Thai Democrat Trial - Court Hears Complex Tale Of 'Retroactive' Receipts

[webfact]

DEMOCRAT DISSOLUTION TRIAL

Court hears complex tale of 'retroactive' receipts

By Kornchanok Raksaseri

The Nation

Money was circulated to produce receipts for Democrat Party campaign boards, a witness in the Bt29-million "scandal" told the Constitution Court yesterday.

Meanwhile, the party denied knowledge of subcontractors used to produce the boards and that the receipts were issued retroactively.

During the fourth hearing in the case, in which the Election Commission's witnesses testified, Democrat chief adviser Chuan Leekpai, adviser Banyat Bantadtan and Pheu Thai spokesman Prompong Nopparit also attended.

After the hearing, Chuan left for Ramathibodi Hospital with a backache cause by an earlier injury during physical exercise.

The Democrat Party has been accused of not using the Bt29 million it received from the Election Commission's political party development fund to produce campaign boards, as it proposed. It has been questioned over possible siphoning off of money through an advertising company. If the party is found guilty, the Constitution Court might dissolve it.

Discussions yesterday centred on suspect receipts and the sizes of the campaign boards.

Magnet Sign's Wasinee Thongjua said she received an order to produce 50,000 campaign boards, which cost the party Bt180 each.

However, she did not produce the boards but only bought the raw materials, including the polypropylene panels and the colours, then hired five other companies to screen-print the boards for Bt40 each. She delivered the completed boards in several lots and the party paid for each lot individually.

Wasinee said the problem arose when the Democrat Party wanted receipts for the campaign boards. The party had not discussed the matter before, otherwise Wasinee would have charged 3 per cent more because she would have had to pay tax, she said.

To acquire the receipts retroactively, Wasinee contacted her suppliers and subcontractors and separated the charges for the materials and printing services. She asked Kerdmek Company to issue receipts worth Bt2 million while the suppliers issued receipts worth close to the actual service charges, she said.

After receiving the receipts, the Democrat Party transferred the money to those companies. And the companies withdrew the money for Wasinee to return to the party, she said.

Wasinee said she received less than Bt9 million but did not say how much. The party did not pay her for boards it had already cancelled although they were produced.

Wasinee said she did not issue the receipts in the name of Magnet Sign to reduce the tax amount it would have to pay according to an advanced tax rate. (The more its revenue, the higher the tax rate.)

Wasinee said Thongchai Dolsrichai was the contact person with the Democrats who paid the money to her.

Although she did not know his position, Wasinee believed Thongchai had a prominent position in the Democrat Party as his name/tag was on the front of his office in the same area as party executives.

Answering questions from Democrat MP Wirat Kalayasiri, Wasinee said she had also produced campaign boards for Chart Pattana, Chart Thai and Thai Rak Thai parties. None of them had signed contracts for the jobs.

Wirat also pointed out that Wasinee never notified the party she would hire other companies to produce the boards.

On the size of the polypropylene panels used to produce the campaign boards, Wasinee said it was 1.30 x 2.45 metres, which was a standard size suitable for the printers.

The Election Commission accused the party of not spending the money on the campaign boards in the size it proposed to the EC.

Suchart Kerdmek, owner of a company subcontracted by Wasinee, was summoned to testify yesterday, but he claimed sickness and the court allowed him to postpone his testimony.

Chayanut Kanchananan, manager of Sinwattana Enterprise Partnership, said she succeeded to the position from her late brother. The firm stopped operations after his death. However, the Revenue Department notified it that it had not paid tax on more than Bt10 million in revenue. So she filed a complaint to police that the company's name had been used falsely.

Democrat lawyer Bundit Siripant denied interfering in the Bt29-million case, while Pheu Thai's Prompong expressed concerns over witnesses' security.

-- The Nation 2010-09-07

[RKASA]

First rule in cases like this, never admit wrong doing and there seems to be a list of it here by the witnesses.

Transferring money around to produce reciept's is out and out fraud.

"Wasinee said the problem arose when the Democrat Party wanted receipts for the campaign boards. The party had not discussed the matter before, otherwise Wasinee would have charged 3 per cent more because she would have had to pay tax, she said." Well that makes under the table OK then.

[gregb]

First rule in cases like this, never admit wrong doing and there seems to be a list of it here by the witnesses.

Transferring money around to produce reciept's is out and out fraud.

"Wasinee said the problem arose when the Democrat Party wanted receipts for the campaign boards. The party had not discussed the matter before, otherwise Wasinee would have charged 3 per cent more because she would have had to pay tax, she said." Well that makes under the table OK then.

The question here is not whether or not some merchants tried to evade the reporting requirements. The big question is whether or not the Democrats are guilty of an infraction. Everyone knows that businesses in Thailand routinely ignore the tax reporting requirements. It is a minor issue, and one that every single one of us has faced every single time we purchase anything here.

At worst, this would get the merchants a slap on the wrist, and most likely it will simply be ignored because it is so pervasive anyway.

No, they are doing exactly the right thing. Be completely honest about what happened so the judges can make an informed decision on whether or not they are guilty. From what I have heard, it doesn't sound like the Democrats truly did anything wrong. The apparently questionable transactions all seem to have logical reasons that do not involve anything fraudulent, just the normal machinations that go on in Thai businesses everyday.

As Samak learned, perjury can have serious consequences. Lying here to try and cover up such small infractions would be an incredibly bad move.

[whybother]

First rule in cases like this, never admit wrong doing and there seems to be a list of it here by the witnesses.

Transferring money around to produce reciept's is out and out fraud.

"Wasinee said the problem arose when the Democrat Party wanted receipts for the campaign boards. The party had not discussed the matter before, otherwise Wasinee would have charged 3 per cent more because she would have had to pay tax, she said." Well that makes under the table OK then.

Do you mean transferring money to pay for something and then asking for a receipt is fraud?

It sounds like Wasinee did something wrong by not charging tax in the first place.

[Thai at Heart]

First rule in cases like this, never admit wrong doing and there seems to be a list of it here by the witnesses.

Transferring money around to produce reciept's is out and out fraud.

"Wasinee said the problem arose when the Democrat Party wanted receipts for the campaign boards. The party had not discussed the matter before, otherwise Wasinee would have charged 3 per cent more because she would have had to pay tax, she said." Well that makes under the table OK then.

Do you mean transferring money to pay for something and then asking for a receipt is fraud?

It sounds like Wasinee did something wrong by not charging tax in the first place.

And it just great to know that the current government of the day apparently doesn't want receipts for it's party spending.

Only in the merry go round that is Thai corruption would a political party do business without having receipts to account for its expenditure. What hope do we have if the parties themselves actively avoid VAT?

Luom VAT chai mai?

[Robby nz]

It would seem the whole case is based on the size of the advertising boards produced.

I wonder if the Dems specified a size or just assumed they would get the correct size as it should be known to those who do this kind of work?

On the size of the polypropylene panels used to produce the campaign boards, Wasinee said it was 1.30 x 2.45 metres, which was a standard size suitable for the printers.

The Election Commission accused the party of not spending the money on the campaign boards in the size it proposed to the EC.

It would seem that the above is a very small transgretion particularly if as I have read the signs were actually smaller.

Surely that would be a disadvantage not an advantage.

What happened with sub contractors after the order had been placed would be out of the controls of those placing the order as it seems they were not told this would happen.

Asking for receipts is surely standard business practise and would be needed in this case to show the EC how the money had been spent.

The fact that the lady and others were trying to evade tax can hardly be blamed on the Dems.

[gregb]

And it just great to know that the current government of the day apparently doesn't want receipts for it's party spending.

Actually, if you read the article, she was shocked because the Democrats *DID* want receipts. Apparently, it was only the Chart Thai and Thai Rak Thai parties who never expected her to do such trivial things like follow the law.

The nerve of the current government to actually ask for a receipt from her.

[ballpoint]

First rule in cases like this, never admit wrong doing and there seems to be a list of it here by the witnesses.

Yes, she should have lied to the court, or at least tried to cover it up, just like the TRT/PPP

Transferring money around to produce reciept's is out and out fraud.

"Wasinee said the problem arose when the Democrat Party wanted receipts for the campaign boards. The party had not discussed the matter before, otherwise Wasinee would have charged 3 per cent more because she would have had to pay tax, she said." Well that makes under the table OK then.

Maybe you need to read the statement again. The Democrats get a quote for 50,000 sign boards. They like the quote and make the order. When payment is due they ask for a receipt, which surprises the sign company, (maybe the other parties don't ask for them?) "If we'd known they wanted a receipt we would have charged them more, because now we have to pay tax" says the company. The company asks its sub contractors for receipts for the sign components. The Democrats pay the sub conrtractors directly, based on those receipts. The sub contractors transfer the money they owe to the sign company. The only thing the Democrat Party did "wrong" was not to specify they wanted a receipt at the start, which would seem to be a given thing. The defence lawyer needs to start asking questions like "Have you produced signs for any other party". "Did they get receipts?"

[asiawatcher]

What a waste of a courts time... Another much to do about nothing exercise in futility. Stop wasting the publics money!

[chantorn]

First rule in cases like this, never admit wrong doing and there seems to be a list of it here by the witnesses.

Yes, she should have lied to the court, or at least tried to cover it up, just like the TRT/PPP

Transferring money around to produce reciept's is out and out fraud.

"Wasinee said the problem arose when the Democrat Party wanted receipts for the campaign boards. The party had not discussed the matter before, otherwise Wasinee would have charged 3 per cent more because she would have had to pay tax, she said." Well that makes under the table OK then.

Maybe you need to read the statement again. The Democrats get a quote for 50,000 sign boards. They like the quote and make the order. When payment is due they ask for a receipt, which surprises the sign company, (maybe the other parties don't ask for them?) "If we'd known they wanted a receipt we would have charged them more, because now we have to pay tax" says the company. The company asks its sub contractors for receipts for the sign components. The Democrats pay the sub conrtractors directly, based on those receipts. The sub contractors transfer the money they owe to the sign company. The only thing the Democrat Party did "wrong" was not to specify they wanted a receipt at the start, which would seem to be a given thing. The defence lawyer needs to start asking questions like "Have you produced signs for any other party". "Did they get receipts?"

Agree with you that Democrats is innocent. The sign company should go to jail for not filling tax. End of story.

[rubl]

First rule in cases like this, never admit wrong doing and there seems to be a list of it here by the witnesses.

Yes, she should have lied to the court, or at least tried to cover it up, just like the TRT/PPP

Transferring money around to produce reciept's is out and out fraud.

"Wasinee said the problem arose when the Democrat Party wanted receipts for the campaign boards. The party had not discussed the matter before, otherwise Wasinee would have charged 3 per cent more because she would have had to pay tax, she said." Well that makes under the table OK then.

Maybe you need to read the statement again. The Democrats get a quote for 50,000 sign boards. They like the quote and make the order. When payment is due they ask for a receipt, which surprises the sign company, (maybe the other parties don't ask for them?) "If we'd known they wanted a receipt we would have charged them more, because now we have to pay tax" says the company. The company asks its sub contractors for receipts for the sign components. The Democrats pay the sub conrtractors directly, based on those receipts. The sub contractors transfer the money they owe to the sign company. The only thing the Democrat Party did "wrong" was not to specify they wanted a receipt at the start, which would seem to be a given thing. The defence lawyer needs to start asking questions like "Have you produced signs for any other party". "Did they get receipts?"

Agree with you that Democrats is innocent. The sign company should go to jail for not filling tax. End of story.

Innocent till proven guilty, innocent, or absolved.

[animatic]

First rule in cases like this, never admit wrong doing and there seems to be a list of it here by the witnesses.

Transferring money around to produce reciept's is out and out fraud.

"Wasinee said the problem arose when the Democrat Party wanted receipts for the campaign boards. The party had not discussed the matter before, otherwise Wasinee would have charged 3 per cent more because she would have had to pay tax, she said." Well that makes under the table OK then.

Do you mean transferring money to pay for something and then asking for a receipt is fraud?

It sounds like Wasinee did something wrong by not charging tax in the first place.

And it just great to know that the current government of the day apparently doesn't want receipts for it's party spending.

Only in the merry go round that is Thai corruption would a political party do business without having receipts to account for its expenditure. What hope do we have if the parties themselves actively avoid VAT?

Luom VAT chai mai?

Actually it sounds more like this Wasinee babe tried to slip on by,

simply because receipts weren't mentioned early on. and got caught.

"Wasinee said the problem arose when the Democrat Party wanted receipts for the campaign boards.

The party had not discussed the matter before, otherwise Wasinee would have charged 3 per cent more

because she would have had to pay tax, she said."

The Dems rep asked for receipts, Wasinee saw her profit margin shrinking and paniced.

She then started back tracking and finally got herself mostly out of the deal enough to save some cash.

But now this stupid woman's machinations comes back to haunt the Dems

because she ALSO got the poster SIZES wrong...

She seems alike a rank amateur and now is causing

the whole country pain because she couldn't just suck up her mistake.

[Siam Simon]

First rule in cases like this, never admit wrong doing and there seems to be a list of it here by the witnesses.

Transferring money around to produce reciept's is out and out fraud.

"Wasinee said the problem arose when the Democrat Party wanted receipts for the campaign boards. The party had not discussed the matter before, otherwise Wasinee would have charged 3 per cent more because she would have had to pay tax, she said." Well that makes under the table OK then.

Do you mean transferring money to pay for something and then asking for a receipt is fraud?

It sounds like Wasinee did something wrong by not charging tax in the first place.

And it just great to know that the current government of the day apparently doesn't want receipts for it's party spending.

Only in the merry go round that is Thai corruption would a political party do business without having receipts to account for its expenditure. What hope do we have if the parties themselves actively avoid VAT?

Luom VAT chai mai?

Actually it sounds more like this Wasinee babe tried to slip on by,

simply because receipts weren't mentioned early on. and got caught.

"Wasinee said the problem arose when the Democrat Party wanted receipts for the campaign boards.

The party had not discussed the matter before, otherwise Wasinee would have charged 3 per cent more

because she would have had to pay tax, she said."

The Dems rep asked for receipts, Wasinee saw her profit margin shrinking and paniced.

She then started back tracking and finally got herself mostly out of the deal enough to save some cash.

But now this stupid woman's machinations comes back to haunt the Dems

because she ALSO got the poster SIZES wrong...

She seems alike a rank amateur and now is causing

the whole country pain because she couldn't just suck up her mistake.

The Dems are quite capable of making up their own excuses .