AmCham Taiwan Healthy Aging Forum:
2025健康台灣樂齡論壇:公私協力促進全人健康
AmCham Taiwan Healthy Aging Forum:
2025健康台灣樂齡論壇:公私協力促進全人健康
Committee Events & Luncheons
The digital economy holds immense potential to reshape markets and society at large. If managed correctly, digital transformation is an effective means to accelerate and support positive advancements in society. As such, the Committee has several suggestions to help foster a thriving digital landscape in Taiwan.
We urge the government to develop effective, risk-based regulatory frameworks and guardrails for artificial intelligence (AI) governance. To enhance efficiency, accountability, and transparency, we also ask that the government adopt intermediary liability protection principles that balance freedom of expression and legal liability for online platforms, and streamline processes related to digital content censorship and personal data requests.
The Committee also continues to emphasize the importance of good regulatory practices (GRP), including sufficient public consultation and the provision of bilingual documentation. We suggest that the government offer checklists and templates to ensure compliance with GRP standards.
By embracing these recommendations, the government can create a conducive environment for digital innovation and economic growth. A thriving digital economy can generate new opportunities for businesses, boost productivity, and enhance the quality of life for citizens. Implementation of these measures is crucial to safeguard the rights and interests of individuals and businesses, promote fair competition, and foster a culture of innovation and creativity.
Suggestion 1: Implement a balanced approach to responsible AI regulation and the encouragement of innovation.
As the capabilities of generative AI made significant strides in 2023, governments around the world have sought to ensure that their economies are well-positioned to reap the benefits of AI while also implementing policies that mitigate risks and protect citizens from any unintended consequences.
1.1 Designate a coordinating agency to ensure a holistic government approach to AI regulation. AI is a technology that spans almost every sector, necessitating a coordinated approach across government bodies and a coherent regulatory framework that applies principles from existing legislation to AI in a technology-neutral way.
Over-regulation of AI technology at its early-stage development could stymie innovation. Priority should be placed on ensuring that existing laws covering various risks associated with using AI are fit for both current and future needs.
Furthermore, legislative measures should consider the full range of AI technology and focus on high-risk cases. Policies that restrict the use of AI should be narrowly tailored to address context-specific high-risk deployments, such as social scoring or remote biometric identification. Maintaining a focused approach is crucial to avoid under-regulating high-impact AI use cases that could cause real harm, while encouraging innovation and spurring the adoption of beneficial technologies.
Given AI’s broad and evolving applications, the Committee recommends that the Ministry of Digital Affairs (MODA) act as the coordinating agency addressing a wide range of topics and collaborate with various agencies to effectively manage these challenges.
1.2 Establish a dialogue platform with industry to ensure that existing legislation is future-proof and technology-neutral. Risks associated with AI not only arise during its development but also through its application and usage. Regular consultation with industry is therefore essential to ensure that regulations are relevant and based on actual use cases.
1.3 Participate in global norm-setting to ensure interoperability and the international competitiveness of Taiwanese businesses. Regulation of emerging technologies is a challenge faced by governments across the globe. Coordinated international efforts are needed to prevent companies from facing fragmented and contradictory regulatory frameworks beyond their ability to comply. Such a patchwork of conflicting regulations across the globe would undermine the potential of AI, particularly for the small and innovative companies that are the backbone of Taiwan’s vibrant economy.
Suggestion 2: Establish appropriate intermediary liability protection and safe harbor principles for all government agencies.
Since the unsuccessful attempt in 2022 to pass the Digital Intermediary Services Act (DISA), the Committee has observed a concerning trend of government agencies exerting overbearing and confusing discretion over intermediary liability and safe harbor principles. Intermediaries play a key role in the facilitation of expression over the internet. Proportionate limits to the legal liability of intermediaries for content by third parties (intermediary liability) and obligations to meet balanced conditions (safe harbor) help promote freedom of expression and innovation.
While both MODA and the National Communications Commission (NCC) have engaged in numerous rounds of productive conversation with digital platforms, many other government bodies have taken an overly conservative stance. These agencies often craft stringent policies and regulations with minimal stakeholder consultation, excluding even MODA and the NCC from discussions. For example, the ongoing deliberation of the Ministry of the Interior’s (MOI) draft Anti-Fraud Act is resulting in a collection of rules that are disproportionately strict, lack consensus among stakeholders, and are inoperable for businesses.
For the digital economy to continue to thrive in Taiwan, intermediary liability protection with proper safe harbor principles is needed. The Committee calls on the government to adopt an overarching principle regarding intermediary liability protection. We also urge substantive discussions between industry and government agencies, focusing on the broad protections and conditional immunity from liabilities that digital platform businesses should be afforded under their respective mandates.
The industry has exhibited strong unity and support for intermediary liability principles, yet this commitment is not uniformly reflected across government agencies and ministries. For example, as a regulatory and oversight agency, the NCC adopts a markedly different approach in formulating public policy compared to the MOI, which functions primarily as an enforcement agency. These disparities lead to varied perceptions and levels of trust in intermediary businesses by the respective agencies.
As an initial step in addressing these issues, the Committee urges the government to establish broad yet precise rules and principles for intermediary liability protection. These rules and principles should align with the Manila Principles on Intermediary Liability, including shielding intermediaries from liability for third-party content, requiring a court order for content restrictions, committing to clear language and due process in requests for content restrictions, considering tests of necessity and proportionality, and ensuring transparency in content restriction policies and practices. Further, they should be universally applicable to all government agencies, ensuring a standardized approach. Additionally, a harmonization mechanism during the rule-making process is essential to guarantee that policies, laws, and regulations from various agencies align with overarching rules and principles.
We suggest that the Executive Yuan issue guidance clearly defining the principles of intermediary liability protection and safe harbor regulations applicable to digital platform businesses operating in Taiwan. Guidance should be coupled with the effective execution of the existing draft-bill reviewing and consultation processes within the Executive Yuan and its subordinate agencies, fostering a consistent and transparent regulatory environment.
Adopting these principles would enable individual agencies to effectively address potential or emerging issues through meaningful discussion with industry. Discussions should aim to find solutions that suit Taiwan’s specific context.
We also urge the government to review all existing laws and policies to ensure alignment with said principles and protections. Finally, the Committee requests a moratorium on all upcoming policies and implementation that may harm common understanding of intermediary liability protection and safe harbor principles.
Such an approach will significantly enhance clarity, predictability, and stability for digital platforms operating in Taiwan. An improved regulatory environment will not only benefit existing businesses but also attract further investment, positioning Taiwan as a conducive and friendly business location for digital platform companies.
Suggestion 3: Streamline government accountability for digital content censorship and personal data requests.
Noting divergent and arbitrary designs in data protection and content restriction or censorship in recently enacted regulations in Taiwan, the Committee stresses the urgent need for a robust and harmonized content governance model and data protection mechanism. We emphasize the importance of holding authorized agencies accountable for their actions and ensuring that their powers are transparent and subject to rigorous oversight as a crucial component of multi-stakeholder governance.
We also express our concern regarding government proposals to legislate sweeping powers over the digital economy, purportedly to create a trusted and orderly digital ecosystem. All stakeholders agree on the need to consistently improve the digital ecosystem, but this should not undermine due process, the rule of law, and freedom of speech principles. For instance, while acknowledging the police’s efforts in combating online fraud, the Committee urges the implementation of public-private partnerships to address these issues collaboratively, rather than through top-down legislation like the proposed Anti-Fraud Act, which may overlook or compromise foundational digital economy principles. Such legislative approaches risk creating fragmented content restriction systems and allowing agencies to bypass due process in personal data requests.
These measures would establish fragmented content restriction systems and enable unwarranted shortcuts for agencies to bypass human-rights-centered safeguards when requesting personal data. Such measures would also lead to inconsistent content censorship systems, inadequate and confusing due process and appeal mechanisms, and overly simplistic and arbitrary personal data requests. These issues pose a significant risk of conflicting legal obligations for multinational corporations operating in multiple jurisdictions.
Instead, a systematic review and modernization of regulations is needed. Discrepancies around the government’s power to remove or censor speech and content, as well as regulators’ unwarranted power over user data, exist in many of Taiwan’s regulations, including Article 51-3 of the Public Officials Election and Recall Act; Article 47-3 of the Presidential and Vice Presidential Election and Recall Act; Article 13 of the Sexual Assault Crime Prevention Act; Article 47 of the Child and Youth Sexual Exploitation Prevention Act; Article 70-1 of the Securities Investment Trust and Consulting Act; and Articles 70-1 and 15 of the Tobacco Hazards Prevention Act.
We propose a review process as follows:
Suggestion 4: Implement good regulatory practices across government agencies to ensure sustainable growth of the digital economy.
The Committee urges the NDC and other government agencies to rigorously apply the principles of GRP, as defined in the U.S.-Taiwan Initiative on 21st Century Trade and other international trade agreements that Taiwan aspires to join, to optimize the standards and processes for policymaking. A minimum 60-day public consultation period for proposed new regulations is essential to ensure quality and due diligence and to facilitate international trade.
It has come to our attention that the Executive Yuan is accelerating the legislative process for the Anti-Fraud Act to combat scams. While not technically a violation of the 60-day rule, as it currently does not apply to draft legislation, the significantly shortened consultation period and the absence of transparent participation opportunities for industry are concerning. It is imperative to ensure that the legislative process includes both public disclosure of information and sufficient time for thorough consultation, maintaining the integrity and accountability of the governance framework.
We emphasize the need for continued progress in implementing the recommendations. Continuous and substantial advancements in these areas would help ensure an open, fair, meaningful, and constructive policy deliberation process, fostering stakeholder trust and collaboration. The Committee therefore recommends that the government:
4.1 Adhere categorically to the 60-day rule for draft laws and regulations. We urge the adoption of this rule in all laws, regulations, and policies, given the executive branch’s role in proposing them. Doing so would drastically increase the soundness of Taiwan’s regulatory environment.
4.2 Provide bilingual versions of draft regulations at the start of the 60-day period. Government agencies should provide official English translations of proposed regulations and amendments concurrently with their release in Mandarin for public comment, particularly when international business interests are involved. English translations enable an open, fair, and constructive policy deliberation process, ensuring meaningful industry participation.
4.3 Develop comprehensive checklists and proposal templates for ministries to adopt when proposing laws and regulations. Such documents should include regulatory explanations, impact analysis, evidence, feedback on public comments, and consultation process documentation. These checklists will serve as references for administrative agencies when proposing new laws, regulations, and policies, ensuring rigorous adherence to GRP standards.
數位經濟具有能夠重塑市場與社會的巨大潛力,透過妥善管理,數位轉型得以有效推動並加速社會的正向發展。因此,委員會提出下述建議,呼籲政府與業界攜手合作,以推動台灣數位經濟之蓬勃發展。
我們敦促政府制定有效並以風險為基礎的監管架構以及人工智慧(Artificial Intelligence, AI)治理規範。同時,為了提高效率、建立問責制度和增加透明度,我們也呼籲政府採納明確的中介者責任保護原則,在言論自由與數位平台應負之法律責任間取得平衡,並簡化平台內容審核與應政府機關要求提供使用者資料的相關流程。 委員會也持續強調良好法制作業(Good Regulatory Practice, GRP)的重要性,包括充分的法案預告與公眾評論期,以及提供雙語版本的政府文件。我們建議政府針對良好法制作業的標準提供清單和範本,以確保其作業流程之實踐。
透過採納上述建議,政府可以打造有利於推動數位創新和經濟成長的環境。繁榮的數位經濟能夠為企業創造新的機會,提高生產力與大眾生活品質。與此同時,上述政策與措施也可進一步保障個人和企業的權益、促進公平競爭,以及建立一個重視創新與創意的文化。
建議一:在負責任AI之監管與鼓勵創新間取得平衡
隨著生成式人工智慧的效能於2023年取得重大進展,世界各國政府正努力確保其經濟能充分受益於人工智慧,同時透過政策制定以降低風險,避免民眾受到任何意外影響。
1.1 指定專責機關協調以確保政府對人工智慧完善監管。由於人工智慧科技橫跨幾乎所有行業領域,故需要政府跨部門間協調,並建立一致的監管框架,以技術中立之方式將現有立法原則應用至人工智慧。對處於早期發展階段的人工智慧技術進行過度監管可能會阻礙其創新,是故應優先確保現有法規能適應當前及未來使用人工智慧下各種風險之需求。此外,立法提案應考量人工智慧技術的各種應用範圍,並將監管重點放在高風險案例上。對於制定限制使用人工智慧的政策,應針對特定情境下的高風險案例,例如社會信用評分或遠程生物特徵辨識等。保持監管策略之集中至關重要,以避免在鼓勵創新與有益的技術應用之同時,對於可能對社會造成真正危害的高風險人工智慧使用案例監管不足。鑒於人工智慧的廣泛應用和蓬勃發展,委員會建議由數位發展部作為協調機關,處理相關議題並與各機關合作以有效應對該等挑戰。
1.2 與產業界建立溝通平台,確保現行法規具備未來適應性並保持技術中立性。與人工智慧相關的風險不僅出現在其開發過程中,也出現於其應用及使用過程。因此,有必要定期與產業界協商以確保法規具有相關性並以實際使用案例為基礎。
1.3 參與全球規範制定,確保規範之互通性及台灣企業的國際競爭力。監管新興技術是世界各國政府皆面臨的挑戰,需要國際間的協調努力,以防止企業面對零散、相互矛盾之監管框架而無從遵守。尤其對於作為台灣經濟活力支柱的小型創新公司而言,世界各國相互衝突之國內法規將削弱人工智慧的潛力。
建議二:建立適當的中介者責任保護和安全港原則
數位中介服務法草案未能於 2022 年通過,然至今委員會注意到政府機關在中介者責任與安全港原則上,過度行使與混淆行政裁量權的趨勢令產業界十分擔憂。數位中介平台在促進網路表意自由上的角色至關重要,清楚界定中介者對於第三方內容的法律責任(中介者責任)以及履行平衡的義務(安全港原則),將有助於促進言論自由與創新。
儘管數位發展部(數位部)和國家通訊委員會(NCC)與數位平台進行了多輪成效卓著的對話,但許多其他政府機關的立場依然過度保守。這些機關往往在甚少諮詢利害關係人,有時甚至在排除數位部與 NCC 參與的情形下,制定嚴格的政策和法規。例如內政部草擬的打詐專法,其中便包含一系列過度嚴苛、缺乏利害關係人共識且對企業而言窒礙難行的規範。 為了使台灣的數位經濟持續繁榮發展,制定適當的中介者責任保護及納入明確的安全港原則至關重要。委員會呼籲政府針對中介者責任保護制定整體性的原則,並與產業界進行實質討論,聚焦於數位平台在各主管機關轄下應被授予的保護與有條件的責任豁免。
數位經濟產業一致且高度認同中介者責任原則,然而在政府機關和部會之間,仍缺乏對此原則的共識。舉例來說,作為監管機關的 NCC,其制定公共政策的作法與考量,與作為執法單位的內政部存在顯著差異,導致各機關對中介平台持有不同的觀點與信任程度。作為解決上述問題的第一步,委員會敦促政府制定與《馬尼拉中介者責任原則》(Manilla Principles on Intermediary Liability)一致,廣泛但精確的中介者責任保護原則,包括保障中介者免於為第三方內容承擔責任、要求內容限制必須具有法院命令、規範內容限制必須清晰明確且依照正當程序、考量必要性和比例原則,以及內容限制政策和實務作法之透明化。且上述原則應適用於所有政府單位以確保一致性的作法,並在制定規範過程中建立協調機制,以確保各個機關的政策法規符合國家整體性的原則。
委員會建議行政院發布指導方針,明確界定適用於在台灣營運的數位平台之中介者責任保護和安全港原則。此指導方針應適用於行政院及其轄下機關現行審理中的草案和公眾諮詢程序,以建立具一致與透明的監管環境。
透過採取上述原則,個別行政機關得以與產業建立有共識的對話,共同討論如何有效解決潛在或新興的問題,進而探索適合台灣的解決方案。
我們亦敦促政府審查現行法律和政策,以確保與上述的原則與保護機制一致,同時委員會也要求政府部會暫停所有可能損害中介者責任保護和安全港原則的政策與措施。此舉將大幅增進數位平台在台灣營運的透明度、可預測性和穩定性。這不僅對已在台企業之發展有所助益,也得以吸引更多投資,將台灣打造為適合數位平台經營發展的友善環境。
建議三:落實對政府就數位內容審查和調取個人資料請求之責任
據台灣最近頒布的法規中,資料保護和內容限制或審查往往有不一致的規範,委員會強調台灣迫切需要一個完整且一致的網路內容管制模式,以及資料保護機制。我們強調,確保主管機關對其行為負責,並在行使權力時維持透明且受到嚴格監督至關重要,也是公民參與的重要一環。
我們也對政府透過制定法規,藉以擴大其規管數位經濟的權責表示擔憂,即便這些政策據稱是為了創建一個可信且有序的數位生態系。所有利害關係人均同意台灣社會需要持續改進數位生態系,但這不應作為迴避正當程序及言論自由的理由。例如,警方在打擊網路詐騙方面所做的努力有目共睹,但委員會敦促建立公私夥伴關係共同解決這些問題,而非輕率由上而下的立法,強加義務並以處罰相威脅,此舉可能忽視或損害數位經濟對基本權利的保障。上述的立法方式可能會產生分散而不一致的內容審查規定,並使主管機關得以迴避索取個資的正當程序。對於在多國運作的跨國公司來說,這些問題也導致公司法律義務在各國之間互相衝突的重大風險。
對法規進行系統性的檢視和現代化是必要的,台灣的許多法規中都存在政府要求下架或審查言論和內容的權力,以及監管機構對調取用戶資料的任意程序,包括《公職人員選舉罷免法》第51之3條;《總統副總統選舉罷免法》第47之3條;《性侵害犯罪防治法》第13條;《兒童及少年性剝削防制條例》第 47 條;《證券投資信託及顧問法》第70之1條;《菸害防制法》第15條。
我們建議的法規檢視流程如下:
3.1 由國家通訊傳播委員會(NCC)對現行涉及網路內容限制的所有法規進行完整地檢視,將其與《馬尼拉中介者責任原則》進行比較,並請 NCC 發布明確的政策基準,建立一個遵循以法院命令為限的內容移除模式。此外,我們敦促政府調整現有的內容限制法規,以確保移除內容之請求受到嚴格的正當程序約束。
3.2 由個人資料保護委員會(PDPC)對現有法規(例如《行政程序法》)中,所有政府向民間索取個人資料之請求權進行全面檢視,對個資調取權進行現代化的調整,律定政府機構在向私部門單位請求使用者資料時應遵守的法律和正當程序。
3.3 請國家發展委員會、數位發展部和國家通訊傳播委員會等,承諾確保來自產業的利害關係人可以有意義地參與立法的諮詢過程,包括《個人資料保護法》的修法、人工智慧相關的法規討論、以及《科技偵查法案》等相關立法,確保各方的意見和關切可以得到傾聽和回應。
建議四:在政府機構中落實「良好法制作業」的原則,以確保數位經濟的永續發展。
委員會敦促國家發展委員會和其他政府機構應落實「台美21世紀貿易倡議」和台灣擬加入的其他國際貿易協定中所設定的良好法制作業(Good Regulatory Practices, GRP)原則,以提升台灣公共政策制定的標準和流程。新法規草案公告至少有 60 天的公眾諮詢期,對於確保法規品質及促進國際貿易至關重要。
我們相信立法程序必須包括公開資訊揭露,也必須保留足夠的時間供利害關係人進行充分的意見諮詢,以維持治理架構的完整性和可問責性。
我們尤其強調,台灣需要在落實良好法制作業上持續進步且有實質進展,方有助於確保政策審議過程是公開、公平、有意義並具建設性,以促進利害關係人的信任和合作。因此,委員會建議政府:
4.1 恪遵法令草案60日諮詢期的規定。 鑒於行政部門在台灣法律制定程序中的角色,我們敦促各部會在所有法律、法規和政策中,均採用這項規則,此舉將大幅提升台灣法規環境的健全性。
4.2 在 60 天諮詢期開始時,即提供法規草案的雙語版本。政府機構應在向公眾徵求意見時,提供擬議法規和修正案的官方英文翻譯,特別是在涉及國際商業利益時。標準的雙語文件,可推動公開、公平和建設性的政策審議過程,確保產業有意義的參與。
4.3 制定全面的檢核清單和模板,供政府部門在提出法律法規時採用。此類文件應包括法規解釋、法律影響分析、佐證資料、針對公眾諮詢意見的回饋,以及記錄完整諮詢過程的文件。這些清單將可作為各機關在提出新的法律、法規和政策時的參考,以確保完整遵守GRP原則。