Kaohsiung farm arrests and Taiwan's work-permit rules

TikTok videos of farm work and dancing, filmed in a remote part of Kaohsiung, helped immigration officers find the site, Focus Taiwan reported on October 15, 2026. The National Immigration Agency (NIA) said officers arrested 20 Thai nationals who had overstayed their visas and five people suspected of illegally employing them. In the agency's account, a Thai influencer who had overstayed was working at the farm and used the videos to recruit fellow Thai nationals. One video passed 100,000 views. The NIA said it would keep investigating whether an illegal labor brokerage was involved.

CNA's Chinese-language report of October 15 says the jobs included farm work and formwork, and that the agency is investigating and handling the case under the Immigration Act and the Employment Service Act. On October 16, the Taipei Times carried the same account. The suspected illegal employment and any brokerage remain under investigation; the reports describe no fine, court ruling or removal decision.

The arrests also raise a practical question for farm operators, building contractors and labor intermediaries in Taiwan: who may employ a worker, and for what work? Someone can be in Taiwan lawfully and still lack permission to do a particular job. The employer needs to establish which work authorization, or which exception, covers each worker.

A stay document is not a work permit

Article 43 of the Employment Service Act is the baseline: unless the Act provides otherwise, a foreign national may not work in Taiwan without a permit applied for by an employer. An entry stamp or residence card is not proof that the holder may do this job. Check current stay or residence status separately from any work authorization for the employer and work in question.

Some groups fall under exceptions in the Act itself. Whether one fits depends on the worker's documented status. A video or a crew leader's assurance cannot establish a worker's current authorization.

Stay rules come from a different statute. Article 36 of the Immigration Act addresses conduct inconsistent with the purpose of a permitted stay or residence, listing it among the grounds on which the NIA may act against a foreign national. Failure to apply for an extension before a stay or residence period expires is another ground, subject to the exception in paragraph 3 of Article 31.

The employer, the worker and the permitted work

Nine items in Article 57 list conduct barred to employers of foreign nationals. The first three concern permission to work, the person for whom the work is done and whether the assignment stays within the permit.

Under the first item, an employer may not hire a foreign national who has no permit, whose permit has lapsed, or whose employment was applied for by someone else. A worker with a valid permit for a factory or another farm does not become available to a second farm because both sides agree.

Hiring a foreign national in one's own name for someone else's work is barred by the second item. If a contractor hires foreign nationals in its own name but they are in fact working for the grower, Article 57(2) may be relevant. The contractual label alone does not establish whose work they are doing.

The third item bars assigning a hired foreign national to work outside the permit, and Article 68 sets a fine of NT$30,000 to NT$150,000 for that violation.

Any person who unlawfully allows a foreign national to work violates Article 44, whether or not that person is the employer. That matters on farms where whoever runs the land is not the one paying the crew.

Fines and criminal penalties for hiring and brokering

An administrative fine of NT$150,000 to NT$750,000 applies under Article 63 to a violation of Article 44 or items 1 or 2 of Article 57. Under Article 63, imprisonment becomes possible only if the violation is repeated within five years. The maximum is then three years' imprisonment or detention, a fine of up to NT$1.2 million, or both. When a company's representative, agent or employee commits the violation in the course of business, the article penalizes both the individual and the company or person on whose behalf they acted.

Focus Taiwan on October 15 and the Taipei Times on October 16 reported the Kaohsiung brigade captain as saying that employers who hire illegally "for profit" face up to three years in prison. No profit test appears in Article 63. Article 64 separately penalizes illegal brokering under Article 45 when it is done with intent to profit. CNA's Chinese report of October 15 places the intent-to-profit penalty immediately after the brokering fine.

Brokering is its own offense. Article 45 says no one may act as an intermediary for a foreign national to work illegally for another person. A violation draws a fine of NT$100,000 to NT$500,000 under Article 64. Repeating the violation within five years can bring up to one year's imprisonment or detention, a fine of up to NT$600,000, or both. Brokering with intent to profit needs no prior violation: it carries up to three years' imprisonment or detention, a fine of up to NT$1.2 million, or both. Like Article 63, Article 64 also reaches the company or person on whose behalf a representative, agent or employee acted.

A recruitment post alone does not establish illegal brokering under Article 45. What matters is whether the advertiser then acted as an intermediary for a foreign national to work illegally for someone else.

An arrest does not settle what happens to the workers

For the workers, Article 68 also sets consequences when a foreign national violates Article 43. That violation has to be established first. A fine of NT$30,000 to NT$150,000 applies. The authorities must also order the person to leave Taiwan immediately. Nor may the person work in Taiwan again. If the person is given a deadline to leave and does not go, the immigration authority may compel departure and may hold the person until then.

Article 36 gives the NIA separate departure powers. For the grounds in its second paragraph, including the two described earlier, the agency may choose between deportation and an order to leave within ten days. A person who stays past that deadline may then be deported. Before deporting anyone, the agency must give the person a chance to state their views. For a holder of a residence or permanent residence permit, it must also convene a review committee, unless a listed exception applies, such as the person's written declaration waiving the chance to state views or electing voluntary departure. The person may have a lawyer and an interpreter present at the hearing or committee, within limits the article sets.

None of these outcomes has been reported for the 20 people found in Kaohsiung. The October 15 and October 16 reports mention five suspected illegal employers, but describe no final penalty or court finding against them.

The permits behind a farm crew

A recruitment video shows people at work. It does not show their permits. Before a farm crew starts, the question is whether each worker's current authorization or applicable exception covers the planned work. Where an employer's permit is required, the named employer and permitted work also matter. A permit for a different farm or factory raises Article 57's first item. If a contractor hires the crew in its own name but the workers are in fact doing the farm's work, the second item may be relevant. An assignment beyond the permit raises the third.

CNA also reported on October 15 that formwork labor was among the jobs found. Article 57 draws no line between work in a field and work on a building site.

Legal advice on a proposed crew or government notice

Hovering International Law Firm (昊鼎國際法律事務所) can review a proposed labor arrangement, the permits for the workers involved and any notice received from the labor or immigration authorities. Attorney Wei Tseng (曾雋崴) handles consultations. To start, email wei@hoveringlaw.com.tw with the recruiting arrangement, the permit holder and the planned work.

Taipei office: 7F-2, No. 35, Sec. 1, Chengde Rd., Datong Dist., Taipei City 103, Taiwan Taichung office: 6F-1, No. 19, Guanqian Rd., North Dist., Taichung City 40453, Taiwan

Sources

• Focus Taiwan, October 15, 2026: NIA account of the arrest of 20 Thai nationals who had overstayed and five people suspected of illegally employing them; continuing inquiry into a possible brokerage; the brigade captain's penalty remarks.
• CNA (Chinese), October 15, 2026: farming and formwork labor; handling under the Immigration Act and the Employment Service Act; the penalty remarks, with the profit-motive term placed after the brokering fine.
• Taipei Times, October 16, 2026: the same account of the arrests and remarks.
• Employment Service Act (last amended January 20, 2025), Articles 43, 44, 45, 57, 63, 64 and 68: employer permits, unlawful hiring, unlawfully allowing foreign nationals to work, brokering, penalties and worker sanctions.
• Immigration Act, Article 36 (last amended June 28, 2023): deportation, ten-day departure orders and procedural safeguards.

Checked: October 16, 2026