KMT lawmaker Fu Kun-chi now faces serious accusations tied to a growing mining tax dispute in Hualien County. Reports claim he pressured Fu An Mining Co. to withdraw a lawsuit against the county government.
The mining company filed suit after Hualien County raised the Mineral Mining Special Tax by over 600%. That increase far exceeded the legal limit of a 30% adjustment. Fu An Mining challenged this sharp rise, citing unfair treatment.
However, controversy followed. An audio recording surfaced, reportedly from a meeting between Hualien officials and the company. In the recording, officials allegedly suggested Fu An’s operations could stop due to an expired permit.
They also pointed out that bigger firms like Asia Cement had already paid the higher tax. The implication was clear: follow the others or face consequences. This raised concerns about coercion.
The mining tax dispute has drawn attention from the Ministry of Justice’s Investigation Bureau. An anonymous tip accused both Fu Kun-chi and Hualien Magistrate Hsu Chen-wei of intimidation tactics. Officials have not confirmed charges, but the case remains under scrutiny.
Fu’s office denied any wrongdoing. Staff said he had no role in the tax hike or the meeting. They emphasized that the Hualien County Council passed the tax, and the central government approved it.
His team also called the accusations a political attack. They claim it’s part of a recall campaign fueled by opponents in the Democratic Progressive Party. Fu previously served as Hualien magistrate when they increased the tax.
The Hualien government defended the policy. Officials cited public demand for stronger environmental protections. Though initially set at NT$100 per tonne, the rate was later reduced to NT$70 after discussions.
They also noted that Fu An Mining had requested the meeting where the recording took place. Investigations by the government ethics department found no proof of misconduct. Control Yuan reviews supported those findings.
Even with these responses, the mining tax dispute continues to stir debate. Questions remain about the balance between environmental policy, corporate pressure, and political motives.
