Apple Daily insiders cite national security law risks for rejecting calls to use funds from sister companies to pay staff

Suggestions of drawing on parent company Next Digital’s funds dismissed on the basis such a move may expose its subsidiaries to the long arm of the security law

Pro-establishment union leader Bill Tang accuses Apple Daily of staging Wednesday’s dramatic shutdown to avoid paying staff what they are owed

Reading Time:4 minutes

Apple Daily staff mark the final edition in the 26-year history of the newspaper. Photo: Dickson Lee

Published: 9:30am, 25 Jun 2021Updated: 3:26pm, 29 Jun 2021

Drawing on sister company funds to pay the wages of Apple Daily staff exposes those subsidiaries to the same risks under the national security law already engulfing the tabloid-style newspaper, according to insiders at the defunct publication.

They also dismissed suggestions the publication staged Wednesday’s dramatic shutdown as a way of evading paying workers, after a union leader accused them of making staff resign to save on severance costs.

Shortly before the abrupt closure of Apple Daily, Federation of Trade Unions (FTU) Bill Tang Ka-piu said bosses were shirking their responsibilities to staff, with authorities freezing only HK$18 million of their HK$500 million worth of assets.

A senior staff member told the Post on Thursday that Next Digital, the parent company of Apple Daily, had hundreds of millions of dollars in the parent company and other subsidiaries, but using those funds to pay staff put them at risk of allegations they were sponsoring an entity suspected of breaching the national security law.

Other staff who stayed in post until Wednesday to put out the newspaper’s last edition said the company had offered to lay them off to guarantee they would receive a month’s salary in compensation. Those choosing to resign voluntarily would get the same restitution, they were told.

Still reeling from the shock, former employees said they spent their last day on the job working towards final publication, without paying much attention to when they would get their last month’s salary.

Some suggested in the future they could file a bankruptcy petition against the company, if the Security Bureau or the court refused to unfreeze the company’s assets.