A mystery involving government agencies and the "Boom Panadda" foundation's long-standing irregular financial flows remains uninvestigated, reflecting either systemic neglect or reluctance due to concerns about maintaining a "good image".
This has become a hot issue under close social scrutiny regarding the operations and donations of the "Doing Good" foundation founded by Boom - Dr. Panadda Wongpudi. Irregularities include failure to submit financial statements for several years and the use of personal bank accounts to receive massive donations. The key question extends beyond the recipient to government bodies, including the Ministry of Interior and Revenue Department, asking why such a major loophole was allowed.
Lawyer James, also known as Nitithorn Kaewto, a well-known attorney, explained that by law, foundations must submit annual financial statements to the Ministry of Interior and Revenue Department for verification, just like companies or limited partnerships.
There is unequal enforcement: for ordinary private companies, failure to submit financial statements for three consecutive years leads the Department of Business Development to immediately remove them from the system as "dormant companies."
The suspicion is that the "Doing Good" foundation established by Boom in 2022 has never submitted any financial statements, yet continues operating and openly accepting donations online without any objections or random checks from the Ministry of Interior.
The Fundraising Control Act clearly states that fundraising requires permission, specifying objectives, target amounts, and definite start and end dates—not open-ended donation collection. However, penalties under this act are very light, lacking deterrence.
Another concern is the financial and tax transaction monitoring system. Lawyer James noted that according to tax measures, banks must report accounts with over 400 credits and total deposits exceeding 2 million baht, or more than 3,000 incoming transactions per year, to the Revenue Department. The personal account used to receive donations for the foundation had hundreds of thousands to millions of transactions totaling several hundred million baht. Why did the monitoring system fail to detect irregularities?
There is a contradiction in tax filings: reported annual income is only about 200,000 baht per month, which starkly conflicts with the actual account turnover. The Revenue Department must face questions on why no audits or demands for clarification were made earlier.
Lawyer James emphasized that the "shield of goodness" should not exempt anyone from scrutiny. Especially individuals or organizations trusted by the public and involved in public benefit activities must be more transparent than usual.
Immediate actions needed include:
1. Government officials must be vigilant and proactively investigate to close loopholes. Officials who neglect duties or "fear harming" the "good image" causing damage may be liable under Section 157.
2. Urgently audit financial trails retroactively to verify if donations received in personal accounts were misused, such as buying assets, land, or for personal businesses. If misused, legal action must be taken without exception.
3. Revise laws and penalties under the Fundraising Control Act to be modernized and stricter, preventing exploitation of public faith through legal loopholes.
This case is not just about one person or one foundation but a crucial test of the Thai bureaucratic system. If law enforcers continue neglecting duties out of concern for the "good image," the resulting harm will expand and inevitably damage the credibility of all charitable organizations nationwide.