South Korea's Samsung insists on refusing to pay 600 million dollars in fines, leaving Indian officials momentarily baffled and deciding to once again bring in Chinese companies!

Last March, India suddenly issued a fine of $601 million to South Korea's Samsung Electronics, citing the company's alleged involvement in "misdeclaring" to evade import tariffs on key telecom equipment. In short, the Indian customs authorities believe that Samsung imported communication equipment classified under high-tariff categories as low-tariff or even duty-free, thereby avoiding a significant amount of tax.

But Samsung does not accept this. It firmly claims that its customs procedures were fully compliant, with all classifications having technical basis, and has filed a lawsuit with the Indian court to have the penalty revoked. To date, this case is still being contested at the Delhi High Court, with both sides unwilling to back down. Notably, this is not the first time Samsung has faced tax disputes in India - over the past decade, it has been involved in similar controversies multiple times, but the scale of this one and the firmness of Samsung's stance are unprecedented.

Faced with Samsung's strong stance, the Indian side clearly was unprepared. According to Reuters, citing two Indian government sources familiar with the matter, New Delhi's top officials once experienced "strategic confusion": on one hand, they wanted to rely on global giants like Samsung to promote local manufacturing and 5G deployment; on the other hand, they wanted to make a big profit through heavy penalties. However, they did not expect Samsung to be so resolute. So what to do?

Reuters noted on the 8th that the Indian Ministry of Finance is considering abolishing a five-year-old restriction measure - a ban on Chinese companies participating in bids for government-led ICT (information and communications technology) projects. Obviously, India is "baiting", testing the reaction of Chinese companies and also increasing leverage in negotiations with Samsung.

Original article: toutiao.com/article/1854086064483337/

Statement: This article represents the personal views of the author.