Shadowy Chinese Firms That Own Chunks Of Cambodia

Interesting BBC piece on exploitation of Cambodia's resources. The only thing that seems to have changed over the past 30 years is the nationality of those doing the exploiting.

In the mid to late 1990s, French and Malaysian investors attempted, often successfully, to take advantage of Cambodian government officials.

Almost 30 years later, it is Chinese investors although they now deal with a far more sophisticated government apparatus as indicated by the increasing wealth disparity between Cambodian government and business figures and the rest of the population.

Looking back at the land speculation deals dressed up as rice farming projects and the favourable airport concession arrangements, one ultimately unsuccessful deal stands out.

In late 1996 and early 1997, there was a grand plan to erect a sound and light show at Angkor Wat. This proposal would have seen management of the temple complex outsourced to a Malaysian conglomerate which would have had full authority over the area. Cambodians were to be excluded from their own temple other than on particular religious holidays. The Malaysian group was to have total control over the content of the sound and light show and would be entitled to make modifications to the temple complex as they erected their equipment and built fencing.

Equally concerning was the plan to build hotels right up to the front of Angkor Wat, a detrimental step that was unlikely to have ever been reversed.

The contract was a particularly one-sided affair with the Cambodians effectively ceding sovereignty over Angkor to a foreign corporation.

The deal reached an impasse and, in the second half of 1997, an economic tsunami hit Asia. A number of Asian economies fell like dominoes commencing with Thailand. Malaysia enacted currency and capital controls, effectively walling itself off from the rest of Asia.  

The economic crisis severely impacted the Malaysian conglomerate and it went home to try to revive its finances. Its grand plans for Angkor Wat came to nothing. The economic crisis had saved what would arguably have been Angkor Wat's destruction.

Today, as tourists return post-Covid to gaze at the wonder of Angkor Wat, they should say a quick thank you to one of the silver linings of the Asian Economic Crisis.

The shadowy Chinese firms that own chunks of Cambodia

October 2023

© PELEN 2023

The content of this publication is intended to provide a general overview on matters which may be of interest. It is not intended to be comprehensive. It does not constitute advice in relation to particular circumstances nor does it constitute the provision of legal services, legal advice or financial product advice.

A Fool and His Money Are Soon Parted

As the Australian Government's Scams Awareness Week closes, it is worth highlighting perhaps one of the oddest scams of recent times.

In Texas last month, the self-proclaimed ‘Money Doctor’, the 80 year-old William Gallagher was sentenced to three life prison terms in Tarrant County for defrauding investors. This is in addition to a 25 year term for similar offences in Dallas County.

The Money Doctor bought time on a Christian radio station where he gave financial advice with a Christian theme, signing off his broadcasts with ‘see you in Church on Sunday’.

One of the most bizarre investments he promoted through his Ponzi scheme was a plan to use a satellite via a company called Hoverlink to shine holographic advertising down to Earth. Over time, Hoverlink morphed from a hoverboard rink to a cancer-curing pharmaceutical to law enforcement body armour before going galactic with its satellite plans.

It was all a scam. Yet people piled into the schemes, all neatly packaged in religious wrapping.

It reminds me of the time I gently nudged ASIC to force a Qld company to issue a supplementary prospectus to protect investors' interests.

A former sportsman who moved into property development was looking to swap his high levels of bank debt for income securities, issued mainly to retirees.

Investor presentations were organised in regional areas, including in church halls, offering returns around 12% p.a.

In my view, this was an attempt to replace sophisticated Big 4-type lenders with unsophisticated investors. A couple of phone calls to real estate agents quickly uncovered that the sales data in the prospectus was somewhat misleading.

The ex-sportsman was on a generous salary and car package and the company had licensed the use of his name at significant annual cost. Given how the company had performed to that time, it was arguable that killing off all these costs and installing a new CEO may have been a better option.

In the end, ASIC forced the issue of a supplementary prospectus and, given the delay, only a paltry sum was raised.

Unfortunately, the company collapsed a number of years later leaving over 150 small creditors out of pocket to the tune of $17 million. It seems the fund raising hadn't ended with the supplementary prospectus. His company was apparently subsequently offering returns as high as 20% p.a. paid monthly to lure investors.

In the end, slow property sales, poor land purchase decisions and mountains of lender debt (some at 30% p.a.) and investor debt brought the company down. Ex-sports personalities don't necessarily make good business people. Cold comfort to those who lost money.

A Christian talk show host promised to enrich clients. His Ponzi scheme bilked them out of millions.

November 2021

© PELEN 2021

The content of this publication is intended to provide a general overview on matters which may be of interest. It is not intended to be comprehensive. It does not constitute advice in relation to particular circumstances nor does it constitute the provision of legal services, legal advice or financial product advice.

Thailand - Investors optimistic about Kingsgate resolution

Judging by the recent run up in the share price of ASX-listed mining company Kingsgate Consolidated Limited, investors may be punting on a successful resolution of its long running dispute with the Thai Government. (Kingsgate also announced that it continues negotiations for the sale of its gold-silver exploration and development project in Chile, which may also be a contributing factor in the share price rise.)

Kingsgate commenced arbitration proceedings against the Thai Government under the Thailand-Australia Free Trade Agreement (TAFTA) in 2017 following the Thai Government's 2016 order suspending mine operations. This is the first significant test of TAFTA's provisions.

In its latest ASX release, Kingsgate states that "negotiations between the Company and the Royal Thai Government are now entering the final stages. Kingsgate has also been advised that the arbitral tribunal is now ready to issue the award after a lengthy period of deliberations".

The parties have jointly requested that "the arbitral tribunal hold the award until 31 October 2021, to allow the parties a short extension to conclude their settlement negotiations."

Interestingly, the 23 September release makes no reference to compensation by the Thai Government for Kingsgate's losses. Kingsgate's Chairman was previously quoted as stating "[t]here is a definition of expropriation in the Tafta agreement and this certainly fulfils that and so we want full compensation.”

The release sets out a non-exhaustive range of steps as part of settlement negotiations. But no reference to compensation. That does not mean that there will be no compensation as part of any settlement but it seems odd that it was not mentioned. A likely sticking point in the negotiations.

Other disputes between the Thai Government and foreign companies have shown how hard it is to extract compensation from the Government, even with the benefit of an arbitral award. Kingsgate's approach presumably takes these difficulties into account.

It will be interesting to see if Kingsgate can conclude a successful resolution and whether the Thai Government will honour any settlement commitments.

Thailand Update – 23 September 2021

October 2021

© PELEN 2021

The content of this publication is intended to provide a general overview on matters which may be of interest. It is not intended to be comprehensive. It does not constitute advice in relation to particular circumstances nor does it constitute the provision of legal services, legal advice or financial product advice.

Covid-19 Land Tax Relief - How Qld and NSW Programs Differ

Covid-19 has shown that Australia is a collection of States and Territories rather than one nation.  

Australia has become a quagmire of different rules for travelling between States. We have seen different rules apply to similar events such as funerals depending on your State.

Land tax relief is another example of State differences.

In Qld, land tax relief is offered to landowners where the ability of the #tenant to pay rent is affected by Covid-19 (and their rent is reduced) and also where the landowner's ability to secure tenants has been affected by Covid-19.

Qld relief is self-assessed.  (Subsequent auditing is likely.)

Qld is also extending the relief to the 2020-21 land tax liability (applications close on 26 February 2021).

(Qld Land Tax Relief Measures)

In NSW, relief is offered to landowners whose tenants can prove Covid-19 financial distress and have been provided rent reduction.

No relief is currently provided to landowners where their ability to secure tenants has been affected by Covid-19.

NSW is approval based rather than self-assessed.

Relief is currently limited to the 2020 land tax liability.

(NSW Land Tax Relief Measures)

Qld clearly has the more generous relief program at this point.

Update - 23 September 2020

NSW has now extended its Land Tax relief program until 31 December 2020.
Rental support measures in NSW to be extended for six months

September 2020

© PELEN 2020

The content of this publication is intended to provide a general overview on matters which may be of interest. It is not intended to be comprehensive. It does not constitute advice in relation to particular circumstances nor does it constitute the provision of legal services, legal advice or financial product advice.

Will Diminishing Income Returns Affect Residential Property As An Asset Class?

Even before Covid-19, lockdowns and social distancing hit our shores, income returns from residential investment properties were looking suspect.

Flat wage growth has limited the ability to raise residential rents. Not applicable in all property markets but as a general principle.

Meanwhile, costs such as rates, water rates, strata levies and land tax continue their relentless march north.

Then add Covid-19 to the mix.

Investors need to continually focus on cost efficiencies to maintain returns.

The linked articles below highlight one opportunity for cost efficiencies.

Professor Fels calls it the Loyalty Tax. I often refer to it as the Lazy Investor Levy.  

Insurance companies rely on customers being lazy and not shopping around for a better deal. Investors who rely on their agents to renew their insurance are unlikely to be getting the best deal.

There are significant cost savings, particularly on landlord protection insurance. Your own insurance company will often offer you a better deal online than in your renewal notice.  

In terms of cost savings, it is the ultimate low hanging fruit.

NSW regulator tackles $3.6b in hidden insurance fees

Lifting the lid on home insurance price gouging

July 2020

© PELEN 2020

The content of this publication is intended to provide a general overview on matters which may be of interest. It is not intended to be comprehensive. It does not constitute advice in relation to particular circumstances nor does it constitute the provision of legal services, legal advice or financial product advice.