Tax writers propose treaty benefits for Taiwan


The top congressional tax writers from both parties and both chambers last week released draft legislative language that would confer treaty-like tax benefits to Taiwan to reduce withholding and double taxation.


The rare bipartisan and bicameral agreement lends the effort significant momentum, but the outlook is complicated by competing legislation. The discussion draft was released by the chairs and ranking members of both the Senate Finance Committee and the House Ways and Means committee, who are asserting jurisdiction over the issue because it is tax legislation. This has rankled some members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, who see the effort as equivalent to securing a treaty, which would be the purview of their committee. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee has passed a competing bill that would authorize the Biden administration to negotiate a tax agreement with Taiwan.


The underlying difficulty stems from Taiwan’s unique status, which is preventing the U.S. from entering into a formal tax treaty. Lawmakers are looking to provide equivalent benefits, but disagree over how. The discussion draft from tax writers would create new code Section 894A provide treaty-like benefits to Taiwan based on 2016 U.S. Model Tax Treaty, including:

  • Reducing the 30% withholding rate on U.S. source interest and royalties to 10% for nonresident Taiwanese aliens and Taiwanese corporations
  • Reducing the dividend withholding rate to 15% with a 10% rate under certain conditions
  • Applying permanent establishment rules to determine effectively connected income
  • Exempting certain U.S. wages of Taiwanese residents from U.S. tax


The provisions would not take effect until Treasury determines that Taiwan has enacted reciprocal benefits to U.S. persons. If enacted, the legislation would provide significant benefits to U.S. multinationals with investments and operations in Taiwan.


There is widespread bipartisan support to provide relief for Taiwan, but lawmakers must reconcile the different approaches taken by tax writers and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Committee Chair Robert Menendez, D-N.J., has indicated he is open to an “amalgam” of the efforts.





Tax professional standards statement

This content supports Grant Thornton LLP’s marketing of professional services and is not written tax advice directed at the particular facts and circumstances of any person. If you are interested in the topics presented herein, we encourage you to contact us or an independent tax professional to discuss their potential application to your particular situation. Nothing herein shall be construed as imposing a limitation on any person from disclosing the tax treatment or tax structure of any matter addressed herein. To the extent this content may be considered to contain written tax advice, any written advice contained in, forwarded with or attached to this content is not intended by Grant Thornton LLP to be used, and cannot be used, by any person for the purpose of avoiding penalties that may be imposed under the Internal Revenue Code.

The information contained herein is general in nature and is based on authorities that are subject to change. It is not, and should not be construed as, accounting, legal or tax advice provided by Grant Thornton LLP to the reader. This material may not be applicable to, or suitable for, the reader’s specific circumstances or needs and may require consideration of tax and nontax factors not described herein. Contact Grant Thornton LLP or other tax professionals prior to taking any action based upon this information. Changes in tax laws or other factors could affect, on a prospective or retroactive basis, the information contained herein; Grant Thornton LLP assumes no obligation to inform the reader of any such changes. All references to “Section,” “Sec.,” or “§” refer to the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.


More tax hot topics