Questioning the Bonuses and Tantiem of SOE Directors

Questioning the Bonuses and Tantiem of SOE Directors

By Eko B. Supriyanto, Chairman of Infobank Media Group

BISIK-BISIK about large bonuses for directors and commissioners of SOEs is suddenly no longer taboo. What is questioned is not the amount, but the way or eligibility for the thick bonus. For example, the company’s performance is mediocre, even declining, which is indicated by its “falling” stock price, if in banking it can be seen from the increase in non-performing loans, then the lack of reserves. But, the company is then polished here and there so that the profit gain looks big.

Dony Oskaria, Chief Operating Officer (COO) of the Daya Anagata Nusantara Investment Management Agency (Danantara), revealed the mode of SOE directors to obtain large bonuses. According to him, the directors, who are approved by the commissioners, are suspected of engineering the company’s financial statements so that the bottom line in the company’s financial statements looks positive.

In fact, in the long run, the profits and profits obtained do not make BUMN healthy. This is because the profits achieved are false profits. Dony emphasized his dislike for the achievement of exaggerated profits. For example, costs are postponed just to get a good bottom line, then followed by tantiem.

“In my opinion, it was manipulation that caused the company to fall,” said Dony, who is also Deputy Minister of SOEs, at the IKA Fikom Unpad Executive Breakfast Meeting at Hutan Kota by Plataran, Jakarta, Wednesday (18/6/2025). Dony said that what made a number of state-owned companies fail in the past was mainly due to the absence of a long-term vision. In addition, weak operational supervision.

Dony did not mention companies that manipulated their financial statements. But the symptoms are there, including in state-owned banks. For example, their stock prices “plummeted”, non-performing loans (NPLs) rose, profits rose slightly, and reserves fell. However, bonus allocations rose sharply. There is a dangerous anomaly, as Dony said.

At first glance, the company looks great by increasing profits, even though the profits are mere pseudo with the mode of achieving large bonuses and tantiems. What is also quite interesting to question is that there is now a trend of deputy ministers becoming commissioners in state-owned enterprises.

According to the records of the Infobank Research Bureau (birI), there are currently 25 deputy ministers who have become commissioners of SOEs. It is estimated that the number will increase. For information, in the Red and White Cabinet of the Prabowo Subianto administration, there were 56 deputies. This does not include politicians who resigned from their parties and chose to become commissioners.

The placement of deputy ministers is one-sided to harmonize government programs. And, the government argues that there is no violation of the law, because based on the decision of the Constitutional Court (MK) related to the judicial review of the State Ministry Law, it only prohibits ministers, not deputy ministers, from holding concurrent positions.

In fact, these deputy ministers have a tough task, namely realizing Prabowo’s government program. Or, do the deputy ministers not have “jobs” so they can still double as commissioners? Or, because of the lure of bonuses and thick tantiem? The question is, is this healthy for SOEs, going forward? One leg becomes a Deputy Minister, the other leg becomes a commissioner of an SOE, and both are united in a large bonus.

Back to the matter of profit engineering with the big bonus mode questioned by Danantara’s COO, Dony Oskaria. Honestly, there has been a dangerous anomaly and the phenomenon of baseless bonuses. It’s really worrying. The data speaks for itself and reveals a contradictory pattern of remuneration. This clearly contradicts the basic principle of remuneration: rewards should be in line with risk and performance.

Why does this happen? It could be because of the fragility of governance. There is a systematic conflict of interest. The presence of the Deputy Minister will actually be a stamp on this bonus engineering. Moreover, as mentioned by many observers, the Deputy Minister who sits in the commissioner’s chair does not meet the commissioner’s standards. From experience, the presence of the Deputy Minister as commissioner does not supervise properly, but instead agrees with the ways of the directors to manipulate profits.

So, the presence of the Deputy Minister in BUMN should reveal the mode of moral hazard as well as crime. The government as the majority shareholder must lead improvements before a crisis of confidence occurs. Bonuses may exist, but only if accompanied by great responsibility.

It is necessary to reform the bonus system. If necessary, an independent forensic audit. Investigate the suitability of bonuses with real performance, including potential mark-ups. Also, personal sanctions if the audit finds profit engineering. Hopefully, the presence of the Deputy Minister in the BUMN body can expose this profit and bonus engineering. But, honestly, not many are convinced of that. The Deputy Minister’s entourage in the BUMN body is due to the enjoyment of facilities and thick bonuses.

If so, it is not unlike more Deputy Ministers who become “display” commissioners. In fact, one side revealed by Dony Oskaria about profit engineering with bonus motives needs to be supported properly. (*)

Related Posts

Top News

News Update