Where a tenderer submits, pursuant to paragraph 2 of Article 37 of the Act, a bank’s joint and several guarantee or an insurer’s insurance policy of joint and several guarantee in respect of contract performance and compensation, the following requirements shall be followed:
1. the amount of the joint guarantee or joint guarantee insurance policy shall not be less than the total tender price;
2. the joint guarantee or joint guarantee insurance policy shall be submitted together with qualification documents; and
3. the requirements for a performance bond as regards its validity period, contents, release or non-release, etc. shall apply mutatis mutandis to the joint guarantee or joint guarantee insurance policy.
The total tender price referred to in subparagraph 1 of the preceding paragraph may be in one of the following circumstances:
1. where award of contract is based on total price, it refers to the total tender price offered by the tenderer;
2. where award of contract is based on unit price, it refers either to the estimated total procurement value specified in the tender documentation or to the product of the unit price quoted by the tenderer and the estimated procurement quantity specified in the tender documentation; or
3. where qualification evaluation in selective tendering procedures is undertaken, it is either as a tenderer’s estimate based on the subject of tendering or the entity’s estimated total procurement value, or the fixed amount specified in the tender documentation.
In the event that the amount of the joint guarantee or joint guarantee insurance policy exceeds the award price, such amount shall be adjusted according to the award price.

Where a supplier furnishes a price difference bond as the guarantee referred to in Article 58 of the Act, the following requirements shall be followed:
1. where the total tender price is abnormally low, the amount of guarantee shall equal the difference between the total tender price and 80% of the government estimate, or the difference between the total tender price and 80% of the amount recommended by a committee referred to in Article 54 of the Act;
2. where part of the tender price is abnormally low, the amount of guarantee shall equal the difference between the tender price for the part in question and 70% of the government estimate of such part. If there is no government estimate for the part in question, the budget amount or the amount recommended by the committee shall be used instead; and
3. where a supplier fails to deposit a price difference bond as required, an entity may decline to award the contract to such supplier.
A reasonable time-limit of not less than 5 days shall be prescribed for depositing a price difference bond. The requirements for performance bond as regards validity period, contents, release or non-release, etc. shall apply mutatis mutandis to the price difference bond.

Where an entity notifies a supplier to make improvement or replacement within a time-limit pursuant to paragraph 1 of Article 72 of the Act, if the property for which the price has been paid has to be removed from the entity’s premises, the entity may require the supplier to deposit a guarantee bond of the same value as that of the property. Where a property has to be removed from an entity’s premises during the warranty period to make improvement or replacement, the same shall apply.
The requirements as regards performance bond shall apply mutatis mutandis to the guarantee bond referred to in the preceding paragraph.

Where an entity provides its property to a supplier for processing or maintenance, if the property has to be removed from the entity’s premises, the entity may, upon considering actual needs, require the supplier to deposit a guarantee bond either of the same value as that of the property or of a fixed amount.
The requirements as regards performance bond shall apply mutatis mutandis to the guarantee bond referred to in the preceding paragraph.

For procurement under the threshold for publication, an entity may prescribe in the tender documentation that the performance bond or the warranty bond to be deposited by the winning tenderer may be substituted by a joint and several guarantee for performance and compensation provided by an other supplier who satisfies the qualification requirements for tenderers prescribed in the tender documentation.

For procurement above the threshold for publication, an entity may prescribe in the tender documentation that, where the winning tenderer submits a joint and several guarantee for performance and compensation provided by an other supplier who satisfies the qualification requirements for tenderers prescribed in the tender documentation, the amount of performance bond or warranty bond payable may be reduced.
The amount to be reduced referred to in the preceding paragraph, which may be either a fixed amount or proportion, shall be determined by the entity in the tender documentation. This amount shall be limited to a sum not exceeding 50% of the performance bond or warranty bond.

Where an entity permits a guarantee bond to be substituted by a joint and several guarantee or reduced in amount, in accordance with the provisions of the two preceding Articles, the provisions regarding performance bond and warranty bond shall apply mutatis mutandis to the time-limit to submit documents required for the joint-and-several guarantee supplier; the entity shall also prescribe in the tender documentation that the joint liability of the supplier shall not be released progressively with the release of the guarantee bond in parts.
Where circumstances exist for not releasing guarantee bond, the winning tenderer and the joint-and-several guarantee supplier shall make a supplemental payment to the entity the amount of the guarantee bond not being released that equals the amount that had previously been substituted by joint guarantee or reduced. However, if the circumstances allow for the contract to be carried out by the joint-and-several guarantee supplier and renders no need for the supplemental payment, the entity shall first notify such supplier as regards performing the contract.

The supplier providing joint and several guarantee referred to in Articles 33 and 33-1 shall be limited to one that is by law eligible for providing guarantee, that does not participate in tendering, and that does not fall under the circumstances set out in paragraph 1 of Article 103 of the Act, by which it is prohibited from participating in tendering, or being awarded or sub-contracted.

An entity shall prescribe in the tender documentation that, in case any supplier provides joint and several guarantee to more than one government procurement contracts at the same time, the maximum number of contracts for which it guarantees shall be limited to two.
An entity conducting procurement shall, if there exists the circumstance referred to in the preceding paragraph as regards the supplier providing joint and several guarantee, transmit relevant information of the joint-and-several guarantee supplier to the database designated by the responsible entity for public notice.

An entity conducting procurement may prescribe in the tender documentation that, for outstanding suppliers, the amount of bid bond, performance bond or warranty bond to be deposited by such suppliers may be reduced. The maximum amount of reduction shall be limited to 50% of the total amount that has to be deposited originally. This provision shall not be retroactive to any supplier that attains the aforesaid status after depositing the bonds. Where the incentive period expired before the expiry of a bond, the reduced deposited amount needs not be deposited.
The outstanding supplier referred in the preceding paragraph denotes any supplier who has been evaluated as outstanding, based on provisions regarding incentives measure, incentive period and contract performance results by the responsible entity or the relevant central competent authorities in target enterprises covered by laws and regulations responsible by the said entity or authorities, provided that such evaluation has been recognized and announced to the public via the designated database by the responsible entity, and that the incentive period is still valid. Since such evaluation has been completed, the evaluation results and relevant data shall be reported to the responsible entity within three months. If the incentive period commencing from the publishing date of the notice exceeds two years, it shall be deemed as two years. Where there is no incentive period, the status shall last for one year commencing from the publishing date of the notice on which the supplier is listed in the database as an outstanding supplier. An entity may prescribe applicable sectors for eligible outstanding suppliers in the tender documentation for a specific procurement.
As regards the circumstances in which an amount may be reduced as referred to in paragraph 1, an entity shall prescribe in the tender documentation that, where there are circumstances in which a bid bond or guarantee bond shall not be released, the supplier shall make a supplemental deposit that equals the reduced portion of the unreleased amount. The same shall apply to a supplier whose outstanding supplier status has been revoked by the responsible entity or the relevant central competent authorities in target enterprises, or to a supplier who has been published by any entity on the Government Gazette pursuant to paragraph 3 of Article 102 of the Act, and is still under the effect of the period prescribed in paragraph 1 of Article 103 of the Act.
For a supplier who has been evaluated as an outstanding supplier by a municipal or county (city) government, the provisions of paragraph 1, and the preceding paragraph may apply mutatis mutandis when such supplier participates in the procurement conducted by that particular government. Such outstanding suppliers shall neither be reported to the responsible entity, nor be announced to the public via the designated database by the responsible entity.
Where the amount of bid bond, performance bond or warranty bond may be reduced pursuant to other laws, the laws do not stipulate that the incentives shall be specified in the tender documentation, or to be announced to the public via the designated database by the responsible entity, those laws shall apply.

When conducting a procurement not covered by any treaty or agreement to which this nation is a party, an entity may prescribe in the tender documentation that, for globalized suppliers, the amount of bid bond, performance bond or warranty bond to be deposited by such suppliers may be reduced. The maximum amount of reduction shall be limited to 30% of the total amount that has to be deposited originally, and is additional to the reduction amount referred to in the preceding Article. This provision shall not be retroactive to any supplier that attains the aforesaid status after depositing the bonds. Where the incentive period ends before the expiry of a bond, the reduced amount needs not be deposited.
The globalized supplier referred to in the preceding paragraph means any local supplier whose overseas contract value accumulated is not less than the threshold for the central government entities of this nation under the Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA) of the World Trade Organization (WTO), and the contract value has been ratified by the relevant central competent authorities and published in a database designated by the responsible entity in one year after the award of contract, and that the incentive period is still valid. The incentive period shall be one year commencing from the publishing date of the information to which the supplier is listed in the database as an globalized supplier.
As regards the circumstances in which an amount may be reduced as referred to in paragraph 1, an entity shall prescribe in the tender documentation that, where there are circumstances in which a bid bond or guarantee bond shall not be released, the supplier shall make a supplemental deposit that equals the reduced portion of the unreleased amount. The same shall apply to a supplier whose globalized supplier status has been revoked by the relevant central competent authorities due to significant deficiencies in overseas contract performance, or to a supplier who has been published by any entity on the Government Gazette pursuant to paragraph 3 of Article 102 of the Act, and is still within the period prescribed in paragraph 1 of Article 103 of the Act.