MALAYSIA’S SUBCONTRACT CULTURE AND THE CHINA HITMAN CRIME LEGAL STORY
In 2019, there was a case in Nanning, China, businessman Tan Youhui hired a hitman for $282,000 (£218,000) to kill his competitor. The hitman subcontracted. That subcontractor subcontracted again. And again. By the fifth layer, the final “hitman” sat in a cafe with the target and said: “Let’s fake your death for the photo.”
It became a complicated legal case, but the Court eventually ruled that all six men from the businessman to the final “hitman” were guilty and sentenced to jail. Because under the law, the crime was complete the moment intent, contract, and payment were made, even if the murder never happened.
But for accounting under IFRS 15 standards is different; revenue only exists when performance obligations are satisfied. Hence, for this case:
- Tan Youhui (the customer): Paid but received zero service thus entitled to refund from the first hitman.
- All hitmen (the suppliers): Collected cash without delivering must reverse revenue, recognize it as contract liability.
- The last hitman: Provided a fake deliverable (photo) that was a non-performance under IFRS 15.
This case sounds eerily familiar with Malaysia’s project culture. The government approves a budget. The main contractor takes a cut. Then another layer. Then another. By the time it reaches the final subcontractor, there’s barely enough left to actually do the work. The rakyat, the real customer, end up with a “fake photo” instead of real value. All contractors received the payment even have not done the work but when things happened (like explosion, highway didn't completed or building collapsed) all shifted the blame and denial responsibility.
Budgets can be spent, invoices can be issued, but without delivery, the rakyat inherit only empty promises.
Question: Should we measure government projects by money spent or by value delivered?
Disclaimer
The views and opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official stance of Kritik.com.my. As an open platform, we welcome diverse perspectives, but the accuracy and integrity of contributed content remain the responsibility of the individual writer. Readers are encouraged to critically evaluate the information presented.