\n<\/p>\n
SINGAPORE: A corporate service provider linked to two men implicated in Singapore’s S$3 billion (US$2.34 billion) money laundering case admitted on Wednesday (Jun 3) to conspiring with them to lie about tax information.<\/span><\/p>\n Wang Junjie, 43, worked for companies where Su Haijin and Su Baolin were directors, and prosecutors said he knowingly helped create the appearance that one of the companies was profitable despite it having no legitimate business activity in Singapore.<\/span><\/p>\n Su Baolin, a Cambodian national<\/span>, and <\/span>Su Haijin, a Cypriot national<\/span>, were among the 10 offenders convicted and jailed in the <\/span>S$3 billion money laundering case<\/span>, the largest such operation uncovered in Singapore and believed to be one of the largest globally.<\/span><\/p>\n Su Haijin and Su Baolin were each sentenced to 14 months’ jail in April 2024. Authorities seized about S$170 million worth of assets from Su Haijin and about S$72 million from Su Baolin, including luxury properties, cash and high-value items.<\/span><\/p>\n Wang initially intended to contest the charges but indicated on the first day of trial on Tuesday that he wished to plead guilty.<\/span><\/p>\n On Wednesday, he pleaded guilty to two charges of making false representations to the Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore (IRAS) and breaching his duties as a company director.<\/span><\/p>\n Another 13 charges of a similar nature will be taken into consideration for his sentencing, which has been adjourned.<\/span><\/p>\n Deputy Public Prosecutors Grace Teo and Gladys Lim said that Wang, a Singaporean, did not have any accounting qualifications.<\/span><\/p>\n From 2018 to 2023, he was employed by his own company, LW Business Consultancy, as a corporate service provider.<\/span><\/p>\n The consultancy provided clients with corporate secretarial, accounting and taxation services. It also helped clients apply for and renew employment and dependant passes.<\/span><\/p>\n Among its clients were the companies linked to Su Baolin and Su Haijin.<\/span><\/p>\n From 2018 to 2023, Wang acted as the corporate secretary and director of Xinbao Investment Holdings, a company where Su Baolin was a director. From 2018, Wang’s firm charged Xinbao Investment Holdings S$7,500 a year for its services.<\/span><\/p>\n Between 2018 and 2023, Wang was also appointed company secretary and director of Yihao Cyber Technologies, where Su Haijin was a director. Su Haijin told Wang that he would be “just a nominee director” and uninvolved in the company’s operations.<\/span><\/p>\n He helped Su Haijin prepare financial statements for financial years 2019 to 2022.<\/span><\/p>\n On the books, Yihao Cyber Technologies developed software and applications, but investigations later revealed that it did not have a legitimate business operation in Singapore.<\/span><\/p>\n LW Business Consultancy charged Yihao Cyber Technologies S$1,000 per month from 2020, and a few hundred dollars a month from 2018 to 2019. The firm also helped Su Haijin renew his employment pass and his family’s dependant passes.<\/span><\/p>\n Investigations revealed that from 2020 to 2022, Wang and Su Haijin conspired to submit false information to IRAS about the company’s finances.<\/span><\/p>\n Wang filed tax returns that falsely reflected the company’s revenue, gross profits and trade receivables, despite knowing that the figures were not derived using proper accounting methods.<\/span><\/p>\n In one filing made in October 2022 for the company’s 2021 financial year, Wang declared that Yihao Cyber Technologies had revenue of S$804,969 and gross profits of the same amount. He indicated that the company’s total income or loss before donations was S<\/span>$192,924 and the total income or loss after donations was a negative S$102,700. The figures resulted in an estimated tax liability of zero.<\/span><\/p>\n He knew that Yihao Cyber Technologies had no genuine source of revenue in Singapore and did not employ any staff here.<\/span><\/p>\n “The accused admitted that he calculated the figures ‘in any way’ he wanted, as long as his client … approved the final figures. The accused did not conduct any further due diligence on the company,” the prosecution said.<\/span><\/p>\n The false representations to IRAS were intended to make Yihao Cyber Technologies appear profitable, as Su Haijin believed this would improve his chances of obtaining permanent residency in Singapore.<\/span><\/p>\nACTED AS NOMINEE DIRECTOR<\/h2>\n
FALSE INFORMATION SUBMITTED TO IRAS<\/span><\/h2>\n