NACC impounds 1.8 billion baht in fake G-to-G rice deals payments

[rooster59]

NACC impounds 1.8 billion baht in fake G-to-G rice deals payments

BANGKOK: The National Anti-Corruption Commission has decided to freeze 1.8 billion baht in partial payments made by a few Thai companies for the supposedly government-to-government rice deals between the Foreign Trade Department and three Chinese companies.

NACC secretary-general Sansern Polajiak told the media on Friday that 15 individuals and companies, including Siam Indiga and Siralai companies were involved in the issuance of 40 cheques worth 1.8 billion baht to the Foreign Trade Department for the rice deals involving three Chinese companies namely Haikou Liangmao Cereals and Oils Trading Company, Hianan Province Land Reclamation Industrial Development and Hainan Land Reclamation Commerce and Trade Group Company.

Mr Sansern noted that only one Chinese state enterprise, China National Cereals, Oil and Foodstuffs Corporation or COFCO,was authorized to enter into G-to-G trade deals. And in this case, he said that the four Chinese firms that signed G-to-G rice deals with the Foreign Trade Department for the purchase of Thai rice were not authorized to make such deals. In other words, the G-to-G rice deals were fake.

Three of the four Chinese companies have demanded the 1.8 billion baht in partial payments for the rice deals back but the payments were impounded pending the completion of this rice controversy. But information from the Bank of Thailand showed that none of the three Chinese firms had ever wired their money from China to Thailand for the rice payments.

The NACC’s probe team has discovered that besides the four Chinese companies, there were over 10 individuals who were involved in the fake G-to-G rice deals.

Sansern said the probe team noted that the cheques issued by the non-buyers of the rice were an important piece of evidence to be used against those responsible for the fake rice deals.

Source: http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/content/163287

-- Thai PBS 2016-05-14

[Reigntax]

So, the have impounded funds that never existed.

Because they were not authorised, they were fake?

Sonuds like the same junta logic, impounding people who committed no crimes and an unauthorised fake government.

[greenchair]

So, the have impounded funds that never existed.

Because they were not authorised, they were fake?

Sonuds like the same junta logic, impounding people who committed no crimes and an unauthorised fake government.

I read it 3 times! !!!

How did they confiscate money that was never paid? ??

And anyway, if they were not authorised to buy it, then the (not paid money ) should be returned immediately as thailand should never have accepted it.

[colinneil]

The mind boggles !! Thai logic at its best !!

[smedly]

So, the have impounded funds that never existed.

Because they were not authorised, they were fake?

Sonuds like the same junta logic, impounding people who committed no crimes and an unauthorised fake government.

something lost intranslation, my interpretation is that they are holding the uncashed cheques

[rubl]

So, the have impounded funds that never existed.

Because they were not authorised, they were fake?

Sonuds like the same junta logic, impounding people who committed no crimes and an unauthorised fake government.

I read it 3 times! !!!

How did they confiscate money that was never paid? ??

And anyway, if they were not authorised to buy it, then the (not paid money ) should be returned immediately as thailand should never have accepted it.

The article is confusing indeed. I can only imagine that the Thai companies issued those cheques now confiscated as they were supposed to be paid by the Chinese counterparts. Possibly, but not sure.

[alant]

the BoT say the money was not wired but I thought that they were paid by cheque. Were the cheques not honoured? Or were they?

What happens if the Chinese authorities say "we acted in good faith, give us back the money...NOW"?

[halloween]

I read it 3 times! !!!

How did they confiscate money that was never paid? ??

And anyway, if they were not authorised to buy it, then the (not paid money ) should be returned immediately as thailand should never have accepted it.

When you say "......as thailand should never have accepted it." do you mean the corrupt PTP ministers who initiated the scheme, or someone else?

[leeneeds]

Fantasy was only for movies

or so i thought ,

[Smarter Than You]

So, the have impounded funds that never existed.

Because they were not authorised, they were fake?

Sonuds like the same junta logic, impounding people who committed no crimes and an unauthorised fake government.

something lost intranslation, my interpretation is that they are holding the uncashed cheques

Your desperation to defend your beloved junta has you conjuring something out of nothing.

There is no logic or reason to this ridiculous witch hunt, only fools see it otherwise.

You backed the wrong horse, your wiggle room is fast disappearing, a day of reckoning approaches.

How bad must it get? At what stage will you concede your error?

[aussieinthailand]

I read it 3 times! !!!

How did they confiscate money that was never paid? ??

And anyway, if they were not authorised to buy it, then the (not paid money ) should be returned immediately as thailand should never have accepted it.

When you say "......as thailand should never have accepted it." do you mean the corrupt PTP ministers who initiated the scheme, or someone else?

The disappointing thing here is this article is so poorly written that is quite confusing and ambiguous at the very least, would be nice to have names dates etc...

So we have one Chinese government company that is authorized to buy,( then that deal should have gone ahead as no problem)

Tthen three Chinese non government wanting to buy, The question is Who gives the "authority" to buy rice? The Thai government or the Chinese government? If is the Thai gov' that gives "authority" then there is a problem, BUT As we all well know the Chinese are quite practiced at fake stuff such as baby's milk, fake eggs, truffle's, fake steamed pork buns, and well just about anything you can think of so why not fake Chinese gov company's?

And if the Chinese are the ones who give the "authority" then why would Thailand gov' be accountable?

As for checks being sent then never paid,

So who is in the wrong here?

[Kf6vci]

TBH, I can't claim that my own interpretation of this article coincides with the author's intentions.

• Why use paper checks for high value payments? The rest of the world uses wire payments for a reason!
• The market works best - just allow it to work. (No, government committees and Byzantine rules and red tape is not needed. The only criteria should be a minimum quantity and passing the "screening" regarding the ability to pay for the rice.
• It's a perishable good, degrading by the year.
• The government works s l o w l y. Remember the 4 bn THB available to buy tablet computers for kids? They got the cash. Then the years went buy. All they ever procured were a few hundred tablets of questionable quality. But they spent countless millions mishandling that purchase. ** In the private sector, a company acting this way would go bust pdq, pretty darn quickly!!

[Kf6vci]

Why is the government rejecting all these eager buyers?

Even 40 million THB is a lot of rice. I think they should focus on selling and stop dreaming of "G2G" mega deals. As just another layer would be added, while some companies would be u s i n g the rice.

If Thai companies can make a profit as middle men, then this screams inefficiencies @ this ridiculous process. Henceforth, the taxpayers pay the price for pompous officials messing about. 25 year old traders would do a better job! Sell rice, collect the payment, move on to the next deal.

There is something really weird here. I've seen huge commercial buildings. 80% finished. Take the one opposite the Secretary of Defense's building.
Instead of completing the office building, they can recoup exactly nothing, nada. And the years go by... And with motorcycles, a 12 year old one with 54,000 km @ 13,500 THB while a 2 year old one with 11,000 km can be bought @ 23,000 THB. Which is the better deal?!???

[chainarong]

As I keep on saying Prayut- O transparency a government to government deal , like the h/s rail deal , everything done with no checks or balances, because it's government to government, just how much has gone under the radar, but credit where it's due for picking up this anomaly , however who's paying the ferryman here. ......................................... .

[sanukjim]

So, the have impounded funds that never existed.

Because they were not authorised, they were fake?

Sonuds like the same junta logic, impounding people who committed no crimes and an unauthorised fake government.

I read it 3 times! !!!

How did they confiscate money that was never paid? ??

And anyway, if they were not authorised to buy it, then the (not paid money ) should be returned immediately as thailand should never have accepted it.

And why are they not arresting the Thai participants of this "Fake" deal ? What Thai firms were involved ?

[Winniedapu]

TBH, I can't claim that my own interpretation of this article coincides with the author's intentions.

• Why use paper checks for high value payments? The rest of the world uses wire payments for a reason!
• The market works best - just allow it to work. (No, government committees and Byzantine rules and red tape is not needed. The only criteria should be a minimum quantity and passing the "screening" regarding the ability to pay for the rice.
• It's a perishable good, degrading by the year.
• The government works s l o w l y. Remember the 4 bn THB available to buy tablet computers for kids? They got the cash. Then the years went buy. All they ever procured were a few hundred tablets of questionable quality. But they spent countless millions mishandling that purchase. ** In the private sector, a company acting this way would go bust pdq, pretty darn quickly!!

Thailand has an international reputation for crookedness, vide the partially completed elevated road along Viphadee which resulted in an aeroplane being impounded in Germany. There was something of a hoo-ha about that as I recall, but the money awarded by the German Court was paid. Couldn't finagle their way out of that because it wasn't a Thai court.

I am reminded of the Abhisit government's instruction to the proposed lottery card scheme, that the government had changed it's mind after contracts had been signed, and that the responsible department should find some justification for cancelling the contract in the fine print of the contract itself or in the compliance (the actual instruction reported by the Englsih-language newspapers of the day was; "find a reason to cancel it"). Also a huge amount was with-held from a builder of a new expressway some years ago. The government demanded the department find a reason to withold (as I recall, several billion baht) and the reason that they came up with was that several light poles on the expressway were a metre short - a total value about 1.5 million baht and despite the contractor committing to fixing it. Apologies if I have some of the fine detail wrong, I'm speaking from memory.

I'm also reminded of the Canadian business partner of Thaksin, who sued Thaksin for theft and fraud. The case was repeatedly delayed for trivial reasons by the Thai courts (iirc, in one instance just because Thaksin and his lawyers didn't bother to show up, which should have resulted in a default judgment in favour of the plaintiff who had travelled from Canada for the hearing). Ultimately, the courts said the statute of limitations had expired, which surprised nobody and came as a shock only to the plaintiff. Som nam na for doing business in Thailand - with anybody.

Crookedness is baked into the Thai consciousness, they can't help it, it's automatic behaviour.

Any foreign company which chooses to do business in Thailand needs to factor in losses from cheating, as the Australian Gold Mining company featured in the newspapers recently is in the process of finding out. I predict the government will sieze the assets on some pretext or other, then sell them off at fire-sale prices to a nice Thai company who'll come up with some way to 'express their gratitude' in the time-honoured Thai Army manner.

It's the Thai way. Always worked before Somchai, bound to work again... stupid foreigners.

Winnie

Edited May 14, 2016 by Winniedapu

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

If I remember the tortured explanation of all this previously, the main point was, there supposedly was never meant to be any actual transfer of Thai rice to the Chinese, or not much, at any rate.

The whole thing was allegedly a scam to pretend to sell to the Chinese for a very low "G-to-G" price, and then turn around and hand the rice over to Thai middlemen and/or connected types, who'd then re-sell it into the Thai domestic market and make tidy profits in the process.

So that may explain why the money trail involving the Chinese entities is murky at best. Although presumably, the Chinese were going to get some cut of the action for their cooperation in facilitating the deals.

[The Deerhunter]

The mind boggles !! Thai logic at its best !!

Or poor reporting. Several things do not make sense. Unauthorized surely means "did not have permission to....." Fake surely means "Did not happen" but I suppose it could sometimes mean "without legal authorization but proposed to look like it was correctly and legally authorized to proceed." Not sure about holding the money but perhaps the deals were arranged as if to be international sales but someone local was just buying rice on the cheap but lying that it was for an export deal that they had been already paid for. Which might explain why the banking records were quoted to show the money was never was received from the overseas buyers ...... thereby making it a fake export G-to-G deal????. Whatever, but some of these news items might have made sense in Thai until badly translated for us.

[sendintheclowns]

I'm new to all this rice scandal thing. I read somewhere, I think that it was The Economist or Wikipedia ( both unreliable sources of information, I know, compared to your sources, Sir).

My sources reported that the rice scandal was a commodities speculation developed by Mr. T., and implemented by his sister, both of whom the sunn shines out of you know where. That does NOT make me an apologist for the junta. I do get the impression that some posters get all their news from TV forums.

[Winniedapu]

So, the have impounded funds that never existed.

Because they were not authorised, they were fake?

Sonuds like the same junta logic, impounding people who committed no crimes and an unauthorised fake government.

Indeed. If the Chinese companies were not authorised to make deals on behalf of the Chinese Government, then surely that is a matter for the Chinese government, not the Thai NGO who wants to morph it into a corruption case.

And if the companies paid money for rice which the current government is not prepared to provide, surely the Thai government is obliged to return the money?

In other words, if the Chinese govt defrauded thee Thai elected government of the day, how is that Yingluck's fault? And if thee Chinese companies paid money in good faith, how are we supposed to view the Thai governments default on the deal?

I may not have all the relevant facts of course, but this sounds like a bit of junta government dishonesty more than it sounds like corruption or negligence by the elected prime minister who was thrown out by a coup d'etat which was - indubitably treason as the law stood at the time and as it still stands now.

Winnie

Edited May 14, 2016 by Winniedapu

[phoenixdoglover]

I'm pretty sure that pounding your head repeatedly into the wall would be more productive than attempting to unravel this news account.

Perhaps one of the other news outlets will make sense of it.

[marcusd]

I read it 3 times! !!!

How did they confiscate money that was never paid? ??

And anyway, if they were not authorised to buy it, then the (not paid money ) should be returned immediately as thailand should never have accepted it.

When you say "......as thailand should never have accepted it." do you mean the corrupt PTP ministers who initiated the scheme, or someone else?

The disappointing thing here is this article is so poorly written that is quite confusing and ambiguous at the very least, would be nice to have names dates etc...

So we have one Chinese government company that is authorized to buy,( then that deal should have gone ahead as no problem)

Tthen three Chinese non government wanting to buy, The question is Who gives the "authority" to buy rice? The Thai government or the Chinese government? If is the Thai gov' that gives "authority" then there is a problem, BUT As we all well know the Chinese are quite practiced at fake stuff such as baby's milk, fake eggs, truffle's, fake steamed pork buns, and well just about anything you can think of so why not fake Chinese gov company's?

And if the Chinese are the ones who give the "authority" then why would Thailand gov' be accountable?

As for checks being sent then never paid,

So who is in the wrong here?

Three of the four Chinese companies have demanded the 1.8 billion baht in partial payments for the rice deals back but the payments were impounded pending the completion of this rice controversy. But information from the Bank of Thailand showed that none of the three Chinese firms had ever wired their money from China to Thailand for the rice payments.

This is how I interpret this. The Thai and Chinese Govt made deals. However some companies offered CHEQUE deposits. No money was wired.

Now the CORRUPT Chinese companies (who incidentally can teach Thailand a thing or two) who issues a deposit cheque in lieu of WIRED TRANSFERS are trying to say THAILAND DEFAULTED so Thailand must pay

Hahaha Thailand is losing its BEST friend now. Money makes lots of enemies FAST

[Srikcir]

Three of the four Chinese companies have demanded the 1.8 billion baht in partial payments for the rice deals back

If payments were made by check, then cancel the checks. Why would it be necessary to demand the checks back?

All very confusing as to the aspect of corruption.

The deals with the four Chinese companies seem to have been done with the knowledge of the Chinese government. One was identified as a Chinese state-owned enterprise; yet a G-2-G deal necessarily disqualifies state-owned companies. That doesn't mean the other three were unrelated to the Chinese government or operated without its knowledge in the rice deal. The fact that all four coordinated the sale through Thailand's Foreign Trade agency who was coordinating the G-2-G deal directly with the Chinese government implies Chinese government approval.

In terms of a G-2-G fake deal there is a vital fact missing - there has been no cooperation by the Chinese government to assist the Thai junta government in gathering any information that would attest corruption on the Chinese side of the deal. That would seem odd given China's recent aggressive pursuit against corporate corruption in China.

In fact the Prayut government has accededthe Thai government cannot fully develop the case for corruption because it cannot query the alleged chinese companies involved. Prayut's evidence of corruption seems to consist of innuendoes and speculation. But that's all that's needed under the Junta justice system. This case is a jurisprudential mess and might more reflect a hasty political goal than a legitimate law enforcement objective.

[rubl]

So, the have impounded funds that never existed.

Because they were not authorised, they were fake?

Sonuds like the same junta logic, impounding people who committed no crimes and an unauthorised fake government.

Indeed. If the Chinese companies were not authorised to make deals on behalf of the Chinese Government, then surely that is a matter for the Chinese government, not the Thai NGO who wants to morph it into a corruption case.

And if the companies paid money for rice which the current government is not prepared to provide, surely the Thai government is obliged to return the money?

In other words, if the Chinese govt defrauded thee Thai elected government of the day, how is that Yingluck's fault? And if thee Chinese companies paid money in good faith, how are we supposed to view the Thai governments default on the deal?

I may not have all the relevant facts of course, but this sounds like a bit of junta government dishonesty more than it sounds like corruption or negligence by the elected prime minister who was thrown out by a coup d'etat which was - indubitably treason as the law stood at the time and as it still stands now.

Winnie

Actually the Thai government didn't make a deal with the Chinese government. That's were the scam starts.

Of course this is not Yingluck's fault, her hand-picked capable, knowledgeble, full of potential and suitable Minister of Commerce with some cronies did this. There's a court case against them.

[Winniedapu]

Three of the four Chinese companies have demanded the 1.8 billion baht in partial payments for the rice deals back

If payments were made by check, then cancel the checks. Why would it be necessary to demand the checks back?

All very confusing as to the aspect of corruption.

The deals with the four Chinese companies seem to have been done with the knowledge of the Chinese government. One was identified as a Chinese state-owned enterprise; yet a G-2-G deal necessarily disqualifies state-owned companies. That doesn't mean the other three were unrelated to the Chinese government or operated without its knowledge in the rice deal. The fact that all four coordinated the sale through Thailand's Foreign Trade agency who was coordinating the G-2-G deal directly with the Chinese government implies Chinese government approval.

In terms of a G-2-G fake deal there is a vital fact missing - there has been no cooperation by the Chinese government to assist the Thai junta government in gathering any information that would attest corruption on the Chinese side of the deal. That would seem odd given China's recent aggressive pursuit against corporate corruption in China.

In fact the Prayut government has accededthe Thai government cannot fully develop the case for corruption because it cannot query the alleged chinese companies involved. Prayut's evidence of corruption seems to consist of innuendoes and speculation. But that's all that's needed under the Junta justice system. This case is a jurisprudential mess and might more reflect a hasty political goal than a legitimate law enforcement objective.

I see. So that presumably explains why he is not pursuing compensation through the courts but is proposing to demand the money from her directly. Presumably he dosn't trust the courts to come up with the 'correct' result?

I believe, and always have (well, for the past 2 years anyway) that this pursuit of Yingluck will be a big factor in the ruination of this government.

I see from the news that a vary large majority of Thais do not trust the draft constitution.

I can't imagine why... that nice Mr Prayuth and that nice Mr Meechai both say it's all honest and above board and the government has no intention to prolong his stay in power. What more could anyone ask? They're all good people after all.

Winnie

[Winniedapu]

So, the have impounded funds that never existed.

Because they were not authorised, they were fake?

Sonuds like the same junta logic, impounding people who committed no crimes and an unauthorised fake government.

Indeed. If the Chinese companies were not authorised to make deals on behalf of the Chinese Government, then surely that is a matter for the Chinese government, not the Thai NGO who wants to morph it into a corruption case.

And if the companies paid money for rice which the current government is not prepared to provide, surely the Thai government is obliged to return the money?

In other words, if the Chinese govt defrauded thee Thai elected government of the day, how is that Yingluck's fault? And if thee Chinese companies paid money in good faith, how are we supposed to view the Thai governments default on the deal?

I may not have all the relevant facts of course, but this sounds like a bit of junta government dishonesty more than it sounds like corruption or negligence by the elected prime minister who was thrown out by a coup d'etat which was - indubitably treason as the law stood at the time and as it still stands now.

Winnie

Actually the Thai government didn't make a deal with the Chinese government. That's were the scam starts.

Of course this is not Yingluck's fault, her hand-picked capable, knowledgeble, full of potential and suitable Minister of Commerce with some cronies did this. There's a court case against them.

So pursue the case against him then. Easy.

Of course his name isn't Shinawatra... that might be a show-stopper.

Winnie

[rubl]

So, the have impounded funds that never existed.

Because they were not authorised, they were fake?

Sonuds like the same junta logic, impounding people who committed no crimes and an unauthorised fake government.

Indeed. If the Chinese companies were not authorised to make deals on behalf of the Chinese Government, then surely that is a matter for the Chinese government, not the Thai NGO who wants to morph it into a corruption case.

And if the companies paid money for rice which the current government is not prepared to provide, surely the Thai government is obliged to return the money?

In other words, if the Chinese govt defrauded thee Thai elected government of the day, how is that Yingluck's fault? And if thee Chinese companies paid money in good faith, how are we supposed to view the Thai governments default on the deal?

I may not have all the relevant facts of course, but this sounds like a bit of junta government dishonesty more than it sounds like corruption or negligence by the elected prime minister who was thrown out by a coup d'etat which was - indubitably treason as the law stood at the time and as it still stands now.

Winnie

Actually the Thai government didn't make a deal with the Chinese government. That's were the scam starts.

Of course this is not Yingluck's fault, her hand-picked capable, knowledgeble, full of potential and suitable Minister of Commerce with some cronies did this. There's a court case against them.

So pursue the case against him then. Easy.

Of course his name isn't Shinawatra... that might be a show-stopper.

Winnie

In progress as I said

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/886411-three-executives-and-four-firms-indicted-in-fake-g-to-g-rice-deal/

[Winniedapu]

Indeed. If the Chinese companies were not authorised to make deals on behalf of the Chinese Government, then surely that is a matter for the Chinese government, not the Thai NGO who wants to morph it into a corruption case.

And if the companies paid money for rice which the current government is not prepared to provide, surely the Thai government is obliged to return the money?

In other words, if the Chinese govt defrauded thee Thai elected government of the day, how is that Yingluck's fault? And if thee Chinese companies paid money in good faith, how are we supposed to view the Thai governments default on the deal?

I may not have all the relevant facts of course, but this sounds like a bit of junta government dishonesty more than it sounds like corruption or negligence by the elected prime minister who was thrown out by a coup d'etat which was - indubitably treason as the law stood at the time and as it still stands now.

Winnie

Actually the Thai government didn't make a deal with the Chinese government. That's were the scam starts.

Of course this is not Yingluck's fault, her hand-picked capable, knowledgeble, full of potential and suitable Minister of Commerce with some cronies did this. There's a court case against them.

So pursue the case against him then. Easy.

Of course his name isn't Shinawatra... that might be a show-stopper.

Winnie

In progress as I said

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/886411-three-executives-and-four-firms-indicted-in-fake-g-to-g-rice-deal/

Sorry, no time, I'm old already. I can't justify commenting on what appears to be a purposely disingenuous statement.

Winnie

Edited May 14, 2016 by Winniedapu

[rubl]

Actually the Thai government didn't make a deal with the Chinese government. That's were the scam starts.

Of course this is not Yingluck's fault, her hand-picked capable, knowledgeble, full of potential and suitable Minister of Commerce with some cronies did this. There's a court case against them.

So pursue the case against him then. Easy.

Of course his name isn't Shinawatra... that might be a show-stopper.

Winnie

In progress as I said

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/886411-three-executives-and-four-firms-indicted-in-fake-g-to-g-rice-deal/

Sorry, no time, I'm old already. I can't justify commenting on what appears to be a purposely disingenuous statement.

Winnie

I understand, junta bashing didn't work here I guess.

[candide]

In China, there are different levels of government. Central, regional, local, etc.... The central government is not involved in all decisions and transactions, otherwise it would be impossible to manage the country. Also for Chinese people I know, a State owned company is considered the same as government.

Difficult to find out what these organisations are, but some of them are at the regional level (Hainan land ....) and may well be government organisation at the regional level.