Clarification on the price ceilings for socialized housing units

The RMC clarifies the price ceilings for socialized housing units where house and lot packages or only lots are sold, pursuant to Housing and Urban Development Coordinating Council (HUDCC) Memorandum Circular No. 1, Series of 2008, promulgated on December 11, 2008, as implemented by RMC No. 30-2009 dated May 14, 2009.

A socialized housing unit shall not exceed Php400,000 for a house and lot package subject to periodic adjustment of increase as the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HULRB) may effect.  In the case of sale of lots only, the price shall not exceed 40% of the maximum limit prescribed for the house and lot package.

Based on the foregoing,  the Php400,000 price ceiling applies to house and lot packages.  If only lots are sold, the price ceiling should only be Php160,000 per lot (40% of Php400,000).

Revenue Memorandum Circular No. 36-2011 dated August 26, 2011 

Technical Briefs – September to October 2011

Accounting Times Vol. 62 No. 3

This article is also published at www.PlaceSure.com
http://www.placesure.com/groups/general-public/forums/topic/clarification-on-the-price-ceilings-for-socialized-housing-units/

VAT on sale of drugs to in-patients

The sale of pharmacy drugs or medicines to in-patients is not subject to value-added tax (VAT). The sale of drugs to a hospital’s in-patients is considered part of the term “hospital services” covered by the exemption from VAT under Section 109(G) of the Tax Code.

The Court of Tax Appeals (CTA) held that the maintenance and operation of a pharmacy or drugstore by a hospital is a necessary and essential service or facility rendered by any hospital for its patients. Thus, unlike the sale of retailing drugs or medicines by drugstores — which involves the buying of goods — the procurement of medicines and pharmaceutical items from the hospital drugstore or pharmacy for in-patients amounts to the availment of services of the hospital by the in-patients.

[Hermano (San) Miguel Febres Cordero Medical (De La Salle Health Services Institute), Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, CTA Case No. 8194, May 15, 2012]

Tax Brief – June 2012

Punongbayan and Araullo

This article is also published at:
http://www.placesure.com/groups/general-public/forums/general-public/

SEC adopts BSP Circular on Truth in Lending Act

SEC Memorandum Circular No. 7 dated September 15, 2011

This SEC MC adopts BSP Circular No. 730 dated July 20, 2011 on updated rules implementing the Truth in Lending Act to enhance loan transaction transparency.

It its commitment to protect the uninformed use of credit by borrowers or users and in compliance with Truth in Lending Act requiring the full disclosure of the true cost of credit, the SEC adopts BSP Circular No. 730 dated July 20, 2011 on updated rules implementing the Truth in Lending Act to enhance loan transaction.

Non-compliance with the Circular shall subject the creditor concerned to the following penalties:

a.       First Offense:  Basic fine of Php20,000 and Php100 each day of continuing violation;

b.      Second Offense:  Basic fine of Php25,000 and Php100 each day of continuing violation;

c.       Third Offense:  Basic fine of Php30,000 and Php100 for each day of continuing violation;

Fourth Offense:  Suspension/revocation of the Certificate of Authority to Operate as a Lending or Financing Company.

Technical Briefs – September to October 2011

Accounting Times Vol. 62 No. 3

EWT on PHIC payments

This RMC clarifies the application of the EWT on payments made by the Philippine Health Insurance Corporation (PHIC) to medical practitioners and/or hospitals for PHIC member’s benefits.

Among the income payments subject to EWT are its payments to hospitals (2%) and medical practitioners (10% to 15%) who rendered medical services to PHIC members.

Revenue Memorandum Circular No. 38-2011 dated September 1, 2011

Technical Briefs – September to October 2011

Accounting Times Vol. 62 No. 3

Establishing intent to donate

In determining whether a transaction involves gratuitous transfer that is subject to donor’s tax under Section 98 of the Tax Code, not only the legal documents, but also other external factors surrounding the transactions are considered. Thus, in case where a request to include or affix the names of minor children as transferees, in addition to the parents who are the original buyers, in the Certificate Authorizing Registration (CAR), the BIR shall look into the true intent of the parties to the transaction to determine its liability to donor’s tax.

In the instant case, it was alleged that there was no transfer of property from the parent to their children since they do not own the subject property, hence, the inclusion of their names in the CAR is not subject to donor’s tax. Moreover, it was claimed that the minor children used their allowance, which came from their parents, to purchase the properties.

In its decision, the CTA held that there is a clear “animus donandi” or intent to give when the names of minor children who are not earning any income are included in the CAR and certificate of titles of the property. It held that while it is true that minor children can save money from their allowances and buy properties from their savings, considering the children’s age and the price of property, the children will not be able to save a substantial amount, even if they receive enormous allowances from the parents. Moreover, it is highly unlikely for an individual to own real property at such an early age and without a source of income; thus the CTA deemed the transaction to be a donation.

(Hordon H. Evono and Maribel C. Evono v. Department of Finance, CIR and the Republic of the Philippines, CTA EB No. 705 re CTA Case No. 7573, June 4, 2012)

Tax Brief - July 2012

Punongbayan and Araullo

Revenue Regulations No. 7-2012

Revenue Regulations No. (RR) 7-2012

issued on 2 April 2012 amends the consolidated Revenue Regulations on primary registration, updates and cancellation, particularly on the following:

a. Registration, updates and cancellation procedures

b. Venue, forms and documentary requirements

c. Annual registration fee

d. Certification fee

e. Penalties for registration-related violations

The venue, forms and documentary requirements for the registration of each type of applicant-taxpayer are listed in Annex “A” of the Regulations (please refer to www.bir.gov.ph). Application for Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN) with incomplete documentary requirements shall not be processed.

The TIN, once assigned to a particular taxpayer, is non-transferable and there shall be no instance where two or several taxpayers are holders of the same TIN. Only one TIN shall be assigned to the taxpayer, regardless of variety of transactions, e.g., an employee who is also engaged in his/her own business. Once assigned a TIN, a taxpayer is precluded from applying for another TIN, except for banks with both Regular Banking Unit and with Foreign Currency Deposit Unit where each unit is assigned different TINs. Any person who secures more than one TIN shall be subject to the penalty prescribed under Section 15 of the Regulations.

Non-resident aliens not engaged in trade or business (NRANETB) or non-resident foreign corporations (NRFC) shall be issued TINs for purposes of withholding taxes on their income from sources within the Philippines. The withholding agent shall apply for the TIN on behalf of the NRANETB or NRFC prior to or at the time of the filing of their monthly withholding tax return as applicant under Executive Order No. (EO) 98, Series of 1998.

Branches of identified large taxpayers shall be registered at the Large Taxpayers Service (LTS) where the head office (HO) is registered. All incorporators of corporations/associations (stock and non-stock), partners of partnerships and members of cooperatives must have TINs.

While the application and issuance of a TIN is generally made through the concerned BIR district office, the same, upon certain circumstances provided for by existing rules and regulations, may be obtained through the eREGISTRATION (eREG) facility in the BIR website, through the Securities and Exchange Commission, or through other facilities/ agencies as may be made available in the future.

Applicants whose TINs have been secured through the eREG facility shall complete their registration with the BIR district office (e.g., persons who engage in business/practice of profession), but shall no longer be required to fill out the forms for “Application for Registration.” Instead, a printout of the “System Confirmation Page” and the completed on-line “BIR Form 1901,” which is the proof of e-TIN registration, shall be submitted to the concerned BIR district office, together with the prescribed documentary requirements.

Outsourcing Brief – July 2012

Punongbayan and Araullo

Non-redemption of properties sold during involuntary sales

Properties sold during involuntary sales which are not redeemed shall be considered sold. All applicable taxes, such as capital gains tax (CGT) if the property is a capital asset, the creditable withholding tax (CWT) if the property is an ordinary asset, value-added tax (VAT), and documentary stamp tax (DST) shall become due.

The following are the obligations of owner/mortgagor and buyer/mortgagee on unredeemed properties sold during involuntary sales:

1. The buyer of the property shall file the CGT return and remit the tax to the BIR within 30 days from the expiration of the applicable statutory redemption period. As regards the CWT, the buyer shall file the CWT return and remit the tax within 10 days following the end of the month after expiration of the applicable statutory redemption period. For taxes withheld in December, the CWT returns shall be filed and the taxes remitted on or before January 15 of the following year.

2. In case of property sold through involuntary sale that is subject to VAT, the VAT must be paid to the BIR by the owner/mortgagor on or before the 20th or 25th day, whichever is applicable, of the month following the month when the right of redemption prescribes.

3. The DST return shall be filed and the tax shall be remitted to the BIR within five days from the close of the month after the lapse of the applicable statutory redemption period.

The CGT, CWT, VAT and DST shall be based on whichever is the higher consideration (bid price of the highest bidder) or fair market value or zonal value as determined in accordance with Section 6(E) of the Tax Code.

Revenue Regulations No. 9, June 1, 2012

Tax Brief – July 2012

Punongbayan and Araullo

BIR and MGB sign MOA

The BIR and the Mines and Geosciences Bureau (MGB) entered into an agreement that establishes the policies on the exchange of information between the two agencies. The following are some of the highlights of the agreement:

1. The MGB shall require all mining applicants, contractors, permittees and operators to indicate their respective BIR-validated taxpayer identification number (TIN) in all statistical report forms and mining applications, including application for area clearance required to be submitted under existing rules and regulations. The BIR shall validate the TIN supplied by contractors, permittees, and operators to the MGB.

2. The MGB shall require mining contractors, permittees and operators to present the following:

(a) copy of proof of payment of excise tax on minerals, mineral products and quarry resources duly authenticated by the BIR;

(b) income tax returns and business tax returns (excise tax, VAT and percentage tax for non-VAT contractors) for the operating year(s) immediately preceding the application for permits;

(c) Certificate of BIR registration; and

(d) tax clearance certificate and certificate of “No Delinquent Accounts or Outstanding Liabilities” duly issued by the BIR or written request for such certificates if not issued with 15 working days from actual receipt of request.

The BIR shall process and issue within 15 days upon request the tax clearance certificate and certificate of “No Delinquent Account or Outstanding Tax Liabilities,” which will serve as the MGB’s basis in processing applications or renewals of mining permits and contracts.

3. The MGB shall provide the BIR with the annual list of large-scale metallic mining contractors, permittees and operators in each project with the corresponding volume and value of their gross output within 90 days after the end of each year to serve as basis in the validation of payment for excise tax on minerals. Upon request, the BIR shall certify the proof of payment of excise and other taxes for submission to the MGB.

4. A directory of mines and quarries containing list of mining contractors, permittees or operators of mining projects in the Philippines as of December 31 of the reporting year shall be submitted by the MGB not later than every end of December immediately after the preceding reporting year. The list shall be used by the BIR as a guide in identifying the taxpayers liable to pay excise tax.

Revenue Memorandum Circular No. 28-2012, June 21, 2012

Tax Brief – July 2012

Punongbayan and Araullo

Water Refilling Station

Sa isang siyudad sa Pangasinan, maraming naglipanang water refilling station.  Mas marami pa ang kanilang bilang sa bilang ng barangay sa nasabing lungsod.  Mahigit kalahati sa kanilang bilang ang walang kaukulang permit mula sa Department of Health para magpatakbo ng isang water refilling station.  Wala rin silang business permit mula sa Business Permit and License Office ng lungsod.

Tumigil bumili ng tubig sa isang water refilling station ang pamilya ni Aling Sebya dahil sumakit ang tiyan ng mga bata kapag umiinom nito.  Kanyang napag-alaman na wala palang Mayor’s Permit ang nasabing water refilling station.

Tanong:

Sino ang maaaring kasuhan ni Aling Sebya sa pagkakasakit ng tiyan ng kanyang mga anak?

Sagot:

Ang mga maaaring kasuhan ni Aling Sebya ay ang sumusunod:  ang water refilling station, ang City Health Office at ang Business Permit and License Office.

Ang water refilling station ay mananagot dahil sa kagustuhang kumita, siya ay nagbenta ng tubig na dahilan ng sakit ng kanyang mga customer at kahit wala siyang kaukulang mga dokumento para sa nasabing bisnis.

Ang City Health Office at Business Permit and License Office ay maaaring kasuhan dahil sa pagpapabaya sa tungkulin.  Hindi dapat hinayaan ng City Health Office at Business Permit and License Office na magbukas at magbenta ng tubig ang nasabing water refilling station kung ito ay hindi pa nainspection ng City Health Office na hindi kontiminado ang tubig na ibinibenta.  Meron ding pagpapabaya ang Business Permit and License Office dahil hinayaang magbukas at magbenta ang nasabing water refilling station kahit wala pa itong Mayor’s Permit mula sa kanila.

Lascivious conduct through fraudulent machination

QUESTION: “A” is married to “X”. “Z” pretended to be his twin brother, “X”, and by that ploy he was able to freely undress “A”, kiss her nipples and rub his erect penis on the mons pubis of her vulva. After a few minutes, “Z” ejaculated. The crime committed is

(A) Rape since under RA No. 8353 this crime can be committed by means of fraudulent machination.

(B) Attempted rape because there is intent to have sexual intercourse on the part of “Z”. 

(C) Acts of lasciviousness because “Z” committed lascivious conduct upon “A” without intent to have sexual intercourse.

(D) Unjust vexation because “Z” did not employ violence or intimation, and hence, he could not be held liable for acts of lasciviousness.

While it is true that pretending to be a husband of the victim constitutes fraudulent machination, which is a mode of committing rape under RA No. 8353, nevertheless “Z” cannot be held liable for consummated rape. Jurisprudence dictates that the labia majora must be entered for rape to be consummated, and not merely for the penis to stroke the surface of the female organ.  Thus, a grazing of the surface of the female organ or touching the mons pubis of the pudendum is not sufficient to constitute consummated rape. Absent any showing of the slightest penetration of the female organ, i.e., touching of labia majora or minora of the pudendum by the penis, there can be no consummated rape (People vs. Campuhan, G.R. No. 129433, March 30, 2000, En Banc). Hence, “A” is not the answer.

“Z” cannot be held liable for attempted rape since he did not cause his erect penis to enter the labia of “A” in the midst of opportunity thereof. This indicates lack of intent to have sexual intercourse, which is an indispensable element of attempted rape (People vs. Abanilla, G.R. Nos. 148673-75, October 17, 2003). Hence, “B” is not the answer.

Under Article 336 of the Revised Penal Code, any person who shall commit any act of lasciviousness upon other persons of either sex, under any of the circumstances mentioned in the preceding article, shall be punished by prision correccional. Article 335, which is the preceding article of Article 336, is the definitional provision of rape. Hence, the modes of committing rape such as use of force or intimidation are the same as those of committing acts of lasciviousness.

RA No. 8353 reclassified rape as crime against persons and made it punishable under Article 266-A of the Revised Penal Code. Under this provision, fraudulent machination is a new mode of committing rape. However, since this new mode is not found under Article 335 of the Code, it cannot be treated as mode of committing acts of lasciviousness. The terms “the preceding article” mentioned in Article 336 still pertains to Article 335 and not Article 266-A. 

In Flordeliz vs. People, G.R. No. 186441, March 3, 2010 - The crime of Acts of Lasciviousness has the following elements: (1) That the offender commits any act of lasciviousness or lewdness; (2) That it is done under any of the following circumstances: a. By using force or intimidation; or b. When the offended party is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious; or c. When the offended party is under 12 years of age; and (3) That the offended party is another person of either sex.

In this case, “Z” committed lascivious conduct upon “A” by means of fraudulent machination and not by using force or intimidation. Hence, “Z” cannot be held liable for acts of lasciviousness. Without employing force or intimidation, acts of lewdness constitute the crime of unjust vexation (See: People vs. Bernaldo, CA-G.R. No. 26102-R, Oct. 31, 1959). Hence, the answer is “D” and not “C”.

Marlo Campanilla

Presiding Judge

Metropolitan Trial Court

Branch 83, Caloocan City

SEC-OGC Opinion No. 12-05 dated April 2, 2012

TJM Association is a non-stock national organization with several chapters nationwide.  Based on its By-Laws, it has 25 National Directors consisting of 21 Regional Directors and 4 Sectoral Directors.  The 21 Regional Directors are elected by members belonging to defined geographical areas while Sectoral Directors are elected nationwide by members belonging to each sector.

The SEC was asked to opine on whether TJM’s method of electing directors on a regional basis is in violation of the Corporation Code?

Section 89 of the Corporation Code, applicable to non-stock corporations, provides that the right of members to vote may be limited to the extent specified in the articles and by-laws.  Under this provision, there is nothing objectionable about the manner of voting for the directors of TJM as provided in its By-Laws. Its By-Laws have in effect limited the right of members to vote only for candidates for director for their own region.  Hence, under Section 89, regional elections for directors may be allowed as long as it is the mode of election provided in the non-stock corporation’s by-laws.

BIR Ruling No. 247-12 dated April 13, 2012

JMM Co. is a domestic corporation operating toll facilities by virtue of a franchise.  It held in trust for the Government certain shares in various subsidiaries and joint venture companies.  In view of the expiration of its franchise in 1997, P Co. was ordered by the Supreme Court to transfer the said shares in favor of the Government.

Being made without monetary consideration and merely for confirmation of title / ownership in favor of the Government as beneficial owner, the BIR held that transfer is not subject to Capital Gains Tax imposed under Section 27(A) and (D)(2) of the Tax Code.  Likewise, the BIR opined that no donor’s tax is applicable since the transaction was made without intent to do an act of liberality on the part of the transferor and merely in compliance with a Supreme Court decision.  Further, the transfer is subject to the DST on certificates under Section 188 of the Tax Code, not to the DST on sales, or agreements to sell, or transfer of shares or certificates of stock.

Accounting Times, Vol. 62 No. 4, June 2012

Psychological incapacity

Dahil si Sarah ay buntis na, sila ni Gerard ay ikinasal sa bahay ng magulang ni Sarah ng isang pastor na protestante. Meron silang tig-tatlong ninong at ninang na dumalo sa nasabing kasalan.

Pagkatapos ng kasal, madalas sinasaktan ni Gerard si Sarah lalo na kung lasing kung umuwi galing sa trabaho.  Dahil ang inatupag ay ang pagbabarkada, hindi nagkaroon ng permanenteng trabaho si Gerard.  Tiniis ni Sarah ang ganitong sitwasyon para sa kapakanan ng kanilang dalawang anak.

Minsang umuwing lasing si Gerard, nag-away sila ni Sarah na noon ay buntis sa pangatlo nilang anak at sinakal ni Gerard ang kanilang pangalawang anak na isang taong gulang.  Habang hawak ang leeg ng bata, sinabi ni Gerard na pabigat sila na buhay niya.

Hindi na makatiis si Sarah at gusto na niyang hiwalayan si Gerard.

Tanong:

Kung magsampa ng kasong annulment of marriage ayon sa Article 36 ng Family Code si Sarah, makakuha kaya siya ng favorableng desisyon?

Sagot:

Kung maliban sa salaysay ni Sarah ay matunayan ng hukuman na taglay ni Gerard ang walang kakayanan na gampanan ang papel bilang asawang lalaki dahil sa isang depekto sa pagkatao na pinatunayan ng isang psychologist, ang kasalang Sarah at Gerard ay maaaring mapawalang bisa.

Mandatory submission of quarter Summary List of Sales and Purchases

On February 20, 2012, the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) issued Revenue Regulations No. (RR) 1-2012, which requires the mandatory submission of quarterly summary list of sales and purchases (SLSP) by all Value-Added Tax (VAT) registered taxpayers, thereby amending Section 4.114-3 of RR 16 -2005, as amended, otherwise known as the Consolidated Value-Added Tax Regulations of 2005.

SECTION 4.114-3 (a). Submission of Quarterly Summary List of Sales and Purchases is modified as follows:

1. Persons required to submit summary lists of sales – All persons liable for VAT such as manufacturers, wholesalers, service-providers, among others are required to submit Summary List of Sales.

2. Persons required to submit summary lists of purchases - All persons liable for VAT such as manufacturers, service-providers, among others are required to file Summary List of Purchases.

Moreover, Section 4.114-3(e) 7 has also been modified to provide that the quarterly SLSP shall be submitted through compact disk-recordable (CDR) medium following the format provided in Subsection (g) of the regulations.

All reference to “magnetic form 3.5-inch floppy diskettes” in RR 16-2005 shall henceforth refer to “Compact Disk-Recordable (CDR)” device.

This Revenue Regulations took effect on January 1, 2012.

Outsourcing Brief – January to March 2012

Punongbayan and Araullo

Certificate of Authority to Register

Si Ramona ay bumili ng lupa kay Jonas sa halagang P500,000 upang pagtitirikan ng bahay.  Si Ramona ang naglakad sa papeles para ilipat sa kanyang pangalan ang mga dokumento ng lupain.  Nakakuha ng Tax Declaration si Ramona mula sa Provincial Assessor.

Nagtataka si Filipina kung bakit naibenta ang nasabing lupa habang ito ay isinanla sa kanya ni Jonas sa halagang P60,000.  Kaya humingi siya ng kopya ng Deed of Sale mula sa Municipal Assessor at kanyang napag-alaman na hindi pala nagbayad ng kaukulang Capital Gains Tax si Ramona dahil walang Certificate of Authority to Register mula sa Bureau of Internal Revenue.  Ganoong din hindi nakansela ang Titulo ng nasabing lupain mula kay Jason papunta kay Romana dahil hindi rin dumaan sa Register of Deeds ang transaksyon.

Mga Tanong:

(a)      Sino-sino ang mga mananagot sa pagkalipat ng Tax Declaration sa pangalan ni Ramona na hindi dumaan sa BIR at Register of Deeds?

(b)      Ano ang dapat gawin ni Filipina upang mapangalagaan ang kanyang interes sa lupang isinanla sa kanya na lumalabas na ibinenta pagkatapos kay Ramona?

Mga Sagot:

(a)      Kung walang kinalaman ang BIR at SEC sa pagkalipat ng Tax Declaration sa pangalan ni Ramona ang mga taong mananagot ay ang nakinabang sa paglipat ng pangalan na hindi dumaan sa tamang proseso at ang tanggapan ng gobyerno na hindi humingi ng mga kailangan dokumento sa paglilipat sa pangalan sa Tax Declaration.

Kung susundin ang daan matuwid sa paglilipat ng pangalan ng bumili sa Tax Declaration bilang bagong may-ari, hihingin ng Municipal o Provincial Assessor ang Certificate of Authority to Register galing sa Bureau of Internal Revenue. Ito ay patunay na nabayaran ang Capital Gains Tax at Documentary Stamp Tax sa bentahan ng lupa.  Pangalawa, hihingin din ng Municipal or Provincial Assessor ang Certificate of Registration mula sa Register of Deeds. Ito naman ay patunay na ang transaksyon ay dumaan sa Register of Deeds.  Pangatlo, hihingin pa rin ng Municipal o Provincial Assessor ang Tax Clearance Certificate mula sa Municipal Treasurer bilang patunay na bayad hanggang sa kasalukuyan ang Real Property Taxes ang naturang lupain.

(b)      Ang dapat gawin ni Filipina ay magsampa ng kaukulang kaso laban kay Jason sa pagbebenta ng lupang dati ng nakasanla at hilingin sa Register of Deeds na i-annotate sa titulo ang kontrata ng sanla sa pagitan niya at ng dating may-ari.

This article is also published at:
http://www.placesure.com/groups/general-public/forums/topic/certificate-of-authority-to-register/

Revenue Regulations No. 09-2012 dated May 31, 2012

In cases of non-redemption of properties sold during involuntary sales, regardless of the type of proceedings and personality of mortgagees / selling persons or entitles, the following taxes shall become due:

1.       Capital Gains Tax (CGT) if the property sold is a capital asset;

2.       Creditable Withholding Tax (CWT) if the property sold is an ordinary asset;

3.       Value-added Tax (VAT); and

4.       Documentary Stamp Tax (DST)

The buyer shall file the returns and remit the taxes withheld within the following periods:

1.       CGT – within 30 days from the expiration of the applicable statutory redemption;

2.       CWT – within 10 days following the end of the month after the expiration of the applicable statutory redemption period, provided, that for taxes withheld in December, the return shall be filed and the taxes remitted to BIR on or before January 15 of the following year;

3.       VAT – on or before the 20^th or the 25^th day, whichever is applicable,, of the month following the month when the right of redemption prescribes;

4.       DST – within 5 days after the close of the month after the lapse of the applicable statutory redemption period.

The CGT / CWT / VAT and DST shall be based on whichever is higher between the consideration (bid price of the highest bidder) or the fair market value or zonal value as determined in accordance with Section 6(E) of the NIRC.

Contempt at Barangay Court

Nagsampa ng reklamo si Mikay sa Barangay dahil ayaw bayaran ni Ashi ang kanyang utang sa halagang P65,000.  Nagpadala ng abiso sa unang paghaharap ang Pangulo ng Lupon kay Ashi ngunit hindi ito sumipot.  Nagpadala ulit ng abiso sa pangalawang paghaharap ngunit hindi pa rin sumipot kahit na personal niyang tinanggap ang abiso. Kaya nagpadala ng pangatlong abiso ng paghaharap, tulad ng dalawang naunang abiso, dumating si Mikay sa opisina ng Lupon pero sa pangatlong beses hindi pa rin sumipot si Ashi.

Dahil dito, si Mikay ay binigyan ng Pangulo ng Lupon ng Certification to File Action.

Tanong:

Tama ba ang naging desisyon ng Pangulo ng Lupon?

Sagot:

Hindi.  Ayon sa Katarungan Barangay na napapaloob sa Local Government Code o Republic Act No. 7610, kapag ayaw sumipot ng isang partido sa reklamo sa Lupon Tagapamayapa sa barangay kahit may tamang abiso, ang dapat ginagawa ng Pangulo ng Lupon ay magpapatulong sa Municipal Trial Court na makasuhan ng contempt ang nasabing partido dahil hindi niya sinipot ng mga pagdinig sa Lupon.

Dahil hindi pa naghaharap ang nagreklamo at ang nireklamo sa Lupon, hindi pa masasabing hindi magkasundo ang mga partido.  Kaya hindi pa dapat magbigay ng Certificate to File Action ang Pinuno ng Lupon.

BIR Ruling No. 26-2012 dated January 12, 2012

SDS Co., a domestic corporation, acquired 11 parcels of land from the Asset Privatization Trust, the government agency in charge in disposing the government’s non-performing assets.  Although the parcels of land are located in various localities, SDS Co. filed all pertinent tax returns and paid the corresponding taxes with BIR Pasay for the issuance of the Certificates Authorizing Registration (CARs).

SDS Co. requested for a ruling that the CARs be issued by BIR Pasay for the transfer of the subject parcels of land.

The BIR ruled that BIR Pasay cannot issue the CARs to SDS Co. since under Section 5 of RR No. 5-09, CARs shall be issued by the Revenue District Office of the BIR district having jurisdiction over the place where the property being transferred is located.

Senior Citizen discounts

Si Mang Ador ay retiradong kawani ng gobyerno.  Dahil sa katandaan marami na siyang mga gamot para sa kanyang high blood, diyabetes and kolesterol.

Lahat ng botika sa bayan ay nagsabi sa kanya na ang oras ng pagbili ng mga senior citizen ay mula ala-una hanggang alas dos ng tanggali lamang at ang pwedeng bilhin ay ang magagamit lang niya sa loob ng isang linggo.

Tanong:

Tama ba ang mga botika?

Sagot:

Hindi.  Walang nakatadhana sa batas ng Senior Citizen na may nakalaang oras silang bumili at wala ring limistasyon sa dami ng bibilhin basta ito ay may prescription ng doctor.

BIR Ruling No. 14-2012 dated January 4, 2012

A PEZA-registered Ecozone export enterprise, enjoys 5% Gross Income Tax incentive on gross income from the manufacture and sale of lighters.  Under license agreement, BV Co. granted the enterprise the right to use intellectual property over technology and trademarks in the manufacture and sale of lighters.

In consideration for granting the license, the said enterprise pays royalties to BV Co, which, in its opinion, are deductible from its gross income for purposes of computing 5% gross income tax.

The BIR held that the royalty payments to be paid by the enterprise to BV Co. are not deductible for purposes of the 5% gross income tax.  The BIR argued that Section 2, Rule XX of the PEZA implementing Rules and Regulations provides an exclusive enumeration of allowable deductions from the gross income of Ecozone Export Enterprises and the enumeration does not include royalty payments.