Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Constitutional Limitations 1 Due Process
Constitutional Limitations 1 Due Process
Sison, as
taxpayer, alleged that its provision (Section 1) unduly
1. DUE PROCESS OF LAW discriminated against him by the imposition of higher
There must be a valid law rates upon his income as a professional, that it
amounts to class legislation, and that it transgresses
Tax measure should not be unconscionable
against the equal protection and due process clauses
and unjust as to amount to confiscation of of the Constitution as well as the rule requiring
property. uniformity in taxation.
Tax statute must not be arbitrary as to find
no support in the Constitution. Issue: Whether BP 135 violates the due process and
equal protection clauses, and the rule on uniformity
Sec. 1 Art. III 1987 - No person shall be deprived of in taxation.
life, liberty, or property without due process of law,
nor shall any person be denied the equal protection HELD: No, there was no violation of the due process
of the laws. and equal protection clause, since petitioner did not
made a case, only allegations.
Tan v. Del Rosario, supra – (SNITS);
The Congress has the power to determine
FACTS: Petitioners challenge the constitutionality of the rates of taxation; thus, the due process
RA 7496 or the simplified income taxation scheme clause may be invoked where a taxing
(SNIT) under Arts (26) and (28) and III (1). The SNIT statute is so arbitrary that it finds no support
in the Constitution. An obvious example is
contained changes in the tax schedules and different
where it can be shown to amount to the
treatment in the professionals which petitioners assail confiscation of property. That would be a
as unconstitutional for being isolative of the equal clear abuse of power. It then becomes the
protection clause in the constitution. Petitioner duty of this Court to say that such an
contends that the tile of House Bill No. 34314 arbitrary act amounted to the exercise of an
progenitor of RA 7496, is a misnomer or, at least, authority not conferred. That properly calls
for the application of the Holmes dictum.
deficient for being merely entitled, “Simplified Net
Income Taxation Scheme for the Self-Employed and
It has also been held that where the assailed
Professional Engaged in the Practice of their
tax measure is beyond the jurisdiction of the
Profession”. state, or is not for a public purpose, or, in
case of a retroactive statute is so harsh and
HELD: Tax law is constitutional. Uniformity of unreasonable, it is subject to attack on due
taxation, like the hindered concept of equal process grounds.
protection, merely require that all subjects or objects
of taxation similarly situated are to be treated alike 2. EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAWS
both privileges and liabilities. Uniformity, does not
– Right to be treated under like circumstance.
offend classification as long as it rest on substantial
distinctions, it is germane to the purpose of the law. It All persons subject to legislation shall be
is not limited to existing only and must apply equally treated alike under similar circumstances
to all members of the same class. The due process and conditions both in the privileges
clause may correctly be invoked only when there is a conferred and liabilities imposed.
clear contravention of inherent or constitutional The doctrine does not require that persons
limitations in the exercise of the tax power. No such or properties different in fact be treated in
transgression is evident to us. law as though they were the same. What it
prohibits is “Class Legislation” which
discriminates against some and favors
others.
Sison v. Ancheta, supra – BP 135
As long as there are rational or reasonable purposes of taxation. Where the
grounds for so doing. Congress may group differentiation conforms to the practical
persons or property to be taxed and it is dictates of justice and equity, similar to the
standards of equal protection, it is not
sufficient if all members of the same class
discriminatory within the meaning of the
are subject to the same rate and the tax is clause and is therefore uniform.
administered impartially upon them.
It suffices then that the laws
Requisites of a Valid Classification: operate equally and uniformly on all persons
under similar circumstances or that all
1. Must be based on Substantial
persons must be treated in the same
Distinctions. manner, he conditions nt being different,
2. Germane to the purpose of law both in the privileges conferred and liabilities
3. Classification must not be limited to imposed.
existing conditions only but must also
apply to future conditions substantially It is inherent in the power to tax
identical to those of the present. that a state be free to select the subjects of
taxation and it has been repeatedly held that
4. It must apply equally to all members of
inequalities which result from a singling out
the same class. of one particular class for taxation, or
exemption infringes no constitutional
Application limitation.
Where the statute or ordinance in question
applies alike to all persons, firms, or Villegas vs Hiu Chiong Tsai Pao Ho
corporations placed in similar situations, or
differently to persons, firms, or corporations FACTS: The Municipal Board of Manila enacted
Ordinance 6537 requiring aliens (except those
belonging to different classes provided all those
employed in the diplomatic and consular missions of
belonging to one class are treated alike, there is foreign countries, in technical assistance programs of
no infringement of the constitutional guarantee. the government and another country, and members
What the Constitution requires is equal of religious orders or congregations) to procure the
treatment under the law and this may involve requisite mayor’s permit so as to be employed or
same or different treatment depending on the engage in trade in the City of Manila. The permit fee
circumstances. is P50, and the penalty for the violation of the
ordinance is 3 to 6 months imprisonment or a fine of
P100 to P200, or both.
Sison v. Ancheta, supra.
ISSUE: Whether the ordinance imposes a regulatory
There is a need for proof of such persuasive
fee or a tax.
character as would lead to a conclusion that
there was a violation of the due process and HELD: The ordinance’s purpose is clearly to raise
equal protection clauses. Absent such money under the guise of regulation by exacting P50
showing, the presumption of validity must from aliens who have been cleared for employment.
prevail.
The amount is unreasonable and excessive
Equality and uniformity in taxation means because it fails to consider difference in
that all taxable articles or kinds of property situation among aliens required to pay it, i.e.
of the same class shall be taxed at the same being casual, permanent, part-time, rank-
rate. and-file or executive.
The Ordinance was declared invalid as it is
The taxing power has the authority to make arbitrary, oppressive and unreasonable,
reasonable and natural classifications for being applied only to aliens who are thus
deprived of their rights to life, liberty and Alhambra. CA affirming such decision, hence, this
property and therefore violates the due appeal.
process and equal protection clauses of the
Constitution. ISSUE: whether private respondent's reliance on a
Further, the ordinance does not lay down void BIR ruling conferred upon the latter a vested
any criterion or standard to guide the Mayor right to apply the same in the computation of its ad
in the exercise of his discretion, thus valorem tax and claim for tax refund
conferring upon the mayor arbitrary and
unrestricted powers. HELD: The government is not stopped from
collecting taxes legally due because of mistake/errors
Tan v. Del Rosario, supra. of its agents, this admits of exceptions in the interest
of justice and fair play, as where injustice will result to
The said law is not arbitrary; it is germane to the taxpayer. As regards, petitioner’s argument the
the purpose of the law and; applies to all private respondent should have made consultations
things of equal conditions and of same class. with it before private respondent used the
computation mandated by BIR ruling 473-88 suffice it
to state that the BIR ruling was clear and categorical,
It is neither violative of equal protection
there leaving no room for interpretation. The failure
clause due to the existence of substantial
of private respondent to consult petitioner does not
difference between one who practice his
imply bad faith on the part of the former.
profession alone and one who is engaged to
proprietorship.
Tiu v. Court of Appeals, 301 SCRA 278 (1999) – The
Further, the SC said that RA 7496 is just an Subic Special Economic Zone case.
amendatory provision of the code of
taxpayers where it classifies taxpayers in to The Constitutional right to equal protection
four main groups: Individuals, Corporations, of the law is not violated by an executive
Estate under Judicial Settlement and
order, issued pursuant to law, granting tax
Irrevocable Trust. The court would have
and duty incentives only to business within
appreciated the contention of the petitioner
if RA 7496 was an independent law. But since the “secured area” of the Subic Special
it is attached to a law that has already Economic Zone and denying them to those
classified taxpayers, there is no violation of who live within the Zone but outside such
equal protection clause. “fenced in” territory.
The Constitution does not require absolute
CIR VS. CA AND ALHAMBRA 267 SCRA 557 (1997) equality among residents. It is enough that
all persons under like circumstances or
FACTS : Alhambra industries, Inc. (Alhambra) is a
domestic corporation engaged in the manufacture conditions are given the same privileges and
and sale of cigar and cigarette products. On May 7, required to follow the same obligations. In
1991 private respondent received a letter dated April short, a classification based on valid and
26, 1991 from the Commissioner of Internal Revenue reasonable standards does not violate the
assessing its deficiency Ad Valorem Tax (AVT) in the equal protection clause.
total amount of P488,396.62, inclusive of increments, We find real and substantial distinctions
on the removals of cigarette products from their place
between the circumstances obtaining inside
of production during the period Nov. 2, 1990 to
January 22, 1991.Alhambra filed protest against and those outside the Subic Naval Base,
amount assessed by the CIR, however, it was denied thereby justifying a valid and reasonable
by the latter at the same time increasing the amount classification.
assessed to P520,835.29. Alhambra filed a petition for
review with the CTA, despite payment under protest Classification based on:
the amount of P520,835.29. On December 1, 1993, 1. Valid & Does not violate
CTA ordered petitioner to refund said amount to equal protection
clause
2. Reasonable Standards
The concept of uniformity in taxation implies The owners of boarding stables for race
that all taxable articles or properties of the horses and, for that matter, the race horse
owners themselves, who in the scheme of
same class shall be taxed at the same rate. It
shifting may carry the taxation burden, are a
requires the uniform application and class by themselves and appropriately taxed
operation, without discrimination, of the tax where owners of other kinds of horses are
in every place where the subject of the tax is taxed less or not at all, considering that
found. It does not, however, require equity in taxation is generally conceived in
absolute identity or equality under all terms of ability to pay in relation to the
circumstances, but subject to reasonable benefits received by the taxpayer and by the
public from the business or property taxed.
classification.
Taking everything into account, the volume of their sales, and even if the same
differentiation against which the plaintiffs exceeded those made by said agents or
complain conforms to the practical dictates consignees of producers or merchants
of justice and equity and is not established outside the City of Butuan,
discriminatory within the meaning of the would be exempt from the disputed tax.
Constitution.
It is true that the uniformity essential to the
Equity in taxation is generally conceived in
valid exercise of the power of taxation does
terms of liability to pay in relation to the
not require identity or equality under all
benefits received by the taxpayer and by the
circumstances, or negate the authority to
public from the business or property taxed.
classify the objects of taxation.
Eastern Theatrical Co. Inc., vs. Alfonso The classification made in the exercise of this
authority, to be valid, must, however, be
there is equality and uniformity in taxation if reasonable and this requirement is not
all articles or kinds of property of the same deemed satisfied unless:
class are taxed at the same rate. Thus, it was
o (1) it is based upon substantial
held in that case, that "the fact that some
distinctions which make real
places of amusement are not taxed while
differences;
others, such cinematographs, theaters,
vaudeville companies, theatrical shows, and o (2) these are germane to the
boxing exhibitions and other kinds of purpose of the legislation or
amusements or places of amusement are ordinance;
taxed, is not argument at all against the
o (3) the classification applies, not
equality and uniformity of tax imposition."
only to present conditions, but, also,
The taxing power has the authority to make to future conditions substantially
reasonable and natural classifications for identical to those of the present;
purposes of taxation. and
PEPSI-COLA BOTTLING CO. OF THE PHILS., INC. vs. o (4) the classification applies equally
CITY OF BUTUAN to all those who belong to the same
class.
FACTS: The ordinance imposes taxes for every case of Shell Company of P.I, Ltd. Vs. Vano, etc. 94 Phil 387
soft drinks, liquors and other carbonated beverages,
regardless of the volume of sales, shipped to the FACTS: The municipal council of Cordova, Cebu
agents and/or consignees by outside dealers or any adopted several ordinances among which Ordinance
person or company having its actual business outside 10 imposing an annual tax of P150 on occupation or
the City. the exercise of the privilege of installation manager.
Shell Co., a foreign corporation, filed suit for the
ISSUE: Does the tax ordinance violate the uniformity refund of the taxes paid by it on the ground that the
requirement of taxation? ordinance imposing such tax is ultra vires for being
discriminatory and hostile because there is no other
HELD: Yes. The tax levied is discriminatory. person in the locality who exercise such designation
or occupation.
Even if the burden in question were regarded
HELD: A tax on “installation manager” is not
as a tax on the sale of said beverages, it
discriminatory just because at the time said tax was
would still be invalid, as discriminatory, and
imposed, there was no other person in the locality
hence, violative of the uniformity required by
who exercised such occupation. The tax is and will be
the Constitution and the law therefor, since
applicable to any person or firm who exercises such
only sales by "agents or consignees" of
calling or occupation designated as “installation
outside dealers would be subject to the tax.
manager”.
Sales by local dealers, not acting for or on
behalf of other merchants, regardless of the
CITY OF BAGUIO vs. DE LEON 25 SCRA 938 professional services performed by registered general
professional partnerships are exempt from VAT.
FACTS: The City of Baguio passed an ordinance
ISSUE: Whether the E-VAT law discriminates against
imposing a license fee on any person, entity or
customs brokers.
corporation doing business in the City. De Leon was
assessed for P50 annual fee it being shown that he HELD: The phrase “except custom brokers” is not
was engaged in property rental and deriving income meant to discriminate against custom brokers but to
therefrom. The latter assailed the validity of the avert a potential conflict between Sections 102 and
ordinance arguing that it is ultra vires for there is no 103 of the Tax Code, as amended.
statutory authority which expressly grants the City of
Baguio to levy such tax, and that there it imposed The distinction of the customs brokers from
double taxation, and violates the requirement of the other professionals who are subject to
uniformity. occupation tax under the Local Tax Code is
based upon material differences, in that the
HELD: No. activities of customs brokers partake more of
First, RA 329 was enacted amending Section a business, rather than a profession and
2553 of the Revised Administrative Code were thus subjected to the percentage tax
empowering the City Council not only to under Section 174 of the Tax Code prior to its
impose a license fee but to levy a tax for amendment by EO 273. EO 273 abolished the
purposes of revenue, thus the ordinance percentage tax and replaced it with the VAT.
cannot be considered ultra vires for there is
more than ample statutory authority for the Villanueva vs. City of Iloilo, supra:
enactment thereof. The ordinance is not violative of the rule of uniformity
Second, an argument against double taxation in taxation.
may not be invoked where one tax is The Supreme Court has already ruled that
imposed by the state and the other is tenement houses constitute a distinct class
imposed by the city. of property. It has likewise ruled that "taxes
are uniform and equal when imposed upon
And third, violation of uniformity is out of all property of the same class or character
place it being widely recognized that there is within the taxing authority."
nothing inherently obnoxious in the The fact, therefore, that the owners of other
requirement that license fees or taxes be classes of buildings in the City of Iloilo do not
exacted with respect to the same pay the taxes imposed by the ordinance in
occupation, calling or activity by both the question is no argument at all against
state and the political subdivisions thereof. uniformity and equality of the tax imposition.
A tax is considered uniform when it operates Neither is the rule of equality and uniformity
with the same force and effect in every place violated by the fact that tenement taxes are
where the object may be found. not imposed in other cities, for the same rule
does not require that taxes for the same
Kapatiran vs. Tan purpose should be imposed in different
FACTS: EO 273 amended the Revenue Code, territorial subdivisions at the same time.
adopting the (VAT) effective 1 January 1988. Four So long as the burden of the tax falls equally
petitions assailed the validity of the VAT Law for being and impartially on all owners or operators of
beyond the President to enact; for being oppressive, tenement houses similarly classified or
discriminatory, regressive, and violative of the due situated, equality and uniformity of taxation
process and equal protection clauses, among others, is accomplished.
of the Constitution. The Integrated Customs Brokers
Association particularly contend that it unduly Association of Custom Brokers v. Mun.Board, supra:
discriminate against customs brokers (Section 103 [r]) Facts: The Association of Customs Brokers, Inc., which
as the amended provision of the Tax Code provides is composed of all brokers and public service
that “service performed in the exercise of profession operators of motor vehicles in the City of Manila
or calling(except custom brokers) subject to challenge the validity Ordinance No. 3379 on the
occupational tax under the Local Tax Code, and
ground that (1xxx (2) said ordinance offends against property which in no case shall exceed Five thousand
the rule of uniformity of taxation; and (3) xxx. pesos (P5,000.00).
The ordinance exacts the tax upon all motor
vehicles operating within the City of Manila. In the case of husband and wife, the additional tax
It does not distinguish between a motor herein imposed shall be based upon the total
vehicle for hire and one which is purely for property owned by them and the total gross receipts
private use. Neither does it distinguish or earnings derived by them.
between a motor vehicle registered in the
City of Manila and one registered in another Section 158. Juridical Persons Liable to Community
place but occasionally comes to Manila and Tax. - Every corporation no matter how created or
uses its streets and public highways. This is organized, whether domestic or resident foreign,
an inequality which the Court finds in the engaged in or doing business in the Philippines shall
ordinance, and which renders it offensive to pay an annual community tax of Five hundred pesos
the Constitution. (P500.00) and an annual additional tax, which, in no
case, shall exceed Ten thousand pesos (P10,000.00) in
accordance with the following schedule:
4. PROHIBITION AGAINST IMPRISONMENT FOR
NON-PAYMENT OF POLL TAX (1) For every Five thousand pesos (P5,000.00) worth
of real property in the Philippines owned by it during
the preceding year based on the valuation used for
Section 20, Article III, Constitution. No person shall
the payment of real property tax under existing laws,
be imprisoned for debt or non-payment of poll tax.
found in the assessment rolls of the city or
The non-imprisonment rule applies to non-payment municipality where the real property is situated - Two
of poll tax which is punishable only by a surcharge, pesos (P2.00); and
but not to other violations like falsification of
community tax certificate and non-payment of other (2) For every Five thousand pesos (P5,000.00) of gross
taxes. receipts or earnings derived by it from its business in
Community Tax v. Poll Tax the Philippines during the preceding year - Two pesos
(P2.00).
Section 157. Individuals Liable to Community Tax. - (1) Diplomatic and consular representatives; and
(18) or over who has been regularly employed on a
wage or salary basis for at least thirty (30) (2) Transient visitors when their stay in the Philippines
consecutive working days, or who is engaged in does not exceed three (3) months.
business or occupation, or who owns real property
with an aggregate assessed value of One thousand Section 160. Place of Payment. - The community tax
pesos (P1,000.00) or more, or who is required by law shall be paid in the place of residence of the
to file an income tax return shall pay an annual individual, or in the place where the principal office of
additional tax of Five pesos (P5.00) and an annual the juridical entity is located.
additional tax of One peso (P1.00) for every One
thousand pesos (P1,000.00) of income regardless of 164 (c) The proceeds of the community tax actually
whether from business, exercise of profession or from and directly collected by the city or municipal
treasurer shall accrue entirely to the general fund of
the city or municipality concerned. However, Note: A latter statue may revoke exemption from
proceeds of the community tax collected through the taxation provided for in a franchise because the
barangay treasurers shall be apportioned as follows:
Constitution provides that a franchise is subject to
amendment, alteration or repeal. [Sec. 11 Art. XII]
(1) (50%) shall accrue to the general fund of
the city or municipality concerned; and
OPOSA vs. FACTORAN
(2) (50%) shall accrue to the barangay where Police power prevails over the non-
the tax is collected. impairment clause
LA INSULAR vs. MANCHUCA
5. PROHIBITION AGAINST IMPAIRMENT OF A lawful tax on a new subject or an increased
OBLIGATION OF CONTRACTS
tax on an old one, does not interfere with a
contract or impairs its obligation.
No law impairing the obligation of contracts shall be
passed. [Section 10, Article III, Constitution] The constitutional guarantee of the non-
impairment clause can only invoked in the
The power of taxation cannot be exercised in a grant of tax exemption.
manner that would impair the obligation of contracts.
What is prohibited is that a taxing statute be passed RULES:
that would alter the relative rights of the parties with
1. If the exemption was granted for valuable
each other.
consideration and it is granted on the basis
of a contract.
The mere fact that a tax makes the conduct of a cannot be revoked
business more expensive or makes an activity more 2. If the exemption is granted by virtue of a
difficult does not result in the impairment of the contract, wherein the government enters
obligation of contracts. Contract is impaired only if into a contract with a private corporation
the relative position of the parties to a contract (i.e. cannot be revoked unilaterally by
the government
equality that is assumed when the contract was
3. If the basis of the tax exemption is a
entered into) is disturbed by the operation of a taxing franchise granted by Congress and under the
statute. franchise or the tax exemption is given to a
particular holder or person
The obligation of a contract is impaired when can be unilaterally revoked by the
its terms or conditions are changed by law or government (Congress)
The non-impairment clause applies
by a party without the consent of the other,
only to contracts and not to a
thereby weakening the position or rights of franchise.
the latter. The non-impairment clause applies
to taxation but not to police power
An example of impairment by law is when a
and eminent domain.
later taxing statute revokes a tax exemption Furthermore, it applies only where
based on a contract. But this only applies one party is the government and
when the tax exemption has been granted the other, a private individual.
for a valid consideration. As a rule, the obligation to pay tax is
based on law. But when, for
A later statute may revoke exemption from instance, a taxpayer enters into a
taxation provided for in a franchise because compromise with the BIR, the
the Constitution provides that a franchise is obligation of the taxpayer becomes
subject to amendment, alteration or repeal. one based on contract.
Tolentino v. Sec. of Finance, supra:
1 issue that was raised was whether the imposition of HELD: The payment of license fees for the
the VAT on sales & leases on real estate by virtue of distribution and sale of bibles suppresses the
contract s entered into prior to the efectivity of the constitutional right of free exercise of religion.
law would violate the non-impairment of contracts
rule in the constitution. A tax ordinance is considered violative of the
free exercise of religion when it becomes a
HELD: prior restraint to the exercise thereof. In this
It is enough to say that parties to a contract case, the business permit is a prior restraint
cannot, through the exercise of prophetic to the exercise of one's religion since the
discernment, fetter the exercise of the taxing constitutional guaranty of the free exercise
power of the state. and enjoyment of religious profession and
For not only are existing laws read into worship carries with it the right to
contracts in order to fix obligations as disseminate religious information.
between parties, but the reservation of It is one thing to impose a tax on the income
essential attributes of sovereign power is or property of a preacher, and another to
also read into contracts as a basic postulate exact a tax for him for the privilege of
of the legal order. delivering a sermon.
The policy of protecting contracts against
impairment presupposes the maintenance of The power to tax the exercise of a privilege
a government which retains adequate is the power to control or suppress its
authority to secure the peace & good order enjoyment
of society.
7. PROHIBITION AGAINST APPROPRIATION OF
PROCEEDS OF TAXATION
6. PROHIBITION AGAINST INFRINGEMENT OF
RELIGIOUS FREEDOM
Section 29, Article VI, Constitution
No law shall be made respecting an establishment of 1. No money shall be paid out of the Treasury
religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. The except in pursuance of an appropriation
free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession made by law.
and worship, without discrimination or preference,
2. No public money or property shall be
shall forever be allowed. No religious test shall be
appropriated, applied, paid, or employed
required for the exercise of civil or political rights.
directly or indirectly, for the use, benefit, or
[Section 5, Article III, Constitution]
support of any church, denomination,
American Bible Society v. City of Manila sectarian institution or system of religion, or
of any priest, preacher, minister or other
FACTS: In the course of its ministry, the Philippine
religious teacher, or dignitary as such except
agency of the American Bible Society has been
when such priest, preacher, minister or
distributing
dignitary is assigned to the armed forces, or
and selling bibles and/or gospel portions thereof
to any penal institution, or government
throughout the Philippines and translating the same
orphanage or leprosarium.
into several Philippine dialets. The acting City
Treasurer of Manila required the society to secure the 3. All money collected on any tax levied for a
corresponding Mayor’s permit and municipal license special purpose shall be treated as a special
fees, together with compromise covering the period fund and paid out for such purpose only. If
from the 4th quarter of 1945 to the 2nd quarter of the purpose for which a special fund was
1953. The society paid such under protest, and filed created has been fulfilled or abandoned, the
suit questioning the legality of the ordinances under balance, if any, shall be transferred to the
which the fees are being collected. general funds of the government.
Use of tax levied for a special purpose:
Osmena v. Orbos, supra - It seems clear that while While the second floor’s use, as residence of
the funds collected may be referred to as taxes, they the director, is incidental to education; the
are exacted in the exercise of the police power of the lease of the first floor cannot by any stretch
State. Moreover, that the OPSF as a special fund is of imagination be considered incidental to
plain from the special treatment given it by E.O. 137. the purposes of education.
It is segregated from the general fund; and while it is
The test of exemption from taxation is the
placed in what the law refers to as a "trust liability
use of the property for purposes mentioned
account," the fund nonetheless remains subject to
in the Constitution.
the scrutiny and review of the COA. The Court is
satisfied that these measures comply with the “Use” overrides “ownership”.
constitutional description of a "special fund."
If a property is incidentally used for the
aforementioned purposes, it is clear from
decided cases that tax exemption still
8. Prohibition against taxation of real property
subsist.
actually, directly and exclusively used for
religious, charitable and educational purposes
9. Prohibition against taxation of the revenues
Charitable institutions, churches and
and assets of non-stock, non-profit educational
parsonages or convents appurtenant
institutions
thereto, mosques, non-profit
cemeteries, and all lands, buildings, and
improvements, actually, directly, and
All revenues and assets of non-stock, non-profit
exclusively used for religious, charitable,
educational institutions used actually, directly, and
or educational purposes shall be exempt
exclusively for educational purposes shall be exempt
from taxation. [Section 28 (3) , Article VI,
from taxes and duties. Upon the dissolution or
Constitution]
cessation of the corporate existence of such
This is an exemption from real property institutions, their assets shall be disposed of in the
tax only. manner provided by law. [Section 4, Article XIV,
Constitution]
Abra Valley College vs. Aquino
This exemption from corporate income tax is
Facts: Abra Valley College rents out the ground floor
embodied in Section 30 of the NIRC which includes a
of its college building to Northern Marketing
non-stock, non-profit educational institution.
Corporation while the second floor thereof is used by
the Director of the College for residential purposes.
The municipal and provincial treasurers served upon Note: however the last paragraph of Section 30
the College a “notice of seizure” and later a “notice of which states: “Notwithstanding the provisions in the
sale” due to the alleged failure of the College to pay preceding paragraphs, the income of whatever kind
real estate taxes and penalties thereon. The school and character of the foregoing organizations from any
filed suit to annul said notices, claiming that it is tax-
of their property, real or personal, or from any of
exempt.
their activities conducted for profit, regardless of the
Issue: Whether the College is exempt from taxes disposition made of such income, shall be subject to
tax imposed under this Code.”
HELD:
While the Court allows a more liberal and
non-restrictive interpretation of the phrase Charitable institutions, churches and parsonages or
“exclusively used for educational purposes,” convents appurtenant thereto, mosques, non-profit
reasonable emphasis has always been made cemeteries, and all lands, buildings, and
that exemption extends to facilities which improvements, actually, directly, and exclusively used
are incidental to and reasonably necessary for religious, charitable, or educational purposes shall
for the accomplishment of the main be exempt from taxation. [Section 28 (3) , Article VI,
purposes. Constitution]
This is an exemption from real association duly registered under
property tax only. Philippine law, and operated
The exemption in favor of property exclusively for educational
used exclusively for charitable or purposes, maintained and
educational purposes is not limited administered by a private individual
to property actually indispensable or group offering formal education,
therefore, but extends to facilities and with an issued permit to
which are incidental to and operate by the DECS.
reasonably necessary for the Revenues derived from and assets
accomplishment of said purposes. used in the operation of
[Abra Valley College v. Aquino, 162 cafeteria/canteens, dormitories,
SCRA 106] and bookstores are exempt from
taxation provided they are owned
Department of Finance Order 145-85 and operated by the educational
institution as ancillary activities and
Non-stock, non-profit educational the same are located within the
institutions are exempt from taxes school premises.
on all their revenues and assets
used actually, directly and CIR v. Court of Appeals, et.al., 298 SCRA 83 (1998)
exclusively for educational
purposes. FACTS: The Young Men’s Christian Association of
However, they shall be subject to the Philippines, Inc. (YMCA) was established as “a
internal revenue tax on income welfare, educational and charitable non-profit
from trade, business or other corporation.” It conducts various programs and
activity, the conduct of which is not activities that are beneficial to the public, especially
related to the exercise or the young people, pursuant to its religious,
performance by such educational educational and charitable objectives.
institution of its educational
purposes or functions. HELD: In this case, the Supreme Court held that the
Interest income shall be exempt income derived by YMCA from leasing out a portion of
only when used directly and its premises to small shop owners, like restaurant and
exclusively for educational canteen operators, and from parking fees collected
purposes. To substantiate this claim, from non-members are taxable income.
the institution must submit an
annual information return and duly First, the constitutional tax exemption granted to
audited financial statement. A non-stock, non-profit educational institutions does
certification of actual utilization and not find application because YMCA is not an
the Board resolution or the educational institution. The term “educational
proposed project to be funded out institution” or “institution of learning” has acquired a
of the money deposited in banks well known technical meaning. Under the Education
shall also be submitted. Act of 1982, such term refers to schools.
Department of Finance Order 137-87 Second, even if it be exempt under Section 30 of the
NIRC as a non-profit, non-stock educational
An educational institution means a corporation, the income from the rent of its premises
non-stock, non-profit corporation or and parking fees is not covered by the exemption,
according to the last paragraph of the same section. The power to tax and to grant tax
Section 30 provides that income of whatever kind and exemptions is vested in the Congress and, to
a certain extent, in the local legislative
character from any of its properties, real or personal,
bodies.
or from any of its activities for profit are not exempt Section 28 (4), Article VI of the Constitution,
from income tax. specifically provides: "No law granting any
tax exemption shall be passed without the
Finally, Section 28(3), Article VI of the Constitution concurrence of a majority of all the Member
does not apply as it extends exemption only from real of the Congress."
property taxes – not from income taxes. The PCGG has absolutely no power to grant
tax exemptions, even under the cover of its
authority to compromise ill-gotten wealth
CIR v. CA, CTA, and ATENEO cases. Even granting that Congress enacts a
law exempting the Marcoses form paying
The Supreme Court denied the petition and taxes on their properties, such law will
affirmed the assailed Decision of the Court definitely not pass the test of the equal
of Appeals. The Court ruled that the private protection clause under the Bill of Rights.
respondent is not a contractor selling its Any special grant of tax exemption in favor
only of the Marcos heirs will constitute class
services for a fee but an academic institution
legislation. It will also violate the
conducting these researches pursuant to its constitutional rule that "taxation shall be
commitments to education and, ultimately, uniform and equitable."
to public service.
For the institute to have tenaciously 2. Veto of appropriation, revenue, or tariff bills
continued operating for so long despite its by the President
accumulation of significant losses, we can
only agree with both the Court of Tax The President shall have the power to veto any
Appeals and the Court of Appeals that particular item or items in an appropriation, revenue,
“education and not profit is motive for or tariff bill, but the veto shall not affect the item or
undertaking the research projects items to which he does not object. [Section 27 (2)
Article VI, Constitution]
10. Other Constitutional Limitations
An item in a bill refers to particulars, details,
1. Grant of tax exemption the distinct and severable parts of a bill. In
budgetary legislation, an item is an
No law granting any tax exemption shall be passed individual sum of money dedicated to a
without the concurrence of a majority of all Members stated purpose. [Gonzales v. Macaraig, 191
of Congress. [Section 28 (4), Article VI, Constitution] SCRA 452]
It is taxable in the State where it has actual Theories re: Situs of Income tax
situs although the owner resides in another
jurisdiction. 1. Domicilliary theory
The location where the income earner The relaxation of the original rule rests on either
resides is the situs of taxation. This is where of two fundamental considerations:
he is given protection, hence, he must
support it. 1. Upon the recognition of the inherent
power of each government to tax persons,
2. Nationality theory properties and rights within its jurisdiction and
enjoying the protection of its laws; or
2. Upon the principle that as to intangibles, a
The country of citizenship is the situs of single location in space is hardly possible,
taxation. This is so because a citizen is given considering the multiple, distinct relationships
protection by his country no matter where which may be entered into with respect thereto.
he is found or no matter where he earns his
income. The actual situs of the shares of stock is in the
Philippines, the corporation being domiciled
3. Source law therein. And besides, the certificates of stock
have remained in this country up to the time
The country which is the source of the when the deceased died in California, and they
income or where the activity that produced were in the possession of the secretary of the
the income is the situs of taxation. Benguet Corporation. The secretary had the right
to vote, collect dividends, among others. For all
Wells Fargo v. Collector, 70 Phil 325 practical purposes, the secretary had legal title to
the certificates of stock held in trust for Eye. Eye
This case involves the collection of inheritance extended in the Philippines her activities re: her
taxes on shares of stock issued by the Benguet intangible personal property so as to avail herself
Consolidated Mining Corporation and owned by of the protection and benefits of the Philippine
Lillian Eye. Said shares were already subjected to laws.
inheritance taxes in California and are now being
taxed by Philippine authorities. E. Income – Income tax may properly be exacted
from persons who are residents or citizens in the
Originally, the settled law in the United States is taxing jurisdiction and even from those who are
that intangibles have only one situs for the neither residents nor citizens provided the
purpose of inheritance tax – the domicile of the income is derived from sources within the taxing
decedent at the time of death. But this rule has, state.
of late, been relaxed. The maxim mobilia F. Business, occupation and transaction – The
sequuntur personam, upon which the rules rests, general rule is that the power to levy an excise
has been decried as a mere fiction of law having tax depend upon the place where the business is
its origin in considerations of general done, or the occupation is engaged in, or the
convenience and public policy and cannot be transaction took place.
applied to limit or control the right of the State to G. Gratuitous transfer of Property – The
tax property within its jurisdiction. It must yield transmission of property from a donor to a done
to established fact of legal ownership, actual or from a decedent to his heirs may be subject to
presence and control elsewhere, and cannot be taxation in the state where the transferor is or
applied if to do so would result in inescapable was a citizen or resident, or where the property is
and patent injustice. located.
Commissioner vs. British Overseas Airways Corp. bring his person or property within the reach
of the tax gatherer there, the reason for a
The source of an income is the property, single place of taxation no longer obtains.
activity or service that produced the income. In this case, the actual situs of the shares of
For the source of income to be considered stock is in the Philippines, the corporation
as coming from the Philippines, it is being domiciled therein. The owner residing
sufficient that the income is derived from in California has extended her activities with
activity within the Philippines. Herein, the respect to her intangibles so as to avail
sale of tickets in the Philippines is the herself of the protection and benefit of the
activity that produced the income. The Philippine laws
tickets exchanged hands here and payments
for fares were also made here in Philippine
currency. 3. MULTIPLICITY OF SITUS
The situs of the source of payments is the
Philippines. The flow of wealth proceeded
from, and occurred within, Philippine Multiplicity of situs, or the taxation of the
territory, enjoying the protection accorded same income or intangible subject in several
by the Philippine Government. In taxing jurisdictions, arises from various
consideration of such protection, the flow of factors:
wealth should share the burden of
supporting the government.
1. The variance in the concept of domicile for tax
PD 68, in relation to PD 1355, ensures that
purposes;
international airlines are taxed on their
income from Philippine sources.
2. Multiple distinct relationships that may arise
CIR v. Japan Airlines with respect to intangible personal property; or
Citing the case of CIR v BOAC, the court 3. The use to which the property may have been
reiterated that the source of an income is devoted all of which may receive the protection of
the property, activity or service that the laws of jurisdictions other than the domicile of
produced the income.
the owner thereto.
For the source of income to be considered as
coming from the Philippines, it is sufficient
that the income is derived from activity The remedy to avoid or reduce the
within the Philippines. consequent burden in case of multiplicity of
The absence of flight operations to and from situs is either to:
the Philippines is not determinative of the
source of income or the situs of income
1. Provide exemptions or allowance of
taxation.
deduction or tax credit for foreign
The test of taxability is the source, and the
source of the income is that activity which taxes; or
produced the income. In this case, as JAL 2. Enter into tax treaties with other
constitutes PAL as its agent, thesales of JAL
States.
tickets made by PAL is taxable
Collector v. De Lara
Wells Fargo Bank v. Collector
It is the identity or association of intangibles The Supreme Court did not subject to estate
with the person of their owner at his
and inheritance taxes the shares of stock
domicile which gives jurisdiction to tax.
issued by Philippine corporations which were
But when the taxpayer extends his activities
with respect to his intangibles, so as to avail left by a non-resident alien after his death.
himself of the protection and benefit of the Considering that he is a resident of a foreign
laws of another state, in such a way as to country, his estate is entitled to exemption
from inheritance tax on the intangible In its broad sense, referred to as indirect
personal property found in the Philippines. double taxation, double taxation is taxation
This exemption is granted to non-residents other than direct duplicate taxation. It
to reduce the burden of multiple taxation, extends to all cases in which there is a
which otherwise would subject a decedent’s burden of two or more impositions.
intangible personal property to the
inheritance tax both in his place of residence Constitutionality of double taxation
and domicile and the place where those
properties are found. Unlike the United States Constitution, our
This is, therefore, an exception to the Constitution does not prohibit double
decision of the Supreme Court in Wells Fargo taxation.
v. Collector. This has since been incorporated However, while it is not forbidden, it is
in Section 104 of the NIRC. something not favored. Such taxation should,
As to the shares of stocks issued by whenever possible, be avoided and
Philippine corporations, an exemption was prevented.
granted to the estate by virtue of Section 122
In addition, where there is direct double
of the Tax Code, which provides as
taxation, there may be a violation of the
follows:. . ."And Provided, however, That no
tax shall be collected under this Title in constitutional precepts of equal protection
respect of intangible personal property (a) if and uniformity in taxation.
the decedent at the time of his death was a
resident of a foreign country which at the CIR v. S.C. Johnson and Son, Inc.
time of his death did not impose a transfer
tax or death tax of any character in respect The RP-US Tax Treaty is just one of a number of
of intangible personal property of citizens of bilateral treaties which the Philippines has entered
the Philippines not residing in that country, into for the avoidance of double taxation.
or (b) if the laws of the foreign country of
which the decedent was resident at the tune The purpose of these international agreements is to
of his death allow a similar exemption from reconcile the national fiscal legislations of the
transfer taxes or death taxes of every contracting parties in order to help the taxpayer avoid
character in respect of intangible personal simultaneous taxation in two different jurisdictions.
property owned by citizen, of the Philippine
not residing in that foreign country. More precisely, the tax conventions are drafted with a
view towards the elimination of international juridical
4. Double Taxation double taxation, which is defined as the imposition
of comparable taxes in two or more states on the
In its strict sense, referred to as direct same taxpayer in respect of the same subject matter
and for identical periods.
duplicate taxation, double taxation means:
1. taxing twice; The apparent rationale for doing away with double
taxation is of encourage the free flow of goods and
2. by the same taxing authority; services and the movement of capital, technology and
3. within the same jurisdiction or persons between countries, conditions deemed vital
in creating robust and dynamic economies.
taxing district;
4. for the same purpose; Double taxation usually takes place when a person is
resident of a contracting state and derives income
5. in the same year or taxing period;
from, or owns capital in, the other contracting state
6. some of the property in the and both states impose tax on that income or capital.
territory. In order to eliminate double taxation, a tax treaty
resorts to several methods. First, it sets out the 4. by the same State, Government, or
respective rights to tax of the state of source or situs taxing authority;
and of the state of residence with regard to certain
5. within the same jurisdiction or taxing
classes of income or capital. In some cases, an
district;
exclusive right to tax is conferred on one of the
contracting states; however, for other items 6. during the same taxing period; and
of income or capital, both states are given the right to
7. of the same kind or character of tax.
tax, although the amount of tax that may be imposed
by the state of source is limited.
C. Constitutionality of Double Taxation
b. Double Taxation in its broadest sense.
Unlike the United States Constitution, our
In its broad sense, referred to as indirect double Constitution does not prohibit double
taxation, double taxation is taxation other than direct taxation.
duplicate taxation. It extends to all cases in which However, while it is not forbidden, it is
there is a burden of two or more impositions. something not favored. Such taxation should,
whenever possible, be avoided and
Villanueva v. City of Iloilo, 265 SCRA 528 prevented.
In addition, where there is direct double
An ordinance imposing a municipal tax on taxation, there may be a violation of the
tenement houses was challenged because constitutional precepts of equal protection
the owners already pay real estate taxes and and uniformity in taxation.
also income taxes under the NIRC.
The Supreme Court held that there was no City of Baguio v. De Leon, 25 SCRA 938
double taxation.
The same tax may be imposed by the The argument against double taxation may
National Government as well as the local not be invoked where one tax is imposed by
government. the State and the other is imposed by the
There is nothing inherently obnoxious in the city, it being widely recognized that there is
exaction of license fees or taxes with respect nothing inherently obnoxious in the
to the same occupation, calling, or activity by requirement that license fees or taxes be
both the State and a political subdivision exacted with respect to the same
thereof. occupation, calling, or activity by both the
Further, a license tax may be levied upon a State and a political subdivision thereof.
business or occupation although the land And where the statute or ordinance in
used in connection therewith is subject to questions applies equally to all persons, firms
property tax. and corporations placed in a similar
situation, there is no infringement of the rule
In order to constitute double taxation in the on equality.
objectionable or prohibited sense:
1. the same property must be taxed twice Pepsi-Cola Bottling Co. vs. City of Butuan
when it should be taxed once;
The Ordinance, as amended, is discriminatory since
2. both taxes must be imposed on the only sales by “agents or consignees” of outside
same property or subject matter; dealers would be subject to the tax. Sales by local
dealers, not acting for or on behalf of other
3. for the same purpose; merchants, regardless of the volume of their sales ,
and even if the same exceeded those made by said Both a license fee and a tax may be imposed on the
agents or consignees of producers or merchants same business or occupation for selling the same
established outside the city, would be exempt from article and this is not in violation of the rules against
the tax. The classification made in the exercise of the
double taxation.
authority to tax, to be valid must be reasonable,
which would be satisfied if the classification is based
upon substantial distinctions which makes real
differences; these are germane to the purpose of Means of Avoiding or Minimizing the Burden of
legislation or ordinance; the classification applies not
Taxation:
only to present conditions but also to future
conditions substantially identical to those of the
present; and the classification applies equally to all 1. Shifting - is the transfer of the burden of a tax
those who belong to the same class. These conditions by the original payer or the one on whom the
are not fully met by the ordinance in question. tax was assessed or imposed to someone else.