Wu Tzu-chia Reveals Cheng Yung-chin Raised NT$40 Million for Son's Election; Hsu Chiao-hsin Asks: Where Did the Missing NT$21.9 Million Go?

The 2026 Hsinchu County magistrate election has reignited debate over campaign finances. Wu Tzu-chia, chairman of Formosa TV, recently released copies of financial documents on a web program, alleging that former Hsinchu County Magistrate Cheng Yung-chin raised NT$40 million to support his son Cheng Chao-fang, the current mayor of Zhubei City, during his 2018 campaign for Hsinchu County magistrate. KMT legislator Hsu Chiao-hsin questioned today (8th) why, if the NT$40 million was indeed raised for the election, the reported campaign expenditure was only NT$18.1 million—where did the remaining NT$21.9 million go?

Wu Tzu-chia unveiled a document titled 'The NT$40 Million Loan Case of Cheng Yung-chin' along with copies of financial instruments, claiming Cheng Yung-chin borrowed NT$40 million from a friend in 2016 to fund his son Cheng Chao-fang’s 2018 campaign for Hsinchu County magistrate. Wu stated that the loan remains unpaid to this day.

Hsu Chiao-hsin opened her Facebook post with: 'Oh! The 5,000 taels from the Shanxi Provincial Administration are in his room—so where is the NT$21.9 million from Hsinchu’s Mr. Cheng?' She cited Wu’s recent revelations, referencing repayment receipts and Cheng Yung-chin’s endorsement, and raised a series of questions regarding political donations, private loans, and asset declarations.

Hsu compared the NT$40 million with the NT$18.1 million Cheng Chao-fang reported as campaign expenses, questioning: 'Where did the missing NT$21.9 million go? Does this suggest false reporting of campaign expenditures?' She argued that if the full NT$40 million was used for the election, the discrepancy in reporting must be explained. If not all funds were used, the remaining amount’s purpose should also be disclosed.

Is the NT$40 million truly a private loan? Hsu further questioned whether repayments were ever made

Hsu pointed out that if the funds were indeed a 'private loan,' there should be records of repayment, collection attempts, or interest accrual over the years. If no repayment was ever demanded, she questioned whether this might instead constitute undeclared political donations. She further asked, 'Was it borrowed—or simply given?' demanding Cheng Chao-fang clarify the nature of the funds.

Additionally, under Taiwan’s Public Officials Asset Declaration Act, candidates for county-level and higher offices must declare their assets, including debts exceeding a certain amount. Hsu therefore asked whether, if the NT$40 million legal obligation involved Cheng Chao-fang personally, it was properly declared in his asset reports.

Hsu raised legal concerns across political donations, asset declarations, and potential criminal liability, urging: 'Who really has that NT$21.9 million? It must be clarified—don’t try to muddy the waters amid chaos.'

However, Wu Tzu-chia’s claims about the NT$40 million’s use and loan relationship remain one-sided allegations. The document copies alone cannot directly prove that the full NT$40 million was spent on Cheng Chao-fang’s 2018 campaign. Therefore, whether the NT$21.9 million discrepancy involves illegal activity remains subject to investigation and determination by the competent authorities.

More exclusive reports from Feng Media: · Will the 'KMT’s veteran county magistrate' father support his son from the Green camp? Cheng Chao-fang reveals family dynamics: 'Our styles are completely different.' · Lawyer Chen Yu-hsuan allegedly defrauded Tzu Chi of NT$1 billion; Hsu Chiao-hsin uncovers her past connections with Lin Chia-lung and Chen Po-wei · Shop receives one-star reviews for 'drawing Johnny Chiang’s signature'; Hsu Chiao-hsin urges: 'We don’t need to attack like the Sunflower Movement’s Blue Bird.'