Tabung Haji Hibah Atau Hiba

---

TV AL-HIJRAH: "ANALISIS: TABUNG HAJI: HIBAH ATAU HIBA?" – Datuk Zaiton & Dato' Dr Daud VS Najib Saahari & RAKYAT
Dari status FB Finaz Yunus: "Buat mereka yang menonton untuk mencari salah, PASTI kesalahan akan menjadi bahan utama status FB mereka 😁"
Saya terasa. Guilty

It may have been a coincidence that the programme was aired the night before PRK Rantau but it did not have an impact that PH desired. Rakyat dah cerdik termasuk anak muda

At the beginning of the video, Finaz said:
"Mujahid Yusof Rawa mendedahkan akaun Tabung Haji yang diaudit berakhir 31 Disember 2017 telah merekodkan aset kesuluruhan berjumlah RM70.3b manakala liabiliti adalah RM74.4b. Ini bermakna jumlah liabiliti telah melebihi aset dan pemberian hibah sebanyak 6.25% pada tahun tersebut juga telah melanggar Akta TH 1995. Bekas pengerusi Tabiung Haji Abdul Azeez Abdul Rahim bagaimanapun tampil mempertahankan bahawa badan itu membayar hibah kepada pendeposit mengikut syarat yang ditetapkan. Jelas beliau, laporan kewangan sejak 2015 hingga 2017 telah mencatatkan lebihan aset berbanding liabiliti. Jadi, sebagai rakyat sudah pasti kita bingung mana satu yang betul ni dan bersandarkan kekeliruan yang berpanjangan ini lah kami bawa topik Tabung Haji buat kali ketiga tahun ini."
This is a half-truth or lie that PH keeps repeating: that TH had declared hibah despite liabilities exceeding assets in past years. PH's well known tactic is to keep repeating the same lie until it becomes the truth in people's minds

The amount recorded in the accounts was RM70.3b but the Realisable Asset Value (RAV) was RM74.7b therefore ASSETS EXCEEDED LIABILITIES. Mujahid juga membohong bahawa hibah bagi tahun 2017 telah melanggar Akta TH 1995. The realistic value of assets would be the RAV and not the book value for the purpose of hibah. That would be in accordance with and in the spirit of Akta Tabung Haji FOR THE BENEFIT OF DEPOSITORS. It is also common sense

In this respect, Najib Saahari correctly pointed out Section 22(2)(a) Akta TH 1995:
"… aset Kumpulan Wang tidak kurang daripada jumlah liabiliti Kumpulan Wang, amaun yang kena dibayar kepada pendeposit dikira seolah-olah kena dibayar dengan serta-merta…"
This means use the realisable value. This means using RAV is correct and not in breach of Akta TH. If, for example, an asset is stated at cost of RM10 million in the accounts but the market value is RM15 million, what should you expect to receive if you were to sell it? Yes, it would be RM15 million i.e. the realisable value. Only an idiot would sell it at RM10 million. If the book value of your assets is RM10 million (due to accounting standards) but the Realisable Asset Value is RM15 million and your liabilities are RM12 million, do the value of your assets exceed or not exceed your liabilities? Yes, you would say the value of your assets exceed your liabilities by RM3 million unless you are a brainless mahacai. A brainless mahacai will say liabilities exceed assets by RM2 million because he is willing to sell the assets for RM10 million instead of RM15 million

Sebab itu Kerajaan PH dan Mujahid tolak desakan tubuh RCI untuk siasat dakwaan mereka terhadap pengurusan TH yang lama. 
It has to also be stressed that the previous TH management had been consistent in the use of RAV whereby although certain investments (e.g. THHE and Pelikan) were not impaired in the accounts, they were impaired for the purpose of arriving at RAV i.e. lower than book value, meaning less distributable profit and hibah

If the previous TH management was dishonest or unethical, the book value per accounts (higher than RAV) would have been used. So even though in the audited accounts those investment were not impaired, they were impaired in arriving at RAV. On the other hand, the action of the new TH management and MOF are very questionable transferring assets to SPV at book value instead of RAV, which is why the proposed Sukuk and RCPS-I faced a valuation problem (and the RCPS-I was subsequently aborted). 
ADAKAH HIBAH TAHUN2 LEPAS HARAM

FINAZ [5:53]: "Ini antara kekeliruan banyak pihak. Adakah benar, Datuk, pemberian hibah 4 tahun berturut-turut ini menyalahi Akta Tabung Haji sedangkan yang memperakui akaun, yang mengaudit laporan kewangan [adalah] Jabatan Audit Negara, dan dibentangkan di Parlimen. Komen Datuk bagaimana?" 
ZAITON: "Ahhmmm… kita tidak komen apa… uhh… uhhh… kata orang tu fakta-fakta yang diambilkira bila keputusan lama dibuat. Tetapi setelah kami semak semula akaun tersebut, memang kami dapati 4 tahun berturut-turut memang aset itu kurang dari liabiliti. Itu pendapat... [ ]… bila kita tengok balik akaun tu… memang… memang jelas."
Zaiton tidak menjawab soalan samada hibah tahun-tahun lepas menyalahi atau tidak menyalahi Akta TH. Beliau hanya mengatakan akaun menunjukkan aset tidak melebihi liabiliti. 
If Zaiton had read the past Annual Reports (2015 and 2016) she would have known that among the factors considered was the REALISABLE ASSET VALUE (RAV) of those assets. Faktor RAV ini juga telah diambilkira oleh Jabatan Audit Negara dan Ernst & Young. Kenapa Zaiton tidak boleh komen faktor2 yang diambilkira oleh pengurusan TH yang lama? Sebab tak baca Laporan Tahunan dan board minutes atau sebab memang tidak menyalahi Akta TH? 
Kalau benar menyalahi Akta TH, ia adalah kesalahan besar dan RCI perlu ditubuhkan untuk menjalankan siasatan berdasarkan dakwaan tersebut kerana ia juga melibatkan integriti Jabatan Audit Negara. Siasatan RCI juga akan membantu untuk memastikan kaedah yang mana satu lebih tepat (book value atau RAV) untuk menilai aset bagi tujuan pemberian hibah. 
REALISABLE ASSET VALUE (RAV)
Najib explained why the use of RAV was justified but Zaiton could only respond with waffle

ZAITON [14:30]: "Realisable Asset Value mesti dizahirkan dalam Penyata Akaun. Masalahnya RAV tersebut tidak dizahirkan. Kalau kita tengok akaun.. ahh… pada penghujung 2017, aset RM70 billion, pendeposit RM74 billion, negative reserve. Reserve negative ni kalau rugi lah ya, kalau untung, positif – ditolak daripada balance deposit tadi. Mana boleh kita tolak? Itu bukan kita punya modal. Itu duit pendeposit. Jadi kerugian tidak boleh ditolak dari duit pendeposit. Itu masalahnya. Dan itu kalau kita semak akaun 2017, di mana Realisable Asset Value tersebut? Tidak dizahirkan dalam akaun."
FINAZ concluded: "Itu masalahnya, tidak dizahirkan"
Sebab tidak dizahirkan dalam akaun? What kind of answer is that? Sepatutnya Zaiton cuba memberi jawapan berdasarkan tafsiran Akta TH, yang tidak langsung menyatakan "Realisable Asset Value mesti dizahirkan dalam Penyata Akaun"

Nonetheless, if you look at the Annual Reports of 2015 and 2016, the RAV is mentioned in "Ulasan Operasi" i.e. ia "dizahirkan". Zaiton was not lying that RAV for 2017 "tidak dizahirkan dalam akaun" but it was a deceptive half-truth which is as good as a lie. Ia tidak dizahirkan di dalam penyata akaun tidak bermaksud ia tidak wujud

In this respect, a very important point to note is that TH has not published its 2017 Annual Report (Laporan Tahunan) – only the statutory Financial Statements (Penyata Akaun) with limited information was published but not the Annual Report

This is what was mentioned in the 2015 and 2016 Annual Reports:
"… the Realisable Asset Value (RAV) as at 31 December 2015 stood strong at RM64.74 billion…" – Ulasan Operasi, Laporan Tahunan TH 2015 page 127
"TH Realisable Asset Value (RAV) as at 31 December 2016 remained strong at RM67.90 billion…" -- Ulasan Operasi, Laporan Tahunan TH 2015 page 102
(Rujuk gambar)

Mana Laporan Tahunan 2017? Kenapa takut nak publish dan bentang di Parlimen

I tried to obtain at least the draft 2017 Annual Report (which had been done by the previous management) but was told that it was under OSA. (Can anyone verify this? Najib, tolong tanya Aunty Ton. She gave you her mobile number kan?). The statutory financial statements does not contain additional useful information and commentaries that would have been provided in the Annual Report like in previous years

Why would the Annual Report be under OSA instead of being published and tabled to Parliament as has been done every year and, I believe, as required by Pekeliling Perbendaharaan PA3.1? The answer is obvious: Because they don't want the public to have information that would officially contradict PH's malicious allegations

ROSOT NILAI (IMPAIRMENT) TAHUN 2018
ZAITON [16:11]: "Sebenarya kejatuhan nilai pelaburan TH tidak bermula dari tahun 2018. Ia bermula dari tahun 2012. Saya beri contoh. Kita beli Felda Global di tahun 2012 RM4.62. Di akhir tahun 2014 ia telah jatuh ke RM2.18. Di akhir tahun 2016 ia jatuh kepada RM1.55 ya. Jadi bila datang 2018 bila kita buat rosot nilai dia cumulative. Daripada sebelum sebelum ni tak buat, sekali buat. Itu yang impact dia besar. So kejatuhan tidak kerana 2018 ya. Kita terpaksa tengok nilai sebenar Realisable Asset Value pada 2018. Ini ikut Financial Reporting Standard. Financial Reporting Standard ni sebenarnya cuma cermin -- cermin menunjukkan kalau hari ini kalau saya nak.. uhh… bubarkan semua aset dan saya nak kembalikan duit deposit secara serta merta -- seperti yang dikatakan Encik Najib tadi -- saya kena jual aset saya. Saya jual aset saya, saya dapat RM70b. Tapi tanggungan saya kepada pendeposit RM74b. Jadi saya nak bayar pendeposit macam mana? Itu persoalannya ya. Jadi, jatuh 2018 itu cuma satu contoh. Saya boleh bagi contoh2 lain dalam aset Tabung Haji tapi kita tak cukup masa ya. Tapi contoh yang paling ketara ialah Felda Global itu sendiri sudah jatuh dari 2012 jadi jangan salahkan 2018."
Lie #1: Zaiton said that impairment on FGV was made only in 2018. The truth is that the 2017 accounts had indeed included impairment not only in the accounts but also in computing RAV for the purpose of hibah. 
Lie #2:  Zaiton also lied that when she said "Saya jual aset saya, saya dapat RM70b". She correctly said "terpaksa tengok nilai sebenar Realisable Asset Value (RAV)" but then subsequently follos up with a lie or an error when she said, "saya dapat RM70b" because the RAV was actually RM74.7b. Beliau mengaku RAV adalah asas yang betul bila jual aset tapi membohong bila mengatakan akan dapat RM70b – angka RAV yang betul adalah RM74.7b bukan RM70b. RM70b adalah book value, bukan RAV. Maka kalau jual aset, TH akan dapat RM74.7b bukan RM70bn. Mudah faham kenapa saya kata beliau membohong

PROPOSED SUKUK FAILED THE SPPI (Solely Payments of Principal and Interest) TEST
There is an accounting problem with the proposed Sukuk and Zaiton failed to answer Najib's point that based on the original terms of the Sukuk, it would fail the SPPI test. The new TH management made a huge blunder thinking that they could wipe out negative reserves from the Balance Sheet by creative accounting vis-à-vis transfer of assets (at book value) to the SPV in return for Sukuk and RCPS-I totalling RM19.9 billion with (i) no periodic cashflow (ii) no government guarantee and (iii) underlying value of assets worth RM10 billion less than the Sukuk and RCPS-I

Zaiton gave a flimsy and false argument to counter Najib's assertion that the Sukuk would fail the SPPI test. Najib correctly said that the Sukuk's value of RM19.9b was questionable because of the lack of periodic and regular cashflow of principal and interest. Zaiton rebutted by claiming that the Sukuk had a yield. Yield? Does Zaiton not realise that sukuk with a proposed yield of even 30% would fail the SPPI test if there is no certainty of cashflow? It is not about yield on paper but CASHFLOW

In hoping that the rakyat would not judge prematurely, she then accidentally shot herself in the foot when she arrogantly said the Sukuk had not yet been issued. She actually dug a bigger hole for herself

ZAITON [26:45]: "I think ini sebenarnya prasangka. Sebab sukuk tersebut belum issue pun. Sukuk tersebut akan diterbitkan sebelum akhir bulan Mei 2019. Jadi untuk kita kata benda tu tidak dalam dokumen, dokumen tu belum dibuat pun. Itu adalah jangkaan. Kita belum tahu lagi. Itu setakat speculation. Kita tak tahu ya."
Eh? What??? Assets were transferred to the SPV under Lim Guan Eng's charge before the Sukuk was issued? Which means, the amount is just a receivable in TH's accounts without any contractual obligations and no guarantee of getting full payment. (Remember TH's media statement that the Sukuk and RCPS-I would not be guaranteed by government)

So Najib was spot on to say that the government was not legally bound to make good the amount that the SPV is unable to pay TH but yet the assets have already been transferred. Zaiton even said "Kita belum tahu lagi ya". Bagus lah tu, transfer aset walaupun tak tahu samada akan terima bayaran penuh dan tak tahu nilai Sukuk yang akan memberi kesan besar kepada pendeposit

Najib was correct based on what TH / PH government had announced to the public. But u-turns will of course be welcome. Until then, it is a fact that the sukuk would fail the SPPI test and would be impaired by about RM10b and it's all too obvious this is the main reason the RCPS-I was aborted and the issue of Sukuk delayed

Zaiton then tried to justify the RM19.9b value of the proposed Sukuk by giving verbal assurance that the government would come up with the money but air liur is worthless. Of course now we hear that the government will pump in RM17.8 billion but this is to cover their own blunder in managing TH and the economy and has nothing to do with TH's past performance pre-GE

Anyway, they are now in a spot because this issue has been exposed publicly, so they have no choice but to change or come up with new terms and conditions of the transfer of assets and Sukuk such that TH will get their full RM19.9b. Otherwise they will be cursed by the Muslim community for their deception, false promises and lies – just another reason that PH will be only a one term government

So well done Najib for forcing the issue. Exposing this on TV may have saved TH from losing RM10 billion if TH and PH are not too proud to rectify their blunder even if they won't admit to it

These bunch of clowns were so confident that their over-simplistic creative accounting scheme would work that they transferred the assets even before the Sukuk and RCPS-I were issued. They only realised they were in trouble when they were told that the Sukuk and RCPS-I would have to be impaired. TH would merely be replacing a big hole with an even bigger hole. How so? Remember that the assets vs liabilities deficit was only RM4.1 billion at end 2017. Since PH took over, they have caused the deficit to grow to RM10.9 billion. Therefore, at this time, TH accounts would show an amount due from SPV (unsecured receivable) of RM19.9 billion. Already the RCPS-I has been aborted and they are now cracking their heads to amend the T&Cs of the Sukuk to avoid impairment of RM9.9 billion. What was once a negative reserve of RM4.6 billion on "Assets available for sale" has ballooned to a negative reserve of RM9.9 billion due to the Sukuk. So much for the purpose of the SPV being to clean up the Balance Sheet.  B***h nak m****s

ROSOT NILAI TAHUN 2018 TERUK SEBAB SEBELUM INI ROSOT NILAI TIDAK DIZAHIRKAN DALAM AKAUN

ZAITON [29:08]: "Kita tidak mengatakan 2018 tak jatuh langsung. Memang ada sebab tak semua aset dapat dipindahkan kepada SPV. Ada aset2 yang kami simpan yang terus ada rosot nilai dan kami membuat rosot nilai tersebut dalam akaun memang akan nampak. Jadi kami tak pernah kata takde. Tapi kebanyakan rosot nilai adalah macam saya kata tadi adalah dari 2012 tadi. So kita tidak boleh letakkan terus ke 2018. 2018 memang nampak teruk sebab di situ kita membuat penzahiran yang pertama baru orang tahu sebenarnya aset TH tu apa. Sebelum ini tak dizahirkan. Jadi benda tu macam sesuatu yang dah lama di situ tapi tak nampak. Jadi bila kita zahirkan itu sebab 2018 baru nampak segalanya. Dan tanpa pindahan ke SPV tersebut wallahua'lam lama tak dapat bayar hibah pun."
This is an incredible lie. She claims that no impairment had been made since 2012. What a massive lie. 
How do you think reserves became negative? Yes, due to impairment

2015: Reserves = -RM4.0 billion2016: Reserves = -RM4.5 billion2017: Reserves = -RM4.6 billion, Deficit (assets vs liabilities) = RM4.1 billion2018: Deficit = RM10.9 billion 
The negative reserves each year was due to impairment being made. The RM4.1 billion deficit is primarily due to the IMPAIRMENT on assets (yes, including impairment on FGV so Zaiton lied when she gave FGV as an example of an asset not being impaired until only 2018)

The fact is that out of the RM10.9 billion deficit, RM6.8 billion happened during their watch. TH management and PH government are collectively accountable for RM6.8 billion of the deficit. And Zaiton had the gall to lie that "kebanyakan rosot nilai adalah macam saya kata tadi adalah dari 2012 tadi. So kita tidak boleh letakkan terus ke 2018". Yang mana adalah "kebanyakan" – RM4.1 billion atau RM6.8 billion? Mahacai yang tidak berakal akan jawab RM4.1 billion sebab taksub politik

SUMMARY
(i) Mujahid membohong pemberian hibah pada tahun2 lepas menyalahi Akta Tabung Haji 1995. Aset melebihi liabiliti berdasarkan RAV aset. Pemberian hibah tahun2 lepas adalah halal. Khalid Samad bodoh nak mampus mengatakan hibah pada tahun2 lepas adalah "advance payment"

(ii) Zaiton buat-buat tak tahu RAV adalah fakTor diambilkira untuk aset bagi tujuan pemberian hibah. Beliau juga tidak berani menyatakan ia menyalahi atau tidak menyalahi Akta TH 1995. (Jabatan Audit Negara dan Ernst & Young berpendapat tidak menyalahi Akta TH)

(iii) Zaiton membohong rosot nilai (impairment) tidak pernah dibuat sejak 2012 oleh pentadbiran lama dan kononya dibuat pada kali pertama dalam tahun 2018

(iv) Zaiton membohong atau jahil mengatakan aset jika dijual akan dapat RM70.3 billion (book value) manakala realisable value adalah RM74.7 billion. 
(v) Defisit berkembang dari RM4.1 billion (2017) KEAPDA RM10.9 billion pada penghujung tahun 2018 --- the new TH management and PH government are accountable for the additional RM6.8 billion deficit. Najib Saahari agreed that 1.25% was all TH could afford to declare due to TH's miserable financial performance, which is also largely due to PH's incompetence in economic management and government administration

(vi) As it stands, the proposed Sukuk fails the SPPI test, which would result in up to RM10 billion in impairment, which would defeat the whole purpose of selling the assets to the SPV to clean up the Balance Sheet. Indeed the Balance Sheet is worse than before. Tetapi Zaiton kata kita belum tahu lagi sebab dokumen Sukuk belum siap. Tapi aset telah dipindahmilik kepada SPV. Hebat

(vii) Kerajaan PH dan Mujahid tolak desakan tubuh RCI sebab takut kebenaran

Tahniah Najib Saahari. If only you were given more time. 
- AA -
Rakaman video TV AlHijrah Zaiton & Daud vs Najibhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAAoPZgnkqI&feature=youtu.be

---