Singapore Remittance Firm Sued After China Police Freeze Cash
Three Chinese nationals working in Singapore sued a remittance firm after police in the mainland froze money they had transferred home, as China ramps up efforts to root out alleged money laundering and other illicit activities.
www.bloomberg.com
Singapore Remittance Firm Sued After China Police Freeze Cash
- Three Samlit clients file suit following alleged police action
- Samlit denies allegations, says it fulfilled obligations
Three Chinese nationals working in Singapore sued a remittance firm after police in the mainland froze money they had transferred home, as China ramps up efforts to root out alleged money laundering and other illicit activities.
The trio are seeking 347,501 yuan ($48,417) from Samlit Moneychanger Pte, as part of other claims, alleging breach of agreements, according to a suit filed to the city-state’s courts in October and obtained by Bloomberg News. Samlit denied the allegations. It said it fulfilled its obligations and can’t be responsible for what happens after money reaches designated accounts in China, according to court documents.
The seizures comes as China cracks down on what it considers massive crime rings that have extended beyond its shores as more of its citizens leave home. Across Asia, nations from Singapore to Myanmar are grappling with scams and money-laundering cases that have spilled out from the world’s second-largest economy. Singapore in particular is seeing its biggest money laundering case play out with more than S$3 billion ($2.2 billion) of assets confiscated from ethnic Chinese in the city-state so far.
Read more: Suspects Spent Billions in Singapore’s Biggest Laundering Case
Police in China has blocked hundreds of remittances from Singapore, many of them sent by Samlit, a licensed money changer based in the city’s Chinatown area, according to complaints made to authorities in Singapore.
In the lawsuit, Tan Mingshi said Chinese police allegedly froze 250,000 yuan that was transferred into his wife’s bank account in 2022 because of “suspicion of money laundering.” Only after he followed police instructions to return to China and transfer 142,226 yuan to “scam victims” were the remaining funds released, according to court documents.
Peng Fang Fang, another claimant, said she gave S$40,000 to Samlit to send the equivalent of about 195,600 yuan to her account in China, only to have most of it frozen by police. Qi Chao, the third claimant, said most of the S$10,576 moved to his Chinese bank account was frozen as the police investigated his “illegal activities” related to the transfer, according to the court filing.
Like Tan, Peng said she returned to China to answer questions from police. Qi also said he had to comply with instructions from police. Their frozen funds were transferred out of their bank accounts, with Peng notified that this was done by the Chinese police bureau, the lawsuit states. All three said they followed police orders “for fear of criminal consequences,” the suit alleges.
None of the claimants has been accused of any wrongdoing related to the fund transfers, according to their lawyer Pang Khin Wee of Hoh Law Corp. Pang said they are all blue-collar workers who have resided in the city-state for years.
In its defense filed to the court, Samlit said none of the claimants provided “satisfactory” evidence backing their frozen money claims. Samlit and its lawyer didn’t reply to emailed requests seeking further comment.
| Related stories |
|---|
| Singapore Regulator Halts Some Remittance Routes to China |
| China’s Rich Tap Underground Networks to Sneak Their Money Out |
In response to the slew of seizures, the Monetary Authority of Singapore ordered remittance firms to only use banks or operators of a card network such as Union Pay International when transmitting funds to China. The remittance firms had often used overseas agents to save costs, rather than making direct bank transfers, MAS said in a statement last month. The restrictions are in place for three months starting Jan. 1, with a possible extension.
The directive wasn’t related to any specific money laundering concern, the MAS said on its website in December.
The MAS and the Singapore police said at the time they haven’t received any information indicating that remittance companies have been involved in money laundering or scams, or that the funds were frozen because these firms had transfered proceeds from any criminal activity.
Singapore is seeking clarity from China’s government on how remitters can unlock their money, Alvin Tan, a minister of state, said earlier this month. China is the world’s third-largest remittance recipient, netting $50 billion in 2023, according to a December report by the World Bank.
The Chinese embassy and government agencies haven’t responded to queries seeking comment on the situation.
— With assistance from Josh Xiao
*** Not a safe time to have funds in banks lol ***
Freezing, Civil Forfeitures, Unexplained Wealth order's etc = all incentivised as it becomes state or county / provincial funds for services.
Whats the bet over the next 8 yrs we will see the 'great taking' of sorts from anyone who isn't on a taxation at source sort of income process.
