The Shipment Arrived. The Taiwan Customer Still Has Not Paid.

The shipping dashboard says delivered. The bank account says otherwise. Another email arrives from Taiwan: payment is “being arranged.” While those emails pile up, the law is counting in years, months and days.

Two years, if Taiwan law governs

Does Taiwan law apply because the buyer is a Taiwan company? Not by that fact alone. Taiwan's choice-of-law statute, the Act Governing the Choice of Law in Civil Matters Involving Foreign Elements, looks first to the law the parties chose; without an express choice, the law most closely connected with the contract governs (Article 20). Limitation follows the same law (Article 36).

Where Taiwan law governs, a merchant's or manufacturer's claim for the price of goods it supplied is extinguished after two years without exercise (Civil Code, Article 127, item 8). Time runs from when the claim can be exercised (Article 128). Article 127's two years cover only the claims it lists.

Six months after the demand letter

Taiwan's formal demand letter, the 存證信函, is registered mail with an identical copy kept at the post office, which certifies only that the two match (Chunghwa Post). It is not a judgment. Nor is it an enforcement title under Article 4 of the Compulsory Enforcement Act.

A demand interrupts limitation (Civil Code, Article 129). The catch is Article 130: without a lawsuit within six months of the demand, the interruption is treated as never having happened. Article 129 gives the same effect as a lawsuit to a short list of steps, including an application for a payment order, mediation or compulsory enforcement, and submission to arbitration. A second reminder is not on the list. The debtor's acknowledgment of the debt is a separate ground of interruption, so keep any dated reply that admits it.

Attachment security is set by the court

Signs that assets are leaving can put provisional attachment (假扣押) ahead of another reminder. It requires a risk that enforcement will later be impossible or very difficult (Code of Civil Procedure, Articles 522 and 523), and a prima facie showing of the claim and of that risk. If the showing falls short, the court may still set security and order attachment where the creditor offers security or the court finds it appropriate. It may also require security when the showing is sufficient (Article 526). No “one-third of the claim” figure appears there.

If the main case is not yet pending, the court must, on the debtor's application, order the creditor to sue within a set period (Article 529). Applying for a payment order or for mediation, or starting arbitration, counts as suing. Miss the period and the debtor may apply to have the attachment revoked.

Payment orders: three months, then 20 days

For a claim to a fixed sum of money, a creditor may apply for a payment order (支付命令) and must make a prima facie showing of the claim (Articles 508 and 511). Article 509 rules it out in three cases: the creditor still owes its own counter-performance, or the order would have to be served abroad, or by public notice. Being an overseas creditor is not one of them.

An order that cannot be served on the debtor within three months of issue loses effect (Article 515). Article 516 then gives the debtor 20 days from service to object, with no reasons required. A lawful objection in time strips the order of effect to that extent, and the application is treated as a lawsuit or a mediation application (Article 519). No objection? The order may then serve as an enforcement title. Even so, Article 521 lets the debtor sue for a declaration that the debt does not exist and ask the court to stay enforcement against security.

Security for costs, then enforcement

Plaintiffs with no domicile, office or place of business in Taiwan face one more step. If the defendant applies, the court must order security for litigation costs (Article 96). The rule does not cover any part of the claim the defendant leaves undisputed, or a plaintiff with enough assets in Taiwan to pay those costs. Attachment security is a separate deposit.

Enforcement needs its own application to the enforcement court (Compulsory Enforcement Act, Article 5). Under Article 19, the court may order the creditor to report the debtor's assets or investigate itself. Movables, real property and money that third parties owe the debtor, such as bank deposits and receivables, can be reached (Articles 45, 75 and 115). For a judgment obtained outside Taiwan, see Enforcing a Foreign Judgment Against Assets in Taiwan.

A non-confidential outline, with the contract and the date of the last demand, can go first to Hovering International Law Firm at wei@hoveringlaw.com.tw. An enforcement title with no assets behind it still leaves the invoice unpaid.

Official sources

• Civil Code (民法), Laws and Regulations Database of the Ministry of Justice: Articles 127, 128, 129, 130
• Act Governing the Choice of Law in Civil Matters Involving Foreign Elements (涉外民事法律適用法): Articles 20, 36
• Code of Civil Procedure (民事訴訟法): Articles 96, 508, 509, 511, 515, 516, 519, 521, 522, 523, 526, 529
• Compulsory Enforcement Act (強制執行法): Articles 4, 5, 19, 45, 75, 115
• Chunghwa Post (中華郵政), 存證信函 service page

Checked: October 6, 2026

This article is general information based on Taiwan statutes and official pages checked on October 6, 2026. It is not legal advice on any individual case.