Republic of the Philipines. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT DILGNAPOLCOM Center, EDSA comer Quezon Avenue, West Triangle, Quezon City http: www dllg.com. ph 24 JUN 2019 OILG OPINION NO. 245, 26/3. MS. NERISSA DONATO nerissa.donato@gmail.com Dear Ms. Donato: ‘This has reference to your electronic mail dated 17 April 2019, requesting this Department's clarification on the following issues, which we quote hereunder, in tota i, iii, If the DILG MC does not refer to the delivery trucks or vans being used for the delivery of goods as claimed by Cavite’s Provincial Legal Office, what does the Prohibition on taxes imposed on the “transport of goods and products” cover? Are not delivery vans, as the name implies, modes of transport of goods? If the Provincial Ordinance charged the “operator of delivery truck or van, regardless of the number of trucks or vans being operated” then why does the province require the sticker to be pasted on the windshield of the delivery van and why does it require every delivery vans to have a sticker? A fee of Php500.00 per sticker is being charged. If a company has 10 vans, then this would up to exorbitant fees annually as other local government units also have similar ordinances. Clearly, this ordinance drives up the cost of doing business in the country. Delivery van owners already pay Road User's Tax when we register our vehicles. Is this ordinance not a form of double taxation? Foremost, this Department has already settled that duly approved ordinances are presumptively valid acts and thus, enjoy the presumption of regularity on the part of the public concerned’. An ordinance that has undergone the procedural process for its enactment under the Local Government Code is presumed valid unless declared otherwise by our courts of justice’. Clearly, matters involving questions on the validity or constitutionality of a duly enacted ordinances may stand on its own and therefore remain valid until judicially declared as null and void. ' DILG Legal Opinion No. 24, & 2011, dated 14 June 2011 Dik Legal Opinion No. 5, 8.2018, dated 25 January 2018Nevertheless, for academic discussion and to avert the same controversy in the future, we are of the considered view that the subject ordinances are valid and reasonable as they are pursuant to Section 141 of Republic Act No. 7160, otherwise known as the “Local Government Code’, vie: “Section 141, Annual Fixed Tax For Every Delivery Track or Van of Manufacturers or Producers, Wholesalers of, Dealers, or Retailers in, Certain Products. - (a) The province may levy an annual fixed tax for every truck, van or any vehicle used by manufacturers, producers, wholesalers, dealers or retailers in the delivery or distribution of distilled spirits, fermented liquors, soft drinks, cigars and cigarettes, and other products as may be determined by the Sangguniang Panlalawigan, to sales outlets, consumers, whether directly or indirectly, within the province in an amount not exceeding Five hundred pesos (P500.00). The afore-quoted provision of the LGC should not be confused with Section 133(e) of the LGC, which provides that: {TON 133. Common Limitations on the Taxing Powers of Local Government Units. - Unless otherwise provided herein, the exercise of the taxing powers of provinces, cities, municipalities, and Barangays shall not extend to the levy of the following: sax (e) Taxes, fee and charges and other impositions upon goods carried into or out of, or passing through, the territorial jurisdictions of local government units in the guise of charges for wharfage, tolls for bridges or otherwise, or other taxes, fees or charges in any form whatsoever upon such goods or merchandise. xxx" ‘Thus, what is prohibited is the collection of pass-through fees as contemplated in the Department's Memorandum Circular No. 2018-133%, dated 16 August 2018 and the annual fixed tax for every delivery truck or van as contemplated in Section 141 of the LGC. Hence, we are of the considered view that securing/purchasing of sticker is valid on the assumption that the stickers will be released/given as a prooffevidence that the said taxes/fees (Section 141 of the I.GC) are already paid, aside from the official receipt that will be issued. With respect to the third issue, there is double taxation when the same taxpayer is. taxed twice when he should be taxed only once for (1) the same purpose (2) by the same ‘axing authority (3) within the same jurisdiction (4) during the same taxing period and (5) * Entitled, “OMNIBUS GUIDELINES ON THE SUSPENSION OF LGU IMPOSITION AND COLLECTION OF ILLEGAL FEES AND TAXES RELATIVE TO THE TRANSPORT OF GOODS AND PRODUCTSthe taxes are of the same kind of character‘. Since the purpose, taxing authority, jurisdiction and taxing period of the Road User's Tax is not the same with that of the tax imposed by the provincial ordinance, we believe, there is no double taxation to speak of. We hope to have addressed your concern accordingly. Very truly yours, By Authority of the Secretary’ den MARIVEL C. SACENDONCILLO, CESO III Undersecretary CC: Dir. Manuel Q Gotis Regional Director DILG-Region IV-A (CALABARZON) “fs 6 “ Nursery Care Corporation, etc. vs Acevedo, G.R. No. 180651, 30 July 2014