In recent two years, the loss of
state assets in SOE restructuring has dominated occupational crime
cases handled by the procuratorial organs in Jiangsu Province. It
is said the total number has reached over millions of yuan.
Although the reasons are complicated, the main tricks used look
something like this.
Trick One: Turn profits into fees for housing, water and
electricity. In this way, enterprises can reduce assets or produce
a zero statement, even making it a loss. Take one enterprise under
the Jiangsu Chuanyuan Group for example. It had been in the state
of non-profit making for quite a long time and was nearly bankrupt.
Yet, even such a poor enterprise hid its business-making
opportunities. During the restructure process, its legal
representative earned 343,300 yuan by making a false report turning
profit into housing rents, water costs and electricity fees, as
well as telephone bills.
Trick Two: Be the legal representatives of both an SOE and private
company concurrently. Yao, one manager in charge of an enterprise
under one group in Jiangsu, had his own private factory secretly.
In this circumstance, both the products and the sales channels of
his private company were all from his state-owned enterprise
without any additional costs at all. Yao also used state assets as
profit and divided them among shareholders even when his private
company did not make any money. By this means, a total of over
800,000 yuan of state assets flowed into his own packet while the
state-owned enterprise turned bankrupt.
Trick Three: Play tricks in the evaluation and restructure report.
One trading company adopted the method of not accounting for its
money properly, pretending instead it was for salaries, turned a
recent profit of 5.28 million yuan into dozens of deposits in bank,
even changing 600,000 yuan into private deposits. In fact, the huge
capital of 5.28 million yuan did not appear in the asset evaluation
report when the enterprise restructured in 2003.
Trick Four: Spend money in the sudden purchase of equipment and
ignore intangible assets. One manufacturing state-owned enterprise
made the decision to buy imported equipment and rebuild old
factories in an effort to consume leftover profit before
restructuring. During the restructure process, again, the
enterprises practiced fraud by saying the newly bought equipment
was out of date and totally ignored the existence of the intangible
assets of its sales channels as well as of its intellectual
rights.
In addition, the procuratorial officials have found that in the
restructuring of some state-owned enterprises, general workers or
worker representatives were excluded. All the materials submitted
were just personal decisions from managers, who were usually legal
representatives. Some even carried out fraud with the help of state
asset evaluation companies. All this has contributed to the huge
loss of state assets in China.
(China.org.cn by Zheng Guihong September 15, 2003)