- Joined
- Jul 11, 2008
- Messages
- 2,082
- Points
- 48
Temasek CEO Ho Ching has plundered hundreds of million$ in tax dollars, time to retire
July 10, 2017
by Phillip Ang
The appointment of Ho Ching, spouse of PM Lee, as Temasek’s CEO is clearly a conflict of interest. Her multi-million pay package is but one issue.
Despite Ho Ching having no prior relevant experience in managing a portfolio of companies or fund management, former PAP minister/Temasek chairman Dhanabalan was somehow convinced that Ho had “all the qualities necessary to do the job“.
This is akin to saying a butcher could become a top hairdresser overnight. Will Dhanabalan have his hair cut by this hairdresser?
In 2004 when Dhanabalan appointed Ho Ching as CEO, Temasek did not disclose other potential candidates.
The $90 billion question:
Which fund with a $90 billion portfolio would have appointed Ho as CEO?
The biggest joke:
Even a $1 billion fund would have thrown her resume into the bin.
Ho Ching has been credited with increasing Temasek’s portfolio by more than $100 billion since 2004. If something sounds too good to be true, it probably is.
If Ho is really able to create $100 billion out of thin air, investors would have come knocking on her doors. There isn’t any.
The CEO of Temasek is not paid peanuts and Ho Ching’s multi-million remuneration should have been scrutinised by Parliament a decade ago. When the government refuses to disclose the remuneration of Temasek’s top management even in salary bands, eg $1 mil to $5 mil, $5 mil to $20 mil, $20 mil to $30 mil, etc. something appears amiss.
How much tax dollars have been earned by Ho Ching can be easily inferred from pay packages of executives in the fund management industry. (I have queried Temasek Holdings and the PMO but they are probably too pai seh to reply.)
As the CEO of a fund, Ho’s pay package comprises a salary, a percentage of assets under management (AUM) and a bonus (percentage of profits).
Even a small percentage of Temasek’s $242 billion AUM would have likely exceeded the total remuneration of cabinet ministers. For eg, 0.1% of AUM = $242 million, 0.01% of AUM = $24.2 million.
If Ho’s bonus is a percentage of Temasek’s profits, she could have received $100 million even if it’s just 0.1% on Temasek’s average profit of $10 billion. Or $10 million if it’s 0.01%.
Temasek Review 2015:
From March 2008 to December 2008, Temasek sold 3 power generation plants which supplied 90% of total electricity to foreign companies. Were bonuses paid to the CEO and directors directly linked to the $12 billion sale?
In 2008, Temasek’s profit doubled to $18 billion. Were bonuses of all directors linked to Temasek’s $18 billion profit? If so, how much were each director paid?
Temasek publishes a self insulting remuneration formula (TR 2016 pg 49) which does not disclose the actual salaries paid to its CEO, directors and top managment.
In 2013, Temasek reported a 19% jump in the value of its portfolio to $266 billion. Naturally, citizens suspected they were likely to own self pay own self sky high bonuses, especially its CEO Ho Ching.
TOC
Kenneth Jeyaretnam: “Even if the performance fee was just 10% this would mean that Ho Ching could have earned several billion dollars this year.”
Although this is most unlikely, many suspect Ho Ching was rewarded with a bonus amounting to tens of million$ for her ‘wealth creation’ ability.
Singtel, a TLC, rewarded its CEO more than $12 million (based on a $4.20 Singtel share price) in 2015, according to Kenneth Jeyeretnam.
Could the world’s 30th most powerful woman and CEO of Temasek be paid anything less?
In the same year that Temasek’s portfolio value hit a record, former Indian national/CEO of DBS Group Piyush Gupta was paid $10.935 million.
Was it possible for Ho Ching to receive anything less than the pay package of TLC CEOs?
The PAP government has a bad habit of leeching on taxpayers and record shows they have helped themselves to obscene bonuses whenever they could.
In 2008, bonuses of ministers came up to 19 months – excluding the 13th month pay.
And ministerial salaries in 2008 weren’t the highest!
Whichever angle one looks at Ho Ching’s remuneration, she could not have possibly been paid ‘peanuts’ under PAP’s elites-drown-in-tax-dollars government.
Without a doubt, Ho Ching has already earned hundreds of million$ in tax dollars over decades in GLCs. I would strongly suggest that it’s time to stop her leeching activity.
July 10, 2017
by Phillip Ang
The appointment of Ho Ching, spouse of PM Lee, as Temasek’s CEO is clearly a conflict of interest. Her multi-million pay package is but one issue.
Despite Ho Ching having no prior relevant experience in managing a portfolio of companies or fund management, former PAP minister/Temasek chairman Dhanabalan was somehow convinced that Ho had “all the qualities necessary to do the job“.
This is akin to saying a butcher could become a top hairdresser overnight. Will Dhanabalan have his hair cut by this hairdresser?
In 2004 when Dhanabalan appointed Ho Ching as CEO, Temasek did not disclose other potential candidates.
The $90 billion question:
Which fund with a $90 billion portfolio would have appointed Ho as CEO?
The biggest joke:
Even a $1 billion fund would have thrown her resume into the bin.
Ho Ching has been credited with increasing Temasek’s portfolio by more than $100 billion since 2004. If something sounds too good to be true, it probably is.
If Ho is really able to create $100 billion out of thin air, investors would have come knocking on her doors. There isn’t any.
The CEO of Temasek is not paid peanuts and Ho Ching’s multi-million remuneration should have been scrutinised by Parliament a decade ago. When the government refuses to disclose the remuneration of Temasek’s top management even in salary bands, eg $1 mil to $5 mil, $5 mil to $20 mil, $20 mil to $30 mil, etc. something appears amiss.
How much tax dollars have been earned by Ho Ching can be easily inferred from pay packages of executives in the fund management industry. (I have queried Temasek Holdings and the PMO but they are probably too pai seh to reply.)
As the CEO of a fund, Ho’s pay package comprises a salary, a percentage of assets under management (AUM) and a bonus (percentage of profits).
Even a small percentage of Temasek’s $242 billion AUM would have likely exceeded the total remuneration of cabinet ministers. For eg, 0.1% of AUM = $242 million, 0.01% of AUM = $24.2 million.
If Ho’s bonus is a percentage of Temasek’s profits, she could have received $100 million even if it’s just 0.1% on Temasek’s average profit of $10 billion. Or $10 million if it’s 0.01%.
Temasek Review 2015:
From March 2008 to December 2008, Temasek sold 3 power generation plants which supplied 90% of total electricity to foreign companies. Were bonuses paid to the CEO and directors directly linked to the $12 billion sale?
In 2008, Temasek’s profit doubled to $18 billion. Were bonuses of all directors linked to Temasek’s $18 billion profit? If so, how much were each director paid?
Temasek publishes a self insulting remuneration formula (TR 2016 pg 49) which does not disclose the actual salaries paid to its CEO, directors and top managment.
In 2013, Temasek reported a 19% jump in the value of its portfolio to $266 billion. Naturally, citizens suspected they were likely to own self pay own self sky high bonuses, especially its CEO Ho Ching.
TOC
Kenneth Jeyaretnam: “Even if the performance fee was just 10% this would mean that Ho Ching could have earned several billion dollars this year.”
Although this is most unlikely, many suspect Ho Ching was rewarded with a bonus amounting to tens of million$ for her ‘wealth creation’ ability.
Singtel, a TLC, rewarded its CEO more than $12 million (based on a $4.20 Singtel share price) in 2015, according to Kenneth Jeyeretnam.
Could the world’s 30th most powerful woman and CEO of Temasek be paid anything less?
In the same year that Temasek’s portfolio value hit a record, former Indian national/CEO of DBS Group Piyush Gupta was paid $10.935 million.
Was it possible for Ho Ching to receive anything less than the pay package of TLC CEOs?
The PAP government has a bad habit of leeching on taxpayers and record shows they have helped themselves to obscene bonuses whenever they could.
In 2008, bonuses of ministers came up to 19 months – excluding the 13th month pay.
And ministerial salaries in 2008 weren’t the highest!
Whichever angle one looks at Ho Ching’s remuneration, she could not have possibly been paid ‘peanuts’ under PAP’s elites-drown-in-tax-dollars government.
Without a doubt, Ho Ching has already earned hundreds of million$ in tax dollars over decades in GLCs. I would strongly suggest that it’s time to stop her leeching activity.
