What Happened: The Cost of "Lending Your Name"
The Taiwanese company originally operated a straightforward trading business. After working for some time with a mainland Chinese consolidation logistics provider in Dongguan, the provider proposed an arrangement that sounded reasonable: when goods were imported into Taiwan, the Taiwanese company's name would be used for a "simplified declaration," supposedly making customs clearance smoother and reducing costs.
The company agreed. It signed the authorization documents and provided its uniform business number and corporate registration information. From then on, every shipment entered Customs under the company's name—without the company confirming the description, quantity, or consignee of each shipment.
Sequence of Events
-
1
Proposal
The mainland Chinese consolidation logistics provider proposed: "Use your company's name for simplified declarations. Customs clearance will be smoother and costs will be lower."
-
2
Information Provided
The Taiwanese company agreed, signed the authorization documents, and provided its uniform business number and corporate registration information.
-
3
Routine Practice
Every subsequent shipment was declared under the company's name, without the company confirming the description of the goods or the identity of the cargo owner.
-
4
Seizure
Customs intercepted a parcel declared under the company's name. Upon inspection, Customs found electronic cigarette cartridges containing Etomidate.
-
5
Investigation
Prosecutors and investigators opened a case. The customs broker stated: "This company instructed us to make the declaration."
-
6
Finding
The court found that the company had acted knowingly and held it liable as an accomplice.
The company argued that it had known nothing about the contents and had merely "helped with the declaration." The court rejected that defense.
Three Critical Factors: Physical Evidence, Witness Testimony, and Complicity
The case was difficult to rebut not because a single document contained an error, but because three separate lines of evidence all pointed to the same name.
Physical Evidence
The Seized Electronic Cigarette Cartridges
The goods discovered during the physical inspection were the strongest evidence. They did not disappear simply because a party said, "I did not know." Moreover, Etomidate moved through several control levels in less than two years: it was designated a fourth-level controlled drug on August 2, 2024, elevated to a third-level narcotic on August 5, elevated to a second-level narcotic on November 27 of the same year, and classified as a first-level narcotic from June 27, 2026. This is no longer a matter involving only administrative penalties.
Witness Testimony
The Customs Broker Said, "This Company Instructed Us"
That statement established the authorization relationship. What made it particularly damaging, however, was the converse: the customs broker's staff did not actually know the company. They had never met its responsible person, reconciled any documents with it, or verified the contents of any shipment. No party at any point in the chain had conducted verification, yet the Taiwanese company's name appeared on the customs declaration.
Finding
The Court Found Knowledge and Complicity
"I did not know what was inside" is rarely sufficient as a stand-alone defense. You provided the company's name, signed the authorization, made no inquiries about any shipment, and continued allowing the other party to use your identity. The court assesses not only whether you knew about that particular shipment, but also the role you played in the arrangement as a whole.
Customs Brokers Already Have a Duty to Verify
Under Article 12 of the Regulations Governing the Establishment and Administration of Customs Brokers (報關業設置管理辦法), a customs broker must properly verify the information stated in a power of attorney and retain the document. Customs may require its production or inspect it at any time. If no power of attorney can be found or its contents are false, the matter must be handled in accordance with the applicable laws and regulations. Article 22 of the same Regulations further provides that a dedicated customs-clearance officer must refuse to certify and must report to Customs if a principal attempts to procure a false or improper certification or deliberately fails to provide truthful and necessary information. In this case, the customs broker made declarations despite "not knowing the principal," which itself implicated these provisions—but that did not automatically relieve the company named on the declarations of liability.
Why the Taiwanese Company, Rather Than the Overseas Cargo Owner, Was Held Accountable
The key issue is the company's status as the "duty-payer."
Under Article 18 of the Regulations Governing Customs Clearance Procedures for Air Express Consignments (空運快遞貨物通關辦法) and Article 19 of the Regulations Governing Customs Clearance Procedures for Maritime Express Consignments (海運快遞貨物通關辦法), when an express delivery operator files a customs declaration in the name of the holder of the goods, Customs may designate the declared consignee as the duty-payer and issue the tax assessment to that party. The person named on the declaration is the first person held accountable.
The actual overseas cargo owner is not immediately within the reach of Taiwan's judicial authorities; the company whose name appears on the declaration is. This is the fundamental imbalance in "lending your name": the other party takes the profit, while you assume the legal identity—and every responsibility attached to it.
Why a Long-Term Power of Attorney Is Particularly Dangerous
Article 12 of the Regulations Governing the Establishment and Administration of Customs Brokers
A customs broker entrusted by an importer or exporter to handle customs declarations must submit a power of attorney. If the broker has received a long-term authorization from a regular importer or exporter, it may submit the power of attorney to Customs in advance for registration. Once registered, the Customs registration number may be entered on customs declarations, transshipment applications, and other documents in place of submitting a separate power of attorney for each consignment.
In plain terms, once a long-term power of attorney has been signed and registered with Customs, no one needs to ask for your approval again before filing each subsequent declaration.
- You will not know how many shipments have been declared.
- You will not know what description was declared for each shipment.
- You will not know who the consignee is or where the goods were delivered.
- By the time you learn about it, Customs will usually already have discovered the goods.
A case-by-case mandate creates friction because every declaration requires your confirmation. That friction is not an inconvenience; it is your only brake.
The Severity of the Legal Risks
Using the conduct involved in this case as an example, the following statutory penalties may apply. The actual offenses and sentences will still depend on the specific facts and evidence in each case.
| Conduct | Legal Basis | Statutory Penalty |
|---|
| Transporting a first-level narcotic | Article 4, paragraph 1 of the Narcotics Hazard Prevention Act (毒品危害防制條例) | Death penalty or life imprisonment; where life imprisonment is imposed, an additional fine of up to NT$30 million may be imposed |
| Smuggling controlled goods into the country | Article 2 of the Act Governing the Punishment of Smuggling (懲治走私條例) | Imprisonment for not more than 7 years, with an additional fine of up to NT$3 million permitted; attempted offenses are punishable |
| Smuggling goods from the mainland area into the Taiwan area | Article 12 of the Act Governing the Punishment of Smuggling | Treated as smuggling goods into the country and punishable under this Act |
Etomidate has been classified as a first-level narcotic since June 27, 2026. In addition to the criminal liability described above, the parties may also face administrative liability under the Customs Anti-Smuggling Act (海關緝私條例), payment of additional duties and fines, and personal liability on the part of the company's responsible person.
HowBridge's Three Recommendations to the Company
By the time the company approached HowBridge for assistance, the goods had already been seized and the case had entered judicial proceedings. Based on our practical experience with consolidation and customs declarations, we made three recommendations. The first two were intended to stop further exposure and enable the company to respond affirmatively; the third was intended to prevent any recurrence.
1
Refuse to Sign a Long-Term Corporate Power of Attorney
Do not sign any authorization document described as "long-term," "general," or "one-time authorization with no subsequent transaction-by-transaction confirmation." If an authorization is necessary, use a case-by-case mandate and review the description, quantity, consignee, and actual cargo owner for every shipment. If you have already signed such a document, terminate it immediately in writing and retain proof. The date of termination may later become important evidence for determining the scope of your liability.
- Inventory every signed authorization document and copy, and determine who received each one
- Notify the customs broker in writing that the long-term authorization is terminated, and require cancellation of the Customs registration number
- Retain registered-mail receipts, emails, and correspondence records; timestamps are important
- Use only case-by-case mandates in the future and reject any authorization that dispenses with confirmation
2
Identify the Actual Consignee
This is the only way to redirect responsibility to the party that should bear it. The goods ultimately had to be delivered to someone, and that fact cannot be erased overseas. A simplified declaration should already state the consignee's name, address, and uniform business number—or, for an individual, the national identification number, resident certificate number, or mobile telephone number verified through real-name authentication. These fields are the starting point for tracing the responsible party.
- Obtain the consignee's name, uniform business number or national identification number, and real-name-verified mobile telephone number from the customs declaration
- Trace the delivery address, logistics receipt records, and the route taken by the last-mile delivery provider
- Compare payment flows: who paid the freight charges and who received payment for the goods
- Compile a complete chain of evidence and have counsel file a written criminal report—merely asserting "I did not know" is ineffective
3
Do Not Allow Mainland Chinese Consolidation Providers to Use Your Company's Name in Future Arrangements
Allowing an overseas operator to use your company's name for import declarations offers limited returns but unlimited risk. The other party, its personnel, and its assets are all overseas. If something goes wrong, you will face Taiwanese prosecutors, while the overseas operator may simply adopt a different name, find another Taiwanese company, and continue the same conduct.
- Before cooperating, confirm whether the other party has a Taiwan business registration and a legal address at which process can be served
- Treat statements such as "we are only borrowing your name," "this is merely procedural," or "nothing will happen" as warning signs
- The actual cargo owner can make its own declaration—a request to borrow another party's name is itself a warning sign
- Work instead with a consolidation provider legally established and operating in Taiwan
Why a Taiwanese Consolidation Provider Offers Greater Protection
HowBridge is legally established and operates lawfully in Taiwan. The difference is not a slogan; it is what recourse remains available to you when something goes wrong.
An Identifiable and Locatable Counterparty
There is a business registration, tax registration, and legal address at which process can be served. If an overseas operator shuts down its communications, you may not even know whom to name as the defendant.
Reconciliable Records
The declaration details, charges, and tracking history for every shipment remain in the system and can be retrieved, verified, and used as evidence.
Access to Legal Remedies
Under Article 240 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (刑事訴訟法), any person who becomes aware of facts giving rise to suspicion that a criminal offense has been committed may file a criminal report. If a similar situation arises, you may file a written criminal report with the prosecution authorities and pursue the matter through judicial procedures. This avenue is largely ineffective against an overseas operator: even if you file a report, the person is outside Taiwan and the proceedings may be unable to advance.
This is the practical meaning of "operating lawfully": it is not an advertising slogan, but a question of whether you retain any leverage when something goes wrong.
Risk-Protection Checklist
If you cannot answer any of the following questions, you have a gap in your risk controls.
- Have I signed any long-term or general power of attorney for customs declarations? Where is my copy?
- Has my uniform business number been used on any customs declaration without my knowledge?
- For every shipment declared under my name, have I reviewed the description, quantity, and consignee?
- Does the customs broker handling the declarations know me personally? Do I have a direct contact there?
- Does my business counterparty have a Taiwan business registration and a legal address at which process can be served?
- Has the other party ever asked me to "sign first and discuss it later," said "this is merely procedural," or claimed that "nothing will happen"?
- If Customs called me now to ask about a particular shipment, could I explain what the goods are?
If you suspect that your uniform business number has been misused, you may ask the relevant Customs office for records of declarations filed under that number and should consult a practicing attorney as soon as possible.
Frequently Asked Questions
I genuinely did not know. Could I still be convicted?
A claim of "lack of knowledge" must be supported by evidence; asserting it is not enough. The court will consider the arrangement as a whole: whether you provided the company's name, whether you signed an authorization, whether you conducted any verification for each shipment, and what the other party paid you. If you allow another party to make declarations under your name over an extended period without ever asking about the contents, the conduct will not ordinarily be treated as mere negligence. To establish a lack of knowledge, you need specific records showing that you conducted verification and were deceived.
I have already signed a long-term power of attorney. Is it too late?
The sooner you terminate it, the better. Immediately notify the customs broker in writing that the authorization is terminated, require cancellation of the Customs registration number, and retain proof of delivery and the broker's response. The date of termination may later become important evidence for determining the scope of your liability. You should also review every declaration previously filed under your name.
The other party says, "We are only borrowing your name; nothing will happen." Is that credible?
That statement is itself a warning sign. A lawful import arrangement does not require the use of another party's name—the actual cargo owner can make the declaration in its own name. A request to borrow another party's name usually indicates that the requester is unwilling or unable to have its own name appear on the customs declaration.
How can I determine whether someone is using my uniform business number for customs declarations?
You may ask the relevant Customs office for records of declarations filed under your uniform business number. If your company has its own import or export activity, you should also periodically compare declaration details against your actual business transactions. If you discover any discrepancy, preserve evidence and consult an attorney as soon as possible.
What is Etomidate, and why is it treated so seriously?
Etomidate was originally used as an anesthetic but, following its abuse, has frequently been added to electronic cigarette liquids in products commonly called "zombie vape cartridges." Taiwan elevated its control status several times in less than two years: it was designated a fourth-level controlled drug on August 2, 2024, a third-level narcotic on August 5, a second-level narcotic on November 27 of the same year, and a first-level narcotic from June 27, 2026. Under Article 4, paragraph 1 of the Narcotics Hazard Prevention Act, transporting a first-level narcotic is punishable by the death penalty or life imprisonment.
Can I file a written criminal report? What should I prepare?
Yes. Under Article 240 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, any person who becomes aware of facts giving rise to suspicion that a criminal offense has been committed may file a criminal report. The essential requirement is evidence, not emotion: authorization documents and termination notices, messages and emails, customs declaration information, consignee and delivery-tracking records, and payment records. It is advisable to have an attorney organize and submit the written report. The more complete the chain of evidence, the more useful it will be.
Does using a Taiwanese consolidation provider guarantee safety?
There is no absolute guarantee, but the risk structure is entirely different. A Taiwanese operator has a business registration, tax registration, and legal address at which process can be served; it is subject to Taiwanese law. If something goes wrong, you can identify the responsible party, obtain records, and pursue legal remedies. The central rule nevertheless remains the same: do not give your company's name to anyone, regardless of where that person or business is located.
Can this article be relied upon as legal advice?
No. This article provides general information adapted from an actual case, with identifying information omitted, and is intended solely to promote risk awareness. The outcome of any case depends heavily on its specific facts and evidence. Always consult a practicing attorney.
Disclaimer
This article provides general risk information adapted from an actual case. Identifying information, including the names of the company and service providers and the case number, has been omitted. It is provided solely to promote risk awareness, does not constitute legal advice, and cannot replace an attorney's assessment of a particular case. The outcome of any case depends heavily on its specific facts and evidence. Always consult a practicing attorney. The statutory provisions cited in this article are based on the laws currently in force; if those laws are amended, refer to announcements issued by the competent authorities.