Following the implementation of the National Security Law in Hong Kong, several independent media outlets and some pro-democracy figures have become targets of the Chinese Communist regime. The Hong Kong government has been accused of using its power to impose additional taxes on independent journalists, leading to the dismissal of pro-democracy former district councilors and removal from performances by art troupes. Victims of systemic suppression have expressed that being a journalist has unfortunate implications for their families, and yet they continue to uphold their beliefs in times of adversity.
The Hong Kong Journalists Association (HKJA) held a press conference on May 21st, stating that the Hong Kong Inland Revenue Department has conducted tax reviews of at least 8 media outlets, 20 journalists, and their families since 2023, alleging that their reported income from 6 to 7 years ago exceeded their actual income and demanding back taxes. The Chairperson of HKJA, Chris, mentioned that she was also subjected to a tax review, with the tax authority estimating her income to be twice the actual amount.
Chris, who has only served as the Chairperson of HKJA for less than a year, along with dozens of journalists, faced systematic harassment, surveillance, and threats last year and continues to be targeted.
According to Radio Free Asia, Chris stated in an interview that seven years ago when she worked at “Hong Kong 01,” her monthly salary was only 18,000 Hong Kong dollars. Recently, the tax authorities unexpectedly reviewed her tax returns from that year, arbitrarily increasing her reported annual income from 230,000 to 630,000 Hong Kong dollars without any evidence, demanding a substantial tax payment.
Chris mentioned that while the tax department has the power to randomly inspect tax affairs of Hong Kong residents, there are thousands of media workers in Hong Kong, with independent journalists being a minority and coincidentally falling within the scope of those under inspection. She is the only case among inspected journalists whose parents have also been subject to tax review. Chris suspects that her identity has made her and her family targets.
She expressed doubts about whether the tax authority’s actions were related to her position at HKJA. The tax authority did not provide an explanation, leaving her unable to comprehend the reasons and motives behind their scrutiny of her and her parents’ taxes. The unfortunate situation has affected her and her family members, with last year’s harassment and intimidation of journalists and their families creating a ripple effect. She emphasized the challenges faced now, where considerations for the implications on family members due to their work were previously unnecessary for journalists but are now unavoidable, causing obstacles to their peace of mind while reporting news.
Chris indicated that the methods of suppressing independent journalists constantly evolve, but standing on the front lines, she has not retreated despite facing various pressures. She has submitted her candidacy for re-election as the Chairperson at HKJA’s executive committee election next month, aiming to continue advocating for Hong Kong’s journalism industry.
An independent journalist, known as Chris, who faced harassment and intimidation last year, expressed outrage at the authorities’ actions, stating that the official’s use of power against journalists was absurd. The process of using the tax department to investigate and collect taxes clearly indicated a targeted action against independent journalists by the regime.
Chris highlighted that the utilization of the tax authority to investigate and collect taxes is a systematic approach targeting independent journalists, specifically individuals disliked by the government. This incremental pressure from the authorities was evident, indicating a deliberate effort against independent journalists.
Chris asserted that anyone choosing to be an independent journalist in today’s Hong Kong had already mentally prepared for official troubles, and until being arrested or prosecuted, he would remain steadfast in reporting the facts.
Another independent journalist, known as A, has appealed against the demand for a five-digit tax payment. He mentioned that the tax authority’s current practice was to punish before reviewing, requiring the payment of back taxes regardless of the appeal’s outcome. A has spent thousands obtaining bank statements from seven years ago to prove his innocence, lamenting the degradation of Hong Kong to such a state.
Journalist A stated, “The method of pressuring through tax demands under the pretext of tax evasion is a tactic commonly used by the Chinese Communist Party against dissidents, and we are very familiar with it.”
Apart from the media, the pro-democracy camp in Hong Kong has also been a target of government suppression. Former pro-democracy district councilor Chen Jianqin publicly disclosed suspected suppression on her Facebook page. She revealed to Radio Free Asia that she was initially set to participate in an art troupe’s public performance at the end of May. However, the troupe received a sudden demand to remove her, stating that they could not use the government venue if she remained, forcing her to withdraw. On the same day, she also received a notice of dismissal from her part-time teaching position at a college. The reason provided was that multiple high-level officials at the school had received a complaint letter in simplified Chinese characters about her, only informing her of the decision to terminate her employment without disclosing the content of the complaint.
She stated that both events occurring simultaneously were not isolated incidents. She criticized the school’s actions as unjustifiable, demonstrating that a blacklist system is operational in Hong Kong.
Chen Jianqin mentioned that due to her background as a former pro-democracy district councilor and her arrest during the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests under Article 23 of the Basic Law, she had been labeled a sensitive figure in modern-day Hong Kong. Her experiences of facing repercussions for participating in non-political activities or work were not unique, with many similar victims in today’s Hong Kong. These consequences are all a result of Article 23, which has created an atmosphere of fear in society.
Chen Jianqin emphasized that, despite being underestimated and cautiously spoken, she would not remain silent in the face of injustice and would not act anonymously when confronted with unfairness.