Two co-founders of Fullerton Healthcare Corporation, Daniel Chan Pai Sheng and Michael Tan Kim Song, both 52-year-old physicians, have been penalised with combined fines totalling S$160,000 for their involvement in a scheme to falsify entertainment expense claims. The disciplinary action, handed down on July 10, concluded a case centred on more than S$211,000 in inflated claims spanning several years. Notably, neither doctor profited directly from the fraudulent arrangement; instead, the fabricated expenses were orchestrated to provide financial assistance to a third party whose legal proceedings remain ongoing.
The structure of the misconduct involved Collin Chiew, 58, a former chief executive of insurance broker Aon Singapore who served in that role between January 2015 and July 2018. Court documents reveal that in 2015, Chiew approached Chan requesting financial support, citing personal difficulties with educational expenses for his children and housing costs. Rather than declining the request, Chan disclosed Chiew's predicament to Tan, and the two men subsequently devised a mechanism to channel funds through their company by inflating legitimate business expenses. The court documents do not clarify whether Chiew ultimately received the full amount targeted through these arrangements.
Chan, who regularly travelled to Hong Kong twice monthly on company business, became the primary instrument for executing the scheme. Before each trip, he would instruct David Sin, the third co-founder, to obtain inflated or fabricated KTV receipts from Tei Chu Pink, 46, who specialised in producing such documentation. During his Hong Kong visits, Chan would socialise at these establishments alongside Sin and Tei while meeting prospective investors, then collect the manipulated receipts. On numerous occasions, court documents indicate that Chan either paid minimal amounts using personal funds or made no payment whatsoever, yet would later submit receipts representing far larger sums. After returning to Singapore, these documents would be transferred to designated personnel within Fullerton Healthcare Corporation or its subsidiary Fullerton Health China, who would process them through official company channels to extract funds.
The falsification scheme materialised across multiple transactions over an extended period. Chan pleaded guilty on July 8 to five counts of falsifying company accounts, with the inflated claims totalling over S$336,000 against actual expenses of approximately S$125,000, creating a discrepancy of S$211,000. His fine of S$135,000 reflected the severity and scope of his participation. Tan, meanwhile, pleaded guilty to a single count of falsification related to one false claim of around S$82,000, when legitimate expenses amounted to just over S$42,000—a gap of nearly S$40,000. This fabricated amount formed part of the broader scheme involving Chan. His more modest fine of S$25,000 corresponded to his comparatively limited direct involvement, though court evidence established his knowledge of several schemes and his participation in at least one conspiracy to falsify claims in 2016.
The prosecution initially pursued graft-related charges against both men, suggesting they had abused positions of trust for dishonest gain. However, prosecutors applied for what is termed a discharge not amounting to acquittal for all corruption allegations, exercising their prosecutorial discretion. District Judge Paul Quan approved this application on July 10. This legal mechanism is significant because individuals receiving such a discharge remain vulnerable to future prosecution should additional evidence or information emerge, offering authorities continued leverage while sparing the defendants conviction records on those specific charges. The decision to focus prosecution exclusively on falsification of accounts rather than pursuing anti-corruption charges reflected the specific evidence available and broader prosecutorial strategy.
Sin, the third co-founder, had already faced judicial consequences for parallel involvement in the scheme. In August 2025, he pleaded guilty to six counts of falsifying accounts and received an identical fine of S$160,000, underscoring the court's assessment that his culpability matched Chan's despite Chan's greater involvement in executing the fraudulent transactions. Sin's multiple counts reflected his role in producing and facilitating the false documentation that underpinned the entire operation. The fact that three company co-founders faced serious criminal liability within a relatively compact timeframe raises significant questions about governance and oversight within the healthcare enterprise they had collectively built.
Fullerton Healthcare Corporation itself operated as an investment holding vehicle, while its primary operating subsidiary, Fullerton Healthcare Group, established in 2010 by Tan and Chan, managed a network of doctors and specialists who provided healthcare services and assisted clients with insurance claims processing. This business model positioned the company to interface with legitimate clients seeking claim assistance, making it a suitable channel through which the fraudulent expenses could be processed. The expansion into China, with the establishment of Fullerton Health China as another subsidiary under Chan's presidency, created additional opportunities for the concealment of falsified entertainment claims as ostensibly business-related expenses. Both Tan and Chan have since relinquished their positions within these subsidiary enterprises.
The sophistication of the scheme—involving international travel, establishment of relationships with accomplices, preparation of falsified documentation, and layering of claims through multiple entities—demonstrates the capacity of even respected professionals to develop elaborate mechanisms for circumventing financial controls. The reliance on Hong Kong trips for business development provided a plausible cover for entertainment expenses that might otherwise have attracted scrutiny. The involvement of a professional document fabricator suggests this was not spontaneous dishonesty but rather a calculated operation executed with preparation and coordination across multiple individuals over several years.
For Malaysian and Southeast Asian readers, this case carries implications regarding corporate governance, the vulnerability of professional services firms to internal fraud, and the increasing sophistication of schemes that exploit legitimate business activities as cover for misconduct. The case illustrates how even established healthcare enterprises with credible business operations can become vehicles for financial manipulation when internal controls are inadequate or oversight is delegated to individuals with conflicting incentives. The enforcement action demonstrates the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau's continued focus on uncovering financial crimes within professional services sectors, with consequences extending beyond fines to reputational damage and operational disruption for the enterprises involved.
