Introducing and analyzing the Scope and Benefits of the Regulation「Statute for Upgrading Industries」in The Biotechnology Industry in Taiwan
The recent important regulation for supporting the biopharmaceutical industry in Taiwan has been the 「Statute for Upgrading Industries」 (hereinafter referred to as 「the Statute」).The main purpose of the Statue is for upgrading all industry for future economic development, so it applies to various industries, ranging from agriculture, industrial and service businesses. In other words, the Statute does not offer incentive measures to biopharmaceutical industry in particular, but focuses on promoting the industry development in general.
Statute for Upgrading Industry and Related Regulations
Generally speaking, the Statute has a widespread influence on industry development in Taiwan. The incentive measures provided in the Statute is complicated and covered other related regulations under its legal framework. Thus, the article will be taking a multi-facet perspective in discussing the how Statute relates to the biopharmaceutical industry.
1 、 Scope of Application
According to Article 1 of the Statute, the term 「industries」 refers to agricultural, industrial and service businesses. Consequently, nearly all kinds of industries fall under this definition, and the Statute is applicable to all of them. Moreover, in order to promote the development and application of emerging technology as well as cultivating the recognized industry, the Statute provides much more favorable terms to these industries. These emerging and major strategic industries includes computer, communication and consumer electronics (3C), precise mechanics and automation, aerospace, biomedical and chemical production, green technology, material science, nanotechnology, security and other product or service recognized by the Executive Yuan.
2 、 Tax Benefits
The Statute offers several types of tax benefits, so the industry could receive sufficient reward in every way it could, and promote a sound cycle in creating new values through these benefits.
(1) Benefits for the purchase of automation equipment
The said procured equipment and technology over NTD600, 000 may credit a certain percentage of the investment against the amount of profit-seeking enterprise income tax payable for the then current year. For the purchase of production technology, 5% may be credited. For the purchase of equipment, 7% may be credited. And any investment plan that includes the purchasing of equipment for automation can qualify for a low-interest preferential loan. Besides, for science-based industrial company imported overseas equipment that is not manufacture by local manufactures, from January 1, 2002, the imported equipment shall be exempted from import and business tax. And if the company is a bonded factory, the raw materials to be imported from abroad by it shall also be exempt from import duties and business tax.
(2) Benefits for R&D expenditure
Expenditure concurred for developing new products, improving production technology, or improving label-providing technology may credit 30%of the investment against the amount of profit-seeking enterprise income tax payable for the then current year. Research expenditures of the current year exceeding the average research expenditure for the past two years, the excess in research expenditure shall be 50% deductible. Instruments and equipments purchased by for exclusive R&D purpose, experimentation, or quality inspection may be accelerated to two years. At last, Biotech and New Pharmaceuticals Company engages in R&D activities, such as Contract research Organization (CRO), may credit 30% of the investment against the amount of profit-seeking enterprise income tax payable.
(3) Personnel Training
When a company trained staff and registered for business-related course, may credit 30% of the training cost against the amount of profit-seeking enterprise income tax payable for the then current year. Where training expenses for the current year exceeds the two-year average, 50% of the excess portion may be credited.
(4) Benefit for Newly Emerging Strategic Industries
Corporate shareholders invest in newly emerging strategic industries are entitled to select one of the following tax benefits:
- A profit seeking enterprise may credit up to 20% of the price paid for acquisition of such stock against the profit seeking enterprise income tax. An individual may credit up to 10%. As of January and once every year, there will be a 1% reduction of the price paid for acquisition of such stock against the consolidated income tax payable in the then current year.
- A company, within two years from the beginning date for payment of the stock price by its shareholders, selects, with the approval of its shareholder meeting, the application of an exemption from profit-seeking enterprise income tax and waives the shareholders investment credit against payable income tax as mentioned above. However, that once the selection is made, no changes shall be allowed.
(5) Benefits for Investment in Equipment or Technology Used for Pollution Control
To prevent our environment from further pollution, the Government offers tax benefits to reward companies in making improvements. Investment in equipment or technology used for pollution control may credit 7% of the equipment expenditure, and 5% of the expenditure on technology against the amount of profit-seeking enterprise income tax payable for the then current year. For any equipment that has been verified in use and specialized in air pollution control, noise pollution control, vibration control, water pollution control, environmental surveillance and waste disposal, shall be exempt from import duties and business tax. And for investment plans that planned implementation of energy saving systems can apply for a low interest loan.
(6) Incentive for Operation Headquarter
To encourage companies to utilize worldwide resources and set up international operation network, if they established operation headquarters within the territory of the Republic of China reaching a specific size and bringing about significant economic benefit, their following incomes shall be exempted from profit-seeking enterprise income tax:
- The income derived from provision of management services or R&D services.
- The royalty payment received under its investments to its affiliates abroad.
- The investment return and asset disposal received under its investment to its affiliates abroad.
(7) Exchange of Technology for Stock Option
The emerging-industrycompany recognized by government, upon adoption of a resolution by a majority voting of the directors present at a meeting of its board of directors attended by two-thirds of the directors of the company, may issue stock options to corporation or individual in exchange for authorization or transfer of patent and technologies.
(8) Deferral of Taxes on the Exchange of Technology for Shares
Taxes on income earned by investors from the acquisition of shares in emerging-industry companies in exchange for technology will be deferred for five years, on condition that the shares exchanged for technology amount to more than 20% of the company's total stock equity and that the number of persons who obtain shares in exchange for technology does not exceed five.
3 、 Technical Assistance and Capital Investment
The rapid industry development has been closely tied to the infusion of funds. In addition to tax benefits, the Statute incorporates regulations especially for technical assistance and capital investment as below:
(1) In order to introduce or transfer advanced technologies, technical organization formed with the contribution of government shall provide appropriate technical assistance as required.
(2) In order to advance technologies, enhance R&D activities and further upgrade industries, the relevant central government authorities in charge of end enterprises may promote the implementation of industrial and technological projects by providing subsidies to such R&D projects.
(3) In order to assist the start-up of domestic small-medium technological enterprises and the overall upgrading of the entire industries, guidance and assistance shall be provided for the development of venture capital enterprises.
Taiwan's Approach to AI Governance 2024/06/19 In an era where artificial intelligence (AI) reshapes every facet of life, governance plays a pivotal role in harnessing its benefits while mitigating associated risks. Taiwan, recognizing the dual-edged nature of AI, has embarked on a comprehensive strategy to ensure its development is both ethical and effective. This article delves into Taiwan's AI governance framework, exploring its strategic pillars, regulatory milestones, and future directions. I. Taiwan's AI Governance Vision: Taiwan AI Action Plan 2.0 Taiwan has long viewed AI as a transformative force that must be guided with a careful balance of innovation and regulation. With the advent of technologies capable of influencing democracy, privacy, and social stability, Taiwan's approach is rooted in human-centric values. The nation's strategy is aligned with global movements towards responsible AI, drawing lessons from international standards like those set by the European Union's Artificial Intelligence Act. The "Taiwan AI Action Plan 2.0" is the cornerstone of this strategy. It is a multi-faceted plan designed to boost Taiwan's AI capabilities through five key components: 1. Talent Development: Enhancing the quality and quantity of AI professionals while improving public AI literacy through targeted education and training initiatives. 2. Technological and Industrial Advancement: Focusing on critical AI technologies and applications to foster industrial growth and creating the Trustworthy AI Dialogue Engine (TAIDE) that communicates in Traditional Chinese. 3. Supportive Infrastructure: Establishing robust AI governance infrastructure to facilitate industry and governmental regulation, and to foster compliance with international standards. 4. International Collaboration: Expanding Taiwan's role in international AI forums, such as the Global Partnership on AI (GPAI), to collaborate on developing trustworthy AI practices. 5. Societal and Humanitarian Engagement: Utilizing AI to tackle pressing societal challenges like labor shortages, an aging population, and environmental sustainability. II. Guidance-before-legislation To facilitate a gradual adaptation to the evolving legal landscape of artificial intelligence and maintain flexibility in governance, Taiwan employs a "guidance-before-legislation" approach. This strategy prioritizes the rollout of non-binding guidelines as an initial step, allowing agencies to adjust before any formal legislation is enacted as needed. Taiwan adopts a proactive approach in AI governance, facilitated by the Executive Yuan. This method involves consistent inter-departmental collaborations to create a unified regulatory landscape. Each ministry is actively formulating and refining guidelines to address the specific challenges and opportunities presented by AI within their areas of responsibility, spanning finance, healthcare, transportation, and cultural sectors. III. Next step: Artificial Intelligence Basic Act The drafting of the "Basic Law on Artificial Intelligence," anticipated for legislative review in 2024, marks a significant step towards codifying Taiwan’s AI governance. Built on seven foundational principles—transparency, privacy, autonomy, fairness, cybersecurity, sustainable development, and accountability—this law will serve as the backbone for all AI-related activities and developments in Taiwan. By establishing rigorous standards and evaluation mechanisms, this law will not only govern but also guide the ethical deployment of AI technologies, ensuring that they are beneficial and safe for all. IV. Conclusion As AI continues to evolve, the need for robust governance frameworks becomes increasingly critical. Taiwan is setting a global standard for AI governance that is both ethical and effective. Through legislation, active international cooperation, and a steadfast commitment to human-centric values, Taiwan is shaping a future where AI technology not only thrives but also aligns seamlessly with societal norms and values.
Impact of Government Organizational Reform to Research Legal System and Response Thereto (2) – Observation of the Swiss Research Innovation System3.Commission of Technology and Innovation (CTI) The CTI is also an institution dedicated to boosting innovation in Switzerland. Established in 1943, it was known as the Commission for the Promotion of Scientific Research[1]. It was initially established for the purpose of boosting economy and raising the employment rate, and renamed after 1996. The CTI and SNSF are two major entities dedicated to funding scientific research in Switzerland, and the difference between both resides in that the CTI is dedicated to funding R&D of the application technology and industrial technology helpful to Switzerland’s economic development. Upon enforcement of the amended RIPA 2011, the CTI was officially independent from the Federal Office for Professional Education and Technology (OEPT) and became an independent entity entitled to making decisions and subordinated to the Federal Department of Economic Affairs (FDEA) directly[2]. The CTI is subject to the council system, consisting of 65 professional members delegated from industrial, academic and research sectors. The members assume the office as a part time job. CTI members are entitled to making decisions on funding, utilization of resources and granting of CTI Start-up Label independently[3]. The CTI primarily carries out the mission including promotion of R&D of industrial technology, enhancement of the market-orientation innovation process and delivery of R&D energy into the market to boost industrial innovation. For innovation, the CTI's core mission is categorized into[4]: (1)Funding technology R&D activities with market potential The CTI invests considerable funds and resources in boosting the R&D of application technology and industrial technology. The CTI R&D Project is intended to fund private enterprises (particularly small-sized and medium-sized enterprises) to engage in R&D of innovation technology or product. The enterprises may propose their innovative ideas freely, and the CTI will decide whether the funds should be granted after assessing whether the ideas are innovative and potentially marketable[5]. CTI’s funding is conditioned on the industrial and academic cooperation. Therefore, the enterprises must work with at least one research institution (including a university, university of science and technology, or ETH) in the R&D. Considering that small-sized and medium-sized enterprises usually do not own enough working funds, technology and human resources to commercialize creative ideas, the CTI R&D Project is intended to resolve the problem about insufficient R&D energy and funds of small- and medium-sized enterprises by delivering the research institutions’ plentiful research energy and granting the private enterprises which work with research institutions (including university, university of science and technology, or ETH) the fund. Notably, CTI’s funding is applicable to R&D expenses only, e.g., research personnel’s salary and expenditure in equipment & materials, and allocated to the research institutions directly. Meanwhile, in order to enhance private enterprises' launch into R&D projects and make them liable for the R&D success or failure, CTI’s funding will be no more than 50% of the total R&D budget and, therefore, the enterprises are entitled to a high degree of control right in the process of R&D. The industrial types which the CTI R&D Project may apply to are not limited. Any innovative ideas with commercial potential may be proposed. For the time being, the key areas funded by CTI include the life science, engineering science, Nano technology and enabling sciences, etc.[6] It intends to keep Switzerland in the lead in these areas. As of 2011, in order to mitigate the impact of drastic CHF revaluation to the industries, the CTI launched its new R&D project, the CTI Voucher[7]. Given this, the CTI is not only an entity dedicated to funding but also plays an intermediary role in the industrial and academic sectors. Enterprises may submit proposals before finding any academic research institution partner. Upon preliminary examination of the proposals, the CTI will introduce competent academic research institutions to work with the enterprises in R&D, subject to the enterprises' R&D needs. After the cooperative partner is confirmed, CTI will grant the fund amounting to no more than CHF3,500,000 per application[8], provided that the funding shall be no more than 50% of the R&D project expenditure. The CTI R&D Project not only boosts innovation but also raises private enterprises’ willingness to participate in the academic and industrial cooperation, thereby narrowing the gap between the supply & demand of innovation R&D in the industrial and academic sectors. Notably, the Project has achieved remarkable effect in driving private enterprises’ investment in technology R&D. According to statistical data, in 2011, the CTI solicited additional investment of CHF1.3 from a private enterprise by investing each CHF1[9]. This is also one of the important reasons why the Swiss innovation system always acts vigorously. Table 1 2005-2011 Passing rate of application for R&D funding Year 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 Quantity of applications 590 780 637 444 493 407 522 Quantity of funded applications 293 343 319 250 277 227 251 Pass rate 56% 44% 50% 56% 56% 56% 48% Data source: Prepared by the Study (2)Guiding high-tech start-up Switzerland has learnt that high-tech start-ups are critical to the creation of high-quality employment and boosting of economic growth, and start-ups were able to commercialize the R&D results. Therefore, as of 2001, Switzerland successively launched the CTI Entrepreneurship and CTI Startup to promote entrepreneurship and cultivate high-tech start-ups. 1.CTI Entrepreneurship The CTI Entrepreneurship was primarily implemented by the Venture Lab founded by CTI investment. The Venture Lab launched a series of entrepreneurship promotion and training courses, covering day workshops, five-day entrepreneurship intensive courses, and entrepreneurship courses available in universities. Each training course was reviewed by experts, and the experts would provide positive advice to attendants about innovative ideas and business models. Data source: Venture Lab Site Fig. 3 Venture Lab Startup Program 2.CTI Startup The CTI is dedicated to driving the economy by virtue of innovation as its priority mission. In order to cultivate the domestic start-ups with high growth potential in Switzerland, the CTI Startup project was launched in 1996[10] in order to provide entrepreneurs with the relevant guidance services. The project selected young entrepreneurs who provided innovative ideas, and guided them in the process of business start to work their innovative ideas and incorporate competitive start-ups. In order to enable the funding and resources to be utilized effectively, the CTI Startup project enrolled entrepreneurs under very strict procedure, which may be categorized into four stages[11]: Data source: CTI Startup Site Fig. 4 Startup Plan Flow Chart In the first stage, the CTI would preliminarily examine whether the applicant’s idea was innovative and whether it was technologically feasible, and help the applicant register with the CTI Startup project. Upon registration, a more concrete professional examination would be conducted at the second stage. The scope of examination included the technology, market, feasibility and management team’s competence. After that, at the stage of professional guidance, each team would be assigned a professional “entrepreneurship mentor”, who would help the team develop further and optimize the enterprise’s strategy, flow and business model in the process of business start, and provide guidance and advice on the concrete business issues encountered by the start-up. The stage of professional guidance was intended to guide start-ups to acquire the CTI Startup Label, as the CTI Startup Label was granted subject to very strict examination procedure. For example, in 2012, the CTI Startup project accepted 78 applications for entrepreneurship guidance, but finally the CTI Startup Label was granted to 27 applications only[12]. Since 1996, a total of 296 start-ups have acquired the CTI Startup Label, and more than 86% thereof are still operating now[13]. Apparently, the CTI Startup Label represents the certification for innovation and on-going development competence; therefore, it is more favored by investors at the stage of fund raising. Table 2 Execution of start-up plans for the latest three years Quantity of application Quantity of accepted application Quantity of CTI Label granted 2012 177 78 27 2011 160 80 26 2010 141 61 24 Data source: CTI Annual Report, prepared by the Study Meanwhile, the “CTI Invest” platform was established to help start-up raise funds at the very beginning to help commercialize R&D results and cross the valley in the process of R&D innovation. The platform is a private non-business-making organization, a high-tech start-up fund raising platform co-established by CTI and Swiss investors[14]. It is engaged in increasing exposure of the start-ups and contact with investors by organizing activities, in order to help the start-ups acquire investment funds. (3)Facilitating transfer of knowledge and technology between the academic sector and industrial sector KTT Support (Knowledge & Technology Transfer (KTT Support) is identified as another policy instrument dedicated to boosting innovation by the CTI. It is intended to facilitate the exchange of knowledge and technology between academic research institutions and private enterprises, in order to transfer and expand the innovation energy. As of 2013, the CTI has launched a brand new KTT Support project targeting at small-sized and medium-sized enterprises. The new KTT Support project consisted of three factors, including National Thematic Networks (NTNs), Innovation Mentors, and Physical and web-based platforms. Upon the CTI’s strict evaluation and consideration, a total of 8 cooperative innovation subjects were identified in 2012, namely, carbon fiber composite materials, design idea innovation, surface innovation, food study, Swiss biotechnology, wood innovation, photonics and logistics network, etc.[15] One NTN would be established per subject. The CTI would fund these NTNs to support the establishment of liaison channels and cooperative relations between academic research institutions and industries and provide small- and medium-sized enterprises in Switzerland with more rapid and easy channel to access technologies to promote the exchange of knowledge and technology between both parties. Innovation Mentors were professionals retained by the CTI, primarily responsible for evaluating the small-sized and medium-sized enterprises’ need and chance for innovation R&D and helping the enterprises solicit competent academic research partners to engage in the transfer of technology. The third factor of KTT Support, Physical and web-based platforms, is intended to help academic research institutions and private enterprises establish physical liaison channels through organization of activities and installation of network communication platforms, to enable the information about knowledge and technology transfer to be more transparent and communicable widely. In conclusion, the CTI has been dedicated to enhancing the link between scientific research and the industries and urging the industrial sector to involve and boost the R&D projects with market potential. The CTI’s business lines are all equipped with corresponding policy instruments to achieve the industrial-academic cooperation target and mitigate the gap between the industry and academic sectors in the innovation chain. The various CTI policy instruments may be applied in the following manner as identified in the following figure. Data source: CTI Annual Report 2011 Fig. 5 Application of CTI Policy Instrument to Innovation Chain III. Swiss Technology R&D Budget Management and Allocation The Swiss Federal Government has invested considerable expenditures in technology R&D. According to statistic data provided by Swiss Federal Statistical Office (FSO) and OECD, the Swiss research expenditures accounted for 2.37% of the Federal Government’s total expenditures, following the U.S.A. and South Korea (see Fig. 6). Meanwhile, the research expenditures of the Swiss Government grew from CHF2.777 billion in 2000 to CHF4.639 billion in 2010, an average yearly growth rate of 5.9% (see Fig. 7). It is clear that Switzerland highly values its technology R&D. Data source: FSO and OECD Fig. 6 Percentage of Research Expenditures in Various Country Governments’ Total Expenditures (2008) Data source: FSO and OECD Fig. 7 Swiss Government Research Expenditures 2000-2010 1.Management of Swiss Technology R&D Budget Swiss research expenditures are primarily allocated to the education, R&D and innovation areas, and play an important role in the Swiss innovation system. Therefore, a large part of the Swiss research expenditures are allocated to institutions of higher education, including ETH, universities, and UASs. The Swiss research expenditures are utilized by three hierarchies[16] (see Fig. 8): Government R&D funding agencies: The Swiss research budget is primarily executed by three agencies, including SERI, Federal Department of Economic Affairs, Education and Research, and Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC). Intermediary R&D funding agencies: Including SNSC and CTI. Funding of R&D performing institutions: Including private enterprises, institutions of higher education and private non-profit-making business, et al. Therefore, the Swiss Government research expenditures may be utilized by the Federal Government directly, or assigned to intermediary agencies, which will allocate the same to the R&D performing institutions. SERI will allocate the research expenditures to institutions of higher education and also hand a lot of the expenditures over to SNSF for consolidated funding to the basic science of R&D. Data source: FSO Fig. 8 Swiss Research Fund Utilization Mechanism ~to be continued~ [1] ORGANIZATION FOR ECONNOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT [OECD], OECD Reviews of Innovation Policy: Switzerland 27 (2006). [2] As of January 1, 2013, the Federal Ministry of Economic Affairs was reorganized, and renamed into Federal Department of Economic Affairs, Education and Research (EAER). [3] The Commission for Technology and Innovation CTI, THE COMMISSION FOR TECHOLOGY AND INNOVATION CTI, http://www.kti.admin.ch/org/00079/index.html?lang=en (last visited Jun. 3, 2013). [4] Id. [5] CTI INVEST, Swiss Venture Guide 2012 (2012), at 44, http://www.cti-invest.ch/getattachment/7f901c03-0fe6-43b5-be47-6d05b6b84133/Full-Version.aspx (last visited Jun. 4, 2013). [6] CTI, CTI Activity Report 2012 14 (2013), available at http://www.kti.admin.ch/dokumentation/00077/index.html?lang=en&download=NHzLpZeg7t,lnp6I0NTU042l2Z6ln1ad1IZn4Z2qZpnO2Yuq2Z6gpJCDen16fmym162epYbg2c_JjKbNoKSn6A-- (last visited Jun. 3, 2013). [7] CTI Voucher, THE COMMISSION FOR TECHOLOGY AND INNOVATION CTI, http://www.kti.admin.ch/projektfoerderung/00025/00135/index.html?lang=en (last visited Jun. 3, 2013). [8] Id. [9] CTI, CTI Activity Report 2011 20 (2012), available at http://www.kti.admin.ch/dokumentation/00077/index.html?lang=en&download=NHzLpZeg7t,lnp6I0NTU042l2Z6ln1ad1IZn4Z2qZpnO2Yuq2Z6gpJCDeYR,gWym162epYbg2c_JjKbNoKSn6A--(last visited Jun. 3, 2013). [10] CTI Start-up Brings Science to Market, THE COMMISSION FOR TECHOLOGY AND INNOVATION CTI, http://www.ctistartup.ch/en/about/cti-start-/cti-start-up/ (last visited Jun. 5, 2013). [11] Id. [12] Supra note 8, at 45. [13] Id. [14] CTI Invest, http://www.cti-invest.ch/About/CTI-Invest.aspx (last visited Jun. 5, 2013). [15] KTT Support, CTI, http://www.kti.admin.ch/netzwerke/index.html?lang=en (last visited Jun.5, 2013). [16] Swiss Federal Statistics Office (SFO), Public Funding of Research in Switzerland 2000–2010 (2012), available at http://www.bfs.admin.ch/bfs/portal/en/index/themen/04/22/publ.Document.163273.pdf (last visited Jun. 20, 2013).
Impact of Government Organizational Reform to Scientific Research Legal System and Response Thereto (2) – For Example, The Finnish Innovation Fund (“SITRA”)Impact of Government Organizational Reform to Scientific Research Legal System and Response Thereto (2) – For Example, The Finnish Innovation Fund (“SITRA”) III. Comparison of Strength and Weakness of Sitra Projects 1. Sitra Venture Capital Investment Model In order to comprehend how to boost innovation business development to upgrade innovation ability, we analyze and compare the innovation systems applied in Sweden, France and Finland[1] . We analyze and compare the characteristics, strength and weakness of innovation promotion models in terms of funding, networking and professional guidance. Generally, the first difficulty which a start-up needs to deal with when it is founded initially is the funding. Particularly, a technology company usually requires tremendous funding when it is founded initially. Some potentially adequate investors, e.g., venture capitals, seldom invest in small-sized start-up (because such overhead as supervision and management fees will account for a high percentage of the investment due to the small total investment amount). Networking means how a start-up integrates such human resources as the management, investors, technical advisors and IP professionals when it is founded initially. Control over such human resources is critical to a new company’s survival and growth. Professional guidance means how professional knowledge and human resource support the start-up’s operation. In order to make its product required by the market, an enterprise usually needs to integrate special professional knowledge. Notwithstanding, the professional knowledge and talents which are available from an open market theoretically often cannot be accessed, due to market failure[2]. Assuming that Sitra’s funding is prioritized as Pre-seed-Initiation stage, Seed-Development stage and Follow-up – Growth stage, under Finland model, at the Pre-seed-Initiation stage, Sitra will provide the fund amounting to EUR20,000 when Tekes will also provide the equivalent fund, provided that the latter purely provides subsidy, while the fund provided by Sitra means a loan to be repaid (without interest) after some time (usually after commercialization), or a loan convertible to shares. Then, the loan would be replaced by soft or convertible (to shares) investment and the source of funding would turn to be angel investors or local seed capital at the Seed-Development stage. At this stage, the angel investors, local seed capital and Sitra will act as the source of funding jointly in Finland, while Tekes will not be involved at this stage. At the Follow-up-Growth stage, like the Sweden model, Sitra will utilize its own investment fund to help mitigate the gap between local small-sized funding and large-sized international venture capital[3]. How to recruit professional human resources is critical to a start-up’s success. Many enterprises usually lack sufficient professional human resources or some expertise. DIILI service network set up by Sitra is able to provide the relevant solutions. DILLI is a network formed by product managers. Its members actively participate in starts-up and seek innovation. They also participate in investment of starts-up independently sometimes. Therefore, they are different from angel investors, because they devote themselves to the starts-up on a full-time basis[4]. In other words, they manage the starts-up as if the starts-up were their own business. 2. Key to Public Sector’s Success in Boosting Development of Innovation Activity Business In terms of professional guidance, voluntary guidance means the direct supply of such professional resources as financing, human resource and technology to starts-up, while involuntary guidance means the supply of strategic planning in lieu of direct assistance to help the enterprises make routine decisions[5]. The fractured and incomplete professional service attendant market generates low marginal effect. Therefore, it is impossible for the traditional consultation service to mitigate such gap and the investment at the pre-seed initiation stage will be excessive because of the acquisition of the professional services. Meanwhile, professional advisors seldom are involved in consultation services at the pre-seed initiation stage of a start-up because of the low potential added value. Therefore, at such stage, only involuntary professional guidance will be available usually. Under Sitra model, such role is played by an angel investor. Upon analysis and comparison, we propose six suggested policies to boost innovation activities successfully as the reference when observing Sitra operation. First of all, compared with the French model, Finland Sitra and Sweden model set more specific objectives to meet a start-up’s needs (but there is some defect, e.g., Sitra model lacks voluntary professional guidance). Second, structural budget is a key to the successful model. Sitra will receive the funds in the amount of EUR235,000,000 from the Finnish Government, but its operating expenditure is covered by its own operating revenue in whole. Third, it is necessary to provide working fund in installments and provide fund at the pre-seed-initiation stage. Under both of Finland model and Sweden model, funds will be provided at the pre-seed-initiation stage (Tekes is responsible for providing the fund in Finland). Fourth, the difficulty in networking must be solved. In Sitra, the large-sized talent network set up by it will be dedicated to recruiting human resources. Fifth, the voluntary professional guidance is indispensable at the pre-seed-initiation stage, while the same is unavailable at such stage under Sitra model. Instead, the Sweden model is held as the optimal one, as it has a dedicated unit responsible for solving the difficulty to seek profit. Sixth, soft loan[6] will be successfully only when the loan cannot be convertible to shares. At the pre-seed initiation stage or seed-development stage, a start-up is usually funded by traditional loan. Assuming that the start-up is not expected to gain profit, whether the loan may be convertible to shares will also be taken into consideration when the granting of loan is considered (therefore, the fund provider will not be changed to the “capital” provider). Besides, the government authorities mostly lack the relevant experience or knowledge, or are in no position to negotiate with international large-sized venture capital companies. For example, under the French model, the government takes advantage of its power to restrict the venture capital investment and thereby renders adverse impact to starts-up which seek venture capital. Finally, the supply of own fund to meet the enterprises’ needs at seed-development stage and follow-up-growth stage to mitigate the gap with large-sized venture capital[7] is also required by a successful funding model. IV. Conclusion－Deliberation of Finnish Sitra Experience As the leading national industrial innovation ability promoter in Finland, Sitra appears to be very characteristic in its organizational framework or operating mechanism. We hereby conclude six major characteristics of Sitra and propose the potential orientation toward deliberation of Taiwan’s industrial innovation policies and instruments. 1. Particularity of Organizational Standing In consideration of the particularity of Sitra organizational standing, it has two characteristics observable. First, Sitra is under supervision of the Finnish Parliament directly, not subordinated to the administrative organizational system and, therefore, it possesses such strength as flexibility and compliance with the Parliament’s requirements. Such organization design which acts independently of the administrative system but still aims to implement policies has been derived in various forms in the world, e.g., the agency model[8] in the United Kingdom, or the independent apparatus in the U.S.A. Nevertheless, to act independently of the administrative system, it has to deal with the deliberation of responsible political principles at first, which arouses the difficulty in taking care of flexibility at the same time. In Taiwan, the intermediary organizations include independent agencies and administrative corporations, etc., while the former still involves the participation of the supreme administrative head in the right of personnel administration and is subordinated to the ministries/departments of the Executive Yuan and the latter aims to enforce the public missions in the capacity of “public welfare” organization. Though such design as reporting to the Parliament directly is not against the responsible political principles, how the Parliament owns the authority to supervise is the point (otherwise, theoretically, the administrative authorities are all empowered by the parliament in the country which applies the cabinet system). Additionally, why some special authorities are chosen to report to the parliament directly while other policy subjects are not is also disputable. The existence of Sitra also refers to a circumstantial evidence substantiating that Finland includes the innovation policy as one of the important government policies, and also the objective fact that Finland’s innovation ability heads the first in the world. Second, Sitra is a self-sufficient independent fund, which aims to promote technical R&D and also seeks profit for itself, irrelevant with selection of adequate investment subjects or areas. Instead, for this purpose, the various decisions made by it will deal with the utility and mitigate the gap between R&D and market. Such entity is responsible for public welfare or policy projects and also oriented toward gain from investment to feed the same back to the individuals in the organization. In the administrative system, Sitra is not directed by the administrative system but reports to the Parliament directly. Sitra aims to upgrade the national R&D innovation ability as its long-term goal mission and utilizes the promotion of innovation business and development of venture capital market. The mission makes the profit-orientation compatible with the selection of investment subjects, as an enterprise unlikely to gain profit in the future usually is excluded from the national development view. For example, such industries as green energy, which is not likely to gain profit in a short term, is still worth investing as long as it meets the national development trend and also feasible (in other words, selection of marketable green technology R&D, instead of comparison of the strength and weakness in investment value of green energy and other high-polluted energy). 2. Expressly Distinguished From Missions of Other Ministries/Departments For the time being, Sitra primarily invests in starts-up, including indirect investment and direct investment, because it relies on successful new technology R&D which may contribute to production and marketability. Starts-up have always been one of the best options, as large-sized enterprises are able to do R&D on their own without the outsourcing needs. Further, from the point of view of an inventor, if the new technology is marketable, it will be more favorable to him if he chooses to start business on his own or make investment in the form of partnership, instead of transfer or license of the ownership to large-sized enterprises (as large-sized enterprises are more capable of negotiation). However, note that Sitra aims to boost innovation activities and only targets at start-up business development, instead of boosting and promoting the start-up per se. Under the requirement that Sitra needs to seek profit for itself, only the business with positive development view will be targeted by Sitra. Further, Sitra will not fund any business other than innovation R&D or some specific industries. Apparently, Sitra only focuses on the connection between innovation activities and start-up, but does not act as the competent authority in charge of small-sized and medium-sized enterprises. Meanwhile, Sitra highlights that it will not fund academic research activities and, therefore, appears to be distinguished from the competent authority in charge of national scientific research. Though scientific research and technology innovation business, to some extent, are distinguished from each other in quantity instead of quality, abstract and meaningless research is existent but only far away from the commercialization market. Notwithstanding, a lot of countries tend to distinguish basic scientific research from industrial technology R&D in the administration organization's mission, or it has to be. In term of the way in which Sitra carries out its mission, such distinguishing ability is proven directly. 3. Well-Founded Technology Foresight-Based Investment Business The corporate investments, fund investments and project funding launched by Sitra are all available to the pre-designated subjects only, e.g. ecological sustainable development, energy utilization efficiency, and social structural changes, etc. Such way to promote policies as defining development area as the first priority and then promoting the investment innovation might have some strength and weakness at the same time. First of all, the selection of development areas might meet the higher level national development orientation more therefor, free from objective environmental restrictions, e.g. technical level, leading national technology industries and properties of natural resources. Notwithstanding, an enterprise’s orientation toward innovation R&D might miss the opportunity for other development because of the pre-defined framework. Therefore, such way to promote policies as defining development areas or subjects as the first priority will be inevitably based on well-founded technology foresight-based projects[9], in order to take various subjective and objective conditions into consideration and to forecast the technology development orientation and impact to be faced by the home country’s national and social economies. That is, said strength and weakness will be taken into consideration beforehand for foresight, while following R&D funding will be launched into the technology areas pre-designated after thorough analysis. 4. Self-Interested Investment with the Same High Efficiency as General Enterprises Sitra aims to gain profit generally, and its individual investment model, e.g., DIILI, also permits marketing managers to involve business operation. The profit-sharing model enables Sitra to seek the same high efficiency as the general enterprises when purusing its innovation activity development. The investment launched by Sitra highlights that it is not “funding” (which Tekes is responsible for in Finland) or the investment not requiring return. Therefore, it has the system design to acquire corporate shares. Sitra participates in a start-up by offering its advanced technology, just like a general market investor who will choose the potential investment subject that might benefit him most upon his personal professional evaluation. After all, the ultimate profit will be retained by Sitra (or said DIILI manger, subject to the investment model). Certainly, whether the industry which requires permanent support may benefit under such model still remains questionable. However, except otherwise provided in laws expressly, said special organization standing might be a factor critical to Sitra profit-seeking model. That is, Sitra is not subordinated to the administrative system but is under supervision of the parliament independently, and how its staff deal with the conflict of interest issues in the capacity other than the public sector’s/private sector’s staff is also one of the key factors to success of the system. 5. Investment Model to Deal With Policy Instruments of Other Authorities/Agencies Sitra decides to fund a start-up depending on whether it may gain profit as one of its priorities. As aforesaid, we may preliminarily recognize that the same should be consistent with funding to starts-up logically and no “government failure” issue is involved. For example, the funding at the pre-seed-initiation stage needs to tie in with Tekes’ R&D “funding” (and LIKSA service stated herein) and, therefore, may adjust the profit-seeking orientation, thereby causing deviation in promotion of policies. The dispute over fairness of repeated subsidy/funding and rationality of resource allocation under the circumstance must be controlled by a separate evaluation management mechanism inevitably. 6. Affiliation with Enhancement of Regional Innovation Activities Regional policies cannot be separable from innovation policies, especially in a country where human resources and natural resources are not plentiful or even. Therefore, balancing regional development policies and also integrating uneven resource distribution at the same time is indispensable to upgrading of the entire national social economic benefits. The Finnish experience indicated that innovation activities ought to play an important role in the regional development, and in order to integrate enterprises, the parties primarily engaged in innovation activities, with the R&D ability of regional academic research institutions to upgrade the R&D ability effectively, the relevant national policies must be defined for adequately arranging and launching necessary resources. Sitra's approaches to invest in starts-up, release shares after specific period, integrate the regional resources, upgrade the national innovation ability and boost the regional development might serve to be the reference for universities’ centers of innovative incubator or Taiwan’s local academic and scientific sectors[10] to improve their approaches. For the time being, the organization engaged in venture capital investment in the form of fund in Taiwan like Sitra of Finland is National Development Fund, Executive Yuan. However, in terms of organizational framework, Sitra is under supervision of the Parliament directly, while National Development Fund is subordinated to the administrative system of Taiwan. Though Sitra and National Development Fund are both engaged in venture capital investments primarily, Sitra carries out its missions for the purpose of “promoting innovative activities”, while the National Development Fund is committed to achieve such diversified goals as “promoting economic changes and national development[11]” and is required to be adapted to various ministries’/departments’ policies. Despite the difference in the administrative systems of Taiwan and Finland, Sitra system is not necessarily applicable to Taiwan. Notwithstanding, Sitra’s experience in promotion and thought about the system might provide a different direction for Taiwan to think when it is conceiving the means and instruments for industrial innovation promotion policies in the future. [1] Bart Clarysse & Johan Bruneel, Nurturing and Growing Innovation Start-Ups: The Role of Policy As Integrator, R&D MANAGEMENT, 37(2), 139, 144-146 (2007). Clarysse & Bruneel analysis and comparison refers to Sweden Chalmers Innovation model, French Anvar/Banque de Developpement des PMEs model and Finland Sitra PreSeed Service model. [2] id. at 141-143. [3] id. at 141. [4] id. at 145-146. [5] id. at 143. [6] The loan to be repaid is not a concern. For example, the competent authority in Sweden only expects to recover one-fourths of the loan. [7] Clarysse & Bruneel, super note 26, at 147-148. [8] 彭錦鵬，〈英國政署之組織設計與運作成效〉，《歐美研究》，第30卷第3期，頁89-141。 [9] Technology foresight must work with the innovation policy road mapping (IPRM) interactively, and consolidate the forecast and evaluation of technology policy development routes. One study case about IPRM of the environmental sustainable development in the telecommunication industry in Finland, the IPRM may enhance the foresighted system and indicates the potential factors resulting in systematic failure. Please see Toni Ahlqvist, Ville Valovirta & Torsti Loikkanen, Innovation policy road mapping as a systemic instrument for forward-looking policy design, Science and Public Policy 39, 178-190 (2012). [10] 參見李昂杰，〈規範新訊：學界科專辦法及其法制配套之解析〉，《科技法律透析》，第23卷第8期，頁33（2011）。 [11] National Development Fund, Executive Yuan website, http://www.df.gov.tw/(tftgkz45150vye554wi44ret)/page-aa.aspx?Group_ID=1&Item_Title=%E8%A8%AD%E7%AB%8B%E5%AE%97%E6%97%A8#(Last visit on 2013/03/28)
Shifting AI Governance in East Asia: AI Legislative Progress in Japan, South Korea and TaiwanShifting AI Governance in East Asia: AI Legislative Progress in Japan, South Korea and Taiwan 2025/09/09 Keywords: artificial intelligence, artificial intelligence regulation I.Introduction The landscape of AI governance in East Asia is changing, with two new AI laws enacted and one on the way. In South Korea, an act titled “the Basic Act on the Development of Artificial Intelligence and the Establishment of Foundation for Trustworthiness“ (“인공지능 발전과 신뢰 기반 조성 등에 관한 기본법”, henceforth referred to as “South Korea’s AI Act” or “SKAIA”)[1]was approved on December 26[2], 2024 and promulgated on January 21, 2025. The AI Basic Act is designed to establish a national AI governance framework and systematically foster the AI industry while preventing potential AI risks.[3]A few months later, Japan’s first law regulating AI was passed by the National Diet on May 28, 2025. The new law is titled "the Act on Promotion of Research and Development, and Utilization of AI-related Technology" (“人工知能関連技術の研究開発及び活用の推進に関する法律”, henceforth referred to as "Japan's AI Act" or "JAIA")[4], which reflects the strong will of the government to catch up in the global AI race.[5] Elsewhere in the region, Taiwan’s Executive Yuan finally passed its draft AI Basic Act (“人工智慧基本法草案”) on August 28[6] [7], which must now be submitted to the Legislative Yuan for deliberation. The government hopes the new law will lay the foundation for establishing Taiwan as an AI island and a key driving force in global AI development.[8] This article will give a quick overview of the key features of the three new AI regulations to illustrate the new landscape these countries are shaping in AI governance. II.Key features of Japan’s AI Act (JAIA) 1.Purpose and principles of JAIA Given Japan's lagging AI development and rising public concerns, JAIA reflects the government's worry about falling behind global peers in AI investment and adoption.[9] It is believed that new laws are needed in addition to existing laws and regulations to promote innovation and address risks.[10] Hence JAIA aims to advance the R&D and application of AI through the formulation of basic principles and plans, and the establishment of an "AI Strategic Headquarters".[11] JAIA establishes basic principles for the promotion of the R&D and application of AI-related technologies[12], including enhancing industry R&D capabilities and competitiveness, systematically promoting AI collaboration from research to application with transparency, and enabling Japan to shape global norms through international cooperation.[13] 2.Industry Development and Promotion JAIA requires the government to develop a National AI Basic Plan, in accordance with the basic principles, to promote the R&D and application of AI. The AI Basic Plan should set out fundamental policy guidelines and measures to comprehensively and systemically advance the R&D and application of AI-related technologies, along with other necessary provisions.[14] JAIA also specifies basic measures to be included in the plan, which cover issues of promotion of R&D, expansion and sharing of facilities and data, human resources and education, international engagement in AI norm setting, and domestic guidelines making. In addition, the government should monitor AI technology trends and analyze cases of rights violations from improper AI use to develop countermeasures and provide guidance accordingly.[15] 3.Governance JAIA stipulates that an AI Strategy Headquarters should be established under the Cabinet, composed of all cabinet members and headed by the Prime Minister.[16] The AI Strategic Headquarters is tasked with comprehensively and systematically advancing AI-related technology R&D and application policies, including the formulation, promotion, and implementation of AI Basic Plans and other related initiatives.[17] The Act also empowers the AI Strategy Headquarters to invite stakeholders to provide information, opinions or explanations, and other necessary assistance.[18] 4.Risk managements and rights protection JAIA does not impose direct compliance obligations, but AI companies and research institutions are required to cooperate with government investigations and follow government guidance in cases involving violations of human rights and interests.[19] 5.Implementation of JAIA and Follow-up Work JAIA came into force in May 2025. The Japanese government is required to develop guidelines that align with international standards and launch the Strategic Headquarters for the preparation and implementation of the National AI Basic Plan. III.Key features of the South Korea’s AI Act (SKAIA) 1.Purpose and principles of SKAIA SKAIA is designed to establish a foundation for AI development and trustworthiness, increasing citizens’ rights and interests protection, quality of life, and the country’s competitiveness.[20] It focuses on advancing national AI collaboration to foster a flourishing AI sector and developing legal frameworks to mitigate risks.[21] Accordingly, the Act establishes basic AI development principles: prioritizing safety and reliability to improve quality of life, and ensuring those affected by AI output receive clear, meaningful explanations within reasonable parameters.[22] 2.Industry development and promotion Supporting AI technology and industry development is a key feature of SKAIA. It establishes comprehensive measures covering technology development, industry revitalization, SME support, industrial foundations, talent cultivation, regulatory adaptation, and international cooperation.[23] 3.Governance SKAIA also strengthens the institutional framework for AI governance. The Ministry of Science and ICT (henceforth referred to as “MSIT”) is mandated to execute an AI Master Plan every three years and empowered to investigate violations, require corrective action, and impose fines on non-compliant entities.[24] The National AI Committee is authorized to review and decide on the AI Master Plan and AI-related matters, making it the highest decision-making body for South Korea's AI policies. It is composed of the heads of central administrative agencies and civilian AI experts appointed by the president.[25] SKAIA also establishes the AI Policy Center to support MSIT on AI policy formulation, and the AI Safety Institute for AI safety matters.[26] 4.Risk management and rights protection SKAIA imposes specific obligations on operators of high-impact AI and generative AI systems. All operators must ensure system transparency and safety, while high-impact AI operators face additional responsibilities including conducting fundamental rights impact assessments.[27] High-impact AI systems are defined as AI systems that have a significant impact on or may pose a risk to human life, safety, and fundamental rights and are mainly utilized in critical infrastructure sectors and human rights-sensitive areas, or other areas specified by presidential decree.[28] The procedure for determining whether an AI system qualifies as high-impact AI will be established through subordinate legislation.[29] 5.Implementation of SKAIA and Follow-up Work SKAIA will come into effect on January 1, 2026 and the formulation of subordinate statutes that detail enforcement mechanisms and guidelines should be expedited. However, domestic critics argue that corporate obligation provisions may hinder AI development and advocate for postponing their implementation.[30] Actually, an amendment to the Act was proposed in April 2025, seeking such a postponement along with a three-year grace period.[31] IV. Key features of Taiwan’s draft AI Basic Act 1.Purpose and Principles of the draft AI Basic Act[32] Taiwan adopts a relatively conservative approach to AI policy and measures to boost industrial development have long occupied the agenda of AI governance. Given that AI is a crucial technology for national development, the draft AI Basic Act (henceforth referred to as "the draft Act") seeks to ensure that AI technology develops vigorously in a human-centered approach, encourage innovation while considering human rights, and safeguard Taiwan’s national sovereignty and cultural values.[33] Hence, the draft Act establishes seven guiding principles in line with international norms, which are sustainability, human autonomy, privacy protection and data governance, security, transparency and explainability, fairness and accountability.[34] 2.Industry Development and Promotion It is the government’s responsibility to promote the R&D and application of AI and construct the infrastructure needed.[35] In order to facilitate AI innovations, competent authorities may provide a controlled environment for testing and validating AI innovation products and services before they are released to the market or put into use.[36] Considering the wide scope of AI application and development, the government is encouraged to collaborate with the private sector, including through public-private partnerships, and should promote international cooperation on AI matters.[37] The government should also continue to comprehensively promote AI education at all levels to enhance the public's AI literacy.[38] Data is crucial for AI development, so the draft Act mandates the government to establish mechanisms to enhance data availability, and measures to facilitate AI outputs that maintain the country's multicultural values, and protect intellectual property rights.[39] 3.Risk Management and Rights Protection (1) Risk Management The draft Act includes several provisions addressing AI risks. The government should take steps to prevent AI from being used for illegal purposes. For example, Ministry of Digital Affairs (MODA) and other relevant agencies may provide or recommend tools or methods for AI evaluation and verification to avoid misuse of AI.[40] Secondly, MODA is mandated to foster an AI risk classification framework, based on which sectoral competent authorities should establish risk-based tiered management standards.[41] Thirdly, the government may, through binding regulations or non-binding administrative guidance, promote safety standards, verification, transparent and explainable traceability, or accountability mechanisms to enhance the trustworthiness of AI development and application.[42] Lastly, the government should clarify the ownership and conditions of liability for high-risk AI applications and establish relevant mechanisms for relief, compensation or insurance to protect affected parties.[43] However, AI application responsibility norms would not apply to pre-release activities in order to support technological innovation.[44] [45] (2) Rights Protection The draft Act concerns not only the privacy rights of individuals but also labor rights. The government should ensure the protection of personal data used throughout the AI lifecycle on the one hand[46] , and also protect workers' rights and provide necessary assistance to help them adapt to technological changes, especially those who have lost their jobs due to AI use.[47] 4.Governance and Implementation Despite the heated debate regarding the designation of a dedicated AI regulatory authority in the country, the Executive Yuan decided against establishing such an authority, given AI's cross-ministerial nature. Relevant competent authorities will be responsible for formulating implementing regulations and guidelines and the Executive Yuan will continue to guide relevant agencies and departments at all levels through the existing Digital Legal Coordination Meeting to facilitate the development of AI.[48] V.Analysis and conclusion Japan, South Korea and Taiwan all seek to maintain the countries' momentum in promoting AI development through AI legislation. The three parties all emphasize trustworthy AI, though they actually place greater emphasis on AI development. They share considerable common ground in the policies to foster AI industry development, such as promoting AI R&D and application and supporting infrastructure-building, and diverge in their approaches to addressing potential AI-related risks and governance structure. Japan adopts a ‘light touch’ regulatory approach to AI regulation, maintaining coherent policy coordination that responds to domestic imperatives and global trends without imposing regulatory burdens on industries.[49] The country favors a soft approach with governmental guidance. In contrast, South Korea incorporates regulatory provisions specifically targeting high-impact AI systems in its AI Basic Act, seeking to balance between enhancing national competitiveness through AI and mitigating potential risks stemming from AI misuse, though this approach actually faces some domestic opposition currently. Taiwan adopts an approach similar to Japan's. The draft AI Basic Act avoids imposing regulatory obligations, and the government will prioritize AI verification and evaluation mechanisms to ensure trustworthy AI development. Regarding governance approaches, both Japan and South Korea seek to strengthen governmental AI governance functions through legislation, with Japan establishing an AI Strategic Headquarters and South Korea creating an AI Committee, both operating under their respective Cabinets. In contrast, Taiwan's draft AI Basic Act does not address governance structural matters. Given the profound societal transformations that AI technology may bring, all three East Asian countries recognize the importance of sustained AI advancement while acknowledging the critical need to ensure AI safety and trustworthiness to protect human rights. In an era of intense global AI competition, it seems to be the best policy for governments to carefully design AI policies that strike a balance between fostering innovation and safeguarding human rights. This cautious approach is essential as significant challenges remain and AI risks demand comprehensive solutions. Reference: [1] 인공지능 발전과 신뢰 기반 조성 등에 관한 기본법（법률 제20676호, 2025. 1. 21, 제정），법제처 국가법령정보센터，https://www.law.go.kr/%EB%B2%95%EB%A0%B9/%EC%9D%B8%EA%B3%B5%EC%A7%80%EB%8A%A5%20%EB%B0% 9C%EC%A0%84%EA%B3%BC%20%EC%8B%A0%EB%A2%B0%20%EA%B8%B0%EB%B0%98%20%EC%A1%B0%EC% 84%B1%20%EB%93%B1%EC%97%90%20%EA%B4%80%ED%95%9C%20%EA%B8%B0%EB%B3%B8%EB%B2%95/(206 76,20250121) （最後瀏覽日：2025/09/11）。 [2] A New Chapter in the Age of AI: Basic Act on AI Passed at the National Assembly‘s Plenary Session, Ministry of Science and ICT, https://www.msit.go.kr/eng/bbs/view.do?sCode=eng&mId=4&mPid=2&pageIndex=&bbsSeqNo=42&nttSeqNo=1071&searchOpt=ALL&searchTxt= (last visited Sept. 11, 2025). [3] A New Chapter in the Age of AI: Basic Act on AI Passed at the National Assembly‘s Plenary Session, Ministry of Science and ICT, https://www.msit.go.kr/eng/bbs/view.do?sCode=eng&mId=4&mPid=2&pageIndex=&bbsSeqNo=42&nttSeqNo=1071&searchOpt=ALL&searchTxt= (last visited Sept. 11, 2025). [4] 人工知能関連技術の研究開発及び活用の推進に関する法律（令和7年法律第53号），e-Gov法令検索，https://laws.e-gov.go.jp/law/507AC0000000053（最後瀏覽日：2025/09/11）。 [5] CABINET OFFICE, GOVERNMENT OF JAPAN, Outline of the Act on Promotion of Research and Development, and Utilization of AI-related Technology (AI Act), https://www8.cao.go.jp/cstp/ai/ai_hou_gaiyou_en.pdf (last visited Sept. 11, 2025). [6] 〈政院通過「人工智慧基本法」草案 建構AI發展與應用良善環境 打造臺灣成為AI人工智慧島〉，行政院，https://www.ey.gov.tw/Page/9277F759E41CCD91/5d673d1e-f418-47dc-ab35-a06600f77f07（最後瀏覽日：2025/09/09）。 [7] There are other AI bills brought up by legislators in the Legislative Yuan. The purpose of this article is to analyze the AI governance priorities of the governments of Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan; therefore, other AI bills proposed by legislators are not included in the discussion. [8] 蘇文彬，〈行政院通過AI基本法草案，將不設立AI專責機關〉，iThome，2025/08/28，https://www.ithome.com.tw/news/170874 (最後瀏覽日：2025/09/09)。 [9] Japan’s AI Bill Advances Toward Enactment, Connect on Tech (May 27, 2025), https://connectontech.bakermckenzie.com/japans-ai-bill-advances-toward-enactment/ (last visited Sept. 9, 2025). [10] 松尾剛行，〈【2025年施行】AI新法とは？AIの研究開発・利活用を推進する法律を分かりやすく解説！〉，Keiyaku-Watch，https://keiyaku-watch.jp/media/hourei/2025-ai-law/（最後瀏覽日：2025/09/11）。 [11] 人工知能関連技術の研究開発及び活用の推進に関する法律（令和7年法律第53号）第1条。 [12] 人工知能関連技術の研究開発及び活用の推進に関する法律（令和7年法律第53号）第3条。 [13] Japan Enacts AI Promotion Act: Overview and Implications for Businesses, Zelo Law Square (May, 2025), https://zelojapan.com/en/lawsquare/56899 (last visited Sept. 9, 2025). [14] 人工知能関連技術の研究開発及び活用の推進に関する法律（令和7年法律第53号）第18条。 [15] 人工知能関連技術の研究開発及び活用の推進に関する法律（令和7年法律第53号）第11-17条。 [16] 人工知能関連技術の研究開発及び活用の推進に関する法律（令和7年法律第53号）第19、21-24条。 [17] 人工知能関連技術の研究開発及び活用の推進に関する法律（令和7年法律第53号）第20条。 [18] 人工知能関連技術の研究開発及び活用の推進に関する法律（令和7年法律第53号）第25条。 [19] 人工知能関連技術の研究開発及び活用の推進に関する法律（令和7年法律第53号）第16条。 [20] 인공지능 발전과 신뢰 기반 조성 등에 관한 기본법，제1조。 [21] The Korean AI Basic Act: Asia’s First Comprehensive Framework on AI, Lexology (Mar. 17, 2025), https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=f91ff0fb-94ed-4aa9-b667-65d6206a7227 (last visited Sept. 9, 2025). [22] 인공지능 발전과 신뢰 기반 조성 등에 관한 기본법，제3조。 [23] 인공지능 발전과 신뢰 기반 조성 등에 관한 기본법，제13-26조。 [24] 인공지능 발전과 신뢰 기반 조성 등에 관한 기본법，제40조。 [25] 인공지능 발전과 신뢰 기반 조성 등에 관한 기본법，제7조。 [26] 인공지능 발전과 신뢰 기반 조성 등에 관한 기본법，제6-12조。 [27] 인공지능 발전과 신뢰 기반 조성 등에 관한 기본법，제31-32조。 [28] 인공지능 발전과 신뢰 기반 조성 등에 관한 기본법，제4조。 [29] 인공지능 발전과 신뢰 기반 조성 등에 관한 기본법，제33조。 [30] Seungmin (Helen) Lee, South Korea’s Evolving AI Regulations, Stimson (June 12, 2025), https://www.stimson.org/2025/south-koreas-evolving-ai-regulations/ (last visited Sept. 9, 2025). [31] 〈인공지능 발전과 신뢰 기반 조성 등에 관한 기본법 일부개정법률안〉，대한민국국회，https://likms.assembly.go.kr/bill/bi/billDetailPage.do?billId=PRC_N2M5K0S3R2R0Q1O3X5X1W1U1T7P3Q6&currMenuNo=2600044（最後瀏覽日：2025/09/09）。 [32] 〈政院通過「人工智慧基本法」草案 建構AI發展與應用良善環境 打造臺灣成為AI人工智慧島〉，行政院，https://www.ey.gov.tw/Page/9277F759E41CCD91/5d673d1e-f418-47dc-ab35-a06600f77f07（最後瀏覽日：2025/09/09）。 [33] 人工智慧基本法草案第1條。 [34] 人工智慧基本法草案第3條。 [35] 人工智慧基本法草案第4條。 [36] 人工智慧基本法草案第5條。 [37] 人工智慧基本法草案第6條。 [38] 人工智慧基本法草案第7條。 [39] 人工智慧基本法草案第14條。 [40] 人工智慧基本法草案第8條。 [41] 人工智慧基本法草案第9條。 [42] 人工智慧基本法草案第10條。 [43] 人工智慧基本法草案第11條。 [44] 人工智慧基本法草案第11條。 [45] See also: Taiwan Rolls Out Draft Artificial Intelligence Law, OCACNEWS, July 18, 2024, https://ocacnews.net/article/374412 (last visited Sept. 3, 2025). [46] 人工智慧基本法草案第14條。 [47] 人工智慧基本法草案第12條。 [48] 蘇文彬，〈行政院通過AI基本法草案，將不設立AI專責機關〉，iThome，2025/08/28，https://www.ithome.com.tw/news/170874 (最後瀏覽日：2025/09/09)。 [49] Sun Ryung Park, Less Regulation, More Innovation in Japan’s AI Governance, East Asia Forum (May 21, 2025), https://eastasiaforum.org/2025/05/21/less-regulation-more-innovation-in-japans-ai-governance/ (last visited July 4, 2025).
- Impact of Government Organizational Reform to Scientific Research Legal System and Response Thereto (1) – For Example, The Finnish Innovation Fund (“SITRA”)
- The Demand of Intellectual Property Management for Taiwanese Enterprises
- Impact of Government Organizational Reform to Research Legal System and Response Thereto (2) – Observation of the Swiss Research Innovation System
- Blockchain in Intellectual Property Protection
- Copyright Ownership for Outputs by Artificial Intelligence
- Recent Federal Decisions and Emerging Trends in U.S. Defend Trade Secrets Act Litigation
- Legal issues of Third-Party Payment in Taiwan
- The amendment of the Taiwanese Personal Data Protection Act