MORE REVEALED IN FANOURAKIS’S COMPANY TAX EVASION PROBE

MBABANE –   Financial investigators reportedly found that the address where Unionlet (Proprietary) Limited was registered to be operating  from was in fact a site for a well-known poultry business owned by MP Royal Fanaourakis.

The company is suspected of tax evasion and money laundering as monies from outside the country would be allegedly deposited into its bank accounts and transferred to various individuals in different parts of the world. A large amount of money was allegedly paid to well-known arms manufactures and this raised concerns.
The Mtfongwaneni Member of Parliament (MP) is a Director of Unionlet (Proprietary) Limited, together with Mark Ranger, who is a British national. The information about the company is contained in the application filed by the director of public prosecutions DPP to restrain an amount of E6.2 million belonging to the company.

Accounts

Head of the Asset Forfeiture Unit in the office of the DPP, Elsie Matsebula, told the court  that the circumstances were not clear whether Unionlet was trading or not.  She said it was the active bank accounts with a turnover amounting to millions that signalled that the company was trading but that was not supported by what was happening on the ground.

Matsebula told the court that a lease was obtained, which confirmed the registered office of Unionlet as Portion 12 Farm 281, known as Lozindaba Shopping Complex in Manzini. “The financial investigators visited the said address and found that this was a site of a well-known poultry business that Fanourakis runs named Ngwane Poultry. It is the poultry business operating at this address,” submitted the head of Asset Forfeiture Unit.

Employee

She said enquiries were made at Ngwane Poultry about the location of Unionlet company offices and one male employee working at the poultry by the name of Nkosikhona Nxumalo, indicated that he did not know, but it was Fanourakis who could assist with the issue.  The investigator, according to Matsebula, instructed Nxumalo to call Fanourakis.

“When Fanourakis was called, he instructed Nxumalo to show the investigator his office which was situated at the back of the shop. Fanourakis gave information that the files of Unionlet are not in the said office, but he removed them to his home,” narrated Matsebula. The investigator was then reportedly led to the office, which was small with a desk and some empty cabinets. The court was told that, according to the investigators, there were no signs whatsoever, indicating that these were offices of Unionlet.

The head of the Asset Forfeiture Unit further brought it to the attention of the court that Unionlet, in the first six years filed returns reflecting that it was not trading. “However, during the said tax years, the company ran bank accounts that were receiving monies on behalf of the company. In the last two tax years being 2020 and 2021, the company filed returns that reflected it was trading. However, a  huge discrepancy exists between the cash flow reflected in the bank accounts when compared to that declared by the company to the tax authority,” Matsebula argued.

The returns filed for the tax year 2020, as per Matsebula, reflected that the company had non-current assets in the form of property, plant and equipment to the value of E11 432  and current assets totalling E5 998 731 in the form of cash and equivalents.

Assets

It was further highlighted to the court that the returns filed for the tax year 2021 reflected that the company had non- current assets in the form of property, plant and equipment to the value of E9 344 and current assets totalling E7 182 633 in the form of cash and equivalents. “Both filed returns failed to reflect common business expenses like payment of salaries, electricity, lease payments and travel costs to mention few.

The returns boasted of huge long-term loans termed director loans and associated company loans,” said Matsebula.
The court was told that it was difficult to foresee how a business would earn income without incurring costs. “The anomalies led to the inference that there was a lot of malice when the returns were completed. Such returns are usually filed by individuals who file for the sake of receiving status of having complied with taxation laws, when they have in fact not complied, as opposed to honest declaration in compliance with the duty to pay tax,” averred Matsebula.

Funds

She said the circumstances revealed that Unionlet was a shell company that was registered so that it could open accounts in the Kingdom of Eswatini that were utilised to receive huge funds, which were mostly transferred offshore for the utilisation of Ranger and his relatives. It was further her submission that the total benefit from the alleged criminal activity amounted to E62 816 909.47, which was calculated as 27.5 per cent gross income.

Post your comment

Your name:

Your e-mail address:

Add your comments:

Please enter the code you see in the image:

Image:

Code: