Ko Chih-en Refutes '3% Capital Tax': No Such Clause in Final Passed Version, Lai Jui-long Stop Spreading Falsehoods

In response to DPP Kaohsiung mayoral candidate Lai Jui-long's remarks today (14th) alleging that the revision of the Fiscal Allocation Act involves a '3% increase in capital tax,' KMT candidate Ko Chih-en issued a stern rebuttal. Ko stated that she had already publicly opposed the '3% capital tax' design during the 2024 KMT draft discussion phase of the Fiscal Allocation Act. More importantly, the final version passed by the Legislative Yuan in its third reading contains no such provision.

Ko Chih-en questioned why Lai Jui-long continues to attack using content that does not exist in the final third-reading version, despite knowing it was not included. She accused him of spreading misinformation and confusing public perception.

Ko explained that although she served as executive director of the KMT think tank in 2024, the think tank naturally incorporates opinions from various experts. While the KMT caucus's draft version of the Fiscal Allocation Act did include a '3% capital tax' proposal at one point, she had already expressed opposition to it publicly at the time.

Now that the final enacted version lacks the '3% capital tax' clause, Ko emphasized that past draft proposals should not be conflated with the final legal text. She urged Lai to engage in rational debate based on the actual final provisions rather than using discarded draft content for political attacks.

'When the final version clearly does not contain this clause, continuing to exploit non-existent content is not policy debate—it's deliberate misinformation,' Ko stated.

She also criticized the fact that while President Lai Ching-te recently warned against disinformation during elections, DPP candidates continue to cite claims inconsistent with the final third-reading version. 'Does anything a DPP candidate says automatically bypass fact-checking?' she asked, calling on Lai Jui-long to cease using false information in political attacks and return the campaign to a positive comparison of policies and achievements.

Regarding Lai Jui-long's repeated claim that he secured 'NT$600 billion in construction funding' for Kaohsiung, Ko demanded full transparency. She pointed out that multiple legislators from Kaohsiung jointly advocate for local development, and central ministries continuously invest in major public infrastructure projects. It is inappropriate, she said, to bundle all central government budgets, Executive Yuan-approved plans, and achievements secured by other Kaohsiung legislators into a single legislator's personal accomplishments.

Ko challenged Lai: 'If you claim NT$600 billion, then lay out the details.' She called for full disclosure of specific projects, funding amounts, approval dates, and Lai's actual role, so Kaohsiung citizens can properly evaluate the claims.

She emphasized that if NT$600 billion were truly Lai's personal achievement, other DPP legislators from Kaohsiung, the Executive Yuan, and central ministries should all verify it—instead of attributing the entire central government's investment in Kaohsiung solely to one individual.

'People call you "Little Lai," but please stop acting unreasonably every time,' Ko said. While competition and policy debate are acceptable in elections, she stressed that basic facts must not be distorted and others' achievements must not be claimed as one's own.

Rather than repeatedly attacking opponents with a '3% capital tax' that never made it into the final version, Ko urged Lai to first release his claimed NT$600 billion construction list so citizens can see how much was genuinely secured by him.

Ko concluded by calling for an election based on public policy choices, not a race of misinformation. Kaohsiung citizens have the right to know the full truth and to scrutinize every candidate's claims and achievements. She urged Lai Jui-long to return to policy debate and face public scrutiny with concrete data and complete details.