This is a theoretical question not relating directly to anyone’s particular case.
In another thread I have been discussing the “usual” route for NWOHRs to gain full “citizenship” in Taiwan via the procedure of NWOHR passport → TARC → 1 year residency → household registration → ID card → full “citizen” (national with household registration).
However, just now, I found some unusual English-language information from the government webpage at Dept. of Household Registration. Ministry of the Interior. Republic of China(Taiwan) - Related Law and Regulations, specifically in the document https://www.ris.gov.tw/documents/data/en/2/Applicant-who-have-at-least-one-parent-who-is-or-was-an-ROC-national.pdf.
That document above describes how an “applicant who have at least one parent who is or was an ROC national” can apply for “naturalization” – and the requirements here are stricter than the NWOHR procedure I described above, requiring proof of “enough property or professional skills for self-support or ensuing living”, and also proof of Chinese language ability, and requiring 5 years (not 1 year) of residence.
This above-linked document all seems very strange to me. It applies to an “applicant who have at least one parent who is or was an ROC national”. But I thought that this, by definition, is a National WithOut Household Registration. Therefore, such a person would not need to apply for naturalization, as such a person is already an ROC national, right? Further adding to the confusion, as I mentioned, is the fact that the above document on naturalization (for persons whose parent is an ROC national!) seems to list more stringent requirements (like proof of income or assets) than the usual NWOHR passport->TARC->residence route.
So what is going on here? Why does the government offer NWOHR two routes to citizenship – the NWOHR passport->TARC->residence route, and the alternative “naturalization as child of ROC national” route?
The reason I am asking this question is that I want to understand as many aspects about the Taiwanese nationality law as possible. An inconsistent law makes no sense, so there must be some consistency or logic that can explain why there are two possible citizenship paths for NWOHRs. I am trying to derive the logic that could explain the apparent inconsistency of having 2 paths.
One possible explanation would be that the “usual” path of NWOHR passport->TARC->etc. requires an NWOHR passport, which can only be acquired abroad. But in case the NWOHR fails to obtain an NWOHR passport abroad and instead moves to Taiwan and establishes residency there as a foreigner with a foreign passport, then I suppose the option 2 that I linked to above might be for such foreigners. Such a foreigner cannot (as far as I understand) obtain an NWOHR passport inside of Taiwan; furthermore, leaving Taiwan to obtain the NWOHR passport and then re-entering Taiwan would “reset the clock” regarding residency, essentially discarding all the previous days or years of acquired residency (acquired under foreigner status with the foreign passport), requiring the person to start a new period of residency from scratch in order to gain citizenship.