APRC: Worth it?

To a local, yes. To a foreigner, if not working by yourself, nope.

Wouldn’t that defy the grant on their card based on the requisite of not being able to look for oneself? I do not think the government here would take such a disregard for local law lightly. It is not the purpose of this visa. It is humanitarian.

that is about adult children.

Adult children who can look for oneself cannot get the dependent APRC.

That was the law people were fighting for so their offpring of college age would not be kicked out. Again, it is a bit more complicated than that.

Does permanent residency grants open working permit?

that is Article 17 of Act for the Recruitment and Employment of Foreign Professionals etc.

iiuc, article 51 of Employment service act says so.

after being on a spousal ARC (to a foreign professional) for 5 years, after the foreigner gets an APRC, yes. (Article 16 of AREFP)

If the foreigner is a foreign special professional, at the same time when the foreigner applies to APRC, without the 5 year residency requirement. (Article 15 of of AREFP)

AREFP: Act for the Recruitment and Employment of Foreign Professionals


When you change from ARC to APRC your ID number does not change, right?

Correct, it doesn’t change.


Isnt there pretty serious talk of unifying arc and national id numbers to dump that problem second letter? Seem to remember Tsai got this one in the works.

There was, but the reality is that they still need to distinguish them.

Under the current plan, the second letter would be changed to a number, but not to a 1 or a 2 (which represent male/female on TW ID cards). So we would go from ABCD to something like 3456, meaning that the new ARC numbers still wouldn’t be able to pass the checks which validate Taiwanese ID numbers. Totally useless, and I hope they don’t bother because it will be a royal pain for everyone and not a single benefit will come of it.


From previous posts they seem to be aware it’s useless but are still going ahead with it. Even the chamber of commerce advised them of the incompatibility. Hopefully they will adjust this before launch

Well, we all expect the gov here to not be super detailed and thorough…but it would be hard to believe they could redo all arcs without realizing this being a problem. I mean i wouldnt be shocked if they overlooked this but i certainly dont expect them to.

Perhaps the way their systems coding works, numerical digits are more easily integrated than A through Z so it wouldnt be a problem as numbers still work they just have a different category set? Seems like a stretch, even for Taiwan, that this would intentionally be ignored as it has been pointed out to them from early on.

It’s not overlooked–this is 100% intentional.

1 Like

Still wouldnt shock me. But curious your theory on why.

I get separation. But i wpuld assume the web srrvices and computer systems would be compatible, no?

1 Like

They’re not compatible, and when I wrote a letter to the MOI pointing this out they replied that they are doing this intentionally so foreigners can still be distinguished.

I can actually accept having ID numbers that depict nation vs foteign. Much lime the taiwan local ID numbers depict county and gender. This is a logistics thing that is quite reasonable. I think anyway. Very open to opposing opinions that might convince me otherwise. But this is how computing works, placing things into groups.

What i feel makes no sense is that if this new system of one letter and the rest numbers doesnt click with computers here. As that is what we assume the reason for the fix is. If not, what is the reasoning behind a fix that doesnt fix what we think needs fixing ? That is the question.

Being ignorant on this issue, i always assumed the issed was a double letter. Making the second placement a nber i thought would fix this coding issue…if not, what is the next step? If i can get educated i certainly dont mind spending some time with people in office chatting. As we all should if oppotunity arises. But how to proceed with a factual base?

The format is more complicated than that. Most validators explicitly check for a 1 or 2 as the second digit, and a checksum final digit. They’re set on using 7, 8, or 9 as the second digit for ARC holders, which means many platforms will still fail to validate these ID numbers. Not only that, providers who actually made the effort to accept ARC numbers with two letters will now be broken as well.

Well, damn. If that is true it is a bit if a mess.

Have they (gov) discussed this publicly on how it will effect services? The few things i read were about the gov and foreign bodies collaborating so it seems strange to me this would be done so without good reason? Is there somehow a foreign threat (china) angle to it?

This is super dumb in many respects as they should reserve the number 3 for third gender applications. Doh!