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
Minister of Labor Hung Sun-han (洪申翰) on April 9 said that the first group of Indian workers could arrive as early as this year as part of a memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the Taipei Economic and Cultural Center in India and the India Taipei Association. Signed in February 2024, the MOU stipulates that Taipei would decide the number of migrant workers and which industries would employ them, while New Delhi would manage recruitment and training. Employment would be governed by the laws of both countries. Months after its signing, the two sides agreed that 1,000 migrant workers from India would
In recent weeks, Taiwan has witnessed a surge of public anxiety over the possible introduction of Indian migrant workers. What began as a policy signal from the Ministry of Labor quickly escalated into a broader controversy. Petitions gathered thousands of signatures within days, political figures issued strong warnings, and social media became saturated with concerns about public safety and social stability. At first glance, this appears to be a straightforward policy question: Should Taiwan introduce Indian migrant workers or not? However, this framing is misleading. The current debate is not fundamentally about India. It is about Taiwan’s labor system, its
On March 31, the South Korean Ministry of Foreign Affairs released declassified diplomatic records from 1995 that drew wide domestic media attention. One revelation stood out: North Korea had once raised the possibility of diplomatic relations with Taiwan. In a meeting with visiting Chinese officials in May 1995, as then-Chinese president Jiang Zemin (江澤民) prepared for a visit to South Korea, North Korean officials objected to Beijing’s growing ties with Seoul and raised Taiwan directly. According to the newly released records, North Korean officials asked why Pyongyang should refrain from developing relations with Taiwan while China and South Korea were expanding high-level
Japan’s imminent easing of arms export rules has sparked strong interest from Warsaw to Manila, Reuters reporting found, as US President Donald Trump wavers on security commitments to allies, and the wars in Iran and Ukraine strain US weapons supplies. Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s ruling party approved the changes this week as she tries to invigorate the pacifist country’s military industrial base. Her government would formally adopt the new rules as soon as this month, three Japanese government officials told Reuters. Despite largely isolating itself from global arms markets since World War II, Japan spends enough on its own
RSS