Clive Palmer’s wife ‘vetoed Singapore tax sling’

As a hearing into Clive Palmer’s $300bn claim against Australia wrapped up in The Hague, WA Premier Roger Cook slammed the billionaire as a greedy ‘villain’.

Clive Palmer with his wife Anna. Picture: Lyndon Mechielsen

Clive Palmer’s wife vetoed a plan that would have resulted in the Queensland billionaire saving a quarter of a billion dollars in tax, the former MP has said.

Continuing his testimony in the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague, Mr Palmer – who is suing Australia for $300bn over what he says are breaches of a free-trade agreement between Australia and Singapore – has been grilled over his decision to shift his Australian assets into a new Singapore-based entity called Zeph Investments in 2019.

That restructure allowed him to launch his arbitration claim, the largest of its kind ever seen, after Western Australia in 2020 passed legislation killing off his $30bn lawsuit against the state.

Mr Palmer had argued that WA breached a state agreement it had with his private company when it refused to approve the development of his Balmoral South iron ore deposit.

Australia has tried to argue that the relocation to Singapore was a ruse designed to give Mr Palmer legal rights under international trade laws, although Mr Palmer has said it was driven by an appetite to secure finance for his Queensland coal project and reduce his tax bill.

Under questioning from Australia’s solicitor-general Stephen Donaghue, Mr Palmer said he had calculated that he could save around $250m in tax if he shifted himself to Singapore, as the dividends he paid to himself would no longer be taxed at the same rate.

He told the tribunal that nothing came of the plan to move to Singapore after he raised the prospect with his wife Anna Palmer. Ms Palmer is part of the legal team working on the arbitration case.

“I had a concrete plan to discuss it with my wife, but she ­vetoed it four years later,” Mr Palmer said, adding she had not wanted their children to leave their school in Queensland for Singapore.

“The possibility appealed to me personally. I thought I’d be more successful in convincing my wife than I eventually was,” Mr Palmer said.

Mr Donaghue also questioned Mr Palmer about the rationale for moving the assets to Singapore in order to obtain coal financing.

The billionaire had earlier told the court how he was “shocked” to learn NAB would no longer extend loans for new thermal coal projects, prompting him to begin the Singapore restructure.

Mr Donaghue cited an expert’s report prepared by experienced investment banker George Rogers, examining banks from Australia, Singapore and around the world, which found that most had policies against lending to new thermal coalmines at the time. Australia actually had more banks prepared to lend for coal projects than Singapore, where not one of Singapore’s three banks had ever been involved in financing new coalmines.

Speaking under the protection of parliamentary privilege on Wednesday, WA Premier Roger Cook slammed Mr Palmer over the case.

“A $300bn claim is staggering, and it is audacious. It’s an outrage. These are the actions of a villain,” Mr Cook said.

“We all know that there is greed and then there is Clive Palmer. “Only Clive Palmer would try to sue his own country for $300bn.”