisdiction\u2019s approach to anti-bribery and corruption compares on an international scale?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>In recent years, the Taiwan government has placed significant importance on anti-bribery and anti-corruption issues. Although Taiwan is not a member of the United Nations and therefore cannot formally become a State Party to the United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC), Taiwan enacted the Act to Implement United Nations Convention against Corruption in 2015, giving the UNCAC the effect of domestic law, and has continued to review the implementation of relevant systems through national reports and international review mechanisms. In addition, Taiwan has continued to promote whistleblower protection legislation, political donation transparency, and the Government Procurement Integrity Platform in recent years, demonstrating the government\u2019s ongoing efforts to strengthen preventive anti-corruption mechanisms.<\/p>\n<p>From an international comparative perspective, according to Transparency International\u2019s 2025 Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI), Taiwan scored 68 points and ranked 24th among 182 countries and territories, indicating that Taiwan is a relatively highly ranked jurisdiction in both the Asia-Pacific region and globally.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Generally, how serious are corporate organisations in your country about preventing bribery and corruption?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Overall, Taiwanese companies have placed significantly greater emphasis on the prevention of bribery and corruption in recent years, although differences still exist among industries and companies of different sizes. Large multinational corporations, listed companies, financial institutions, and companies that heavily rely on cross-border transactions or government procurement projects have generally established more comprehensive risk assessment rules and preventive measures relating to anti-corruption and anti-bribery, and regularly review the effectiveness of implementation and continue to revise such measures. This trend is partly attributable to the Taiwan authorities\u2019 continuous strengthening of corporate governance requirements in recent years, such as the Ethical Corporate Management Best Practice Principles for TWSE\/TPEx Listed Companies, and partly attributable to cross-border regulatory pressure, including the extraterritorial application of the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and the UK Bribery Act 2010. However, compared with large enterprises, many small and medium-sized enterprises still rely more heavily on informal management practices, and their anti-corruption systems remain relatively less developed.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What are the biggest challenges corporate entities face when investigating bribery and corruption issues?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>One of the main challenges is the legal framework. In practice, unlike corruption cases involving public officials, where certain regulations provide relatively clearer standards regarding permissible gifts and hospitality, Taiwan does not have equally clear statutory standards for corporate bribery and corruption cases. Judicial practice still generally requires a case-by-case assessment of whether the relevant benefits have a quid pro quo relationship with official acts. Therefore, during investigations, companies often need to further examine the purpose of the relevant expenses, fund flows, and the background of the decision-making process.<\/p>\n<p>In addition, multinational companies frequently face compliance pressure from multiple jurisdictions. Under certain circumstances, Taiwanese companies or individuals may simultaneously be subject to the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and the UK Bribery Act. Therefore, during investigations, companies often need to assess compliance requirements under both Taiwan law and foreign laws at the same time.<\/p>\n<p>Furthermore, where cases involve cross-border transactions, overseas fund flows, or international cooperation, although Taiwan has established mechanisms for international mutual legal assistance and asset recovery, evidence collection and investigations may still involve a certain degree of complexity.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What are the biggest challenges enforcement agencies\/regulators face when investigating and prosecuting cases of bribery and corruption in your jurisdiction? How have they sought to tackle these challenges?  What do you consider will be their areas of focus\/priority in the next 12-18 months?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Taiwan enforcement authorities mainly face three challenges when investigating and prosecuting bribery and corruption cases. First, difficulties in tracing cross-border fund flows and assets: where bribery cases involve overseas accounts, third-country companies, or foreign individuals, cross-border judicial cooperation is often required. Taiwan enacted the \u201cMutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Act\u201d in 2018 to establish a cross-border judicial assistance mechanism, reflecting the complexity of cases involving overseas evidence and assets.<\/p>\n<p>Second, bribery cases are highly concealed and evidence is often difficult to obtain. Such cases usually rely heavily on the cross-analysis of communication records, fund flows, and witness statements, and such evidence is often concealed in nature and difficult to collect.<\/p>\n<p>Third, government procurement remains a high-risk area. To address the above challenges, the government has actively promoted cross-border judicial assistance and introduced digital monitoring tools, including big data analysis, Python auditing tools, automated warning systems, and robotic process automation (RPA), in order to enhance risk identification and monitoring capabilities.<\/p>\n<p>Over the next 12 to 18 months, enforcement efforts are expected to continue focusing on government procurement, cross-border money laundering, asset recovery, and technology-assisted investigations.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">How have enforcement agencies\/regulators in your jurisdiction sought to address the challenges presented by the significant increase of electronic data in either investigations or prosecutions into bribery and corruption offences?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>In recent years, with the rapid increase of electronic data, digital communication records, and online transaction information, Taiwan enforcement authorities have gradually introduced technological tools to improve the efficiency of investigations into bribery and corruption cases. For example, in the area of preventing corruption in government procurement projects, the Taiwan government has in recent years utilized big data analysis, computer-assisted software such as Python, and automated warning systems to help detect abnormal procurement cases. In addition, the government has established the \u201cGovernment Procurement Integrity Platform,\u201d which allows prosecutors\u2019 offices, the Agency Against Corruption, and investigation authorities to cooperate across agencies and jointly participate in the handling process of major construction projects.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What do you consider will be the most significant bribery and corruption-related challenges posed to businesses in your jurisdiction over the next 18 months?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>First, cross-border compliance requirements will continue to exist. Under certain circumstances, Taiwanese companies or individuals may simultaneously be subject to the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and the UK Bribery Act, demonstrating that companies must continue to comply with compliance requirements across multiple jurisdictions.<\/p>\n<p>In addition, corporate transparency and corporate governance requirements will continue to receive attention. The government has promoted the beneficial ownership disclosure system and whistleblower protection-related legislation, indicating that companies still need to continuously adjust their information disclosure and internal supervision mechanisms.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, integrity supervision in the area of government procurement will remain a key focus. The government remains focus on promoting the Government Procurement Integrity Platform and related risk monitoring mechanisms, reflecting that companies participating in government procurement projects must continue to comply with relevant integrity requirements.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">How would you improve the legal framework and process for preventing, investigating and prosecuting cases of bribery and corruption?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>With respect to legal clarity, whether gifts, hospitality, or other benefits provided by companies constitute bribery is currently not subject to relatively clearer standards comparable to those provided under the &#8220;Integrity and Ethics Directions for Civil Servants&#8221; (IEDCS). It is therefore recommended that more specific guidance be provided in the future in order to enhance predictability for corporate compliance.<\/p>\n<p>At the institutional level, as the government continues to strengthen whistleblower protection systems and corporate transparency measures, this indicates that the relevant systems are still developing. In the future, their completeness may be further strengthened so that whistleblower protection can be more comprehensive in both the public and private sectors.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\r\n<div class=\"word-count-hidden\" style=\"display:none;\">Estimated word count: <span class=\"word-count\">4575<\/span><\/div>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t<\/ol>\r\n\r\n<script type=\"text\/javascript\" src=\"\/wp-content\/themes\/twentyseventeen\/src\/jquery\/components\/filter-guides.js\" async><\/script><\/div>"}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comparative_guide\/142138","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comparative_guide"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/comparative_guide"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=142138"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}