Shinawatras in spotlight: Two PMs, billions in assets seized

May 22, 2025, marked another historic moment in Thai political history as the Supreme Administrative Court overturned a lower court ruling, ordering former Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra to pay 10.028 billion baht (approx. USD275 million) in damages related to her government’s controversial rice-pledging scheme.

In its decision, the court found that although the Ministry of Finance’s original order—requiring Yingluck to pay for failing to prevent over 170 billion baht in losses during the 2012/13 and 2013/14 rice seasons—was unlawful, she was nonetheless grossly negligent in overseeing the G2G (government-to-government) rice export deals under the program. 

These deals led to an estimated 20 billion baht in damages, for which the court ordered her to compensate 50%, resulting in the final sum of 10.028 billion baht.

With this ruling, the matter is considered legally final. The Ministry of Finance is now obligated to formally notify Yingluck to settle the amount. If she fails to pay within the stipulated time, the case may be brought back to the Administrative Court for enforcement, including potential asset seizure.

Yingluck becomes the fourth Thai prime minister in history to face asset confiscation. The first was Field Marshal Sarit Thanarat, Thailand’s 11th PM, whose assets were seized posthumously in 1963 for unexplained wealth. 

His successor, Field Marshal Thanom Kittikachorn, the 12th PM, also had assets seized in 1974 under an emergency decree by Prime Minister Sanya Dharmasakti, targeting Thanom, his wife, son (Col. Narong Kittikachorn), and close associate Field Marshal Praphas Charusathien. More than 434 million baht in assets were confiscated.

The third case occurred in the wake of the 2006 military coup, which ousted Thaksin Shinawatra, Yingluck’s brother and Thailand’s 23rd prime minister. The Council for National Security established the Asset Examination Committee (AEC) to investigate alleged corruption tied to Thaksin’s policies and personal wealth.

In 2010, the Supreme Court’s Criminal Division for Holders of Political Positions ruled that Thaksin had unjustly enriched himself by over 76 billion baht, leveraging government policy to benefit his family’s business interests. 

The court ordered the seizure of 46.737 billion baht—primarily from suspicious promissory notes and proceeds from the high-profile sale of Shin Corp to Singapore’s Temasek Holdings—commonly referred to in Thailand as the “Second Asset Concealment Case.”

According to findings by AEC, Thaksin was accused of concealing assets—including Shin Corp shares—under the names of family members and close associates, including his then-wife, sister, children, and in-laws. Many of the transactions involved promissory notes (PNs) used in lieu of actual payments.

For example, Khunying Potjaman Shinawatra (then Thaksin’s wife, now divorced and known by her maiden name, Damapong) sold Shin Corp shares to her son, Panthongtae Shinawatra, who issued a promissory note worth 309.2 million baht and agreed to repay 424.75 million baht upon demand—without interest.

Thaksin also sold shares to his sister, Yingluck, who issued a 20 million baht promissory note, also repayable upon demand, interest-free. Another portion was sold to Bannapoj Damapong, Potjaman’s brother, who issued a note worth 268.25 million baht, again with no interest or specified repayment schedule.

Following these transfers, Shin Corp underwent a stock split—reducing its par value from 10 baht to 1 baht per share—resulting in a tenfold increase in the number of shares held. For example, Potjaman’s stake ballooned to over 733 million shares, Yingluck held 20 million, and Bannapoj held over 404 million.

In 2006, these shares—held by Panthongtae, Pinthongta, Yingluck, and Bannapoj—were sold to Cedar Holdings and Aspen Holdings, totaling 1.49 billion shares at 49.25 baht per share. The transaction included shares acquired directly from Thaksin and Potjaman, as well as additional shares transferred via Ample Rich, a British Virgin Islands entity.

After deducting brokerage fees and VAT, the net transaction value was approximately 69.72 billion baht. The same shares had also earned 6.89 billion baht in dividends between 2003 and 2005.

The Supreme Court found numerous irregularities in the transactions. For instance, Potjaman claimed she had lost one of the promissory notes and reissued it upon receiving the title "Khunying" (a royal honorific), a justification the court deemed implausible. None of the PNs issued to Potjaman were repaid until Shin Corp began paying dividends—at which point, portions of those dividends were used to retroactively settle the debts.

Notably, Yingluck claimed to have received 97 million baht in dividends, which she partially used to settle her share purchase, but could not account for the remainder of the funds.

In addition, the court found that Thaksin was the original founder of Ample Rich, which he used to transfer 32 million Shin Corp shares in 1999. In 2000, he transferred Ample Rich to Panthongtae for just one US dollar. However, bank records showed that “Dr T. Shinawatra” (a pseudonym for Thaksin) retained full control over the company’s finances. Between 2003 and 2005, Ample Rich received over 1 billion baht in dividends, with Dr T. Shinawatra as the sole authorized signatory.

The Supreme Court concluded unanimously that Thaksin and Potjaman remained the true beneficiaries of over 1.4 billion Shin Corp shares sold to Singapore’s Temasek Holdings during Thaksin’s two terms as prime minister.

As a result, the court ruled—by majority decision—to confiscate:

39.77 billion baht in proceeds from the Shin Corp share sale

6.89 billion baht in dividends from those shares

The total amount seized: 46.37 billion baht, now returned to the Thai state.

Unlike her brother Thaksin’s case, which was criminal in nature, Yingluck ’s legal battle falls under administrative law, specifically a civil liability case for official misconduct. As such, the Supreme Administrative Court’s ruling requires her to pay damages of approximately 10.028 billion baht. If she fails to comply within the legal timeframe, the Ministry of Finance may initiate a new case in the Administrative Court to enforce the judgment, which could result in the seizure and liquidation of her assets to recover the funds for the state.

With this, Yingluck becomes the fourth Thai prime minister in history to face asset confiscation as a consequence of official actions. 

Whether any future prime ministers will be added to this list remains to be seen.