– Bilingual Lyrics Chinese/English

Lyrics & Translation

[English]

Imagine a family where kids earn money

Some is kept for themselves

Some is given to the parents to form a fund

And then redistributed to all the kids

This is the concept of a general allocation fund

But if some kids earn less

The money they get after distribution

Is still not enough to cover their living expenses

The parents will regularly provide extra support

This is like the central government’s general subsidies to local areas

One day

The formula for distributing this fund changed

Most kids could get more money

But some didn’t get any increase

Plus after the legal revision

Parents reduced regular subsidies

Now, if you want more

You have to see if the parents agree

Overall

The kids still feel money isn’t enough

So, on November 14, there was another legal revision

Before we talk about these two issues

Let’s go back to the source

Why did the distribution method for the parents’ and kids’ common fund—the general allocation fund—change?

Originally, some of the kids’ earnings

也就是統籌分配款的分配方式會改變

Were given to the parents for redistribution

But this led to kids long-term feeling their money was never enough

Local governments became heavily dependent on central government funding

By the end of 2024, the Fiscal Planning Law was revised

Allowing local areas to pay less in

And get a larger share back from the government

This was actually the main point

It corrected

Or partially fixed

The long-standing issue

Of centralization of power and money in the central government

Because the formula changed

In 2025, the general allocation fund is 467.6 billion

In 2026, it jumps to 884.1 billion

An increase of 416.5 billion

Local areas do get more money

But one kid isn’t happy

Because his share in 2026

Is the same as in 2025

That’s Lienchiang County

This time, Lienchiang gets less

Because the denominator was set wrong

This mistake

Means about 30 billion can’t be distributed

What does using the wrong denominator mean?

Before the law changed, the general allocation ratio

是發不出去的

分母放錯了是什麼意思

Was that special municipalities got 61.76%

Lienchiang and other general counties shared 24%

After the revision, special municipalities and general counties

Share 90.5% together

2.5% is for the three outlying island counties

So, out of 884.1 billion, the three island counties get about 20 billion

The intention was to guarantee funding for the islands

But during the revision

The formula for the three island counties

Used 22 as the denominator instead of 3

Lienchiang should have gotten 3.3 billion

But only got 720 million

This also made it impossible to fully distribute the 2026 fund

The island formula can be corrected by revising the law

But grouping 19 counties together for allocation

Has caused new disputes

Experts think this could worsen wealth gaps between counties

In the current formula

Population carries the biggest weight

在那個公式裡面

So, based on population

Special municipalities

Now get about 60%

There are other factors too

Like business revenue

And special municipalities get a big share there as well

So under the new formula

Non-municipal counties appear more disadvantaged

Take Taipei City and Yilan County for example

In 2026, Taipei City gets 114.9 billion

Yilan County only gets 19 billion

If you visit Taipei City

You’ll see

Its public infrastructure is already very complete

Better than any other local government

Does it still need so much money?

Because counties must also divide funds by towns and townships

Money at the township level

Can’t be used by the counties

Counties have to do the same things

因為縣自己本身下面

But support two sets of government

So funding is even more spread out

That’s why

More remote counties in Taiwan

Often have inadequate basic infrastructure

Though some scholars differ

If we treat the total allocation as 100

Before the law change, in year 114

The six major cities got 65.17%

Sixteen counties got 26.13%

Next year, for the allocation

The six cities get 56.02%

Sixteen counties now get 34.91%

The ones benefiting more

Are actually the general counties, not the big cities

So is the money enough?

The Executive Yuan says

After calculations, including Tainan, Chiayi, Lienchiang, and others

Nine counties get less than before the revision

But the actual decrease

Won’t be known until reviewed by each ministry

Why have bigger general funds, but less for some counties?

Because the regular subsidies that used to be given

Have now been reduced due to the legal revision

The Ministry of Finance revised the method for regular subsidies

Now, the only subsidy approved

Is for social welfare

Remember the common fund mentioned earlier?

The regular subsidies

Previously topped up for shortfall

So over time had set items

But now, most counties get more from the allocation fund

So the central government feels extra support should be controlled

Thus, for regular subsidies in education and infrastructure

Counties must now apply to the central government

The centrally allocated tax revenue

Has already greatly increased for local areas overall

But now, there are insufficient regular subsidies

The total was already low

And some was further cut from the budget

So regular subsidies

Now, if needed, are applied for from each ministry

It’s become

More like project-based support

To protect subsidies

The KMT caucus proposed

Project-based subsidies should not fall below the past ten-year average

Regular subsidies must not be less than the previous year

On November 14, this was passed in the Legislative Yuan

After two rounds of law changes

Experts say

The formula error is still unresolved

Even though local governments get more overall

Project and regular subsidies now can’t be reduced

Local overall revenue has increased

But required tasks haven’t increased

Funds are meant to be used for things

But right now, local governments rarely say

What they want to do with the extra money

With the central government’s administrative power cut back a lot

It will propose its own version of the Fiscal Planning Law

For a full-on debate

In the future, central and local governments will not only fight over money

But also how to divide responsibilities

Fiscal law debates

Are to be continued

Linking fiscal power and administrative authority

Should have a legal basis

So, in future fiscal adjustments

Tasks and authority can be adjusted together

There should be a legal rule for this

This isn’t a gift from nowhere

The money comes with

Responsibilities

公式錯誤問題還沒解決

而地方拿到的統籌分配款變多了

計畫型跟一般性補助款又不能減

地方總財源變多

但該做的事卻沒有增加

錢是為了做事情用

那我們現在基本上

地方自治團體比較沒有去提出來說

為什麼我多出來這些錢

我想要去做什麼事情

中央面對行政權大幅減少

也將提出行政院版的財劃法

全面迎戰

未來中央與地方除了爭錢

又如何劃分事權

財劃法爭議

未完待續

你要讓財政跟事務高權之間的連結

有一個法律上的規定作為基礎

那讓未來我們在調整財權的時候

去連動事務高權

有一個法律規範作為他的依據

其實這不是天外掉下來的禮物

跟著錢來的

或是錢的背後是有責任的

[Chinese]

想像一個家庭孩子賺的錢

有一部分自己收

一部分要交給爸媽做為基金

再重新分配給所有孩子

這就是統籌分配款的概念

可是如果有的孩子收入較低

分配下來的錢

也不夠他應付生活支出

爸媽就會固定額外資助他

這就是中央給地方的

一般性補助款

有一天

這個分配基金的公式改變了

大部分孩子都可以拿到更多錢

但有的卻沒增加

加上修法後

爸媽減少了一般性補助款的資助

如果要

就得看爸媽同不同意

整體來說

還是讓孩子覺得錢不夠花

於是11月14號再次發動修法

要講這2個問題前

我們先回到源頭

為什麼爸媽跟小孩的共同基金

也就是統籌分配款的分配方式會改變

原本孩子賺的錢

一部分交給爸媽重新分配

卻造成孩子長期以來錢都不夠花

地方財政變成長期依賴政府給錢

於是2024年底財劃法修正

讓地方少繳一些錢

交給政府的錢也可以分回來更多

這一個事實上是最主要的

就是它去導正了

或是一定程度修正了

長久以來我們看到的

財政中央集權又集錢

這樣的一個情形

因為公式變了

2025年的統籌分配款是4676億元

2026年一口氣增加到了8841億元

多了4165億元

地方拿到的錢確實變多了

不過有一個孩子卻高興不起來

因為他2026年分到的統籌分配款

跟2025年一樣

他是連江縣

這一次連江會分的少

就是因為分母錯置

分母錯置導致了

我們大概有300多億左右

是發不出去的

分母放錯了是什麼意思

修法前統籌分配款的比例

是直轄市拿61.76%

連江縣跟其他一般縣市共分24%

修法後直轄市加一般縣市

一起來分90.5%

2.5%分給離島3縣

也就是8841億元的統籌分配款

大約200多億分給離島3縣

本意是想保障離島的財源

但修法過程

離島3縣的分配公式

分母把3寫成全國的22個縣

連江縣原本應該拿到33億

變成只有7.2億

也造成2026年的統籌分配款分不完

離島公式出錯只要修法改正

但19個縣市放在一起分錢

也引發爭議

學者認為可能加劇縣市貧富差距

在那個公式裡面

最大權重的就是人口

所以就人口來講的話

可能直轄市

目前看起來就佔60%

那可能還有其他的

像營利事業營業額這些的

直轄市他的佔比也是很大

所以在這個新的公式之下

那就會顯得

非直轄市的縣市他的表現

就比較弱勢一點

以台北市跟宜蘭縣為例

2026年台北市

拿到的統籌分配款是1149億

宜蘭縣則拿到190億

你去台北市的時候

你就會發現

他的公共建設已經很完善了

已經比各個地方政府完善了

那他還需要這麼多錢嗎

因為縣自己本身下面

還要再分鄉鎮市這一級

鄉鎮市這一級的錢

其實是縣不能用的

等於是他做同樣的事情

養兩批人

那財源他又更分散

所以形成了

台灣越偏遠的縣

他基礎建設可能不足的問題

不過也有學者持不同看法

我們把整個統籌分配稅款

就當成100的話

在修法前114年

六都合計拿到的統籌分配稅款

是65.17%

16個縣是拿的是26.13%

明年統籌分配稅款的分配的話

六都拿了56.02%

那16縣是這個部分

他現在拿的是34.91

得到比較多利益的

反而不是六都

而是一般縣市

這樣錢到底夠不夠用

行政院說

試算後包括台南市

嘉義縣市

連江縣等

一共9個縣市拿到的錢

比修法前還要少

但實際減少金額

還要等各部會審核後才確定

為何統籌分配款變多了

還有縣市拿到的錢變少

問題就出在之前談到的

原本固定會給的一般性補助款

中央政府為了因應修法

就把補助款減少了

財政部在一般性補助款的辦法那個地方

做了修正

他們現在核定的一般性補助款

只有一個部分

就是社會福利

還記得開頭提到的

爸媽跟小孩的共同基金嗎

一般性補助款

以前是因為共同基金不夠

爸媽額外資助

長期下來已經有一些固定的項目

但現在多數縣市分到的統籌分配款

已經變多

中央就覺得額外的資助

應該控管

因此一般性補助款

在教育 基礎建設的部分

改成地方向中央申請

中央的統籌分配稅款

已經大幅下放給地方總體

那導致他現在一般補助款不足

他本來量就已經少了

又被統刪預算的關係

一般補助就轉型成

你們需要就跟各部會去申請

他反而變成有點像

計畫型補助的樣態這樣子

為了保住補助款

國民黨團又提案

計畫型補助款比率

不得低於過去十年的平均值

一般性補助款的金額

不能少於前一年度

11月14號已經在立法院三讀通過

歷經兩次修法

學者認為

公式錯誤問題還沒解決

而地方拿到的統籌分配款變多了

計畫型跟一般性補助款又不能減

地方總財源變多

但該做的事卻沒有增加

錢是為了做事情用

那我們現在基本上

地方自治團體比較沒有去提出來說

為什麼我多出來這些錢

我想要去做什麼事情

中央面對行政權大幅減少

也將提出行政院版的財劃法

全面迎戰

未來中央與地方除了爭錢

又如何劃分事權

財劃法爭議

未完待續

你要讓財政跟事務高權之間的連結

有一個法律上的規定作為基礎

那讓未來我們在調整財權的時候

去連動事務高權

有一個法律規範作為他的依據

其實這不是天外掉下來的禮物

跟著錢來的

或是錢的背後是有責任的

Key Vocabulary

Vocabulary	Meanings
分配 fēnpèi /fən˥˩ˈpʰeɪ˥˩/ B2	verb - to distribute or allocate
基金 jījīn /tɕi˥˥tɕin˥˥/ C1	noun - fund or foundation (financial)
收入 shōurù /ʂoʊ˥˥ɻu˥˩/ B2	noun - income, revenue
支出 zhīchū /ʈʂɨ˥˥ʈʂʰu˥˥/ C1	noun - expense, expenditure
補助 bǔzhù /pu˨˩˦ʈʂu˥˩/ C1	noun - subsidy, financial aid
修法 xiūfǎ /ɕjoʊ˥˥fa˨˩˦/ C1	noun - amendment of law, legal revision
減少 jiǎnshǎo /tɕjɛn˨˩˦ʂaʊ˨˩˦/ B2	verb - to decrease, reduce
申請 shēnqǐng /ʂən˥˥tɕʰiŋ˨˩˦/ B2	verb - to apply or request formally
財政 cáizhèng /tsʰaɪ˧˥ʈʂəŋ˥˩/ C1	noun - finance, fiscal affairs
地方 dìfāng /ti˥˩fɑŋ˥˥/ A2	noun - place, local region
中央 zhōngyāng /ʈʂʊŋ˥˥jɑŋ˥˥/ B2	noun - central government or center
公式 gōngshì /kʊŋ˥˥ʂɨ˥˩/ B2	noun - formula, equation
錯誤 cuòwù /tsʰwɔ˥˩u˥˩/ B1	noun/adjective - mistake; wrong
資助 zīzhù /tsɨ˥˥ʈʂu˥˩/ C1	verb - to subsidize or provide financial help
爭議 zhēngyì /ʈʂəŋ˥˥ji˥˩/ C1	noun - dispute, controversy
學者 xuézhě /ɕɥe˧˥ʈʂɤ˨˩˦/ B1	noun - scholar, academic
建設 jiànshè /tɕjɛn˥˩ʂɤ˥˩/ B2	noun/verb - construction, to build
審核 shěnhé /ʂən˨˩˦xɤ˧˥/ C1	verb - to review, examine, audit
依據 yījù /i˥˥tɕy˥˩/ B2	noun/verb - basis, foundation; to be based on
自治 zìzhì /tsɨ˥˩ʈʂɻ̩˥˩/ C1	noun/adjective - autonomy, self-governance
官方 guānfāng /kwan˥˥fɑŋ˥˥/ B2	adjective/noun - official, authoritative source

Key Grammar Structures

• 想像一個家庭孩子賺的錢，有一部分自己收，一部分要交給爸媽做為基金

  ➔ Use of “做為 (zuòwéi)” as 'to serve as/to be'

  ➔ The phrase “做為基金” means “to be used *as* a fund”. The preposition “做為” indicates the function or purpose.

• 再重新分配給所有孩子，這就是統籌分配款的概念

  ➔ The structure “再 (zài) + Verb” implying 'then/afterward/again'.

  ➔ Here, “再重新分配” means “*then* redistributed.” It indicates a sequence of actions.

• 地方財政變成長期依賴政府給錢

  ➔ Use of “變 (biàn) + 成 (chéng)” signifying 'to become'.

  ➔ The phrase “變成長期依賴” indicates a transformation *into* a state of long-term dependency.

• 讓地方少繳一些錢，交給政府的錢也可以分回來更多

  ➔ Use of “讓 (ràng)” to mean 'to allow/let' something happen.

  ➔ “讓地方少繳一些錢” means “*allow* the local governments to pay less money.”

• 這一次連江會分的少，就是因為分母錯置

  ➔ The “就是因為 (jiùshì yīnwèi)” structure: 'it is precisely because'.

  ➔ “就是因為分母錯置” means “It's *precisely because* the denominator was misplaced.”

• 但修法過程，離島3縣的分配公式，分母把3寫成全國的22個縣

  ➔ Using “把 (bǎ)” to emphasize the object of the action.

  ➔ “分母把3寫成全國的22個縣” means “The denominator *took* the 3 and wrote it as 22 counties nationwide.” The “把” highlights what was done to the denominator.

• 整體來說，還是讓孩子覺得錢不夠花

  ➔ The use of “還是 (háishì)” meaning 'still/nevertheless'.

  ➔ “整體來說，還是讓孩子覺得…” means “Overall, *still* it makes the children feel…” despite the changes.