Thaksin Asset Case: Bt46 Billion Will Be Seized Along With Interests

[DavidHouston]

There is a tax claim to follow, claiming illegal tax evasion.

It seems to me that any tax claim must be computed on the excess of the sales price, reduced by the amount of the profits confiscated, over his basis in the stock. To compute the tax on the original sales price would be double-dipping.

[Donnyboy]

# "If u are businessmen, think it through if you are tempted to enter politics"

# "Let me be the last victim"

# "Don't cause any trouble and give government a chance to pick on you".

# "You (red shirts) must fight peacefully, or our country will remain in the hands of ammat. Fight on. Don't give up until you get democracy"

# Thaksin wears a black suit and black tie.

# "Things move super fast when it involves cases against people like me"

# "Thai justice system is child play"

# "When democracy matures, there should be no more victims like me"

# "This is cruel politics"

# "I'm sorry kids, for causing trouble to our family", he said.

# Through D station, he said he's mourning his own stubbornness. (referring to refusal to heed his family's warnings against playing politics)

# Now, Thaksin reacting to the verdict..

---The Nation

Good God! Playing the poor martyr.

Don't forget - he's Thailand's Nelson Mandela (according to him )

and also thailands Aung San Suu Kyi

[WeeGB]

I dont think Thaksin will be too disappointed. Any day where you start with zero and end up 30 billion better off is not a bad one.

It wasn't as though he was going to get it all back, if he had then it would have nullified the coup and everything since 2006, and there was a good chance he could lose it all. The judiciary have done what they were required to do and there's a compromise that should satisfy both sides.

Now what to spend that 30 billion on

Pattaya Beach Road is open again for "business".

[elcent]

TAN Network: Thaksin swears that he did not corrupt; prompts reds to keep on fighting

... his last breath?

He'll be ignored and like a broken glass that can't be restored.

[RegularReader]

TAN_Network Thaksin says that if he did corrupt, may he die a painful death within 7 days

I won't hold my breath...or get out the black shirt

[sawadeeken]

I'd like to see them get it all................ He probably has plenty more scattered around the world that would be more difficult to trace and get hold of............. And slap some big fines and court costs and charge for all the security that has become necessary....

[britmaveric]

TAN Network: Thaksin swears that he did not corrupt; prompts reds to keep on fighting

That's the spirit, may have lost this battle, but still can win the war.

[Old Man River]

Process-wise, does Thaksin have any rights to appeal the decision to any higher level of Thai court??? Or is this verdict the last stop on the judicial circuit???

Most certainly, if he has or can find any recourse whatsoever, it would seem most likely he will pursue it...

Not many people, especially Thaksin, are likely to willingly accept a verdict taking 46 billion baht out of their pockets...

P.S. - My question does not imply any support for the individual involved. I'm just hoping somewhere, somehow this can all be put behind the country for its own good and future. There has to be an end somewhere....

From memory, he has 30 days to appeal, but must come up with new evidence for the appeal to be accepted. That won't happen.

This won't end while people like Jakropob run free.

[webfact]

LET JUSTICE BE DONE

Thaksin guilty, Bt46 bn seized, Bt30 bn returned

By Avudh Panananda

The Nation

BANGKOK: -- Morning: About three companies of policemen are deployed to guard the Suprme Court compound and surrounding areas.

Red Siam rally site at Sanam Luang sees sparse crowds following last night rally. Organisers ask protesters to reassemble in the afternoon to monitor the verdict.

Security measures stepped up at Parliament, Government House, Si Sao Thewes residence of chief royal adviser General Prem Tinsulannonda, Chan Song La residence of ex-premier Thaksin Shinawatra's family and the stock market.

7.30 am: Nine Supreme Court judges arrive in a bullet-proof car. Tight security at court building,

8.30 am: People's Channel, pro-Thaksin satellite broadcasting, airs a taped Thaksin speech urging his supporters not to assemble at the court building.

Thaksin said he would monitor the live broadcast of the verdict in Dubai and that none of his family members would attend the verdict session.

In his speech and his Twitter message, Thaksin insists on his innocence, arguing he is not a cheater and that his wealth has been honestly earned and not ill-gotten gains.

9.30 am: Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thuagsuban says the situation is stable. He pledges to safeguard the judges in doing their job. He ensures the public that the government has the contingency plan to deal with any disturbances.

He also allays the concern for a coup, saying he guarantees there will be no military intervention.

9.10 am: Nine Supreme Court judges seen entering their private chamber to debate the Bt76 billion asset seizure case.

The judges are expected to read out their individual opinions before forming the judicial decision.

Wireless signals are jammed to prevent leaks.

By 10.00 am: Democrats and Pheu Thai MPs start arriving at their respective parties to monitor the situation.

Red shirts in Udon Thani congregate at a pro-Thaksin radio station to keep tap on the verdict.

Red shirts in Chiang Mai assemble at an empty lot in front of Waroros Grand Palace Hotel.

11.30 am: Thaksin may phone in via a video link to his Pheu Thai supporters while the verdict is being read this afternoon, Pheu Thai Party spokesman Prompong Nopparit says.

The video link will take place at Phue Thai headquarters on Rama IV Road. The main opposition party has set up two large projectors for live broadcast of the verdict. Party supporters are expected to turn out in full force.

Key figures in the pro-Thaksin camp, including Chavalit Yongchaiyudh, Somchai Wongsawat, Yaowapha Wongsawat, Pongthep Thepkanchana, Chaturon Chaisang, Chusak Sirinil and Sukhumpong Ngonkham are scheduled to arrive at the party headquarters before the verdict session at 1.30 pm.

After the judges read out the verdict, the Pheu Thai legal team will issue a statement. Thaksin is scheduled to give an interview reacting to his verdict via the video link. Web-based TV journalist Tuangporn Asvavilai is in Dubai to act as his interviewer.

11.45 am: Red Siam rally organiser Surachai Danwattananusorn says protesters would not move to the Supreme Court compound regardless of the outcome of the verdict.

The Red Siam rally site is at Sanam Luang, Surachai says, denying the linkage to the verdict on the asset seizure case.

Before noon, Chart Thai Pattana Party spokesman Watchara Kannikar calls on parties concerned to respect the judicial decision. If rival camps continue to carry on the fight, then the political struggle might escalate into a civil war, he says.

Watchara urges the authorities to exercise restraints and refrain from using force to crackdown on protesters. And the military should not exploit the situation to seize power, he says.

1.15 pm: In his video link message to Pheu Thai Party, Thaksin calls on his supporters to join him in listening in to the verdict.

He says he views the verdict as the historic moment signalling the major change following a long political struggle.

He says he braces well for the verdict.

"The ball is now not in our court, it is up to how the other would play and direct the ball," he says, ahead of the verdict session.

1.30 pm: Judges start reading the verdict by outlining the prosecution case

The high court begins by outlining the prosecution argument detailing Thaksin's equity structure in Shin Corp. The prosecution contends equity structure was designed to conceal true ownership.

The next issue is the conversion of telecom concession fees into excise charges to favour the family-controlled Shin Corp.

The other prosecution point is the adjustment of the revenue sharing agreement on pre-paid mobile phone services to benefit Advanced Information Service.

The prosecution contends Thaksin's interference in regulating the telecom industry to benefit his family-controlled telecom group, boosting its market valuation.

The prosecution outlines Thaksin's involvement to fix the concession contract on satellite communications. Because of his meddling, ThaiCom 4, a designated satellite for back-up communications, was cancelled and replaced by the launching of IPStar which allows the operator to start the satellite service for Internet instead of fulfilling the original ageement on satellite communications.

The prosection contends Thaksin's inference in satellite communications has inflicted Bt4 billion damage to the state and left a long-lasting impact on the country's communications security.

The prosecution contends Thaksin's involvement to grant Exim Bank loans to Burma in order to benefit the telecom and satellite businesses of his family business empire. Under Thaksin's instruction, the loans were increased from Bt3 billion to Bt4 billion.

The prosecution contends Thaksin's involvement in increasing the equity cap on the telecom business to pave way for him and his family to sell their Shin Corp stakes to a foreign buyer.

The Asset Examination Committee has frozen Bt66 billion of Bt76 billion sought as compensation to damage caused by conflict-of-interest decisions.

2.50 pm: Judges begins to outline the defence arguments.

The defence contends Thaksin filed his asset statements as prescribed by the anti-graft law.

The defence contends Thaksin openly transferred his equity stakes to his children before assuming office.

The defence contends the AEC was biased in trying to fault Thaksin. The AEC conducted iits investigation based on expediency and not prescribed procedures. For example, the AEC claimed the shares belonging to Thaksin's children when it ruled on tax liability. But it insisted Thaksin had full control of the shares when it wanted to prosecute him for abuse of power and conflict of interest.

In rebutting charges related to telecom business, the defence contends Thaksin's leadership following precribed procedures and implementing all policies sanctioned by the laws.

The defence contends the wealth of Thaksin and family was earned before assuming office.

The defence contends the wealth distributed from Thaksin to his children was genuine and not a scam for asset concealment.

The defence cites the statutory limitation as ground for dismissal, arguing the AEC indicts Thaksin after he left office for more than two years.

The defence contends the AEC failed to follow prescribed steps for indicting Thaksin and freezing the assets.

The defence contends the National Anti Corruption Commission was not appointed under the constitutionally-sanctioned procedures, hence it had no mandate to carry on the defunct AEC in prosecuting Thaksin.

The defence cites the statutory limitation as ground for dismissal, arguing the AEC indicts Thaksin after he left office for more than two years.

The defence contends the AEC failed to follow prescribed steps for indicting Thaksin and freezing the assets.

The defence contends the National Anti Corruption Commission was not appointed under the constitutionally-sanctioned procedures, hence it had no mandate to carry on the defunct AEC in prosecuting Thaksin.

3.50pm: Judges begins to read the ruling by outlining the non-contested issues and the business ties between Thaksin and his family members.

First legal issue is whether the AEC has the mandate to probe Thaksin and seize the assets. The high court rules by an unanimous decision that the AEC was empowered to prosecute Thaksin.

Second legal issue is whether legal provisions can be applied to Thaksin in the wake of the coup and the suspension of the 1997 charter. The high court rules the suspended charter has not impacted on law enforcement.

Third legal issue is whether the coup announcement to form the AEC was legally sanctioned. The high court rules that the coup-issued law is classified as an equivalent to an act of Parliament, hence it is legally binding.

Fourth legal issue is whether the AEC violates the statutory of limitations. The high court rules that the AEC complete its job within the deadline.

On the fifth legal issue, the high court rules to endorse steps taken by the AEC and the NACC to conduct the inquiry, notify charges, review defence rebuttals and freeze assets.

On the seventh legal issue, the high court rules to endorse appointments in the AEC, the NACC and in relevant investigative panels.

On the ninth legal issue, the high court strikes down the defence argument related to biased opinions of three graft busters, Klanarong Chantik, Banjerd Singkhaneti and Kaewsan Atibhodi.

On the tenth legal issue, the high court dismisses the defence argument that the prosecution omits to prove criminal wrongdoing before asking for the asset seizure. At issue is the civil litigation on whether or not the accused amass unusual or illegal wealth due to his office. This is not a litigation about criminal wrongdoing.

The judges rules in the unanimous decision that the prosecution is just and has followed legally-sanctioned steps.

At 5.00 pm: The judges proceed to rule on the followings:

- By an unanimous decision, the prosecution is unclear on the extent of unusual wealth and how it is linked to abuse of office

- The high court believes Thaksin and family retain control over Shin Corp through their equity structure before and after becoming the prime minister

- The high court rules the conversion of concession fees to excise charges for mobile phone services was deemed favourable to Shin Corp, dampening competition.

- In regard to the adjustment of revenue sharing scheme for AIS pre-paid services, the high court rules that the new scheme was unnecessarily made favourable to the operator.

- Addressing the adjustment of roaming charges paid by AIS to its contractor Telephone Organisation of Thailand, the high court rules the charges were calculated to favour AIS.

- The high court rules in a majority decision that the adjusted rules for the telecom industry were designed to favour Shin Corp.

- In regard to satellite communications, the high court rules the revised contractual provision for ThaiCom deal were manipulated to designate IPStar as a back-up satellite even though its functions are different from ThaiCom. This allows the contractor to avoid launching ThaiCom4.

- The high court rules the decision to adjust satellite contractual provisions resulted in helping Shin Corp and ThaiCom to launch a new satellite without having to bid for a new concession.

- By a majority decision, the jugdes rule the ThaiCom deal was favourable to Shin Corp.

- The high court rules that Shin Corp, state concessionair holding the majority stakes in ThaiCom, diluted its equity in the satellite communications without the approval of the Cabinet.

- By a majority decision, the judges rule the equity dilution was favourable to Shin Corp.

- The high court finds the decision to allow ThaiCom to earmark an insurance claim from damaged ThaiCom3 satellite to lease a foreign satellite instead of launching a back-up satellite was arbitrary.

- By a majority decision, the judges rule such arbitrary decision to favour Shin Corp and ThaiCom.

- The high court finds that the approval of Exim Bank loans to Burma was part of the Thai foreign policy.

- It also uncovers that the telecom deal came up after Thaksin met Burmese leaders and that the deal was not in the original talks in Pegu, Burma to promote good neighbourly relations.

- The high court believes the Burmese request to increase the loans from Bt3 billion to Bt4 billion under concessionary terms was destined to pay for services provided by ThaiCom.

- By a majority decision, the judges rules the deal was favourable to Shin Corp and Thaicom.

At 8.15: the judges move to address Thaksin's involvement in benefiting Shin Corp.

The high court finds Thaksin as prime minister and his ministers, including those from Finance, Industry and Information Communication and Technology were directly linked to deals deemed favourable to Shin Corp.

By a majority decision, the judges rule Thaksin abuse his office to benefit Shin Corp, AIS and ThaiCom.

The high court rules Thaksin's wealth is ill-gotten gains. The earnings from the Shin Corp deal to Temasek of Singapore is ill-gotten, hence can be confiscated by the state.

The high court then addresses the ground on asset seizure related to the wealth held by Thaksin's ex-wife.

The judges rule ill-gotten gains in the name of the spouse can be seized.

The judges outline two grounds to seize assets - unusual increase in wealth and abuse of office to beget the wealth.

The judges move to address that the dividend payments can be seized.

The judges say the original stakes owned by Thaksin before assuming office can not be seized.

By a majority decision, the seizable assets confined to dividend payment worth Bt6 billion and the capital gains worth Bt39 billion. The total seizure is Bt46 billion.

-- The Nation 2010-02-26

[newsfooter][/newsfooter]

[whistleblower]

Why did they only take 46.363 bill. Because the tax man want's his bit + he has more court case's in the pipe line. By the time they have finished with him, and his family, they will get the lot. Might take a year or two but mark my word's.

What an ignorant comment

Is it <deleted> an ignorant comment!!!! probably the most honest and true comment so far!. let me guess you believe the money seized will be distributed amongst the poor?????

[Cayenne]

Just out of curiosity but now that the court has found Thaksin of illegally using his position to favor Shin Corp, will there be further punishments beyond just seizure of assets?

[hunglikea]

One court case down, now what about the rest?

Abuse of civil rights, extrajudicial killings and his outstanding 2 year penal servitude?

[whistleblower]

Thaksin slams 'very political' Thai court ruling

BANGKOK: -- , February 26, 2010 (AFP) - Former Thai premier Thaksin Shinawatra said in a video speech from exile in Dubai Friday that a court ruling confiscating more than half of his wealth was "very political" and a "joke for the world".

-- ©Copyright AFP 2010-02-26

Published with written approval from AFP.

[newsfooter][/newsfooter]

As opposed to lying about visiting China for the Olympic opening ceremony and doing a runner?????

[elcent]

... and court costs and charge for all the security that has become necessary....

that, or part of it will be considered by the courts additionally to the calculation of interest

[sloopy]

Sounds fair and reasonable to me. But 30m Billion (when/if he gets it) plus what is stashed away o/s is still plenty enough to cause HAVOC

[britmaveric]

Abuse of civil rights, extrajudicial killings

Unlikely because the entire govt would have to turn itself in.

[A_Traveller]

Process-wise, does Thaksin have any rights to appeal the decision to any higher level of Thai court??? Or is this verdict the last stop on the judicial circuit???

Most certainly, if he has or can find any recourse whatsoever, it would seem most likely he will pursue it...

Not many people, especially Thaksin, are likely to willingly accept a verdict taking 46 billion baht out of their pockets...

P.S. - My question does not imply any support for the individual involved. I'm just hoping somewhere, somehow this can all be put behind the country for its own good and future. There has to be an end somewhere....

There is a 30 day window for Thaksin's legal team to file an appeal, however it must be based on 'new facts', additional evidence of consequence which was not presented in the original pleadings, or, IIRC specific areas of law.

Regards

Edited February 26, 2010 by A_Traveller

[Ricardo]

I hope Thaksin can accept this, as he said he would before the final verdict was announced, and let Thailand move forward.

agreed

Indeed, he can always get it back once he returns as PM!! :D

The image of a future PM-Thaksin, happily taxing the poor to repay himself his former wealth, would seem fully in-character.

[Old Man River]

There is a tax claim to follow, claiming illegal tax evasion.

It seems to me that any tax claim must be computed on the excess of the sales price, reduced by the amount of the profits confiscated, over his basis in the stock. To compute the tax on the original sales price would be double-dipping.

That is a good point. It will be interesting to see how the TRD handles this.

[spongeman]

I hope Thaksin can accept this, as he said he would before the final verdict was announced, and let Thailand move forward.

Thaksin will continue to cast a shadow over Thailand for as long as he he alive, thats for sure.

[whistleblower]

Why do all the papers insist that Thaksin is in exile?????? He is on the run from a two year prison sentence. Can all the western criminals in Pattaya now say they are not on the run but in exile?????

[caf]

All's quiet at the moment but wait until the Lao Khao kicks in to the peasant lovers of Thaksin!

Was rather amusing seeing his cronies blubbing over the loss of their stolen cash.

Fair do's!

PEASANT lovers of Thaksin. ???

You like the class structures of society, Professor

[Robbie Dye]

My question is - where does this cash go now? I sort of said it'll go to infrastructure, healthcare etc - and got shot down bigtime - for posting rules i can't say why

Let us hope that this very sensible judgment will put out the flames of violence and let us all get on with our lives in the land of Smiles.

[tonglen]

I think the interests should be paid by the banks. Aren't they the ones that got them?

When your bank account gets frozen the bank will of course continue to credit the account with accrued interests.

There's a huge difference in the interest rates. While the banks may pay something like 5%, in a court case 17% plus can be charged. Look at credit card interest rates to get you a clue.

Unfortunately credit cards charge compounded interest. Banks charge simple interest. The calculation is far different.

[elcent]

Abuse of civil rights, extrajudicial killings

Unlikely because the entire govt would have to turn itself in.

Today, PM Abhisit announced to re-investigate the killings. The Ministry of justice clearly stated that many stories are true.

This will honor an international arrest warrant in a jiffy.

[Sparkles]

46 Billion is small change. The 76b is not his total fortune.

I read somewhere that in 2007 he had 530 Billion baht. Yes, 530. It may have been more, because these "rich lists" never tell the whole story. Sure, he may have lost some of that with football clubs, but we are talking smaller sums.

Anyone with his money and acumen will have made sure that a large lump is in Bermuda or a Basel bank and that it was spread around ages ago into all sorts of offshore places and ghost companies. He may be chuckling now.

This is speculation on my part, and should not be taken as criticism or legal fact. But, anybody who thinks that he will be eating boiled race next week is badly mistaken

Eddy

One football club He sold Manchester City with a massive profit.

[FunkyGuru]

:D

All of the above for the Judges. After all the rule of law prevailed.

[sloopy]

Sounds fair and reasonable to me. But 30m Billion (when/if he gets it) plus what is stashed away o/s is still ample to cause HAVOC.

[hammered]

My question is - where does this cash go now? I sort of said it'll go to infrastructure, healthcare etc - and got shot down bigtime - for posting rules i can't say why

Let us hope that this very sensible judgment will put out the flames of violence and let us all get on with our lives in the land of Smiles.

I think a lot of people feel that way but know that really it wont. Thaksin probably wont stop and then there are the issues of equality and a shaky government and other things. The short to medium term future is likely not ging to see poltical harmony

[A_Traveller]

There is a tax claim to follow, claiming illegal tax evasion.

It seems to me that any tax claim must be computed on the excess of the sales price, reduced by the amount of the profits confiscated, over his basis in the stock. To compute the tax on the original sales price would be double-dipping.

That is a good point. It will be interesting to see how the TRD handles this.

No, in these cases such actions would be based on the original activity, it is after all meant to be a penalty.

Regards