Chen Jinde interview 3: Taipei demolishes 1% of illegal structures, Yilan will demolish violations to show you

On November 23, "Upstream and Downstream" conducted an exclusive interview with Chen Chin-te, acting magistrate of Yilan. A reporter asked: according to statistics, more than 70 percent of farm houses in Yilan are in violation of regulations. The former magistrate "punished" non-agricultural use of farm houses by levying additional land value tax and house tax, which to some degree amounted to acknowledging the existence of illegal farm houses. After taking office, why does the magistrate advocate refunding the house tax to illegally used farm houses? After the refund, how does he expect to handle the problem of illegal farm houses?

In addition, illegal farm houses can legally be fined repeatedly until they are improved. But there is a joke circulating that "60,000 yuan protects you for life," meaning that at most a violator receives the first fine of NT$60,000, and afterward there will be no second penalty, so from then on one can rest easy. How does the magistrate expect to handle this problem? Including the farm house for which the magistrate himself was fined for a violation, how will it be handled in the future?

The following text and video content are dictated by Chen Chin-te and summarized and compiled by the Upstream and Downstream editorial office. For the complete 3 interviews, please see the end of the article. For outside responses to Chen Chin-te's statements, please click here.

The government is not a Beiyang warlord clique; it cannot levy taxes arbitrarily

Is a farm house violation because it is used for other purposes? Or because it is not used for agriculture? There are two meanings. If a factory is built on a farm house, a hospital is built, a restaurant is built, that is called violating the original use, use outside the permitted scope; that is handled according to law. If it is urban land, it follows the Urban Planning Act; if it is non-urban land, it follows the Regional Planning Act. They can penalize the change of use, or change the levy to land value tax.

The most common violation today is that after building a farm house, they pile up soil. Because the neighboring plot is a field, if the retaining wall is not put up, that soil will spill onto the neighboring field, so everyone who builds a house piles up soil, piling soil against the retaining wall. Or, because you did not apply for a grain-drying yard or the like in front, and you need to park a car, you fill in the front. The so-called violation is this kind of violation.

Farmland was originally levied the land tax on agricultural land, and the part of the farmland not used for agriculture was changed to levy the "land value tax." But Yilan (during County Magistrate Lin Tsung-hsien's term) also added the "house tax," that is, I see that your farmland is not used for agriculture; for violations exceeding 1,000 meters, an additional one, two, or three times the house tax is levied. But this was levied wrongly, because this is not what the law calls house tax. You cannot use illegally used land to levy the house tax on a house, so we refund it to the people.

What we refunded is not the land value tax; what we refunded is the "house tax surcharge."

Article 19 of the Constitution: the people have the duty to pay taxes in accordance with law; without law they cannot pay taxes; the government, without law, may not collect taxes from the people. What is law? The house tax is called the House Tax Act; it was passed by the Legislative Yuan and promulgated by the president; that is called law.

There are three types under the House Tax Act. According to the price of the house tax, construction cost, location, and depreciation: which is more expensive, a 50-year-old house or a 2-year-old house? The 50-year-old one is cheaper. Which is more expensive, the Xinyi Planned District or here? Houses in the Xinyi Planned District are more expensive. Construction cost: one built by Farglory and one built by Lee Chang may not be the same, and one built here may not be the same as ours. The house tax is the price of the house multiplied by the tax rate; that is called house tax. You use a land violation to levy house tax; that is not what the law provides.

Furthermore, if you determine that this is a local matter, and our Yilan County Government wants to levy a tax on you, may it? It may, but it must use local law, the "Local Tax Act General Principles." What the Local Tax Act General Principles say is that when you want to levy an additional tax, a special tax, or a temporary tax, the local government must carry out a local self-governance matter, send it to the council for passage, and the county government promulgates it; this is called a self-governance ordinance. If you have not gone through the council's passage and levy taxes on the people, how is that different from the Beiyang army corps? Saying that for 1,000 jin you must hand over 200 shi, that is a return to the warlord era!

Let me tell you about my own case

My own case (the illegal farm house that was fined) is roughly the plot I bought more than ten years ago. That plot was not a field; it was a place for raising sheep. That plot was about 1.5 fen (1,500 sq m, about 450 ping). After we bought the land, we used the landowner to build a farm house, and after it was built it was transferred to me. Where was it (the farm house) in violation? The retaining wall and the original fill soil.

(Background supplement: the Agricultural Development Act provides that the minimum farmland area for building a farm house is 750 ping, but old farmers who already held farmland before the 89th year of the Republic of China (2000), regardless of the size of the farmland, may build a farm house and are not subject to the 750 ping rule. Chen Chin-te's farmland area is 1,500 sq m, about 450 ping; the base is already built up to 1/10, including walls and landscaping, all within the scope of non-agricultural use of farmland in violation, and the Yilan County Land Administration Office determined that 800 sq m were in violation and issued a NT$60,000 fine according to law.)

That was in the 96th year of the Republic of China (2007) when the use permit was obtained; it is a legally used building, and the location is a leisure agriculture area, so a bed and breakfast was applied for. Why did I want to run a bed and breakfast? Because I lost the legislative election, and it was awkward to go ask others for work, so I opened a bed and breakfast and enjoyed myself. According to county government regulations, illegal farm houses before April 7, 104th year of the Republic of China (2015) are listed, graded, and classified and handled according to grade; after April 7, 104th year of the Republic of China (2015), it is report and punish immediately. Everyone says, by refunding taxes yourself, are you not seeking benefit for yourself? But it was not only my house; it was a general category, so the county government did this. There is no issue of avoiding benefit or not avoiding benefit; I would still do it this way. But I must look strictly at my own matter. The ownership of this house now belongs to my ex-wife, Councilor Huang Su-chin, but I believe I was the actor at the time, so I asked her to issue (the fine) to me. Of the refund (because the farm house violation was overcharged house tax), the portion of NT$15,000, I donated it to the Lanyang Agricultural Development Foundation. As for the penalty portion, that is the illegal fill soil. You ask me how to improve it? That ownership is now not mine; it is my ex-wife Councilor Huang Su-chin's. (Upstream and Downstream supplementary note: the Yilan County Government stated that the first fine has now been issued, and by law there is a 3-month improvement period; if not improved, fines may continue until improvement is completed.) Taipei demolishes one percent of illegal buildings; Yilan will demolish them to show you. Do you know how many illegal structures there are in Taipei City, China? I think more than 100,000. Ko P didn't say when he took office that they would be demolished, that the violations were very serious; so should Taipei demolish illegal structures or not? I do not think those (Yilan) violations are more serious than the violations in Taipei City, all right? As far as I know, in Taipei City all illegal structures are not even fined, and no house tax is paid either. Houses in Taipei City do not even need to pay NT$60,000; which one pays a fine because of a violation? I think your (reporter's) question is unfair to the people of Yilan. I think that when you use this angle to look at the filling of farmland, as if to turn it back and restore it to the original farming, that is unfair. In Taipei City's illegal high-rise buildings, go and look; which hotel has no illegal structure? Taipei City's illegal structures, not to mention demolishing one-tenth, if one percent were demolished that would be good. Then we would demolish all the illegal fill soil and walls, all of it; would that be good? Why are you (reporter) so harsh on Yilan in particular? You are using a completely different standard! We follow the Regional Planning Act, and in stages and by year will require improvement. In a few days we will discuss a method. Under several principles, including overall monitoring of farmland, the penalty portion will be graded, depending on the circumstances of the violation. Some people (violations) are houses built too much; for example, he (by law) is one-tenth, but he built eight-tenths. Some people just filled some soil to plant vegetables, plant trees. You think that is extremely terrible, as if murder and arson, as if it were a violation. You photograph one farm house violation, as if deciding that the fields are all farm houses, that those farm houses are legal, that every one in the fields is legal, that what is illegal is the land. You Taipei people's mistaken impression is that farm houses should not be built in farmland. The relevant Urban Planning Act and Building Management Act define illegal structures very clearly. Your illegal structures in building land, when are they demolished? Why be especially harsh on farmland and turn a blind eye to building land? The law has general principles; you cannot single out this farmland. I just said, illegal structures in houses are more harmful to the city, including how far they are supposed to be from the road, the bottom is also occupied, the top is built up; have you handled it, has Taipei City, China handled it, has your building land handled it? My principle is, if Taipei City, China demolishes one percent of illegal structures, we will demolish them to show you. You go find Ko P, and if all county and city government building-land illegal structures can be one percent demolished, then we will demolish them to show you, all right? Further reading: Chen Chin-te interview 01: Slapping the Council of Agriculture in the face, farm house "road frontage and side frontage" is not law, farmers need not comply. Chen Chin-te interview 02: Farm house location strangles rural development; who has the right to make farmers farm, and let Taipei people come see the pastoral scenery? Chen Chin-te fires at the central government over farm houses, Chen Chi-chung: causing damage to farmland is illegal, Peng Tso-kwei strongly criticizes it as unbelievable. Standing at the crossroads of old and new agriculture, firmly upholding Yilan values or converting farmland to cash? | How to implement agricultural use of farmland? [Chart analysis] Chen Chin-te wants to forcefully amend the law; will Yilan return to the era of runaway farmland? Chen Teng-chin / Those Yilan values we fought for, those scars we bear, a small step that is not easy to stand firm on! Chen Pi-yuan / Farmland reform cannot turn back; appeal to County Magistrate Chen, please let Yilan walk out on its own glorious path! Yilan Tianzhongyang | Chang Liang-i photography feature Read Here: https://www.newsmarket.com.tw/blog/103106/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=newsmarket" class="nc_tweet"> Email