Osmeña v.

Orbos
GR 99886, 220 SCRA 703 [Mar 31, 1993]
Facts.
By PD 1956, a special account in the general fund designated as the Oil
Price Stabilization Fund (OPSF) was created. The OPSF was designed
to minimize frequent price changes by reimbursing oil companies for the
cost increases brought about by exchange rate adjustments and
increases in the world market price of oil. Subsequently, by EO 1024,
the OPSF was reclassified into a “trust liability account” and was
ordered released from the National Treasury to the Ministry of Energy.
The same EO also authorized the investment of the fund in govt
securities, with the earnings from such accruing to the fund. As the
OPSF is now in a balance deficit, the Energy Regulatory Board issued
an order approving the increase in pump prices of petroleum products.
Petitioner avers that the reclassification is a violation of Sec 29(3), Art VI
of the Constitution as it authorized the monies collected for the OPSF to
be channeled to another govt objective and not maintained in a special
account in the general fund. He maintains the monies collected for the
OPSF must be treated as a “special fund” and not a “trust account”
Issue. Is the “trust liability account” violative of Sec 29(3), Art VI of the
Constitution?
Held.
No. Petitioner’s averment is premised on the view that the powers
granted to the ERB partake of the nature of the taxation power of the
State. It assumes that the OPSF is a form of revenue measure drawing
from a special tax to be expended for a special purpose. This is not
quite correct. It is right to say that the stabilization fees collected are in
the nature of a tax. The fact that the State has taken possession of
moneys pursuant to law is sufficient to constitute them State funds.
However, the tax collected is not in a pure exercise of the taxing power.
It is levied with a regulatory purpose, to provide a means for the
stabilization of [oil prices]. The levy is primarily in the exercise of the
police power of the State. Moreover, that the OPSF is a special fund is
plain from the fact that it is segregated from the general fund; and while
it is placed in what the law refers to as a “trust liability account,” the fund
nonetheless remains subject to the scrutiny and review of the
Commission on Audit. The Court is satisfied that these measures
comply with the constitutional description of a “special fund.”