Corporate Services for Your Business in Singapore
WhatsApp
WeChat⌄
Apex Gateway WeChat QR code

Scan to contact us on WeChat

Mobile: +65 8585 9090Email: info@acggroupsg.com
News directory →

NEWS · IRAS · Tax Crime

Key Member Behind Goods and Services Tax Missing Trader Fraud Syndicate Sentenced to Six Years' Imprisonment

IRAS publication date:

Case and status

Luke Giam Zi Hin was sentenced to six years for fraudulent trading, ending proceedings against eight people in a scheme involving approximately S$114 million of fictitious sales. He pleaded guilty during trial to one charge concerning xShine, with another concerning Nagore taken into consideration.

Facts, amounts and outcome

Nagore used forged invoices attributed to at least 12 suppliers. xShine issued at least 127 false invoices worth at least S$46 million between July 2015 and January 2016. For at least 16 invoices, nearly S$7 million was deposited into an exporter’s account to simulate overseas payments. Goods sometimes delivered differed from invoice descriptions or quantities. The paperwork supported nearly S$8 million in fraudulent input-tax claims. Annex B lists the seven co-accused persons’ outcomes below.

How the missing-trader arrangement works

The upstream trader invoices a domestic buyer for goods plus GST but does not remit the collected tax. Intermediate businesses provide a chain of invoices, and the final exporter claims purchase input tax while recording a zero-rated export. Where the upstream tax is missing, paying a downstream refund causes a loss to the revenue. Some cases use nonexistent goods; others repeatedly circulate goods through imports and exports. The case amounts above describe this particular release, not every missing-trader arrangement.

Due diligence and input-tax exposure

The release warns businesses to investigate the commercial substance of purchases and respond to suspicious arrangements. For supplies that a business knew or should have known were part of missing-trader fraud, the cited rule denies input tax and adds a 10% surcharge on the amount denied. Supplier paperwork alone should not replace checks on actual goods, delivery and the commercial purpose of a transaction.

Co-accused outcomes in Annex B

PersonConvicted offencesSentence for those charges
Ang Chee KeongFraudulent trading52 months
Chua Han Soon, AlvinFraudulent trading4 years
Wong Meng FaiFraudulent trading3 years
Lee Chong HoongFraudulent trading3 years
Koh Soo Lin2 fraudulent-trading counts; accounts falsification4 years per trading count; 15 months for falsification
Tan Boon Leong, MarcusFraudulent trading3 years 6 months
Tay Tiong KiongForgery5 months

Per-charge terms are not a new calculation of each person’s aggregate prison sentence.

Official attachments and further guidance

Official source

This report is independently written from the IRAS release dated above. Case status, policy announcements and historical figures refer to that release.

Read the complete IRAS release ↗

More news

Contact Us