After OBI Pharma last week issued a statement apologizing for failing to register sales of shares by one of its major shareholders as required, people are wondering if other companies listed on the local bourse have also broken the law and should come under scrutiny.
OBI Pharma on Wednesday said that senior finance manager Chang Sui-fen (張穗芬) had failed to register stock trading activities by Alpha Corporate Holdings Ltd, after investigators found the British Virgin Islands-registered company sold OBI Pharma shares worth several hundred million New Taiwan dollars in October last year, which Chang allegedly concealed.
This violated the declaration procedure for publicly listed companies in Taiwan regarding their shareholding changes, and OBI Pharma is likely to face a fine of between NT$240,000 and NT$2.4 million (US$7,423 and US$74,234) under the Securities and Exchange Act (證交法).
OBI Pharma shares have gone into free-fall since Feb. 21, when the firm announced that second and third-phase clinical trial results of a new breast cancer vaccine showed “no statistical significance,” followed by insider-trading allegations involving a number of high-ranking executives and Academia Sinica President Wong Chi-huey (翁啟惠).
The firm said it would begin an internal investigation and take appropriate action in a bid to limit the fallout, but that has not been enough to stave off criticism after media outlets reported that OBI Pharma chairman Michael Chang (張念慈) was a key figure in Alpha Corporate Holdings.
Investigators are still trying to clarify if the British Virgin Islands entity is a shell company set up by Michael Chang to hide his investment profits and whether Chang Sui-fen was under pressure from her superiors to conceal the change in the company’s shareholding structure.
However, questions have also been raised about whether regulators have turned a blind eye to an increasing number of local businesses that have sought shelters from tax laws in places such as the British Virgin Islands, the Cayman Islands and other tax havens.
Samoa and Mauritius are also on the “best” tax haven-list for Taiwanese to register offshore companies. Interestingly, another of OBI’s major shareholders is a Taiwanese company registered in Samoa whose representative is Yang Shih-chien (楊世緘), a national policy adviser to President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九).
Not all Taiwanese companies registered overseas engage in illegal activities. Many Taiwanese businesses set up overseas-registered entities when the government relaxed restrictions on business investments in China, a move that was aimed at helping them contain the risk of those investments affecting their home market operations. Nowadays, many individuals and companies set up offshore entities to enjoy lower tax rates on capital gains, while a few firms use overseas registries or shell companies to hide assets from tax authorities, help launder the proceeds of criminal activities or conceal misappropriated wealth.
In the case of OBI Pharma, financial authorities and investigators need to find out if high-ranking executives or major shareholders used offshore entities to avoid taxation and financial oversight. However, what was once a single company’s problems are seemingly growing into a regulatory issue and more than just an insider-trading scandal.
If the government does not act swiftly to fix shortcomings in the taxation system and cannot move forcefully enough against the illegal use of offshore companies based in tax havens, it will invite suspicion that Taiwan is supporting income inequality, tax evasion, money laundering and other irregular activities.
The Chinese government on March 29 sent shock waves through the Tibetan Buddhist community by announcing the untimely death of one of its most revered spiritual figures, Hungkar Dorje Rinpoche. His sudden passing in Vietnam raised widespread suspicion and concern among his followers, who demanded an investigation. International human rights organization Human Rights Watch joined their call and urged a thorough investigation into his death, highlighting the potential involvement of the Chinese government. At just 56 years old, Rinpoche was influential not only as a spiritual leader, but also for his steadfast efforts to preserve and promote Tibetan identity and cultural
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Former minister of culture Lung Ying-tai (龍應台) has long wielded influence through the power of words. Her articles once served as a moral compass for a society in transition. However, as her April 1 guest article in the New York Times, “The Clock Is Ticking for Taiwan,” makes all too clear, even celebrated prose can mislead when romanticism clouds political judgement. Lung crafts a narrative that is less an analysis of Taiwan’s geopolitical reality than an exercise in wistful nostalgia. As political scientists and international relations academics, we believe it is crucial to correct the misconceptions embedded in her article,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,