台媒：一杯大陆咖啡竟被台当局视为“洪水猛兽”？

Brief (coffeeyo.com): A Taiwan media commentary asks why Luckin Coffee — the affordable chain often called “China’s Starbucks” — has seen its plan to enter the Taiwan market stalled for months, with company registration unapproved, while mainland-capital restaurants already operate freely on the island. The piece argues the obstruction reflects political maneuvering rather than genuine security concerns.

Reference News Network, September 18 report

Luckin Coffee, the affordable chain brand known as “China’s Starbucks,” has seen its plan to “land in Taiwan” stalled for months, with its branch-company registration unapproved.

In the eyes of the Lai administration, this coffee carton is more frightening than toxic oil and more dangerous than a chemical explosive.

When news emerged late last year that Luckin would enter the Taiwan market, DPP legislator Lin Chu-yin questioned in the legislature, worrying that Luckin, through QR codes and app-based ordering, would thereby grasp consumers’ personal data, location and spending footprints. Tsai Ming-yen, head of the Taiwan authorities’ security affairs department, also said worriedly that the related apps pose personal-data and information-security risks, and that if investment applications were involved, the security affairs department would participate in the review.

The problem is, if what the authorities worry about is “apps collecting location and consumption data,” then the target of regulation should be the data-collection behavior, not fussing over where the coffee beans come from.

Moreover, mainland-capital catering is not an absolute taboo under Taiwan’s laws. Company data currently published by the economic affairs department plainly states that Haidilao’s related companies are registered with “mainland investors.” If Haidilao can let Taiwan residents eat, then why would the authorities worry that Luckin would let Taiwan residents drink their way into a security crisis? Why is Haidilao treated as a market economy, while Luckin Coffee suddenly becomes “cognitive warfare”?

The street scene before our eyes: mainland-capital enterprises such as SF Express and ZTO Express already roam every lane and alley in Taiwan, and people can also buy Xiaomi phones and DJI drones. This style of governance by the Lai administration is like “suspecting the neighbor stole the axe” — first convinced the neighbor stole the axe, so he walks like a thief, talks like a thief, and even drinks water like a thief; only when the axe is found in his own barn does the neighbor suddenly stop looking like a thief.

When politicians loudly call for building a “non-red supply chain,” they turn a blind eye to the ubiquitous mainland-capital products in daily life. This logic of “selective blindness” and “different rules for different people” exposes not far-sighted precaution, but the flustered disorder of pure political manipulation.

Political figures reap electoral dividends by shaping “anti-China anxiety,” yet cast an inescapable gloom over Taiwan’s business environment and rule of law.

What the Lai administration needs to cure is never the political ailment of “pro-China” or “anti-China,” but a more troublesome symptom — the moment mainland China is involved, politics immediately replaces professionalism, and stance immediately replaces standards.

More tellingly, online, netizens have left messages one after another: “Hurry up and come! The coconut-latte is so good!” Some even wish: “Hope Mixue, Chagee and Guming come together too!” The panic of the power system and the calm of grassroots consumers form an extremely ironic contrast.

The Lai administration seems to suffer from “advanced anti-China syndrome,” with prominent symptoms including selective blindness and knee-jerk victim delusion. This unavoidably raises the question: is it that the commercial goods from across the strait are too fierce, or that our own confidence has long been too fragile to withstand a single blow?

Reprint Note & Disclaimer

This article is compiled and edited by coffeeyo.com. The materials and images herein are sourced from public channels and the copyright belongs to the original authors. This site reprints them solely for information sharing within the coffee industry and does not represent our stance; all data and views are subject to the original source. We thank the original authors for their work and sharing.
For matters concerning content authorization, attribution, copyright, or any other issues, please contact us promptly. We will verify and cooperate in handling them without delay. We also welcome coffee-growing regions, brands, and industry media to exchange and contribute articles with us.
Contact coffeeyo.com — Tel: 400-0000-641 (+86-18288016826) | Email: 405854472@qq.com | Address: Jinghong City, Xishuangbanna, Yunnan / Tieling City, Liaoning

Reprint Notice & Disclaimer

This article has been edited and compiled by China Coffee Network. The information and images therein come from public sources and the copyright belongs to the original author. This reprint is intended solely for information sharing within the coffee industry and does not represent the views of this website; all data and opinions are subject to the original article. Our thanks to the original author for creating and sharing it.
For matters concerning content licensing, attribution, copyright or otherwise, please contact us promptly and we will verify and cooperate in handling them as soon as possible. We also welcome coffee origins, brands and industry media to exchange ideas and contribute articles.
Contact China Coffee Network: Tel 400-0000-641 (+86-18288016826) | Email 405854472@qq.com | Address: Jinghong, Xishuangbanna, Yunnan Province / Tieling, Liaoning Province

Related Reading

Market Insights · More from this section

Sign In

Register

Reset Password