Prof.

pdf
Saved to Dropbox • 16 Sep 2017, 3905 PM

Value Added Tax

Prof. Serafin U . Salvador,
Jr. ​ ​October 2017

SYLLABUS
TRANSFER TAXES & TAXPAYER’S REMEDIES
TAX II

Course Requirements:
Class Participation: Attendance, Recitation, and Reporting
Final Exam: Departmental MCQ and Essay

ESTATE TAX
Sec. 84-97, Sec. 104, NIRC; Revenue Regulation (RR) 17-93 -
Estate Tax Regulations, as amended by RR 2-2003 dated Jan. 17,
2003)

Lorenzo v. Posadas, G.R. No. L-43082, June 18, 1937 - transmission

by inheritance is taxable at the time of the predecessor's death,
notwithstanding the postponement of the actual possession or
enjoyment of the estate by the beneficiary, and the tax measured by
the value of the property transmitted at that time regardless of its
appreciation or depreciation

GROSS ESTATE – Rule for Imposition

i. Resident, non-resident alien

ii. Reciprocity of exemption (CIR v. Fisher, G.R. Nos. L-11622 &

L-11668, Jan. 28, 1961)

iii. Valuation of gross estate

a. Decedent’s interest
b. Transfers in contemplation of death
c. Revocable transfers
d. Property passing under general appointment
e. Proceeds of life insurance
 f. Priorinterest
g. Transfer for insufficient consideration

RR 2-82: Taxation of shares of stock, as amended by RR 6-

2008, Apr. 22, 2008

1. Exclusion from gross estate: capital of surviving spouse

2. Deduction from gross estate

a. Funeral expenses
b. Judicial expenses
c. Claim v. the estate
d. Claims v. insolvent persons
e. Unpaid mortgages and losses
f. Property previously taxed – vanishing deduction
g. Transfer for public purpose
h. Family house
i. Share in the conjugal property
j. Standard deduction

3. Tax credit for estate taxes

4. Exemption of certain acquisitions

5. Tax returns

i. ​Time to file and notice

ii. ​Payment of tax

6. Obligations of executor, administrator, officers, others

DONOR’S TAX (Sec. 98-103, NIRC)

1. Imposition of gift tax

2. Transfer of inadequate consideration

3. Exemption from gift tax

4. Tax credit
5. Tax return (time and filing and payment)

6. Political contributions: tax treatment (Abello v. CIR, G.R.

No. 120721, Feb. 23, 2005) [See Sec. 13, Omnibus
Election Code (Treatment of political contributions to
candidates and political parties)]

RMC 30-2016 (Mar. 14, 2016): Only those

donations/contributions that have been utilized/spent during
the campaign period as set by the COMELEC are exempt from
donor’s tax.
RR 7-2011 (Feb. 18, 2011): Tax treatment of campaign
contributions and expenditures

RR 8-2009 (Oct. 22, 2009): Withholding tax on all political

contributions and campaign expenditures of candidates running
for public office.

7. Deemed donation: Philippine American Life and General

Insurance Company (Philamlife) v. Sec. of Finance and
CIR, G.R. No. 210987, Nov. 24, 2014 – under Sec. 100 of
NIRC, no donative intent required

VALUE-ADDED TAX

1. Sec. 105-115, NIRC as amended by RA 8424 & RA 9238,

February 5, 2004 and RA 9337 effective July 1, 2005,
implemented by RR 16-2005 (Oct. 19, 2005) & RR No.
4-2007 (Mar. 20, 2007) and RA 10378 (March 7, 2013)
exempts international carriers from VAT

2. RR 2-88, Revenue Memorandum Order (RMO) 22-92

3. Tolentino v. Guingona, G.R. 115455, Aug. 25, 1994 –

legality of EVAT; Motion for Reconsideration – G.R. L-
11455, Oct. 30, 1995
 Abakada Guro Party List, et al. v. Hon. E. Ermita, G.R.
168056, Sept. 1, 2005; Motion for Reconsideration - Oct. 18,
2005

4. RR 7-95

5. RMO 39-95

6. Revenue Memorandum Circular (RMC) 1-96 up to 7-96

7. Philamlife v. CTA, CA-G.R. SP No. 31283, Apr. 25, 1995 -

definition of royalty

8. Commonwealth Mgt. & Services Corp. (Comaresco) v. CIR &

CTA, CA-G.R. SP No. 34032, Dec. 21, 1995) - Are
reimbursements subject to VAT?

See also:
RMC 9-2006 (Feb. 2, 2006), clarifying amount subject to
VAT of brokers

RMC No. 39-2007, (Jun. 13, 2007), clarifies the income tax
and VAT treatment of agency fees of security agencies

9. Opinion 40, April 22, 1996 – effectivity of VAT on other

taxpayers

10. Improved VAT (IVAT) – RA 8241, December 20, 1996

(effectivity date – January 1, 1997 (RR 6-97, Jan. 2,
1997)

11. RR 8-99 (May 11, 1999) penalties for indicating separately

VAT in sales invoice or O.R. on sale of goods or services
as amended by RA 9337 and implemented by RR 16-
2005 – “…the invoice or receipt shall clearly indicate the
break-down of the sale price between its taxable, exempt
and zero-rated components, and the calculation of the
value-added tax on each portion of the sale shall be
known on the invoice or receipt…”

See also: RR 4-2007 (Mar. 20, 2007) - If the VAT is not

billed separately in the document of sale, the selling price
or the consideration stated therein shall be deemed to be
inclusive of VAT
12. RR 1-2005 (Feb. 11, 2005) amends RR 7-95 & RR 8-2002
re: VAT exemption on real estate sales and rentals

13. RR 13-97 (Nov. 18, 1997) - Submission of the names of all

buyers of goods and services subject to VAT to be
contained in Summary List of Sales (SLS) and the names
of sellers/suppliers to be contained in Summary List of
Purchases (SLP)

14. RR 7-99 (Apr. 20, 1999) as amended by RR 8-2002 (Jun.

24, 2002) – Submission of diskettes for summary list of
sales and purchases within the following month at the
close of each calendar quarter

15. RMC 74-99, October 15, 1999 – tax treatment of sales of

goods and services made by suppliers from western
territory to a PEZA registered enterprise and sale
transactions made by PEZA registered enterprises within
and without the zone. (Destination or Cross Border
Principle first adopted November 5, 1998, BIR Ruling
032-98, Shimizu Philippines)

16. American Express v. Commissioner, CA-G.R. SP No.

62727, Feb. 28, 2002 (zero rated sale of service); G.R.
No. 152609, Jun. 29, 2005

17. CIR v. Burmeister and Wain, G.R. No. 153205, Jan. 22,
2007

18. CIR v. Magsaysay Lines, G.R. No. 146984, Jul. 28, 2006 -
No VAT on sale not made in trade or business

On “incidental sale”, see also item 33. (Mindanao

Geothermal II v. CIR, March 11, 2013)

19. RR 6-2001, (Aug. 1, 2001) - payment of VAT within 10 days

after end of the month, as amended by RR 8-2002 (Jun.
24, 2002) - filing of VAT returns

20. RR 29-2002 (Dec. 20, 2002), VAT on refined sugar as

amended by RR 2-2004 (Feb. 26, 2004), supplemented by
RR 4-2004 (Mar. 26, 2004) and RR 16-2005, as amended
by RR 13-2008 (Sept. 19, 2008), RR 4-2015 (Mar. 13,
2015), RR 8-2015 (May 27, 2015)
21. RA No. 9361 (December 13, 2006) as implemented by RR
No. 2-2007 (Dec. 29, 2006) - Repeal of 70% input VAT
Cap

22. CIR v. Seagate Technology Phils., GR No. 153866, Feb. 11,

2005 (effectively zero-rated transactions with PEZA)

23. RMC 77-2008 (Dec. 3, 2008) revokes RMC 34-2008 (April

18, 2008) re: VAT on Directors’ Fees

24. RMC No. 31-2008 (Apr. 11, 2008) & No. 46-2008 (Jun. 20,
2008), Clarifications concerning common carriers by Sea
and Air as to vatability.

25. Sec. 112 - Period to file claim for refund or credit of input
VAT for zero-rated sales.

CIR v. San Roque Power Corporation, GR No. 187485

(Feb. 12, 2013) Failure to comply with the 120 day
waiting period violate mandatory provision of Sec.
112(d). The two year period does not refer to the filing of
the judicial claim with CTA but to the filing of the
administrative claim

26. RR 10-2011 (July 7, 2011); Transfer of real estate used in

business or held to lease subject to VAT (Amending RR
6-2006 and RR 4-2007) Also, exemption from VAT of
transfer from real estate dealer to another real estate
dealer is deleted.

27. RR No. 16-2011, (Oct. 28, 2011) - Adjusted thresholds of

VAT effective January 1, 2012

28. Diaz & Timbol v. Secretary of Finance, G.R. No. 193007,

Jul. 19, 2011 - “VAT on Toll Fees”

29. Fort Bonifacio Dev. Corp. v. CIR, G.R. No. 173425, Sept. 4,
2012 - Refund allowable even if no prior payment of
input VAT

30. Waterfront Philippines, Inc. v. CIR, CTA EB No. 1070, Dec.

4, 2014 - VAT on interest income
 31. Rohm Apollo Semiconductor Philippines v. CIR, G.R. No.
168950, Jan. 14, 2015 – When the 120 day period lapses
and there is inaction on the part of the CIR, the inaction is
the decision itself and is deemed a dismissal of the refund
claims. The taxpayer must appeal within 30 days from the
lapse of the 120 day period.

32. RMC 49-2003 as amended by RMC 54-2014 (Jun. 11,

2014) and further amended by RR 1-2017 (Jan. 18, 2017)
– RMC 54-2014 cannot apply retroactively for claims
filed and pending prior to Jun. 11, 2014, the date the
RMC took effect

See also: Pilipinas Total Gas, Inc. v CIR, G.R. No.

207112, Dec. 8, 2015 – Prior to the issuance of RMC 54-
2014, it is the taxpayer who ultimately determines when
complete documents have been submitted for purpose of
commencing and continuing the 120 day period.
However, under the current rule in RMC 54-2014, the
reckoning of the period has been withdrawn from the
taxpayer since he is required to attest that he will no
longer submit other documents at the time of filing. He is
also barred from submitting additional documents after he
has filed his administrative claim. Nonetheless, the
foregoing issuance cannot be applied retroactively since it
imposes new obligations upon taxpayers to perfect their
claim.

33. Mindanao II Geothermal Partnership v. CIR, G.R. No.

193301 & 194637, Mar. 11, 2013 - a transaction "in the
course of trade or business" includes "transactions
incidental thereto”; the sale of the jeep is an incidental
transaction made in the course of business which should
be liable for VAT

OTHER PERCENTAGE TAXES

Sec. 116 ​Tax on persons exempt from VAT

Sec. 117-118 ​Carriers tax as amended by RA 9337 (July 1, 2005)

and RA 10378, March 7, 2013:
​Limits the 3% carrier’s tax on cargoes of international
carriers
RR 11-2011 ​(July 20, 2011), Amending Sec. 10 of RR 15-
2002; Definition of gross receipt for common carriers

Sec. 119 ​Tax on franchises

Sec. 120 ​Overseas communications tax

Sec. 121 ​Tax on banks and financial intermediaries as amended

by RA 7716 & RA 9238 (China Banking Corp. v. CTA,
G.R. 146749, Jun. 10, 2003 - base of 5% GRT on interest
income, RA 9238 as implemented by RR 9-2004 (GRT on
banks), RA 9337, effective July 1, 2005 on increase of
GRT to 7% on other income of banks)

Sec. 122 ​Tax on finance companies (BIR Ruling, August 16,

1990 on credit card companies as amended by RA 9238)

Sec. 123 ​Tax on Insurance premiums, as amended by RA 8424

Sec. 124 ​Tax on agents of foreign insurance companies

Sec. 125 ​Amusement taxes (RMC 8-88, February 19, 1888, p.

785, Nolledo)

Sec. 126 ​Tax on winnings

Sec. 127 ​Percentage tax on IPOs

Sec. 128 ​Payment of percentage taxes RR 6-2001 (Jul. 31, 2001)

CIR v. Lhuiller Pawnshop, G.R. 15094, Jul. 15, 2003 (pawnshops

are not lending investors)

RR 10-2004, 5% GRT on pawnshops (beginning January 2004);

also Money Shops or Forex Shops (RR 4-2007)

EXCISE TAXES ON CERTAIN GOODS

Chapters 1 and 2
 Sec. 129 to Sec. 140, NIRC, as amended by RA 10351 (Dec.
26, 2012), implemented by RR 17-2012, implementing
guidelines on revised tax rates on alcohol, etc. effective
January 1, 2013;

RMC No. 90-2012 (Dec. 28, 2012) & RMC 03-2013 (Jan. 9,
2013)

Chapter 3 – Excise tax on alcohol products

​RA 10351, implemented by RR 17-2012 & RMCs above

Chapter 4 – Excise tax on tobacco products

​Sec. 144 – 147, NIRC as amended by RA 10351 &

implemented by RR 17-2012

Chapter 5 and 6 – Excise tax on petroleum products and

miscellaneous articles

Sec. 148 – 150, NIRC as amended by RA 9337 effective July

1, 2005 (deleting excise tax on certain petroleum products)

RR 4-2003, January 29, 2003, Revised Regulations on Excise

Tax of Automobiles ​amending RR 14-99, October 13, 1999
(before Amendment by RA No. 9224)

Chapter 7 – Excise tax on mineral products

​Sec. 151, NIRC as amended by RA 7729, June 2, 1994

RA 9224, October 2003 - Excise tax on cars,

RR 25-2003 (Sept. 16, 2003), new rules implementing RA

9224

DOCUMENTARY STAMP TAX

Sec. 173 – 201, NIRC, as amended by RA 8424 & RA 9243 (Feb. 7,

2004) & RR 13-2004 (Dec. 29, 2004)

RA 7660, December 23, 1993, effective January 14, 1994

RR 9-94 (Mar. 8, 1994) - New DST Regulations

RR 6-2001, (Aug. 1, 2001) - Payment of DST within 5 days, as

amended by RR 15-2001 (Oct. 18, 2001)

Banco de Oro v. CIR, CTA EB No. 165, Aug. 15, 2006 – Investment
Savings Account (ISA) subject to DST as time deposit certificate

RA No. 9648 (Exemption from DST stocks traded through Stock

Exchange) June 30, 2009 (retroactive to March 20, 2009)

RR No. 7-2009 (Oct. 2, 2009) - Electronic DST (EDST) System as

clarified by RMC 51-2010 (Jun. 15, 2010)

REMEDIES

1. Sec. 4, NIRC - Power of Secretary of Finance to review rulings of

CIR as implemented by RMC 44-2001 (Oct. 11, 2001) and
DOF Order 702 (May 7, 2002)

(See u. ​Philamlife v. Sec. of Finance, GR No. 210987, Nov.

24, 2014)

2. Sec. 6 – Sec. 17, NIRC

3. Sec. 2002 – Sec. 282, NIRC

4. RR 12-99 (Sept. 14, 1999) implementing the provisions of the

NIRC on rules of assessment, civil penalties and interest and
extra-judicial settlement of taxpayer’s criminal violation under
RMO 1-90, as amended by RR 18-2013 (Nov. 28, 2013)

5. RR No. 11-2006 (Jun. 15, 2006) - Accreditation of Tax

Practitioners to Practice before BIR

6. Cases:

a. RP v. CTA & Nielson & Co., G.R. 38540, Apr. 30, 1987, 149
SCRA 351 - Demand letter/follow-up letter for payment
of taxes considered notice of assessment
b. Collector v. Pedro Bautista and Dativa Tan, G.R. No. L-
12250 & L-12259, May 27, 1959 - Notice of Assessment
deemed made when notice is released, mailed and does
not require that notice be received within 3 year period

c. Republic v. Ricarte, GR L-46893, Nov. 12, 1985 - action to

assess prescribed since there was no proof that notice was
sent

d.
i. Advertising Associates v. CTA, G.R. No. L-59758,
Dec. 26, 1984, 133 SCRA 765 (p. 939, Nolledo) -
Reviewable decision of CIR where he directs taxpayers
to appeal to CTA not mere issuances of warrants of
distraint and levy

ii. CIR v. Union Shipping, GR 66160, May 21, 1990 -

Demand to pay deficiency tax considered final
decision of CIR

iii. Surigao Electric v. CTA, G.R. No. L-25289, Jun. 28,

1974, 57 SCRA 523 - CIR should categorically state
whether order is final determination so that it can be
appealed to the CTA

e.
i. CIR v. Isabel Cultural Corporation, G.R. No. 135210,
Jul. 11, 2001 - Final demand letter from BIR is
tantamount to denial of request for reconsideration
which is therefore appealable to CTA

ii. Oceanic Wireless Network v. CIR, G.R. No. 148380,

Dec. 9, 2005 - Final demand letter from Accounts
Receivable Division Head was final decision of the
CIR and constituted appealable decision to CTA

f. Gibbs v. CIR, G.R. No. L-17406, Nov. 29, 1965 (period to

file refund claim) and Gibbs v. Collector, GR No. L-
13453, Feb. 29, 1960 (2-year period is absolute)

​(If income of taxpayer is withheld at source he is deemed

to have paid his tax liability at the end of the tax year. It
is from this date that the 2-year period will run.)
g. CIR v. TMX Sales & CTA, GR 83736, Jan. 15, 1992 - when
to count 2-year period if on installment basis. If taxpayer
pays income tax on quarterly basis, the 2-year period is
counted from the time of filing final adjustment return.

​CIR v. Philamlife Insurance Co., G.R. No. 105208, May

29, 1995 - Obiter by Justice Vitug referring to the 10-year
period on taxes not erroneously/illegally paid. Likewise,
the claim must be filed within 2 years regardless of
supervening cause.

​See also: Pacific Pro., Ltd. Case, G.R. No. 68013, Nov.
12, 1984 - counting of two-year prescriptive period for
filing claim for refund of overpaid corporate income tax
starts from time final adjustment return is filed.

h. CIR v. Wyeth, G.R. No. 76281, Sept. 30, 1991 - Sec. 222 &
223; request for reinvestigation suspends the 5-year
period for collection of tax

i. ABS-CBN Broadcasting Corp. v. CTA, G.R. No. L-52306,

Oct. 12, 1981, 108 SCRA 143 - non-retroactivity of ruling
requiring 3 years back taxes after previous circular
violated Sec. 246

See again: Pilipinas Total Gas, Inc. v CIR, G.R. No.

207112, Dec. 8, 2015 – the rule on non-retroactivity [of
RMC 54-2014] is provided under Sec. 246 of the Tax
Code.

j. CIR v. Court of Appeals, Lucio Tan, et al., G.R. No. 119322,

Jun. 4, 1996

k. CIR v. CTA & Fortune Tobacco, G.R. 119761, Aug. 29, 1996

l. CIR v. Pascor Realty & Development Corp., G.R. 128315,

Jun. 29, 1999 - Assessment not necessary before filing
criminal complaint for tax evasion based on Sec. 222
itself;

See also Lucas Adamson v. CA & CIR, G.R. No. 120935,

May 21, 2009
m. Lascona Land Co., Inc. v. CIR, G.R. No. 171251, Mar. 5,
2012

See also: Allied Banking Corporation v. Parayno, CTA

6565, Nov. 3, 2004 and CTA EB No. 69, Jul. 11, 2005 -
When to elevate assessment to CTA

n. San Agustin v. CIR, G.R. No. 138485, Sept. 10, 2001 -

taxpayer can appeal a disputed assessment despite
payment of deficiency tax. Filing of refund not necessary
for this purpose.

o. Philippine Journalists, Inc. v. CIR, G.R. No. 162852, Dec.

16, 2004 - Waiver of prescription must be executed
properly per RMO 20-90, otherwise, invalid

See also: CIR v Philippine Daily Inquirer, G.R. No.

213943, Mar. 22, 2017 – defective waiver for non-
compliance with RMO 20-90 and RDAO 05-01 will not
extend the 3 year prescriptive period to assess deficiency
tax; the BIR cannot shift the blame to the taxpayer and
hide behind the doctrine of estoppel

p. CIR v. Philippine Global Communications, G.R. No. 167146,

Oct. 31, 2006 - Prescriptive period to collect taxes
assessed by CIR

q. RCBC v. CIR, G.R. No. 168498, April 24, 2007 - Options for
disputing tax assessment mutually exclusive under
Section 228

r. BPI v. CIR, G.R. No. 174942, Mar. 7, 2008 - Suspension of

collection requires request for reinvestigation to be
granted

s. CIR v. Enron Subic Power Corp., G.R. No. 166387, Jan. 19,
2009 - FAN must state legal and factual basis of
assessments to be valid

See also: CIR v. Fitness by Design, G.R. No. 215957,

Nov. 9, 2016 – FAN should purport to be a demand for
payment of tax due, not only a computation of tax
liability; basis for allegations of fraud should include
details of the fraudulent act as part of due process
 t. Philamlife v. Sec. of Finance, GR No. 210987, Nov. 24, 2014
- Jurisdiction of CTA over Review Power of Sec. of
Finance, Sec. 4, NIRC

u. Cebu Mitsumi, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue,

CTA No. 8531, May 21, 2015 and MR Aug. 5, 2015 -
There must first be a grant of letter of authority before an
officer can conduct an examination or issue an
assessment.

See also: CIR v. DLSU, G.R. No. 196596, Nov. 9, 2016 -

RMO 43-90 does not say that a Letter of Authority
(LOA) which contains unverified prior years [together
with a specified year] is void. It merely prescribes that if
the audit includes more than one taxable period, the other
periods or years must be specified as well. Only the
assessments for the unspecified years are void and not the
specified year’s assessment.

Medicard Philippines, Inc. v CIR, G.R. No. 222743, Apr.

5, 2017 – FAN issued on basis of Letter Notice (LN) is
void. LOA is required to be issued. In the absence of such
an authority, the assessment or examination is a nullity.

v. CIR v. Next Mobile, CTA EB No. 1419, Nov. 21, 2016 – 15

days to reply to PAN required by due process

See also: Dionisia Pacquiao v. Milabao (OIC, Regional

Director BIR), CTA No. 9039, May 30, 2017 - 15 days
for PAN is required; due process violated for not giving
taxpayer the chance to answer the PAN

7. Regulations

Revenue Regulations 12-85, Nov. 27, 1985 (Nolledo, p. 947)

Revenue Regulations 2-90, May 25, 1990 (Nolledo, p. 999)

RR 12-99 implementing the provisions of the NIRC, Sec. 6, 7,

204, 228, 247, 248 and 249 on assessments of taxes and civil
penalties and interest and extrajudicial settlement of taxpayers
criminal violation under RMO 1-90, as amended by RR 18-
2013 (Nov. 28, 2013)
 Revenue Regulations 2-78 (Nolledo, p. 1001)

RMC 48-90, April 23, 1990 (counting of 3-year period of 365

x 3 regardless of leap year and Asianbank v. CIR, CTA No.
6095, Oct. 9, 2001)

8. RA 9282, expanding the jurisdiction of the CTA, elevating it to

collegiate court, amending RA 1125 (effective April 23, 2004)

9. RA 9503, (June 12, 2008) further expanding the composition of

CTA by adding 3 new Justices (9 in all)

LOCAL TAXATION
(Local Government Code – RA 7160)

Local Government Taxation

​Section 128 – 196 (LGC)

​Alejandro Ty v. Hon. Trampe & Municpal Treasurer of Pasig,

G.R. No. 117577, Dec. 1, 1995

Rule XXX, Art. 217 – 287 (Rules and Regulations

Implementing the Local Government Code)

Local Finance Circular 1-93 (banks)

Local Finance Circular 2-93 (insurance companies)

Local Finance Circular 3-93 (finance companies)

Memo Circular 3-92, January 16, 1992, issued by the

Department of Interior and Local Government

Memo Circular 5-93, October 22, 1993, issued by the

Department of Finance

Sec. Drilon v. Mayor Lim, G.R. No. 112497, Aug. 4, 1994 -

Manila Tax Ordinance

Coca-Cola Bottlers Phils., Inc. v. City of Manila, G.R. No.

156252, Jun. 27, 2006 - validity of Manila Tax Ordinance
See also: City of Manila, Toledo, & Santiago v. Coca-Cola,
G.R. No. 181845, Aug. 12, 2009 - Double Taxation

International Container Terminal Services, Inc. v. City of

Manila, CTA AC No. 11, May 17, 2006 - Manila Tax
Ordinance Sec. 21(A) – Double Taxation; Coca-Cola v. City of
Manila, G.R. No. 181845, Aug. 4, 2009

Phil. Match Co., Ltd. v. City of Cebu, G.R. No. L-30745, Jan.
18, 1978, 81 SCRA 99-- situs of payment of local business tax

PLDT v. City of Davao, G.R. No. 143867, Mar. 25, 2003 -

PLDT liable to franchise tax imposed by city

Palma Development Corporation v. Municipality of Malangas,

G.R. No. 152492, Oct. 16, 2003 - Limitations on Wharfage
fees etc. as per Sec. 133(c), LGC

PLDT v. Province of Laguna, G.R. No. 151899, Aug. 16, 2005

Smart Communications v. City of Makati, October 13, 2004

City of Manila, Mayor Alfredo Lim v. Maersk-Filipina, G.R.

No. 120051, Dec. 10, 2014 (En Banc) - LGU cannot impose
business tax on transportation contractors and common
carriers ​

Smart Communications v. City of Davao, G.R. No. 155491,

Sept. 16, 2008 - Liable to Davao City Franchise Tax

Yamane v. BA Lepanto Condominium Corporation, G.R. No.

154993, Oct. 25, 2005 - Condominium corporation is not a
business entity

Ericsson Telecommunications, Inc. v. City of Pasig, G.R. No.

176667, Nov. 22, 2007 - Definition of Gross Receipt

City of Makati vs. Municipality of Bakun and Luzon Hydro

Corporation, CTA EB No. 1179, Jan. 14, 2016 - Local business
tax sites

Michigan Holdings vs. City Treasurer of Makati, CTA EB No.

1093, Jun. 17, 2015 - LBT on dividends received by Holding
Companies
 REAL PROPERTY TAXATION – LOCAL
GOVERNMENT CODE (RA 7160)

Sec. 197 to 283 ​Local Government Code

Definition of Machinery and Equipment

Sec. 199 ​Local Government Code

Sec. 299 ​Implementing Rules and Regulations

Sec. 202 ​Declaration of real property

Sec. 215-216 ​Classes of real property

Sec. 218 ​Assessment Levels

Sec. 226-230 ​Local Board Assessment Appeals

​Central Board Assessment Appeals

Sec. 232-235 ​Rates of Levy

Sec. 234 ​Exemption from real property tax

Sec. 237 ​Idle lands

Sec. 250-251 ​Payment of real property taxes and discounts

Sec. 252 ​Protest

Sec. 255 ​Interest on unpaid taxes

Sec. 270 ​Period to collect real property taxes

Cases:

1. Lung Center of the Philippines v. Quezon City, G.R. No. 144104,

Jun. 29, 2004 - Exemption based on actual use
2. Mactan International Airport Authority (MCIAA) v. Hon.
Ferdinand J. Marcos, G.R. 120082, Sept. 11, 1996 - Exemption
from real property tax lifted by RA 7160 (LGC)

Reversed by: MCIAA v. City of Lapu-Lapu, G.R. No. 181756,

Jun. 15, 2015 – applying the decision held in MIAA v CA (2006)

3. Manila International Airport Authority (MIAA) v. CA and City of

Parañaque, G.R. No. 155650, Jul. 20, 2006 - Exemption from
RPT of MIAA; MIAA v. City of Pasay (En Banc), G.R. No.
163072, April 2, 2009

4. City Government of QC v. Bayan Telecommunications, Inc., G.R.

No. 162015, Mar. 6, 2006

5. NPC v. Central Board of Assessment Appeals (CBAA), G.R. No.

171470, Jan. 30, 2009 - on Sec. 234(c) LGC

See also NPC v. Province of Quezon and Municipality of

Pagbilao, G.R. No. 171586, Jul. 15, 2009

See Executive Order (EO) 173, Oct. 31, 2014 – Reduction &
condonation of RPT, penalties of Power Plant owned by NPC.

CUSTOMS MODERNIZATION AND TARIFF ACT (CMTA)

RA 10863, Customs Modernization and Tariff Act (CMTA), June
16, 2016

I. ​CONCEPT

A. ​Customs Modernization and Tariff Act (CMTA) -

amends the Tariff and Customs Code RA 10863 signed
May 30, 2016 effective June 16, 2016

II. ​PROVISIONS

Section 103: ​When Importation Begins and Deemed

Terminated

Section 104: ​When Duty and Tax are Due on Imported

Goods
Section 106: ​Declarant

Section 113: ​Decision and Ruling

Section 114: ​Right of Appeal, Forms and Ground

Section 120: ​ ​Relief Consignment

Section 401: ​ ​Importations Subject to Goods Declaration

Section 402: ​ ​Goods Declaration for Consumption

Section 404: ​Owner of Imported Goods

Section 423: ​Determination of the De Minimis Value

Section 700: ​Sequential Application of Valuation

Methods

Section 701: ​Transaction Value System—Method One

Section 702: ​Transaction Value of Identical Goods—

Method Two

Section 703: ​Transaction Value of Similar Goods—

Method Three

Section 704: ​Deductive Value—Method Four

Section 705: ​Computed Value—Method Five

Section 706: ​Fallback Value—Method Six

III. ​SPECIAL DUTIES AND TRADE REMEDY

MEASURES

Section 709: ​Government's Right of Compulsory

Acquisition
 A. ​Special Duties are classified into:

b. Marking Duty
c. Dumping Duty
d. Countervailing Duties
e. Discriminatory Duty

Section 714: ​Discrimination by Foreign Countries

Section 800: ​Conditionally-Free and Duty-Exempt

Importations

Section 900: ​Duty Drawbacks

Section 913: ​Claims for Refund

Section 1000: ​Audit and Examination of Records

Section 1002: ​Access to Records

Section 1003: ​Requirement to Keep Records

Section 1100: ​Classification Ruling

Section 1106: ​Protest

Section 1126: ​Appeal to the Commissioner

Section 1127: ​ ​Automatic Review in Forfeiture Cases

Section 1128: ​ Automatic Review by the Secretary of Finance

in Other Cases

Section 1136: ​ ​Review by the CTA

​- 3 - Prof. Serafin U. Salvador |Second Semester
AY: 2017-2018 Page 3 of 15