Opening Remarks – Taipei Bar Association Tax Law Salon March 11, 2026
Good afternoon distinguished colleagues, members of the Taipei Bar Association, and friends.
It is truly a pleasure and an honor to be invited by the Tax Law Committee of the Taipei Bar Association to speak today on the topic of “The Determination of Tax Residency and Cross-Border Taxation.”
Before moving into the technical aspects of today’s discussion, I would like to begin with a few observations drawn from practice. These reflections concern three themes that increasingly shape the legal and tax landscape of our time: cross-border asset ownership, tax residency, and the practical management of international legal and financial affairs.
The Allure — and the Complexity — of Cross-Border Assets
In an era of globalization, cross-border asset allocation has become increasingly common. Individuals today may live in Taiwan, invest in the United States, hold assets in Japan, or structure wealth through offshore entities. On the surface, such arrangements often appear efficient and attractive.
Yet beneath that attractiveness lies a significant degree of legal and tax complexity, particularly when inheritance enters the picture.
Consider, for example, the institutional differences between Taiwan’s relationships with the United States and Japan.
Taiwan currently does not have a comprehensive tax treaty with the United States. As a result, individuals holding U.S. citizenship or a U.S. green card may remain subject to U.S. tax filing obligations, including the reporting of income earned in other jurisdictions — even when they reside primarily outside the United States.
By contrast, Taiwan and Japan are connected by a bilateral tax treaty, which provides a clearer legal framework for addressing double taxation and allocating taxing rights. This treaty framework offers a structured reference point when navigating cross-border tax issues.
Even with direct investments, these institutional differences already create significant legal considerations. The complexity increases further when assets are held through offshore corporate structures.
Allow me to share a practical example.
In one case, a land registration professional in Kaohsiung held approximately 5 million USD in deposits through an offshore structure, with the funds placed in an OBU account under a Samoan offshore company.
Following the individual’s passing, the company’s annual maintenance fees were not paid. The entity subsequently became administratively frozen. Because the heirs were unable to change the company’s responsible officer, the company effectively entered a suspended status — and the funds held in the account were frozen together with it.
What this example illustrates is simple but important: offshore structures without proper documentation and succession planning can quickly become legal dead ends for the next generation.
The Quiet Risk of Dual Tax Residency
A second observation concerns tax residency status, which is often easier to trigger than many individuals realize.
In Japan, for instance, a foreign national who stays in the country for more than 183 days, or who obtains a work visa, may be recognized as a Japanese tax resident and thereby become subject to comprehensive tax obligations.
The situation in the United States is particularly notable. Individuals who hold a green card or certain types of work visas may be treated as U.S. tax residents. Once classified as such, they fall within the United States’ worldwide taxation system.
This means that even when a person spends most of their time living in Taiwan or elsewhere, they may still be required to report their global income to the U.S. Internal Revenue Service.
From a legal and tax planning perspective, the determination of tax residency therefore becomes a pivotal issue in cross-border asset management.
Managing Cross-Border Legal and Tax Affairs
The third point concerns the practical management of cross-border legal and financial matters.
Whether we are dealing with lifetime planning or post-inheritance administration, cross-border issues inevitably involve multiple jurisdictions, legal regimes, and regulatory frameworks.
For this reason, one of the most important foundations for legal practitioners today is the cultivation of international professional networks.
In practice, attempting to coordinate all cross-border matters through a single centralized referral channel is rarely efficient. A more sustainable approach is for professional communities — including bar associations and their specialized committees — to gradually build trusted partnerships with practitioners in key jurisdictions.
Interestingly, once such networks are established, the tools that support them are quite simple: English, email, and messaging platforms such as WhatsApp.
In most cross-border matters, the majority of substantive communication still occurs through email correspondence. Even when language differences arise — for example, when Japanese corporations prefer Japanese communication, while European counterparts rely primarily on English — modern AI-assisted translation tools have significantly reduced the barriers to communication.
The Human Dimension of Cross-Border Cooperation
Yet the most challenging aspect of cross-border practice is not language — it is coordination.
Once international teams are formed, practitioners must navigate not only legal differences, but also time zones, professional expectations, and working cultures.
In my experience, when working with colleagues in Europe or North America, it is essential to manage communication proactively. Waiting passively for responses can easily delay progress. If a message remains unanswered for a couple of days, a polite follow-up — whether by message or phone call — is often necessary to maintain momentum.
In cross-border work, responsiveness and persistence are sometimes just as important as technical expertise.
Concluding Thought
The themes I have briefly outlined today — cross-border asset structures, tax residency, and international professional coordination — are becoming central issues in modern legal practice.
They remind us that globalization does not merely expand opportunities; it also multiplies the legal responsibilities that accompany them.
With that perspective in mind, I hope today’s discussion will contribute to a deeper understanding of how legal professionals can navigate the evolving landscape of cross-border taxation and international legal cooperation.
Thank you.
