Nadiem Clarifies Rp6 Trillion Income Surge
During a continuation of proceedings regarding the Chromebook laptop procurement case held on Monday (9 March), Nadiem Anwar Makarim delivered a firm clarification concerning allegations of a Rp6 trillion income surge in his annual tax return (SPT). Nadiem characterised the accusations as libellous and contended that there had been a misinterpretation of his tax documents.
“I have received new allegations regarding the placement of Rp6 trillion in enrichment income based on my SPT. This is quite amusing. Court proceedings have already established that share increases—all the shares I own—were acquired by me, and I have held these shares since 2015, five years before becoming a minister. All these shares have remained unchanged since 2015. Even more amusingly, there was no share sale mentioned in 2022 whatsoever. Since I am not permitted to sell shares during the lockup period. Then it is claimed there was an income or revenue surge of 6 trillion. That is a misreading of the SPT,” he stated during the proceedings.
NOT INCOME
Nadiem explained that the figure of Rp5.2 trillion listed in his SPT does not represent income he received, but rather the value of shares he has held since 2015, long before assuming ministerial office. The entry appeared due to a tax obligation on all shareholders when PT Aplikasi Karya Anak Bangsa (PT AKAB/GoTo) conducted its initial public offering (IPO).
“Every shareholder of a company planning to go public is obliged to pay tax once at 0.5% multiplied by total shares multiplied by IPO price. So there is a misreading of the SPT; it is not income, it is an expense. I had to pay the mandatory tax,” Nadiem stated during the proceedings.
He added that 200 other shareholders were likewise obliged to pay the same tax that year. Furthermore, Nadiem firmly denied any share sales in 2022. He explained that the Indonesian Stock Exchange (IDX) imposed a ban on share sales by initial shareholders for eight months following the IPO. “So it was impossible for me to sell shares in 2022,” he asserted.
ASSETS REPORTED
Regarding another allegation mentioning a figure of Rp809 billion, Nadiem also dismissed it as the figure did not appear anywhere in his SPT. He assured that all his assets had been reported transparently and openly, with data between his SPT and Statement of Wealth of State Administrators (LHKPN) consistently matching. He also emphasised that issues concerning wealth had no bearing on the substantive charges in the Chromebook procurement case.
“More amusingly, it is claimed there is Rp809 million in my SPT, yet nowhere in my SPT does this figure appear. My LHKPN and SPT match because I have disclosed everything transparently. I filed the SPT myself, and I filed the LHKPN myself with the KPK. So what is being included in the accusation? Am I being accused of reporting corruption? Moreover, paying tax on corruption would make no sense,” Nadiem concluded.
Meanwhile, during the same hearing, the prosecutors presented several witnesses from distributors and vendors. Based on their testimony before the judges’ bench, no connection or involvement of Nadiem in the Chromebook procurement activities was found. The legal counsel assessed that the testimony of these distributors and vendors was unrelated to the charges brought against their client.
CORRUPTION ALLEGATIONS
In the alleged corruption case concerning the education digitalisation programme involving Chromebook laptop and Chrome Device Management (CDM) procurement within the Ministry of Education, Culture, Research and Technology during 2019–2022, Nadiem has been charged with corruption causing state financial losses valued at Rp2.18 trillion.
The corruption is allegedly committed, amongst other things, by executing the procurement of technology and communications-based learning facilities in the form of Chromebook laptops and CDM in the 2020, 2021, and 2022 budget years in violation of procurement planning and procurement principles.
Nadiem’s actions are alleged to have been committed jointly with three other defendants in separate proceedings, namely Ibam, Mulyatsyah, and Sri Wahyuningsih, as well as Jurist Tan, who remains at large.
For his actions, the former education minister faces penalties under Article 2(1) or Article 3 read together with Article 18 of Law Number 31 of 1999 on the Eradication of Corruption Offences as amended and supplemented by Law Number 20 of 2001 read together with Article 55(1) of the Criminal Code.