The turbulence surrounding Mega International Commercial Bank and the hefty fine levied on its New York branch has been going on for almost a month. The most recent explanation offered for the incident is that it was a “typographical error.”
The Executive Yuan’s task force overseeing the Mega Bank case has revealed that credit transactions between the bank’s Panama and New York branches in 2014 reached a total of US$491 million, but the report from the New York branch to the New York Department of Financial Services stated that the amount was mistakenly given as US$4.491 billion, and that this resulted in a misunderstanding.
Reading between the lines, the implication is that Mega Bank has been wrongfully given an excessive fine. The problem with this explanation is that it is lacking in persuasiveness and has only made the public even more curious about the bank’s dealings.
The financial report was in English, with the amount likely written as “491 million” or “4.491 billion,” which is very different from, and clearer than how it would be rendered in Chinese, in which 491 million would be written as 4.91 yi (100 million, 億), while 4.491 billion would be written as 44.91 yi. There is a huge difference between these two ways of writing it, and it is not a matter of a simple typo.
Even if the numbers were written using Arabic numerals, there would also be a difference of an extra decimal and three zeros, and there is very little chance that this would happen by mistake.
Furthermore, accounting requires that debit and credit balance out, which in itself provides an automatic control of how the sums flow.
Finally, most modern accounting software has functions to prevent mistaken input.
This is why the idea that a typo can occur in a bank accounting system that must focus on accuracy, and that the mistake would remain undiscovered for such a long time is utterly inconceivable. It also raises reasonable suspicions that the whole input mistake is the result of a lack of follow-up and lax controls.
Any process including an audit and a review would be able to discover this kind of mistake, and it is hard to believe that Mega Bank’s reports would not be subjected to any kind of checks before they were submitted. It is very likely that such a mistake would be the result of a lack of detailed and comprehensive planning.
Newly appointed Mega Financial Holding Co chairman Michael Chang (張兆順) is an experienced accountant and it is very unlikely that he would not understand this reasoning.
Furthermore, if this is really only a matter of a typo, that would mean that the US fine of US$180 million is also a mistake, and Mega Bank should do all it can to overturn the decision. It would only be reasonable to expect that the bank would not pay the fine just to put the whole affair at rest and live with what would in that case be the untruthful accusation of being guilty of money laundering. However, there are no signs that the bank is about to make such a move.
In addition to highlighting the bank’s diffidence, how would such an illogical approach be able to convince the general public?
Lai Chen-chang is a former Taiwan Solidarity Union legislator.
Translated by Perry Svensson
Taiwan stands at the epicenter of a seismic shift that will determine the Indo-Pacific’s future security architecture. Whether deterrence prevails or collapses will reverberate far beyond the Taiwan Strait, fundamentally reshaping global power dynamics. The stakes could not be higher. Today, Taipei confronts an unprecedented convergence of threats from an increasingly muscular China that has intensified its multidimensional pressure campaign. Beijing’s strategy is comprehensive: military intimidation, diplomatic isolation, economic coercion, and sophisticated influence operations designed to fracture Taiwan’s democratic society from within. This challenge is magnified by Taiwan’s internal political divisions, which extend to fundamental questions about the island’s identity and future
The narrative surrounding Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s attendance at last week’s Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit — where he held hands with Russian President Vladimir Putin and chatted amiably with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — was widely framed as a signal of Modi distancing himself from the US and edging closer to regional autocrats. It was depicted as Modi reacting to the levying of high US tariffs, burying the hatchet over border disputes with China, and heralding less engagement with the Quadrilateral Security dialogue (Quad) composed of the US, India, Japan and Australia. With Modi in China for the
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has postponed its chairperson candidate registration for two weeks, and so far, nine people have announced their intention to run for chairperson, the most on record, with more expected to announce their campaign in the final days. On the evening of Aug. 23, shortly after seven KMT lawmakers survived recall votes, KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) announced he would step down and urged Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕) to step in and lead the party back to power. Lu immediately ruled herself out the following day, leaving the subject in question. In the days that followed, several
The Jamestown Foundation last week published an article exposing Beijing’s oil rigs and other potential dual-use platforms in waters near Pratas Island (Dongsha Island, 東沙島). China’s activities there resembled what they did in the East China Sea, inside the exclusive economic zones of Japan and South Korea, as well as with other South China Sea claimants. However, the most surprising element of the report was that the authors’ government contacts and Jamestown’s own evinced little awareness of China’s activities. That Beijing’s testing of Taiwanese (and its allies) situational awareness seemingly went unnoticed strongly suggests the need for more intelligence. Taiwan’s naval
RSS