Mandy Tam height - How tall is Mandy Tam?

Mandy Tam was born on 8 June, 1957 in Hong Kong, is an Accountant, politician. At 63 years old, Mandy Tam height not available right now. We will update Mandy Tam's height soon as possible.

Now We discover Mandy Tam's Biography, Age, Physical Stats, Dating/Affairs, Family and career updates. Learn How rich is She in this year and how She spends money? Also learn how She earned most of net worth at the age of 65 years old?

Popular As N/A
Occupation Accountant, politician
Mandy Tam Age 65 years old
Zodiac Sign Gemini
Born 8 June 1957
Birthday 8 June
Birthplace N/A
Nationality Hong Kong

We recommend you to check the complete list of Famous People born on 8 June. She is a member of famous Accountant with the age 65 years old group.

Mandy Tam Weight & Measurements

Physical Status
Weight Not Available
Body Measurements Not Available
Eye Color Not Available
Hair Color Not Available

Dating & Relationship status

She is currently single. She is not dating anyone. We don't have much information about She's past relationship and any previous engaged. According to our Database, She has no children.

Family
Parents Not Available
Husband Not Available
Sibling Not Available
Children Not Available

Mandy Tam Net Worth

She net worth has been growing significantly in 2021-22. So, how much is Mandy Tam worth at the age of 65 years old? Mandy Tam’s income source is mostly from being a successful Accountant. She is from Hong Kong. We have estimated Mandy Tam's net worth , money, salary, income, and assets.

Net Worth in 2022 $1 Million - $5 Million
Salary in 2022 Under Review
Net Worth in 2021 Pending
Salary in 2021 Under Review
House Not Available
Cars Not Available
Source of Income Accountant

Mandy Tam Social Network

Instagram
Linkedin
Twitter
Facebook
Wikipedia Mandy Tam Wikipedia
Imdb

Timeline

2011

Tam was fully acquitted of the charge after trial before magistrate Gary K Y Lam on 27 May 2011, who "drew a distinction between inducement to vote for a candidate and inducement to attend an electioneering activity". This distinction was further upheld when the case was heard on appeal in April 2012, with the judge Hon Lam J upholding the acquittal, in view of the point of law that: "It is not enough for an advantage to be offered. It has to be offered as an inducement. And an inducement to do something else is not enough: it has to be an inducement [in this case] to vote for a particular candidate [for the vote bribery charge to be upheld]." The offering of a free CPD talk to an audience of professional accountants was not judged to be of value enough to serve as an inducement to change voting preference; nor was the free nature of the talk itself considered an intention to induce to alter people's voting preferences, although it was found to be an inducement to members to attend a talk they might otherwise not have attended. In the words of the judgement in the Court papers: "The conclusion that the Respondent [Tam] did exploit the CPD talk as an inducement to the electors to attend the tea-gathering (and to hear the speeches of Mrs Chan and herself) does not necessarily mean that she intended the CPD talk to be an inducement to vote for her... Section 11(1) itself makes it clear that offering an advantage and inducement are two different elements in the offence. Thus, a finding of advantage does not necessarily lead to a finding of inducement." The Court upheld the acquittal and dismissed the appeal.

2010

In October 2010, upon a complaint lodged by Chow Ka-leung, politician from a rival political party, Tam was charged by the ICAC (Independent Commission Against Corruption) with engaging in corrupt conduct in the 2008 Legislative Council elections for "[offering] an advantage, namely service in the form of a free seminar to other persons as an inducement for them to vote for her at the election." Tam said the prosecution was politically motivated, and maintained that the three free seminars she organised for professional accountants did not constitute a voting inducement. Lawmakers including Audrey Eu and Paul Chan expressed concern over the case.

2006

In mid-September 2006, during a period of heated debate on the Hong Kong Government's plan to introduce GST (General Sales Tax), Tam released the interim results of a survey on attitudes towards the introduction of the GST, independently conducted by the East Asia Work Based Learning Centre of Middlesex University. After initial reluctance, the survey questionnaires were distributed by the HKICPA, the professional body representing certified public accountants in Hong Kong, alongside an editorial by the President of the Institute stating the body's support for the GST proposal. Only 311 out of circa 26,000 of the territory's accountants responded to the survey; of those who have responded, 62 percent opposed the introduction of a General Sales Tax. In a report of the survey findings, Tam concluded that the majority of respondents opposed a GST, and further suggested that the government should look into other means to broaden its tax base. However, with a response rate of just 1.2 percent, many questioned the validity of the survey findings. In a response letter to the report, the HKICPA expresses doubt on Tam's interpretation of the survey findings.

On 9 October 2006, the HKICPA issued a letter to all its members notifying them that the Institute had made a decision to stop the distribution of the newsletter to its members on Tam's behalf. The decision was made over concerns that, in the view of HKICPA, Tam had adopted an increasingly political stance on many issues. Although not officially related to the decision, Tam had at the time openly criticised the Institute in two Chinese newspapers in Hong Kong on various matters, including its pro-Government stance on the introduction of the GST, which further deteriorated the already fragile relationship between her and the Institute. In the letter to its members, the HKICPA said it needed to maintain its political independence and distanced itself from Tam's personal viewpoints.

2003

In 2003 Tam was elected a district councillor for Wong Tai Sin. In 2004 she was elected to the Legislative Council (colloquially known as "LegCo") representing the accountancy functional constituency seat. She stood for and lost the seat in the 2008 Legislative Council elections. In 2006, she was a founding member of the Civic Party, but left in June 2009. She was embroiled in two separate controversies, one with the HKICPA, a professional body whose members are electors of the accountancy functional constituency of the LegCo; the second one was a result of what was perceived to be a politically motivated charge of voting corruption.

1957

Mandy Tam Heung-man (Traditional Chinese: 譚香文; born 8 June 1957 in Hong Kong) is a former member of the Legislative Council of Hong Kong. She is a tax advisor and also a newspaper columnist for the Hong Kong Economic Journal and other publications.