The key anti-bribery and corruption legislation in Taiwan includes the Criminal Code and the Anti-Corruption Act. Generally, the Criminal Code provides for the basic types of government official’s duty-related criminal offenses. Considering the need to impose stricter punishment on certain serious corruptive crimes, the Legislative Yuan further promulgated the Anti-Corruption Act in 1963 which remains in force to date.  While both the Criminal Code and the Anti-Corruption Act impose penalties on certain common serious types of corruption (see below), in practice the courts of Taiwan would first apply the Anti-Corruption Act to these types of violations under the rule of “the special law prevails over the general law.”  Such common types of corruptive acts include, among others:

• Taking bribes in breach of official duties: A public official who requests, promises to accept or accepts bribes or other illegal benefits in exchange for performing an act in violation of his/her duties.
• Taking bribes for acts within official duties: A public official who requests, promises to accept or accepts bribes or other illegal benefits in exchange for performing an act that does not violate his/her duties. 
• Abuse of power for illegal gains: A public official who, either on his/her own or through an intermediary, abuses the opportunity arising from his/her position or status for illegal private gains of him/herself or of others, and obtains such illegal gains as a result, in matters under his or her charge or supervision with a clear knowledge that such acts violate the law.
• Embezzlement: A public official who steals or misappropriates equipment or properties that are for public use or withholds funds or other assets that should be distributed pursuant to his/her duties. 

While the Criminal Code and the Anti-Corruption Act provide for criminal liabilities directly purported to fight corruption, there are other laws and regulations with objectives to facilitate integrity in both public and private sectors to maintain the trust of the public in civil servants and to foster a corporate culture of ethical management and disciplined development. An example is the Ethics Guidelines for Civil Servants promulgated by the Executive Yuan, which provides ethical guidelines for public officials on aspects of accepting gifts, attending social events, dealing with personal financial affairs, etc.

Another example is the Ethical Corporate Management Best Practice Principles for TWSE/GTSM Listed Companies, which mandates all the companies listed on the Taiwan Stock Exchange and GreTai Securities Market to adopt ethical corporate management best practice principles that prohibit offering or acceptance of any improper benefits by any company constituent, to establish risk assessment mechanism that monitors unethical conducts, and to incorporate other anti-bribery measures into corporate policies. Therefore, such regulations and guidelines may also have ancillary effects on combating corruption in both the public and private sectors.

Yes.  The Act Implementing the United Nations Convention against Corruption ("Act") was promulgated on May 20, 2015, and has remained effective since December 7, 2015. The Act is purported to incorporate the United Nations Convention against Corruption ("UNCAC") into the Taiwanese anti-corruption policy and legal scheme. Pursuant to Art. 7 of the Act, all branches and levels of the government are required to review and modify, update, or abolish relevant laws and regulations that are under their charge or supervision to align with the requirements set forth in the UNCAC within three years from the effective date of the Act.  To date, to align with the requirement of protection against retaliation on whistleblowing as set out in Art. 33 of the UNCAC, the Taiwanese government has been actively deliberating and drafting the Whistleblower Protection Act.

Apart from domestic legislation, Taiwan has also been progressively participating in international cooperation on anti-corruption efforts. For example, in 2019, Taiwan enters the Anti-Corruption Cooperation Agreement with Belize, establishing an information-exchange framework that aims to facilitate the two countries’ cooperation in combating transnational crimes.

Also, Pursuant to Art. 6 of the Act, the Taiwanese government is required to publish a report with respect to the implementation of the UNCAC enforcement mechanism on a regular basis. In this respect, the “ROC’s Initial Report under the United Nations Convention against Corruption” has been published by the Agency Against Corruption ("AAC"), Ministry of Justice in March of 2018.  

In addition, further review of anti-corruption legislation in Taiwan has also been carried out annually to ensure proper and up-to-date alignment with the UNCAC.

For example, in December 2020, the AAC published “the Mid-Term Report on Concluding Observations from Review of the ROC’s Initial Report under the United Nations Convention against Corruption,” responding to the Concluding Observations from Review of the ROC’s Initial Report in August 2018. The report also highlights the work to be done in the future, which is expected to receive supervision and inspection from all sectors and serves as the yardstick for the preparation of the second national report and the international review scheduled to be conducted in 2022.

Yes. Bribing a public official for an act in breach of the official’s duties is prohibited under both the Criminal Code and the Anti-Corruption Act. As mentioned in the answer to the question “What is the key anti-bribery and corruption legislation in your jurisdiction?”, in practice, the courts of Taiwan would first apply the Anti-Corruption Act to such violation under the rule of “the special law prevails over the general law.”  As to bribing a public official for an act not in breach of his/her duties, such violation is prohibited under the Anti-Corruption Act but not under the Criminal Code.  

Yes. According to Para. 3, Art. 11 of the Anti-Corruption Act, bribing a foreign government official in matters relating to cross-regional trades, investments, and other business activities are prohibited.  

Yes.  As mentioned in the answer to the question “What is the key anti-bribery and corruption legislation in your jurisdiction?”, a public official requesting or accepting a bribe shall constitute criminal offenses under both the Criminal Code and the Anti-Corruption Act.  

According to the Criminal Code, the jurisdictional reach of the criminal legislation in Taiwan shall include all criminal offenses committed within the national territory of Taiwan or on-board the vessels or aircrafts carrying the national flag. Moreover, a Taiwanese public official who commits a corruptive crime in a foreign jurisdiction shall as well be punishable under the Criminal Code. Also, according to the Anti-Corruption Act, anyone who bribes officials in a foreign jurisdiction shall constitute the same criminal offenses as domestic violations, regardless of whether the offenses are punishable in the foreign jurisdiction.  

Since our criminal system was heavily influenced by the German law, which does not provide for corporate criminal liabilities due to juristic persons’ lack of the ability to satisfy the fault element (such as intention or negligence), the Criminal Code and the Anti-Corruption Act only impose criminal sanctions on individuals but not on corporate entities. Hence, only individuals and public officials are subject to the criminal liabilities imposed by the Taiwanese anti-corruption legal scheme. However, there are certain legislations that impose criminal and administrative sanctions on corporate entities, albeit the main purpose of such legislation is not fighting corruption. For example, under the Government Procurement Act, a corporate entity may be subject to a criminal fine if its representatives, agents, employees, or other constituents are found guilty of violating the Act when carrying out business activities within the scope of employment. 

Under the Criminal Code, the term “public officials” is defined to include: (1) those who serve a public position at central or local government agencies and are entrusted with legal functions and powers, and those engaged in public matters under the authorization of laws and are entrusted with legal functions and powers; and (2) those who are under the legitimate mandate of central or local government agencies to engage in public matters related to the agencies’ legal functions or powers. As one can see, the term “public officials” is a very broad concept and can include various types of civil servants, including judges, arbitrators, and even professors and doctors of public universities and hospitals under certain conditions. The Anti-Corruption Act adopts the same definition of “public officials” as provided under the Criminal Code.  

As mentioned in the answer to the question “Who is subject to the legislation?”, neither the Criminal Code nor the Anti-Corruption Act imposes criminal liabilities on corporate entities.  However, on July 1, 2016, the Criminal Code was amended to include a new confiscation chapter, which provides that the proceeds of crimes obtained by a juristic person as a result of other individual’s (such as its constituents’) criminal acts shall be confiscated, even if the juristic person is not itself subject to any criminal liability.  In addition, according to the Government Procurement Act, the corporate entity may be subject to administrative sanctions such as publication in the Government Procurement Gazette of the condemnatory resolution and relevant facts, and disqualification from participation in government procurement projects for a certain period, if its constituents were found guilty of bribery in the relevant procurement projects that result in the cancellation of the government procurement contracts.  

Generally, the Anti-Corruption Act imposes more severe criminal sanctions than the Criminal Code does on the same types of corruptive crimes.  

For public officials (under the Anti-Corruption Act)

The criminal offense of taking bribes in breach of official duties is subject to a life sentence or imprisonment for ten to fifteen years, and, in addition thereto, a criminal fine of no more than NT one billion (approx. USD 32 million).  

The criminal offense of taking bribes for acts within official duties is subject to imprisonment for seven to fifteen years, and, in addition thereto, a criminal fine of no more than NT 60 million (approx. USD 1.9 million).  

The criminal offenses of abusing power for illegal gains and embezzlement is subject to imprisonment for seven to fifteen years, and, in addition thereto, a criminal fine of no more than NT 30 million (approx. USD 1 million).

For non-public officials (under the Anti-Corruption Act)

The criminal offense of bribing a public official (including foreign public official) for acts in breach of official duties is subject to imprisonment for one to seven years, and, in addition thereto, a criminal fine of no more than NT three million (approx. USD 97,000).  

The criminal offense of bribing a public official (including foreign public official) for acts within official duties is subject to imprisonment or custody of no more than three years, or a criminal fine of no more than NT 0.5 million (approx. USD 16,000), or both.

Please refer to the answer to the question “Who is subject to the legislation?”. 

Having a compliance program in place to prevent bribery is not a defense for the corporate entities.

That being said, as aforementioned, the implementation of a compliance program designed to prevent bribery as set out in the Ethical Corporate Management Best Practice Principles for TWSE/GTSM Listed Companies is highly recommended for public listed companies to comply.

As mentioned in the answer to the question “Who is subject to the legislation?”, neither the Criminal Code nor the Anti-Corruption Act imposes criminal liabilities on corporate entities.