The latest scandal taking center stage in the Korean entertainment industry is Cha Eun Woo's tax evasion allegation.
Earlier last week, the ASTRO member was accused of evading approximately 20 billion KRW (approx. 13.6 million USD). On January 22, the Seoul Regional Tax Office reported that they had conducted an extensive audit over Cha Eun Woo's earnings in the first half of 2025, suspecting that the celebrity had set up a "paper company" with his mother. According to the reports, Cha Eun Woo is accused of setting up a company with his mother to evade taxes, amounting to approximately 20 billion KRW, by channeling part of the earnings to the "paper company" and paying corporate tax, instead of private tax.
But why is the situation being described as a serious issue? A former National Tax Service (NTS) investigator-turned tax accountant has labeled the case “unprecedented,” suggesting that the authorities are highly confident in their tax rationale.
While poring over the accounting books of Fantagio, the National Tax Service investigators uncovered suspicious money flows. Large sums were traced not to Seoul, but to an eel restaurant in Ganghwa Island. But how can an eel restaurant in Ganghwa Island be linked to a management company worth tens of billions of KRW? This was when the NTS uncovered the link between the restaurant and Cha Eun Woo, one of South Korea's biggest male celebrities.
Former national tax service official weighs in
Moon Bo Ra, a tax accountant and former NTS investigator, said, "This is an unprecedented incident," adding that, "the National Tax Service would not have moved forward unless it was confident in its taxation rationale."
In a video uploaded to her YouTube channel on January 25, Moon stressed, "We’re talking about as much as 20 billion KRW," noting, "This is the largest additional tax assessment ever imposed on a single entertainer in South Korean history." She added that the amount would rank sixth globally in terms of tax evasion cases, if confirmed.
However, she emphasized that "there has been no final court ruling confirming that 20 billion KRW was evaded," clarifying that "this is, for now, the unilateral position of the NTS." The tax authorities have completed a tax audit and issued a preliminary notice of taxation based on their findings, while Cha Eun Woo’s side has stated it will respond.
Despite Cha Eun Woo's side having filed a pre-assessment review request, formally contesting the tax authority’s decision, Moon Bo Ra expressed skepticism about the likelihood of a successful rebuttal. She elaborated, "Even though Cha Eun Woo’s side says they will fight back, it won’t be easy because the investigation was handled by Investigation Bureau No. 4, often referred to as the ‘Grim Reaper of the business world."
Recalling her time in office, Moon said, "Even when I was an active investigator, Bureau No. 4 was feared. Once they determine that tax evasion is clear, they move without mercy." She added that the bureau operates as a non-regular special task force that can launch audits without prior notice. "The fact that this bureau imposed 20 billion KRW suggests the NTS is extremely confident in its taxation logic," she said.
Details of Cha Eun Woo's possible income structure
Moon then broke down Cha Eun Woo’s income structure. Typically, agencies receive revenues from fan meetings, advertisements, and drama appearance fees, deduct expenses, and then split the remaining amount with the artist, often on a 50:50 or 70:30 basis. For example, from 12 billion KRW (8.3 million USD) in revenue, 2 billion KRW (1.4 million USD) in expenses would be deducted, and the remaining 10 billion KRW (6.9 million USD) would be divided according to the agreed ratio.
In Cha Eun Woo’s case, however, an additional corporation enters the picture: Corporation A, owned by his mother. Fantagio signed a management services contract not only with Cha Eun Woo but also with Corporation A. The proceeds Fantagio receives are then split among Fantagio, Corporation A, and Cha Eun Woo, in a 50:30:20 structure rather than a simple 50:50 split. Assuming 10 billion KRW, Fantagio would receive 5 billion KRW, Corporation A 3 billion KRW, and Cha Eun Woo 2 billion KRW. Because corporations are taxed at lower rates, the 3 billion KRW would be taxed at around 19%, while the 2 billion KRW paid to Cha Eun Woo would be taxed at roughly 50%, effectively cutting the overall tax burden nearly in half.
Moon noted, "There is nothing inherently illegal about setting up a corporation and having both the corporation and the individual receive income separately." Even if the corporation is owned by a family member, she said, as long as it operates in substance, it can be considered legitimate tax planning. Rational economic actors, she added, naturally seek lawful ways to reduce taxes. She pointed out that "the key issue, however, is that the NTS appears to have viewed Corporation A as a paper company with no real substance.”
Although Corporation A’s registered address has since been moved to Seoul, at the time the income was generated, it was relocated from Gimpo to Ganghwa Island, specifically, to an eel restaurant. The company’s stated business category was management services.
The reason Cha Eun Woo was caught on NTS's radar
Moon explained, "The first thing investigators check during a tax audit is whether a business location actually exists in substance. Shared offices become problematic when no real business is conducted there." What matters is not simply listing an address for tax benefits, but whether actual business operations are carried out at that location.
She pointed out the incongruity, "A management company generating hundreds of billions of KRW in revenue is registered at an eel restaurant in Ganghwa Island. There’s no office equipment, no staff like managers, just the smell of grilled eel. How could anyone realistically manage a top star like Cha Eun Woo there?" She emphasized that the gap between the stated business and the location was simply too large.
Management agencies are typically based in areas like Gangnam or Nonhyeon in Seoul, she added, making a Ganghwa Island eel restaurant an obviously suspicious address. “Naturally, the NTS would not recognize the provision of management services,” Moon said, explaining that the authorities ultimately concluded the corporation was merely a conduit and that the income should be attributed directly to Cha Eun Woo.
Not only Cha Eun Woo, but Fantagio itself was also penalized. The NTS reportedly deemed tax invoices issued by Corporation A to Fantagio as false, imposing approximately 8.2 billion KRW (5.7 million USD) in penalties, including surcharges for false invoices, value-added tax, and corporate tax.
Moon also highlighted additional red flags. Corporation A was initially established as a joint-stock company in 2022, but when its address was moved to the eel restaurant in 2024, it was converted into a limited liability company.
She explained, “Changing from a joint-stock company to a limited liability company has implications.” Under Korean law, joint-stock companies above a certain size are subject to external audits and mandatory disclosure of financial statements, ensuring transparency for shareholders. Limited liability companies, by contrast, are not required to disclose financials or undergo external audits.
“The NTS likely saw this as an attempt to hide something,” Moon said, interpreting the move as an effort not merely at tax planning, but at avoiding regulatory scrutiny.
Further red flags in Cha Eun Woo's mother's company
She also addressed the addition of a real estate leasing business to Corporation A’s scope following the conversion. According to Moon, this could allow the company to avoid higher acquisition taxes. By registering the company outside the Seoul metropolitan congestion control zone, such as in Ganghwa Island, a corporation can later acquire real estate in Seoul or the metropolitan area without facing punitive acquisition tax rates. Normally, corporations pay around 4.6% in acquisition tax, but this can exceed 9% when surcharges apply. Had the company been based in Seoul, any property acquired within five years would have been subject to higher rates.
Moon said, "Placing the business address in Ganghwa Island and adding real estate leasing suggests there were plans to purchase property in the future, while also seeking tax benefits by avoiding higher acquisition taxes."
She further revealed that Investigation Bureau No. 4 did not initially target Cha Eun Woo or Corporation A. “The original targets were Fantagio’s top executives and its affiliates,” she said. While reviewing Fantagio’s books, the main ‘body’ of the investigation, investigators noticed large sums flowing to an eel restaurant in Ganghwa Island. That entity turned out to be run by Cha Eun Woo’s mother. After further review, the NTS concluded the income substantially belonged to Cha Eun Woo, triggering a derivative investigation.
"It’s like casting a net for a big fish and finding another giant catch inside," Moon said, adding that such derivative audits are extremely common. "No matter how careful you are, tax audits aren’t something you can always avoid. If the tail is too long, it will eventually be stepped on."
Previously, the Seoul Regional Tax Office conducted a high-intensity tax audit of Cha Eun Woo in the first half of last year and notified him of more than 20 billion KRW in additional income tax assessments, the largest ever imposed on an entertainer.
The NTS reportedly believes that Cha Eun Woo and his mother, identified only as Choi, used a paper company called The Annie to apply a corporate tax rate more than 20 percentage points lower than the personal income tax rate of up to 45%.
Fantagio responded on the 22nd, stating, “The key issue is whether the corporation established by Cha Eun Woo’s mother qualifies as a substantive taxpayer.” The agency emphasized that “this matter has not been finalized or officially confirmed,” adding that it would “actively explain its position through appropriate legal procedures regarding the interpretation and application of the law.”
SEE ALSO: Civic group to file police complaint over leak of Cha Eun Woo's tax information
SHARE
