Content of NT$1.25 Trillion Arms Purchase？ Black-Box Process Makes Public Wary
United Daily News Commentary, January 16, 2026
Chairman Huang Kuo-chang of the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) recently visited the United States. After returning to Taiwan, he commented on the Executive Yuan’s proposed NT$1.25 trillion (about US$39.5 billion) special budget for arms procurement, stating that the public still does not know what items will be purchased. It was not until the U.S. Department of State issued an official statement that the Taiwanese public learned of five items, totaling approximately NT$300 billion (about US$9.4 billion). “This is the kind of ‘democratic process’ that we cannot accept,” he said. This statement immediately drew strong rebuttals from the Executive Yuan and the Ministry of National Defense (MND).
However, a defense budget as large as NT$1.25 trillion—regardless of how many years it is spread over—represents a heavy burden on the public. It is the responsibility of opposition parties to clarify matters on behalf of the people. What defense weapons are we purchasing? Will they genuinely contribute to safeguarding Taiwan’s security, or will they merely become lucrative business for a small minority? All of this must be clearly explained to the public.
Last year, the Executive Yuan approved a draft of the “Special Act for Procurement Under the Plan to Strengthen Defense Resilience and Asymmetric Capabilities,” with a total scale of NT$1.25 trillion. On January 14, Huang stated that “to a certain extent, the NT$1.25 trillion has nothing to do with arms purchases from the United States.” On January 15, TPP Spokeswoman Chen Chih-han further noted that only five U.S. arms procurement items are currently known, totaling approximately NT$350 billion (about US$11 billion), while the remaining NT$800 billion (about US$25.2 billion) remains unclear. Moreover, not all of it was proposed by the United States; part of it reflects needs identified by the MND itself.
Although Deputy Minister of National Defense Hsu Szu-chien explained that arms acquisition falls into three categories—foreign military sales, commercial procurement, and domestic production—with more than NT$300 billion to be produced domestically and the remainder procured overseas, and that claims of only NT$300 billion being spent on U.S. procurement are untrue, the MND’s explanation clearly does not align with the TPP’s account, leaving the public confused.
The public should not be faulted for maintaining skepticism toward defense procurement. Since the end of last year, multiple cases have emerged in which small companies without military backgrounds have won major defense contracts. These include a Tainan-based company, Fumai, with registered capital of only tens of millions of New Taiwan dollars, winning a NT$590 million (about US$18.6 million) contract for explosive materials; a Kaohsiung-based tea company, Hongzhang Tea, with capital of just NT$100,000 (about US$3,100), securing cybersecurity and server contracts from the MND; and a Tainan shoe company, Dashih, which, after changing its business registration, obtained a NT$200 million (about US$6.3 million) arms and firearms contract from the MND.
On January 15, Kuomintang (KMT) Legislator Ma Wen-chun further revealed that Taiwan Heiya International Company, a business registered at a townhouse on Songzhu Road in Beitun District, Taichung City, originally engaged in retail and wholesale of tobacco, alcohol, food, and hardware, had never bid on any government contract according to the Ministry of Economic Affairs’ business registry. Yet after changing its business scope in June last year to include the import and export of firearms and ammunition and firearm maintenance services, it bid on an Armaments Bureau ammunition procurement project in less than six months, winning a contract for 9mm pistol ammunition worth NT$45.5 million (about US$1.4 million).
The MND’s response mirrored its previous replies to similar concerns, stating that such tenders all set three vendor qualification requirements, require bid bonds, and involve joint inspections by professional ordnance personnel, with payment made only after passing inspection.
Such “cross-industry” miracles are not unprecedented in the field of defense procurement. The MND’s response remains formulaic: “qualifications met, inspections conducted in accordance with the law.” What the public wants to know, however, is this: How can a small company or intermediary trader with no background in defense manufacturing participate in the supply of weapons and ammunition that directly affect the lives of service members? Are there “political gatekeepers” facilitating these deals behind the scenes? Are certain individuals exploiting cross-strait tensions—a so-called “national crisis”—to reap enormous profits?
These doubts may not be unfounded. Looking back, Taiwan has seen a steady stream of defense procurement scandals, from the Lafayette frigate case in earlier years, to the Ching Fu mine-hunting vessel scandal, to the recent controversies surrounding the indigenous submarine program. All demonstrate that when defense budgets continue to operate as black boxes under the pretext of secrecy, they become breeding grounds for corruption. Consider also the Russia–Ukraine war, now in its fourth year: even as Ukraine fights a bloody war, scandals have emerged involving senior defense officials profiting from wartime procurement. If legislators fail to scrutinize this NT$1.25 trillion with the strictest standards on behalf of the people, then Taiwan risks following the same path—allowing funds meant to be transformed into combat power to instead flow into the pockets of a privileged few.
Minister of National Defense Wellington Koo is scheduled to present a comprehensive arms procurement report on January 19. The purpose of this classified legislative session is to allow the MND to brief legislators in a confidential environment without legal concerns. The public is watching closely to see whether the report can dispel these doubts.
National defense is the cornerstone of national security, and that cornerstone must be built on integrity and transparency. If the government continues to reject reasonable oversight under the banner of “national security secrets,” then no matter how much budget is spent, it will be impossible to build a true shield to protect the nation.