Updates On Tax

Republic Act No.
10158
Posted on March 27, 2012
Republic of the Philippines
Congress of the Philippines
Metro Manila
Fifteenth Congress
Second Regular Session
Begun and held in Metro Manila, on Monday, the twenty-fifth day of July, two thousand
eleven.
[ REPUBLIC ACT NO. 10158 ]
AN ACT DECRIMINALIZING VAGRANCY, AMENDING FOR THIS PURPOSE
ARTICLE 202 OF ACT NO. 3815, AS AMENDED, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS
THE REVISED PENAL CODE
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in Congress
assembled:
SECTION 1. Article 202 of the Revised Penal Code is hereby, amended to read as
follows:
Article 202. Prostitutes; Penalty. For the purposes of this article, women who, for
money or profit, habitually indulge in sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct, are
deemed to be prostitutes.
Any person found guilty of any of the offenses covered by this article shall be punished
by arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos, and in case of recidivism, by arresto
mayor in its medium period to prision correctional in its minimum period or a fine
ranging from 200 to 2,000 pesos, or both, in the discretion of the court.
SEC. 2. Effect on Pending Cases. All pending cases under the provisions of Article 202
of the Revised Penal Code on Vagrancy prior to its amendment by this Act shall be
dismissed upon effectivity of this Act.
SEC. 3. Immediate Release of Convicted Persons. All persons serving sentence for
violation of the provisions of Article 202 of the Revised Penal Code on Vagrancy prior to
its amendment by this Act shall be immediately released upon effectivity of this Act:
Provided, That they are not serving sentence or detained for any other offense or felony.
SEC. 4. Repealing Clause. All laws, presidential decrees, executive orders, rules and
regulations and other issuances, or any part thereof, inconsistent with this Act are hereby
repealed, modified or amended accordingly.
SEC. 5. Effectivity Clause. This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its
publication in the Official Gazette or in at least two (2) newspapers of general circulation.
Approved,
(Sgd.) FELICIANO BELMONTE JR.
(Sgd.) JUAN PONCE ENRILE
Speaker of the House of

Representatives
President of the Senate
This Act which is a consolidation of Senate Bill No. 2726 and House Bill No. 4936 was
finally passed by the Senate and the House of Representatives on March 14, 2011 and
January 30, 2012, respectively.
(Sgd.) MARILYN B. BARUA-YAP
(Sgd.) EMMA LIRIO-REYES
Secretary General House of

Representatives
Secretary of the Senate
Approved: MARCH 27, 2012

(Sgd.) BENIGNO S. AQUINO III
President of the Philippines

Share on social media
Tweet
Resources
[PDF]
o
Republic Act No. 10158, March 27, 2012
This entry was posted under Legislature, Republic Acts. Bookmark the permalink.
REPUBLIC ACT NO. 10021

AN ACT TO ALLOW THE EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION BY THE BUREAU
OF INTERNAL REVENUE OF TAX MATTERS PURSUANT TO
INTERNATIONALLY-AGREED TAX STANDARDS, AMENDING SECTIONS
6(F), 71 AND 270 OF THE NATIONAL INTERNAL REVENUE CODE OF 1997,
AS AMENDED, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
assembled:
Section 1. Title. - This Act shall be known as the "Exchange of Information on Tax
Matters Act of 2009".
Section 2. Declaration of Policy. - It is the declared policy of the State to promote and
pursue a tax environment that contributes in sustaining a favorable international
investment climate and instills confidence in the adequacy and capacity of the country's
tax administration to comply with its commitments under existing international
conventions or agreements on tax matters.
Pursuant to this declared policy, the government shall comply with or commit to the
internationally-agreed tax standards required for the exchange of tax information with its
tax treaty partners to help combat international tax evasion and avoidance and to help
address tax concerns that affect international trade and investment. The government shall
likewise adopt measures and procedures to enhance cooperation with other countries in
the efficient collection of taxes, consistent with the international understanding to ensure
the payment of taxes due the respective taxing jurisdictions of the treaty partners.
Section 3. Authority of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue to Inquire into Bank
Deposit Accounts and Related Information Held by Financial Institutions. - Section 6(F)
of Republic Act No. 8424, as amended, otherwise known as the National Revenue Code
of 1997, as amended, is hereby further amended to read as follows:
"SEC. 6. Power of the Commissioner to Make Assessments and Prescribe
Additional Requirements for Tax Administration and Enforcement. "xxx
"(F) Authority of the Commissioner to Inquire into Bank Deposit Accounts and
Other Related Information Held by Financial Institutions. - Notwithstanding any contrary
provision of Republic Act No. 1405, Republic Act No. 6426, otherwise known as the
Foreign Currency Deposit Act of the Philippines, and other general and special laws, the
Commissioner is hereby authorized to inquire into the bank deposits and other related
information held by financial institutions of:
"(1) A decedent to determine his gross estate.
"(2) Any taxpayer who has filed an application for compromise of his tax liability
under Sec. 204 (A)(2) reason of financial incapacity to pay his tax liability.
"In case a taxpayer files an application to compromise the payment of his tax
liabilities on his claim that his financial position demonstrates a clear inability to
pay the tax assessed, his application shall not be considered unless and until he
waives in writing his privilege under Republic Act No. 1405, Republic Act No.
6426, otherwise known as the Foreign Currency Deposit Act of the Philippines, or
under other general or special laws, and such waiver shall constitute the authority
of the Commissioner to inquire into the bank deposits of the taxpayer.
"(3) A specific taxpayer or taxpayers subject of a request for the supply of tax
information from a foreign tax authority pursuant to an international convention
or agreement on tax matters to which the Philippines is a signatory or a party of:
Provided, That the information obtained from the banks and other financial
institutions may be used by the Bureau of Internal Revenue for tax assessment,
verification, audit and enforcement purposes.
"In case of request from a foreign tax authority for tax information held by banks and
financial institutions, the exchange of information shall be done in a secure manner to
ensure confidentiality thereof under such rules and regulations as may be promulgated by
the Secretary of Finance, upon recommendation of the Commissioner.
"The Commissioner shall provide the tax information obtained from banks and financial
institutions pursuant to a convention or agreement upon request of the foreign tax
authority when such requesting foreign tax authority has provided the following
information to demonstrate the foreseeable relevance of the information to the request:
"(a) The identity of the person under examination or investigation;
"(b) A statement of the information being sought including its nature and the form
in which the said foreign tax authority prefers to receive the information from the
Commissioner;
"(c) The tax purpose for which the information is being sought;
"(d) Grounds for believing that the information requested is held in the
Philippines or is in the possession or control of a person within the jurisdiction of
the Philippines;
"(e) To the extent known, the name and address of any person believed to be in
possession of the requested information;
"(f) A Statement that the request is in conformity with the law and administrative
practices of the said foreign tax authority, such that if the requested information
was within the jurisdiction of the said foreign tax authority then it would be able
to obtain the information under its law or in the normal course of administrative
practice and that it is conformity with a convention or international agreement;
and
"(g) A statement that the requesting foreign tax authority has exhausted all means
available in its own territory to obtain the information, except those that would
give rise to disproportionate difficulties.
"The Commissioner shall forward the information as promptly as possible to the
requesting foreign tax authority. To ensure a prompt response, the Commissioner shall
confirm receipt of a request in writing to the requesting tax authority and shall notify the
latter of deficiencies in the request, if any, within sixty (60) days from the receipt of the
request.
"If the Commissioner is unable to obtain and provide the information within ninety (90)
days from the receipt of the request, due to obstacles encountered in furnishing the
information or when the bank or financial institution refuses to furnish the information,
he shall immediately inform the requesting tax authority of the same, explaining the
nature of the obstacles encountered or the reasons of refusal."
"The term 'foreign tax authority', as used herein, shall refer to the tax authority or tax
administration of the requesting State under the tax treaty or convention to which the
Philippines is a signatory or a party of."
Section 4. Allowing a Foreign Tax Authority to Income Tax Returns of Taxpayers in the
Philippines. - Section 71 of Republic Act No. 8424, as amended, otherwise known as the
National Internal Revenue Code of 1997, is hereby amended to read as follows:
"SEC. 71. Disposition of Income Tax Returns, Publication of Lists of Taxpayers and
Filers. - After the assessment shall have been made, as provided in this Title, the returns,
together with any corrections thereof which may have been made by the Commissioner,
shall be filed in the Office of the Commissioner and shall constitute public records and be
open to inspection as such upon the order of the President of the Philippines, under rules
and regulations to be presented by the Secretary of Finance, upon recommendation of the
Commissioner.
"The Commissioner may, in each year, cause to be prepared and published in any
newspaper the lists containing the names and addresses of persons who have filed income
tax returns.
"Income tax returns of specific taxpayers subject of a request for exchange of information
by a foreign tax authority pursuant to an international convention or agreement on tax
matters to which the Philippines is a signatory or a party of, shall be open to inspection
upon the order of the President if the Philippines under rules and regulations as may be
prescribed by the Secretary of Finance, upon recommendation of the Commissioner."
Section 5. Authority of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue to Supply Information to a
Foreign Tax Authority Which is at his Disposal. - Section 270 of Republic Act No. 8424,
as amended, otherwise known as the National Internal Revenue of 1997, is hereby
amended to read as follows:
"SEC. 270. Unlawful Divulgence of Information. - Except as provided in Sections 6(F)
and 71 of this Code and Section 26 of Republic Act No. 6388, any officer or employee of
the Bureau of Internal Revenue who divulges to any person or makes known in any other
manner than may be provided by law information regarding the business, income, or
estate of any taxpayer, the secrets, operation, style or work, or apparatus of any
manufacturer or producer, or confidential information regarding the business of any
taxpayer, knowledge of which was acquired by him in the discharge of his official duties,
shall, upon conviction for each act or omission, be punished by a fine of not less than
Fifty thousand pesos (P50,000) but not more than One hundred thousand pesos
(P100,000), or suffer imprisonment of not less than two (2) years but not more than five
(5) years, or both.
"Any officer or employee of the Bureau of Internal Revenue who divulges or makes
known in any other manner to any person other than the requesting foreign tax authority
information obtained from banks and financial institutions pursuant to Section 6(F),
knowledge or information acquired by him in the discharge of his official duties, shall,
upon conviction, be punished by a fine of not less than Fifty thousand pesos (P50,000)
but not more than One hundred thousand pesos (P100,000), or suffer imprisonment of not
less than two (2) years but not more than five (5) years, or both."
Section 6. Willful Refusal to Supply Information. - Any officer, owner, agent, manager,
director or officer-in -charge of any bank or financial institution within the purview of
this Act who, being required in writing by the Commissioner, willfully, refuses to supply
the required information shall be punished by a fine of not less than Fifty thousand pesos
(50,000) but not more than One hundred thousand pesos (P100,000) , or suffer
imprisonment of not less than two (2) years but not more than five (5) years, or both.
Section 7. Obligation to Maintain Confidentiality of Information Received. - Any
information received by a foreign tax authority from the Bureau of Internal Revenue
pursuant to an International convention or agreement on tax matters shall be treated by
the authority as absolutely confidential in nature in the same manner as information
obtained by the latter under its laws and shall be disclosed only to persons or authorities,
including courts and administrative bodies, involves in the assessment or collection of,
the enforcement or prosecution in respect of, or the determination of appeals in relation
to, the taxes covered by such conventions of agreements.
Section 8. Notice to Taxpayers. - A taxpayer shall be duly notified in writing by the

Commissioner that a foreign tax authority is requesting for exchange of information held
by financial institutions pursuant to a tax convention or agreement to which the
Philippines is a signatory or a party of, under such rules and regulations as may be
prescribed by the Secretary of Finance upon recommendations of the Commissioner.
Section 9. Separability Clause. -If any provision of this Act is declared invalid or
unconstitutional, other provisions hereof which are not affected thereby shall continue to
be in full force and effect.
Section 10. Repealing Clause. - All laws, presidential decrees, executive orders, rules and
regulations, other issuances or parts thereof which are inconsistent with or contrary to this
Act are hereby repealed or modified accordingly.
Section 11. Effectivity Clause. - This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its
publication in the Official Gazette or in at least two (2) newspapers of general circulation.
Approved,

(Sgd.) PROSPERO C. NOGRALES

Representatives
This Act which is a consolidation of House Bill No. 6899 and Senate Bill No. 3220, was
finally passed by the House of Representatives and the Senate on December 15, 2009 and
December 11, 2009, respectively.

Secretary of Senate
Approved: March 8, 2010

(Sgd.) GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO

Secretary General
House of Represenatives

AN ACT GRANTING INCOME TAX EXEMPTION TO LOCAL WATER
DISTRICTS BY AMENDING Section 27(C) OF THE NATIONAL INTERNAL
REVENUE CODE (NIRC) OF 1997, AS AMENDED, AND ADDING Section 289-A
TO THE CODE, FOR THE PURPOSE
assembled:
Section 1. Section 27(C) of the National Internal Revenue Code (NIRC) of 1997, as
amended by Republic Act No. 9337, is hereby further amended to read as follows:
"Section 27. Rates of Income Tax on Domestic Corporations. "x x x
"(C) Government-owned or -Controlled Corporations, Agencies or
Instrumentalities. - The provisions of existing special or general laws to the
contrary notwithstanding, all corporations, agencies, or instrumentalities owned or
controlled by the Government, except the Government Service and Insurance
System (GSIS), the Social Security System (SSS), the Philippine Health Insurance
Corporation (PHIC), the local water districts (LWD) and the Philippine Charity
Sweepstakes Office (PCSO), shall pay such rate of tax upon their taxable income
as are imposed by this Section upon corporations or associations engaged in a
similar business, industry, or activity.
"x x x."
Section 2. A new section, designated as Section 289-A under Chapter II, Title XI, of the
same Code is inserted to read as follows:
"Section 289-A. Support for Local Water Districts. - The amount that would have
been paid as income tax and saved by the local water district by virtue of its
exemption to the income taxes shall be used by the local water district concerned
for capital equipment expenditure in order to expand water services coverage and
improve water quality in order to provide safe and clean water in the provinces,
cities, and municipalities: Provided, That, the water district shall adopt internal
control reforms that would bring about their economic and financial viability:
Provided, further, That the water district shall not increase by more than twenty
percent (20%) a year its appropriation for personal services, as well as for travel,
transportation or representation expenses and purchase of motor vehicles.
"All unpaid taxes or any portion thereof due from a local water district for the
period starting August 13, 1996 until the effectivity date of this Act are hereby
condoned by the Government subject to the following conditions: (1) that the
Bureau of Internal Revenue, after careful review of the financial statements of a
water district applying for condonation of taxes due, establishes its financial
incapacity, after providing for its maintenance and operating expenses, debt
servicing and reserve fund, to meet such obligations for the period stated herein;
and (2) that the water district availing of such condonation shall submit to
Congress of the Philippines a program of internal reforms, duly certified by the
local water utilities administration, that would bring about its economic and
financial viability.
"All water districts, through the Local Water Utilities Administration, shall furnish
the Committee on Ways and Means of the Senate and House of Representatives,
respectively, on an annual basis, with statistical data and financial statements
regarding their operations and other information as may be required, for purposes
of monitoring compliance with the provisions of this Act and reviewing the
rationalization for tax exemption privileges."
Section 3. Implementing Rules and Regulations. - The Secretary of Finance shall, upon
the recommendation of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, and upon consultation
with the appropriate government agencies, promulgate the necessary rules and
regulations for the effective implementation of this Act.
Section 4. Separability Clause. - If any provision of this Act is declared invalid or
unconstitutional, other provisions hereof which are not affected thereby shall continue to
be in full force and effect.
Section 5. Repealing Clause. - Any law, presidential decree or issuance, executive order,
letter of instruction, administrative order, rule or regulation contrary to or inconsistent
with any provision of this Act is hereby repealed or modified accordingly.
Section 6. Effectivity Clause. - This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its
publication in the Official Gazette or in at least two (2) newspapers of general circulation,
whichever date comes earlier.
Approved,
(Sgd.) PROSPERO C. NOGRALES

Representatives

This Act which is a consolidation of House Bill No. 5210 and Senate Bill No. 3392 was
December 8, 2009, respectively.

Secretary of Senate

Secretary General
House of Representatives
Approved:
(Sgd.) GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO
Lapsed into law on MAR 11 2010 without the signature of the President, in accordance
with Article VI, Section 27 (1) of the Constitution.

Metro Manila
Fifteenth Congress
Third Regular Session
Begun and held in Metro Manila, on Monday, the twenty third day of July, two thousand
twelve.
[REPUBLIC ACT NO. 10351]
AN ACT RESTRUCTURING THE EXCISE TAX ON ALCOHOL AND TOBACCO
PRODUCTS BY AMENDING SECTIONS 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 8, 131 AND 288
OF REPUBLIC ACT NO. 8424. OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE NATIONAL
INTERNAL REVENUE CODE OF 1997, AS AMENDED BY REPUBLIC ACT NO.
9334, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
assembled:
SECTION 1. Section 141 of the National Internal Revenue Code of 1997, as amended by
Republic Act No. 9334, is hereby further amended to read as follows:
SEC. 141. Distilled Spirits. On distilled spirits, subject to the provisions of Section
133 of this Code, an excise tax shall be levied, assessed and collected based on the
following schedules:
(a) Effective on January 1, 2013
(1) An ad valorem tax equivalent to fifteen percent (15%) of the net retail price
(excluding the excise tax and the value-added tax) per proof; and
(2) In addition to the ad valorem tax herein imposed, a specific tax of Twenty pesos
(P20.00) per proof liter.
(b) Effective on January 1, 2015
(1) An ad valorem tax equivalent to twenty percent (20%) of the net retail price
(excluding the excise tax and the value-added tax) per proof; and
(2) In addition to the ad valorem tax herein imposed, a specific tax of Twenty pesos
(P20.00) per proof liter.
(c) In addition to the ad valorem tax herein imposed, the specific tax rate of Twenty
pesos (P20.00) imposed under this Section shall be increased by four percent (4%) every
year thereafter effective on January 1, 2016, through revenue regulations issued by the
Secretary of Finance.
Medicinal preparations, flavoring extracts, and all other preparations, except toilet
preparations, of which, excluding water, distilled spirits form the chief ingredient, shall
be subject to the same tax as such chief ingredient.
This tax shall be proportionally increased for any strength of the spirits taxed over proof
spirits, and the tax shall attach to this substance as soon as it is in existence as such,
whether it be subsequently separated as pure or impure spirits, or transformed into any
other substance either in the process of original production or by any subsequent process.
Spirits or distilled spirits is the substance known as ethyl alcohol, ethanol or spirits of
wine, including all dilutions, purifications and mixtures thereof, from whatever source,
by whatever process produced, and shall include whisky, brandy, rum, gin and vodka, and
other similar products or mixtures.
Proof spirits is liquor containing one-half (1/2) of its volume of alcohol of a specific
gravity of seven thousand nine hundred and thirty-nine ten thousandths (0.7939) at fifteen
degrees centigrade (15C). A proof liter means a liter of proof spirits.
Net retail price shall mean the price at which the distilled spirits is sold on retail in at
least five (5) major supermarkets in Metro Manila, excluding the amount intended to
cover the applicable excise tax and the value-added tax. For distilled spirits which are
marketed outside Metro Manila, the net retail price shall mean the price at which the
distilled spirits is sold in at least five (5) major supermarkets in the region excluding the
amount intended to cover the applicable excise tax and the value-added tax.
Major supermarkets, as contemplated under this Act, shall be those with the highest
annual gross sales in Metro Manila or the region, as the case may be, as determined by
the National Statistics Office, and shall exclude retail outlets or kiosks, convenience or
sari-sari stores, and others of a similar nature: Provided, That no two (2) supermarkets in
the list to be surveyed are affiliated and/or branches of each other: Provided, finally, That
in case a particular distilled spirit is not sold in major supermarkets, the price survey can
be conducted in retail outlets where said distilled spirit is sold in Metro Manila or the
region, as the case may be, upon the determination of the Commissioner of Internal
Revenue.
The net retail price shall be determined by the Bureau of Internal Revenue (B1R)
through a price survey under oath.
The methodology and all pertinent documents used in the conduct of the latest price
survey shall be submitted to the Congressional Oversight Committee on the
Comprehensive Tax Reform Program created under Republic Act No. 8240.
Understatement of the suggested net retail price by as much as fifteen percent (15%) of
the actual net retail price shall render the manufacturer or importer liable for additional
excise tax equivalent to the tax due and difference between the understated suggested net
retail price and the actual net retail price.
Distilled spirits introduced in the domestic market after the effectivity of this Act shall
be initially taxed according to their suggested net retail prices.
Suggested net retail price shall mean the net retail price at which locally manufactured
or imported distilled spirits are intended by the manufacturer or importer to be sold on
retail in major supermarkets or retail outlets in Metro Manila for those marketed
nationwide, and in other regions, for those with regional markets. At the end of three (3)
months from the product launch, the Bureau of Internal Revenue shall validate the
suggested net retail price of the new brand against the net retail price as defined herein
and initially determine the correct tax on a newly introduced distilled spirits. After the
end of nine (9) months from such validation, , the Bureau of Internal Revenue shall
revalidate the initially validated net retail price against the net retail price as of the time
of revalidation in order to finally determine the correct tax on a newly introduced distilled
spirits.
All distilled spirits existing in the market at the time of the effectivity of this Act shall be
taxed according to the tax rates provided above based on the latest price survey of the
distilled spirits conducted by the Bureau of Internal Revenue.
Manufacturers and importers of distilled spirits shall, within thirty (30) days from the
effectivity of this Act, and within the first five (5) days of every third month thereafter,
submit to the Commissioner a sworn statement of the volume of sales for each particular
brand of distilled spirits sold at his establishment for the three-month period immediately
preceding.
Any manufacturer or importer who, in violation of this Section, misdeclares or
misrepresents in his or its sworn statement herein required any pertinent data or
information shall, upon final findings by the Commissioner that the violation was
committed, be penalized by a summary cancellation or withdrawal of his or its permit to
engage in business as manufacturer or importer of distilled spirits.
Any corporation, association or partnership liable for any of the acts or omissions in
violation of this Section shall be fined treble the amount of deficiency taxes, surcharges
and interest which may be assessed pursuant to this Section.
Any person liable for any of the acts or omissions prohibited under this Section shall be
criminally liable and penalized under Section 254 of this Code. Any person who willfully
aids or abets in the commission of any such act or omission shall be criminally liable in
the same manner as the principal.
If the offender is not a citizen of the Philippines, he shall be deported immediately after
serving the sentence, without further proceedings for deportation.
SEC. 2. Section 142 of the National Internal Revenue Code of 1997, as amended by
SEC. 142. Wines. On wines, there shall be collected per liter of volume capacity
effective on January 1, 2013, the following excise taxes:
(a) Sparkling wines/champagnes regardless of proof, if the net retail price per bottle of
seven hundred fifty milliliter (750 ml.) volume capacity (excluding the excise tax and the
value-added tax) is:
(1) Five hundred pesos (P500.00) or less -Two hundred fifty pesos (P250.00); and
(2) More than Five hundred pesos (P500.00) Seven hundred pesos (P700.00).
(b) Still wines and carbonated wines containing fourteen percent (14%) of alcohol by
volume or less, Thirty pesos (P30.00); and
(c) Still wines and carbonated wines containing more than fourteen percent (14%) but
not more than twenty-five percent (25%) of alcohol by volume, Sixty pesos (P60.00).
The rates of tax imposed under this Section shall be increased by four percent (4%)
every year thereafter effective on January 1, 2014, through revenue regulations issued by
the Secretary of Finance.
Fortified wines containing more than twenty-five percent (25%) of alcohol by volume
shall be taxed as distilled spirits. Fortified wines shall mean natural wines to which
distilled spirits are added to increase their alcohol strength.
Net retail price shall mean the price at which sparkling wine/champagne is sold on
retail in at least five (5) major supermarkets in Metro Manila, excluding the amount
intended to cover the applicable excise tax and the value-added tax. For sparkling
wines/champagnes which are marketed outside Metro Manila, the net retail price shall
mean the price at which the wine is sold in at least five (5) major supermarkets in the
region excluding the amount intended to cover the applicable excise tax and the valueadded tax.
in case a particular sparkling wine/champagne is not sold in major supermarkets, the
price survey can be conducted in retail outlets where said sparkling wine/champagne is
sold in Metro Manila or the region, as the case may be, upon the determination of the
Commissioner of Internal Revenue.
The net retail price shall be determined by the Bureau of Internal Revenue through a
price survey under oath.
Sparkling wines/champagnes introduced in the domestic market after the effectivity of
this Act shall be initially tax classified according to their suggested net retail prices.
or imported sparkling wines/champagnes are intended by the manufacturer or importer to
be sold on retail in major supermarkets or retail outlets in Metro Manila for those
marketed nationwide, and in other regions, for those with regional markets. At the end of
three (3) months from the product launch, the Bureau of Internal Revenue shall validate
the suggested net retail price of the sparkling wine/champagne against the net retail price
as defined herein and initially determine the correct tax bracket to which a newly
introduced sparkling wine/champagne shall be classified. After the end of nine (9)
months from such validation, the Bureau of Internal Revenue shall revalidate the initially
validated net retail price against the net retail price as of the time of revalidation in order
to finally determine the correct tax bracket to which a newly introduced sparkling
wine/champagne shall be classified.
The proper tax classification of sparkling wines/champagnes, whether registered before
or after the effectivity of this Act, shall be determined every two (2) years from the date
of effectivity of this Act.
All sparkling wines/champagnes existing in the market at the time of the effectivity of
this Act shall be classified according to the net retail prices and the tax rates provided
above based on the latest price survey of the sparkling wines/champagnes conducted by
the Bureau of Internal Revenue.
Manufacturers and importers of wines shall, within thirty (30) days from the effectivity
of this Act, and within the first five (5) days of every month thereafter, submit to the
Commissioner a sworn statement of the volume of sales for each particular brand of
wines sold at his establishment for the three-month period immediately preceding.
committed be penalized by a summary cancellation or withdrawal of his or its permit to
engage in business as manufacturer or importer of wines.
SEC. 143. Fermented Liquors. There shall be levied, assessed and collected an excise
tax on beer, lager beer, ale, porter and other fermented liquors except tuba, basi,
tapuy and similar fermented liquors in accordance with the following schedule:
Effective on January 1, 2013
(a) If the net retail price (excluding the excise tax and the value-added tax) per liter of
volume capacity is Fifty pesos and sixty centavos (P50.60) or less, the tax shall be Fifteen
pesos (P15.00) per liter; and
(b) If the net retail price (excluding the excise tax and the value-added tax) per liter of
volume capacity is more than Fifty pesos and sixty centavos (P50.60), the tax shall be
Twenty pesos (P20.00) per liter.
volume capacity is Fifty pesos and sixty centavos (P50.60) or less, the tax shall be
Seventeen pesos (P17.00) per liter; and
Twenty-one pesos (P21.00) per liter.
Nineteen pesos (P19.00) per liter; and
Twenty-two pesos (P22.00) per liter.
Twenty-one pesos (P21.00) per liter; and
Twenty-three pesos (P23.00) per liter.
Effective on January 1, 2017, the tax on all fermented liquors shall be Twenty-three
pesos and fifty centavos (P23.50) per liter.
The rates of tax imposed under this Section shall be increased by four percent (4%)
the Secretary of Finance. However, in case of fermented liquors affected by the no
downward reclassification provision prescribed under this Section, the four percent (4%)
increase shah apply to their respective applicable tax rates.
Fermented liquors which are brewed and sold at micro-breweries or small
establishments such as pubs and restaurants shall be subject to the rate of Twenty-eight
pesos (P28.00) per liter effective on January 1, 2013: Provided, That this rate shall be
increased by four percent (4%) every year thereafter effective on January 1, 2014,
through revenue regulations issued by the Secretary of Finance.
Fermented liquors introduced in the domestic market after the effectivity of this Act
shall be initially tax classified according to their suggested net retail prices.
or imported fermented liquor are intended by the manufacturer or importer to be sold on
retail in major supermarkets or retail outlets in Metro Manila for those marketed
nationwide, and in other regions, for those with regional markets. At the end of three (3)
months from the product launch, the Bureau of Internal Revenue shall validate the
suggested net retail price of the newly introduced fermented liquor against the net retail
price as defined herein and initially determine the correct tax bracket to which a newly
introduced fermented liquor, as defined above, shall be classified. After the end of nine
(9) months from such validation, the Bureau of Internal Revenue shall revalidate the
initially validated net retail price against the net retail price as of the time of revalidation
in order to finally determine the correct tax bracket which a newly introduced fermented
liquor shall be classified.
Net retail price shall mean the price at which the fermented liquor is sold on retail in
at least five (5) major supermarkets in Metro Manila (for brands of fermented liquor
marketed nationally), excluding the amount intended to cover the applicable excise tax
and the value-added tax. For brands which are marketed outside Metro Manila, the net
retail price shall mean the price at which the fermented liquor is sold in at least five (5)
major supermarkets in the region excluding the amount intended to cover the applicable
excise tax and the value-added tax.
in case a particular fermented liquor is not sold in major supermarkets, the price survey
can be conducted in retail outlets where said fermented liquor is sold in Metro Manila or
the region, as the case may be, upon the determination of the Commissioner of Internal
Revenue.
The net retail price shall be determined by the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR)
through a price survey under oath.
Any downward reclassification of present categories, for tax purposes, of fermented
liquors duly registered at the time of the effectivity of this Act which will reduce the tax
imposed herein, or the payment thereof, shall be prohibited.
The proper tax classification of fermented liquors, whether registered before or after the
effectivity of this Act, shall be determined every two (2) years from the date of effectivity
of this Act.
All fermented liquors existing in the market at the time of the effectivity of this Act shall
be classified according to the net retail prices and the tax rates provided above based on
the latest price survey of the fermented liquors conducted by the Bureau of Internal
Revenue.
Every brewer or importer of fermented liquor shall, within thirty (30) days from the
effectivity of this Act, and within the first five (5) days of every month thereafter, submit
to the Commissioner a sworn statement of the volume of sales for each particular brand
of fermented liquor sold at his establishment for the three-month period immediately
preceding.
Any brewer or importer who, in violation of this Section, misdeclares or misrepresents
in his or its sworn statement herein required any pertinent data or information shall, upon
final findings by the Commissioner that the violation was committed, be penalized by a
summary cancellation or withdrawal of his or its permit to engage in business as brewer
or importer of fermented liquor.
SEC. 144. Tobacco Products. There shall be collected an excise tax of One peso and
seventy-five centavos (P1.75) effective on January 1, 2013 on each kilogram of the
following products of tobacco:
(a) Tobacco twisted by hand or reduced into a condition to be consumed in any manner
other than the ordinary mode of drying and curing;
(b) Tobacco prepared or partially prepared with or without the use of any machine or
instruments or without being pressed or sweetened except as otherwise provided
hereunder; and
(c) Fine-cut shorts and refuse, scraps, clippings, cuttings, stems and sweepings of
tobacco except as otherwise provided hereunder.
Stemmed leaf tobacco, tobacco prepared or partially prepared with or without the use of
any machine or instrument or without being pressed or sweetened, fine-cut shorts and
refuse, scraps, clippings, cuttings, stems, midribs, and sweepings of tobacco resulting
from the handling or stripping of whole leaf tobacco shall be transferred, disposed of, or
otherwise sold, without any prepayment of the excise tax herein provided for, if the same
are to be exported or to be used in the manufacture of cigars, cigarettes, or other tobacco
products on which the excise tax will eventually be paid on the finished product, under
such conditions as may be prescribed in the rules and regulations promulgated by the
Secretary of Finance, upon recommendation of the Commissioner.
On tobacco specially prepared for chewing so as to be unsuitable for use in any other
manner, on each kilogram, One peso and fifty centavos (P1.50) effective on January 1,
2013.
The rates of tax imposed under this Section shall be increased by four percent. (4%)
No tobacco products manufactured in the Philippines and produced for export shall be
removed from their place of manufacture or exported without posting of an export bond
equivalent to the amount of the excise tax due thereon if sold domestically: Provided,
however, That tobacco products for export may be transferred from the place of
manufacture to a bonded facility, upon posting of a transfer bond, prior to export.
Tobacco products imported into the Philippines and destined for foreign countries shall
not be allowed entry without posting a bond equivalent to the amount of customs duty,
excise and value-added taxes due thereon if sold domestically.
Manufacturers and importers of tobacco products shall, within thirty (30) days from the
effectivity of this Act, and within the first five (5) days of every month thereafter, submit
to the Commissioner a sworn statement of the volume of sales for each particular brand
of tobacco products sold for the three-month period immediately preceding.
misrepresents hi his or its sworn statement herein required any pertinent data or
engage in business as manufacturer or importer of cigars or cigarettes.
SEC. 145. Cigars and Cigarettes.
(A) Cigars. There shall be levied, assessed and collected on cigars an excise tax in
accordance with the following schedule:
(1) Effective on January 1, 2013
(a) An ad valorem tax equivalent to twenty percent (20%) of the net retail price
(excluding the excise tax and the value-added tax) per cigar; and
(b) In addition to the ad valorem tax herein imposed, a specific tax of Five pesos (P5.00)
per cigar.
(2) In addition to the ad valorem tax herein imposed, the specific tax rate of Five pesos
(P5.00) imposed under this subsection shall be increased by four percent (4%) effective
on January 1, 2014 through revenue regulations issued by the Secretary of Finance.
(B) Cigarettes Packed by Hand. There shall be levied, assessed and collected on
cigarettes packed by hand an excise tax based on the following schedules:
Effective on January 1, 2013, Twelve pesos (P12.00) per pack;
Effective on January 1, 2014, Fifteen pesos (P15.00) per pack;
Effective on January 1, 2015, Eighteen pesos (P18.00) per pack;
Effective on January 1, 2016, Twenty-one pesos (P21.00) per pack; and
Effective on January 1, 2017, Thirty pesos (P30.00) per pack.
The rates of tax imposed under this subsection shall be increased by four percent (4%)
every year* effective on January 1, 2018, through revenue regulations issued by the
Secretary of Finance.
Duly registered cigarettes packed by hand shall only be packed in twenties and other
packaging combinations of not more than twenty.
Cigarettes packed by hand shall refer to the manner of packaging of cigarette sticks
using an individual persons hands and not through any other means such as a mechanical
device, machine or equipment.
(C) Cigarettes Packed by Machine. There shall be levied, assessed and collected on
cigarettes packed by machine a tax at the rates prescribed below:
(1) If the net retail price (excluding the excise tax and the value-added tax) is Eleven
pesos and fifty centavos (P11.50) and below per pack, the tax shall be Twelve pesos
(P12.00) per pack; and
(2) If the net retail price (excluding the excise tax and the value-added tax) is more than
Eleven pesos and fifty centavos (P11.50) per pack, the tax shall be Twenty-five pesos
(P25.00) per pack.
pesos and fifty centavos (P11.50) and below per pack, the tax shall be Seventeen pesos
Eleven pesos and fifty centavos (P11.50) per pack, the tax shall be Twenty-seven pesos
(P27.00) per pack.
pesos and fifty centavos (P11.50) and below per pack, the tax shall be Twenty-one pesos
Eleven pesos and fifty centavos (P11.50) per pack, the tax shall be Twenty-eight pesos
(P28.00) per pack.
pesos and fifty centavos (P11.50) and below per pack, the tax shall be Twenty-five pesos
Eleven pesos and fifty centavos (P11.50) per pack, the tax shall be Twenty-nine pesos
(P29.00) per pack.
Effective on January 1, 2017, the tax on all cigarettes packed by machine shall be Thirty
pesos (P30.00) per pack.
The rates of tax imposed under this subsection shall be increased by four percent (4%)
Duly registered cigarettes packed by machine shall only be packed in twenties and other
packaging combinations of not more than twenty.
Cigarettes introduced in the domestic market after the effectivity of this Act shall be
initially tax classified according to their suggested net retail prices.
or imported cigarettes are intended by the manufacturer or importer to be sold on retail in
major supermarkets or retail outlets in Metro Manila for those marketed nationwide, and
in other regions, for those with regional markets. At the end of three (3) months from the
product launch, the Bureau of Internal Revenue shall validate the suggested net retail
price of the newly introduced cigarette against the net retail price as defined herein and
initially determine the correct tax bracket under which a newly introduced cigarette shall
be classified. After the end of nine (9) months from such validation, the Bureau of
Internal Revenue shall revalidate the initially validated net retail price against the net
retail price as of the time of revalidation in order to finally determine the correct tax
bracket under which a newly introduced cigarette shall be classified.
Net retail price shall mean the price at which the cigarette is sold on retail in at least
five (5) major supermarkets in Metro Manila (for brands of cigarettes marketed
nationally), excluding the amount intended to cover the applicable excise tax and the
value-added tax. For cigarettes which are marketed only outside Metro Manila, the net
retail price shah mean the price at which the cigarette is sold in at least five (5) major
supermarkets in the region excluding the amount intended to cover the applicable excise
tax and the value-added tax.
in case a particular cigarette is not sold in major supermarkets, the price survey can be
conducted in retail outlets where said cigarette is sold in Metro Manila or the region, as
the case may be, upon the determination of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue.
The net retail price shall be determined by the Bureau of Internal Revenue through a
price survey under oath.
The proper tax classification of cigarettes, whether registered before or after the
effectivity of this Act, shall be determined every two (2) years from the date of effectivity
of this Act.
All cigarettes existing in the market at the time of the effectivity of this Act shall be
classified according to the net retail prices and the tax rates provided above based on the
latest price survey of cigarettes conducted by the Bureau of Internal Revenue.
No tobacco products manufactured in the Philippines and produced for export shall be
removed from their place of manufacture or exported without posting of an export bond
equivalent to the amount of the excise tax due thereon if sold domestically: Provided,
however, That tobacco products for export may be transferred from the place of
manufacture to a bonded facility, upon posting of a transfer bond, prior to export.
Tobacco products imported into the Philippines and destined for foreign countries shall
not be allowed entry without posting a bond equivalent to the amount of customs duty,
excise and value-added taxes due thereon if sold domestically.
Of the total volume of cigarettes sold in the country, any manufacturer and/or seller of
tobacco products must procure at least fifteen percent (15%) of its tobacco leaf raw
material requirements from locally grown sources, subject to adjustments based on
international treaty commitments.
Manufacturers and importers of cigars and cigarettes shall, within thirty (30) days from
the effectivity of this Act and within the first five (5) days of every month thereafter,
submit to the Commissioner a sworn statement of the volume of sales for cigars and/or
cigarettes sold for the three-month period immediately preceding.
engage in business as manufacturer or importer of cigars or cigarettes.
violation of this Section shall be fined treble the aggregate amount of deficiency taxes,
surcharges and interest which may be assessed pursuant to this Section.
SEC. 6. Section 8 of Republic Act No. 8424 or the National Internal Revenue Code, as
amended, is hereby further amended to read as follows:
SEC. 8. Duty of the Commissioner to Ensure the Provision and Distribution of Forms,
Receipts, Certificates, and Appliances, and the Acknowledgment of Payment of Taxes.
(A) Provision and Distribution to Proper-Officials. Any law to the contrary
notwithstanding, it shah be the duty of the Commissioner, among other things, to
prescribe, provide, and distribute to the proper officials the requisite licenses; internal
revenue stamps; unique, secure and nonremovable identification markings (hereafter
called unique identification markings), such as codes or stamps, be affixed to or form part
of all unit packets and packages and any outside packaging of cigarettes and bottles of
distilled spirits; labels and other forms; certificates; bonds; records; invoices; books;
receipts; instruments; appliances and apparatus used in administering the laws falling
within the jurisdiction of the Bureau. For this purpose, internal revenue stamps, or other
markings and labels shall be caused by the Commissioner to be printed with adequate
security features.
Internal revenue stamps, whether of a bar code or fuson design, or other markings shall
be firmly and conspicuously affixed or printed on each pack of cigars and cigarettes and
bottles of distilled spirits subject to excise tax in the manner and form as prescribed by
the Commissioner, upon approval of the Secretary of Finance.
To further improve tax administration, cigarette and alcohol manufacturers shall be
required to install automated volume-counters of packs and bottles to deter over-removals
and misdeclaration of removals.
SEC. 7. Section 131, Subsection A of the National Internal Revenue Code of 1997, as
amended by Republic Act No. 9334, is hereby further amended as follows:
SEC. 131. Payment of Excise Taxes on. Imported Articles.

x x x
The provision of any special or general law to the contrary notwithstanding, the
importation of cigars and cigarettes distilled spirits, fermented liquors and wines into the
Philippines, even if destined for tax and duty-free shops, shall be subject to all applicable
taxes, duties, charges, including excise taxes due thereon. This shall apply to cigars and
cigarettes, distilled spirits, fermented liquors and wines brought directly into the duly
chartered or legislated freeports of the Subic Special Economic and Freeport Zone,
created under Republic Act No. 7227; the Cagayan Special Economic Zone and Freeport,
created under Republic Act No. 7922; and the Zamboanga City Special Economic Zone,
created under Republic Act No. 7903, and such other freeports as may hereafter be
established or created by law: Provided, further, That notwithstanding the provisions of
Republic Act Nos. 9400 and 9593, importations of cigars and cigarettes, distilled spirits,
fermented liquors and wines made directly by a government-owned and operated dutyfree shop, like the Duty-Free Philippines (DFP), shall be exempted from all applicable
duties only: x x x
x x x
Articles confiscated shall be destroyed using the most environmentally friendly method
available in accordance with the rules and regulations to be promulgated by the Secretary
of Finance, upon recommendation of the Commissioners of Customs and Internal
Revenue.
x
x x.
SEC. 8. Section 288, subsections (B) and (C) of the National Internal Revenue Code of
1997, as amended by Republic Act No. 9334, is hereby further amended to read as
follows:
(B) Incremental Revenues from Republic Act No. 8240. Fifteen percent (15%) of the
incremental revenue collected from the excise tax on tobacco products under R. A. No.
8240 shall be allocated and divided among the provinces producing burley and native
tobacco in accordance with the volume of tobacco leaf production. The fund shall be
exclusively utilized for programs to promote economically viable alternatives for tobacco
farmers and workers such as:
(1) Programs that will provide inputs, training, and other support for tobacco farmers
who shift to production of agricultural products other than tobacco including, but not
limited to, high-value crops, spices, rice, corn, sugarcane, coconut, livestock and
fisheries;
(2) Programs that will provide financial support for tobacco farmers who are displaced
or who cease to produce tobacco;
(3) Cooperative programs to assist tobacco farmers in planting alternative crops or

implementing other livelihood projects;
(4) Livelihood programs and projects that will promote, enhance, and develop the
tourism potential of tobacco-growing provinces;
(5) Infrastructure projects such as farm to market roads, schools, hospitals, and rural
health facilities; and
(6) Agro-industrial projects that will enable tobacco farmers to be involved in the
management and subsequent ownership of projects, such as post-harvest and secondary
processing like cigarette manufacturing and by-product utilization.
The Department of Budget and Management, in consultation with the Department of
Agriculture, shall issue rules and regulations governing the allocation and disbursement
of this fund, not later than one hundred eighty (] 80) days from the effectivity of this Act.
(C) Incremental Revenues from the Excise Tax on Alcohol and Tobacco Products.
After deducting the allocations under Republic Act Nos. 7171 and 8240, eighty percent
(80%) of the remaining balance of the incremental revenue derived from this Act shall be
allocated for the universal health care under the National Health Insurance Program, the
attainment of the millennium development goals and health awareness programs; and
twenty percent (20%) shall be allocated nationwide, based on political and district
subdivisions, for medical assistance and health enhancement facilities program, the
annual requirements of which shall be determined by the Department of Health (DOH).
SEC. 9. Transitory Provision. A special financial support for displaced workers in the
alcohol and tobacco industries shall be allocated and included in the appropriations under
the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) to finance unemployment alleviation
program; and to the Technical Education and Skills Development Authority (TESDA) to
finance the training and retooling programs of displaced workers, to be included in the
General Appropriations Acts for the Fiscal Years 2014 to 2017.
SEC. 10. Annual Report. The Department of Budget and Management (DBM), the
Department of Agriculture (DA), the Department of Health (DOH) and the Philippine
Health Insurance Corporation (PhilHealth) shall each submit to the Oversight Committee,
created under Republic Act No. 8240, a detailed report on the expenditure of the amounts
earmarked in this Section on the first week of August of every year. The reports shall be
simultaneously published in the Official Gazette and in the agencies websites.
SEC. 11. Congressional Oversight Committee. The composition of the Congressional
Oversight Committee, created under Republic Act No. 8240, shall include the Agriculture
and Health Committee Chairpersons of the Senate and the House of Representatives as
part of the four (4) members to be appointed from each House.
Upon receipt of the annual reports from the DBM, DA, DOH, DOLE, PhilHealth and
TESDA, the Committee shall review and ensure the proper implementation of this Act as
regards the expenditures of the earmarked funds.
Starting the third quarter of Calendar Year 2016, the Committee is mandated to review
the impact of the tax rates provided under this Act.
SEC. 12. Implementing Rules and Regulations. The Secretary of Finance shall, upon the
recommendation of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, and in consultation with the
Department of Health, promulgate the necessary rules and regulations for the effective
implementation of this Act not later than one hundred eighty (180) days upon the
effectivity of this Act.
SEC. 13. Separability Clause. If any of the provisions of this Act is declared invalid by
a competent court, the remainder of this Act or any provision not affected by such
declaration of invalidity shall remain in force and effect.
SEC. 14. Repealing Clause. All laws, decrees ordinances, rules and regulations,
executive or administrative orders and such other presidential issuances that are
inconsistent with any of the provisions of this Act are hereby repealed, amended or
otherwise modified accordingly.
SEC. 15. Effectivity. This Act shall take effect upon its publication in a newspaper of
general circulation.
Approved,
(Sgd.) JUAN PONCE

ENRILE
(Sgd.) FELICIANO
BELMONTE JR.
Speaker of the House
of Representatives
finally passed by the House of Representatives and the Senate on December 11, 2012.
Approved: DEC 19 2012
(Sgd.) MARILYN B.
(Sgd.) EMMA LIRIOBARUA-YAP
REYES
Secretary General
Secretary of the Senate House of Representatives
Republic Act No. 10653

Posted on February 12, 2015
H. No. 4970
S. No. 2437
Metro Manila
Sixteenth Congress
Second Regular Session
Begun and held in Metro Manila, on Monday, the twenty-eighth day of July, two
thousand fourteen.
AN ACT ADJUSTING THE 13TH MONTH PAY AND OTHER BENEFITS
CEILING EXCLUDED FROM THE COMPUTATION OF GROSS INCOME FOR
PURPOSES OF INCOME TAXATION, AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE
SECTION 32(B), CHAPTER VI OF THE NATIONAL INTERNAL REVENUE
CODE OF 1997, AS AMENDED
assembled:
SECTION 1. Section 32(B), Chapter VI of the National Internal Revenue Code of the
Philippines (Republic Act No. 8424) is hereby amended as follows:
SEC. 32. Gross Income.
x x x
(B) Exclusions from Gross Income. The following items shall not be included in
gross income and shall be exempt from taxation under this Title:
xxx
(7) Miscellaneous Items. xxx
(e) 13th Month Pay and Other Benefits. Gross benefits received by officials and
employees of public and private entities: Provided, however, That the total exclusion
under this subparagraph shall not exceed eighty-two thousand pesos (P82,000) which
shall cover:
xxx
(iv) Other benefits such as productivity incentives and Christmas bonus: Provided, That
every three (3) years after the effectivity of this Act, the President of the Philippines shall
adjust the amount herein stated to its present value using the Consumer Price Index
(CPI), as published by the National Statistics Office (NSO).
SEC. 2. Implementing Rules and Regulations. The Secretary of Finance shall
promulgate the necessary rules and regulations for the faithful and effective
implementation of the provisions of this Act: Provided, That, the failure of the Secretary
of Finance to promulgate the said rules and regulations shall not prevent the
implementation of this Act upon its effectivity.
SEC. 3. Repealing Clause. All laws, orders, issuances, circulars, rules and regulations
or parts thereof which are inconsistent with the provisions of this Act are hereby repealed
or modified accordingly.
SEC. 4. Separability Clause. If any provision of this Act is declared unconstitutional
or invalid, other parts or provisions hereof not affected thereby shall continue to be in full
force and effect.
SEC. 5. Effectivity. This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days following its publication
in at least two (2) newspapers of general circulation.
Approved,
(Sgd.) FRANKLIN M. DRILON
(Sgd.) FELICIANO BELMONTE

of Representatives
November 26, 2014, respectively.
(Sgd.) OSCAR G. YABES

Approved: FEB 12 2015
(Sgd.) MARILYN B. BARUA-YA

Secretary General

Republic Act No. 10378

Posted on March 7, 2013
H. No. 6022
S. No. 3343
Metro Manila
Fifteenth Congress
Third Regular Session
Begun and held in Metro Manila, on Monday, the twenty-third day of July, two thousand
twelve.
[REPUBLIC ACT NO. 10378]
AN ACT RECOGNIZING THE PRINCIPLE OF RECIPROCITY AS BASIS FOR
THE GRANT OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTIONS TO INTERNATIONAL
CARRIERS AND RATIONALIZING OTHER TAXES IMPOSED THEREON BY
AMENDING SECTIONS 28(A)(3)(a), 109, 118 AND 236 OF THE NATIONAL
INTERNAL REVENUE CODE (NIRC), AS AMENDED, AND FOR OTHER
PURPOSES
assembled:
SECTION 1. Section 28(A)(3)(a) of Republic Act No. 8424, otherwise known as the
National Internal Revenue Code of 1997, as amended, is hereby further amended to read
as follows:
SEC. 28. Rates of Income Tax on Foreign Corporations.
(A) Tax on Resident Foreign Corporations.
(1) xxx
(2) xxx
(3). International Carrier. An international carrier doing business in the Philippines

shall pay a tax of two and one-half percent (21/2 %) on its Gross Philippine Billings as
defined hereunder:
(a) International Air Carrier. Gross Philippine Billings refers to the amount of gross
revenue derived from carriage of persons, excess baggage, cargo, and mail originating
from the Philippines in a continuous and uninterrupted flight, irrespective of the place of
sale or issue and the place of payment of the ticket or passage document: Provided, That
tickets revalidated, exchanged and/or indorsed to another international airline form part
of the Gross Philippine Billings if the passenger boards a plane in a port or point in the
Philippines: Provided, further, That for a flight which originates from the Philippines, but
transshipment of passenger takes place at any part outside the Philippines on another
airline, only the aliquot portion of the cost of the ticket corresponding to the leg flown
from the Philippines to the point of transshipment shall form part of Gross Philippine
Billings.
(b) International Shipping. Gross . Philippine Billings means gross revenue whether
for passenger, cargo or mail originating from the Philippines up to final destination,
regardless of the place of sale or payments of the passage or freight documents.
Provided, That international carriers doing business in the Philippines may avail of a
preferential rate or exemption from the tax herein imposed on their gross revenue derived
from the carriage of persons and their excess baggage on the basis of an applicable tax
treaty or international agreement to which the Philippines is a signatory or on the basis of
reciprocity such that an international carrier, whose home country grants income tax
exemption to Philippine carriers, shall likewise be exempt from the tax imposed under
this provision.
x x x.
SEC. 2. Section 109 of the National Internal Revenue Code of 1997, as amended, is
hereby further amended to read as follows:
SEC. 109. Exempt Transactions. The following shall be exempt from the value-added
tax:
(A) xxx;
xxx
(S) Transport of passengers by international carriers;
(T) Sale, importation or lease of passenger or cargo vessels and aircraft, including
engine, equipment and spare parts thereof for domestic or international transport
operations;
(U) Importation of fuel, goods and supplies by persons engaged in international shipping
or air transport operations;
(V) Services of bank, non-bank financial intermediaries performing quasi-banking
functions, and other non-bank financial intermediaries; and
(W) Sale or lease of goods or properties or the performance of services other than the
transactions mentioned in the preceding paragraphs, the gross annual sales and/or receipts
do not exceed the amount of One million five hundred thousand pesos (P1,500,000):
Provided, That not later than January 31, 2009 and every three (3) years thereafter, the
amount herein stated shall be adjusted to its present value using the Consumer Price
Index, as published by. the National Statistics-Office (NSO);
x x x.
SEC. 118. Percentage Tax on International Carriers.
(A) International air carriers doing; business in the Philippines on their gross receipts
derived from transport of cargo from the Philippines to another country shall pay a tax of
three percent (3%) of their quarterly gross receipts.
(B) International shipping carriers doing business in the Philippines on their gross
receipts derived from transport of cargo from the Philippines to another country shall pay
a tax equivalent to three percent (3%) of their quarterly gross receipts.
SEC. 236. Registration Requirements.
(A) Requirements. x x x
xxx
(G) Persons Required to Register for Value-Added Tax.
(1) Any person who, in the course of trade or business, sells, barters or exchanges goods
or properties, or engages in the sale or exchange of services, shall be liable to register for
value-added tax if:
(a) His gross sales or receipts for the past twelve (12) months, other than those that are
exempt under Section 109(A) to (V), have exceeded One million five hundred thousand
pesos (P1,500,000); or
(b) There are reasonable grounds to believe that his gross sales or receipts for the next
twelve (12) months, other than those that are exempt under Section 109(A) to (V), will
exceed One million five hundred thousand pesos (P1,500,000).
x x x.
SEC. 5. Implementing Rules and Regulations. The Secretary of Finance shall, upon the
recommendation of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, promulgate not later than
thirty (30) days upon the effectivity of this Act the necessary rules and regulations for its
effective implementation. The Department of Finance (DOF), in coordination with the
Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA), shall oversee the exchange of notes between the
Philippines and concerned countries for purposes of facilitating the availment of
reciprocal exemptions intended under this Act.
SEC. 6. Separability Clause. If any provision of this Act is subsequently declared
invalid or unconstitutional, other provisions hereof which are not affected thereby shall
remain in full force and effect.
SEC. 7. Repealing Clause. All laws, acts, presidential decrees, executive orders,
issuances, presidential proclamations, rules and regulations or parts thereof which are
contrary to and inconsistent with any provision of this Act are hereby repealed, amended
or modified accordingly.
SEC. 8. Effectivily. This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its complete
publication either in the Official Gazette or in at least two (2) newspapers of general
circulation.
Approved,
(Sgd.) JUAN PONCE

ENRILE
(Sgd.) FELICIANO BELMONTE

JR.
of Representatives
This Act which is a consolidation of House Bill No. 6022 and Senate Bill, No. 3343 was
finally passed by the House of Representatives and the Senate on January 23, 2013.
(Sgd.) EMMA LIRIOREYES

Approved: MAR 7 2013
(Sgd.) MARILYN B. BARUAYAP

Secretary General

GR 215427 PAGCOR vs BIR

Supreme Court
Manila
EN BANC
UNION BANK OF THE,
G.R. No. 192565
PHILIPPINES and DESI

TOMAS,
Present:
Petitioners,
CORONA, C.J.,
CARPIO,
VELASCO, JR.,
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO,
BRION,
PERALTA,
BERSAMIN,
DEL CASTILLO,*
- versus -
ABAD,
VILLARAMA, JR.,
PEREZ,
MENDOZA,
On official leave.
SERENO,**
REYES, and
PERLAS-BERNABE, JJ.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,
Respondent.
Promulgated:
February 28, 2012

x-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------x
DECISION
BRION, J.:
We review in this Rule 45 petition, the decision 1[1] of the Regional Trial Court,
Branch 65, Makati City (RTC-Makati City) in Civil Case No. 09-1038. The petition seeks
to reverse and set aside the RTC-Makati City decision dismissing the petition for
certiorari of petitioners Union Bank of the Philippines (Union Bank) and Desi Tomas
(collectively, the petitioners). The RTC found that the Metropolitan Trial Court, Branch
63, Makati City (MeTC-Makati City) did not commit any grave abuse of discretion in
denying the motion to quash the information for perjury filed by Tomas.
The Antecedents
On leave.
[1]
Dated April 28, 2010; rollo, pp. 137-143.
Tomas was charged in court for perjury under Article 183 of the Revised Penal
Code (RPC) for making a false narration in a Certificate against Forum Shopping. The
Information against her reads:
That on or about the 13th day of March 2000 in the City of Makati,
Metro Manila, Philippines and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable
Court, the above-named accused, did then and there willfully, unlawfully
and feloniously make untruthful statements under oath upon a material
matter before a competent person authorized to administer oath which the
law
requires
to
wit:
said
accused
stated
in
the
Verification/Certification/Affidavit of merit of a complaint for sum of
money with prayer for a writ of replevin docketed as [Civil] Case No. 34200 of the Metropolitan Trial Court[,] Pasay City, that the Union Bank of
the Philippines has not commenced any other action or proceeding
involving the same issues in another tribunal or agency, accused knowing
well that said material statement was false thereby making a willful and
deliberate assertion of falsehood.2[2]
The accusation stemmed from petitioner Union Banks two (2) complaints for
sum of money with prayer for a writ of replevin against the spouses Eddie and Eliza
Tamondong and a John Doe. The first complaint, docketed as Civil Case No. 98-0717,
was filed before the RTC, Branch 109, Pasay City on April 13, 1998. The second
complaint, docketed as Civil Case No. 342-000, was filed on March 15, 2000 and raffled
to the MeTC, Branch 47, Pasay City. Both complaints showed that Tomas executed and
signed the Certification against Forum Shopping. Accordingly, she was charged of
deliberately violating Article 183 of the RPC by falsely declaring under oath in the
Certificate against Forum Shopping in the second complaint that she did not commence
any other action or proceeding involving the same issue in another tribunal or agency.
Tomas filed a Motion to Quash,3[3] citing two grounds. First, she argued that the
venue was improperly laid since it is the Pasay City court (where the Certificate against
2
[2]
Id. at 11.
[3]
Id. at 29-37.
Forum Shopping was submitted and used) and not the MeTC-Makati City (where the
Certificate against Forum Shopping was subscribed) that has jurisdiction over the perjury
case. Second, she argued that the facts charged do not constitute an offense because: (a)
the third element of perjury the willful and deliberate assertion of falsehood was not
alleged with particularity without specifying what the other action or proceeding
commenced involving the same issues in another tribunal or agency; (b) there was no
other action or proceeding pending in another court when the second complaint was filed;
and (c) she was charged with perjury by giving false testimony while the allegations in
the Information make out perjury by making a false affidavit.
The MeTC-Makati City denied the Motion to Quash, ruling that it has jurisdiction
over the case since the Certificate against Forum Shopping was notarized in Makati City.4
[4] The MeTC-Makati City also ruled that the allegations in the Information sufficiently
charged Tomas with perjury.5[5] The MeTC-Makati City subsequently denied Tomas
motion for reconsideration.6[6]
The petitioners filed a petition for certiorari before the RTC-Makati City to annul
and set aside the MeTC-Makati City orders on the ground of grave abuse of discretion.
The petitioners anchored their petition on the rulings in United States v. Canet7[7] and
Ilusorio v. Bildner8[8] which ruled that venue and jurisdiction should be in the place
where the false document was presented.
The Assailed RTC Decision
In dismissing the petition for certiorari, the RTC-Makati City held:
[4]
Order dated March 26, 2009; rollo, pp. 55-56.
[5]
Id. at 56.
[6]
Order dated August 28, 2009, pp. 69-70.
[7]
30 Phil. 371 (1915).
[8]
G.R. Nos. 173935-38, December 23, 2008, 575 SCRA 272.
[I]nsofar as the petitioners stance is concerned[,] the more recent case of

[Sy Tiong Shiou v. Sy] (GR Nos. 174168 & 179438, March 30, 2009)
however, reaffirms what has been the long standing view on the venue with
respect to perjury cases. In this particular case[,] the high court reiterated
the rule that the criminal action shall be instituted and tried in the court of
the municipality or territory where the offense was committed, or where
any of its essential ingredients occurred. It went on to declare that since the
subject document[,] the execution of which was the subject of the charge[,]
was subscribed and sworn to in Manila[,] then the court of the said
territorial jurisdiction was the proper venue of the criminal action[.]
xxxx
x x x Given the present state of jurisprudence on the matter, it is not

amiss to state that the city court of Makati City has jurisdiction to try and
decide the case for perjury inasmuch as the gist of the complaint itself
which constitute[s] the charge against the petitioner dwells solely on the
act of subscribing to a false certification. On the other hand, the charge
against the accused in the case of Ilusorio v. Bildner, et al., based on the
complaint-affidavits therein[,] was not simply the execution of the
questioned documents but rather the introduction of the false evidence
through the subject documents before the court of Makati City.9[9]
(emphasis ours)
The RTC-Makati City ruled that the MeTC-Makati City did not commit grave
abuse of discretion since the order denying the Motion to Quash was based on
jurisprudence later than Ilusorio. The RTC-Makati City also observed that the facts in
Ilusorio are different from the facts of the present case. Lastly, the RTC-Makati City
ruled that the Rule 65 petition was improper since the petitioners can later appeal the
decision in the principal case. The RTC-Makati City subsequently denied the petitioners
motion for reconsideration.10[10]
[9]
Rollo, pp. 142-143.
10
[10]
Order dated June 9, 2010; id. at 154.
The Petition
The petitioners pray that we reverse the RTC-Makati City decision and quash the
Information for perjury against Tomas. The petitioners contend that the Ilusorio ruling is
more applicable to the present facts than our ruling in Sy Tiong Shiou v. Sy Chim.11[11]
They argued that the facts in Ilusorio showed that the filing of the petitions in court
containing the false statements was the essential ingredient that consummated the
perjury. In Sy Tiong, the perjurious statements were made in a General Information Sheet
(GIS) that was submitted to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).
Interestingly, Solicitor General Jose Anselmo I. Cadiz shared the petitioners view.
In his Manifestation and Motion in lieu of Comment (which we hereby treat as the
Comment to the petition), the Solicitor General also relied on Ilusorio and opined that the
lis mota in the crime of perjury is the deliberate or intentional giving of false evidence in
the court where the evidence is material. The Solicitor General observed that the criminal
intent to assert a falsehood under oath only became manifest before the MeTC-Pasay
City.
The Issue
The case presents to us the issue of what the proper venue of perjury under Article
183 of the RPC should be Makati City, where the Certificate against Forum Shopping
was notarized, or Pasay City, where the Certification was presented to the trial court.
11
[11]
G.R. Nos. 174168 and 179438, March 30, 2009, 582 SCRA 517.
The Courts Ruling
We deny the petition and hold that the MeTC-Makati City is the proper
venue and the proper court to take cognizance of the perjury case against the
petitioners.
Venue of Action and Criminal Jurisdiction
Venue is an essential element of jurisdiction in criminal cases. It determines not

only the place where the criminal action is to be instituted, but also the court that has the
jurisdiction to try and hear the case. The reason for this rule is two-fold. First, the
jurisdiction of trial courts is limited to well-defined territories such that a trial court can
only hear and try cases involving crimes committed within its territorial jurisdiction. 12
[12] Second, laying the venue in the locus criminis is grounded on the necessity and
justice of having an accused on trial in the municipality of province where witnesses and
other facilities for his defense are available.13[13]
Unlike in civil cases, a finding of improper venue in criminal cases carries

jurisdictional consequences. In determining the venue where the criminal action is to be
instituted and the court which has jurisdiction over it, Section 15(a), Rule 110 of the 2000
Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure provides:
(a) Subject to existing laws, the criminal action shall be instituted and
tried in the court or municipality or territory where the offense was
committed or where any of its essential ingredients occurred.
[emphasis ours]
The above provision should be read in light of Section 10, Rule 110 of the 2000
Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure which states:
12
[12]
United States v. Cunanan, 26 Phil. 376 (1913).
13
[13]
Parulan v. Reyes, 78 Phil 855 (1947).
Place of commission of the offense. The complaint or information is

sufficient if it can be understood from its allegations that the offense was
committed or some of its essential ingredients occurred at some place
within the jurisdiction of the court, unless the particular place where it
was committed constitutes an essential element of the offense charged or
is necessary for its identification.
Both provisions categorically place the venue and jurisdiction over criminal cases
not only in the court where the offense was committed, but also where any of its essential
ingredients took place. In other words, the venue of action and of jurisdiction are
deemed sufficiently alleged where the Information states that the offense was committed
or some of its essential ingredients occurred at a place within the territorial jurisdiction of
the court.
Information Charging Perjury
Section 5, Rule 7 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, as amended, contains the
requirement for a Certificate against Forum Shopping. The Certificate against Forum
Shopping can be made either by a statement under oath in the complaint or initiatory
pleading asserting a claim or relief; it may also be in a sworn certification annexed to the
complaint or initiatory pleading. In both instances, the affiant is required to execute a
statement under oath before a duly commissioned notary public or any competent person
authorized to administer oath that: (a) he or she has not theretofore commenced any
action or filed any claim involving the same issues in any court, tribunal or quasi-judicial
agency and, to the best of his or her knowledge, no such other action or claim is pending
therein; (b) if there is such other pending action or claim, a complete statement of the
present status thereof; and (c) if he or she should thereafter learn that the same or similar
action or claim has been filed or is pending, he or she shall report that fact within five
days therefrom to the court wherein his or her aforesaid complaint or initiatory pleading
has been filed. In relation to the crime of perjury, the material matter in a Certificate
against Forum Shopping is the truth of the required declarations which is designed to
guard against litigants pursuing simultaneous remedies in different fora.14[14]
14
Torres v. Specialized Packaging Development Corporation,

149634, July 6, 2004, 433 SCRA 455.
[14]
G.R. No.
In this case, Tomas is charged with the crime of perjury under Article 183 of the
RPC for making a false Certificate against Forum Shopping. The elements of perjury
under Article 183 are:
(a)
That the accused made a statement under oath or executed an

affidavit upon a material matter.
(b)
That the statement or affidavit was made before a competent

officer, authorized to receive and administer oath.
(c)
That in the statement or affidavit, the accused made a willful and

deliberate assertion of a falsehood.
(d)
That the sworn statement or affidavit containing the falsity is

required by law or made for a legal purpose.15[15] (emphasis
ours)
Where the jurisdiction of the court is being assailed in a criminal case on the
ground of improper venue, the allegations in the complaint and information must be
examined together with Section 15(a), Rule 110 of the 2000 Revised Rules of Criminal
Procedure. On this basis, we find that the allegations in the Information sufficiently
support a finding that the crime of perjury was committed by Tomas within the territorial
jurisdiction of the MeTC-Makati City.
The first element of the crime of perjury, the execution of the subject Certificate
against Forum Shopping was alleged in the Information to have been committed in
Makati City. Likewise, the second and fourth elements, requiring the Certificate against
Forum Shopping to be under oath before a notary public, were also sufficiently alleged in
the Information to have been made in Makati City:
That on or about the 13th day of March 2000 in the City of Makati,
Metro Manila, Philippines and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable
Court, the above-named accused, did then and there willfully, unlawfully
and feloniously make untruthful statements under oath upon a material
matter before a competent person authorized to administer oath which the
15
[15]
Monfort III v. Salvatierra, G.R. No. 168301, March 5, 2007, 517 SCRA 447, 461.
law
requires
to
wit:
said
accused
16
Verification/Certification/Affidavit x x x. [16]
stated
in
the
We also find that the third element of willful and deliberate falsehood was also
sufficiently alleged to have been committed in Makati City, not Pasay City, as indicated
in the last portion of the Information:
[S]aid accused stated in the Verification/Certification/Affidavit of merit of

a complaint for sum of money with prayer for a writ of replevin docketed
as [Civil] Case No. 342-00 of the Metropolitan Trial Court[,] Pasay City,
that the Union Bank of the Philippines has not commenced any other
action or proceeding involving the same issues in another tribunal or
agency, accused knowing well that said material statement was false
thereby making a willful and deliberate assertion of falsehood.17[17]
(underscoring ours)
Tomas deliberate and intentional assertion of falsehood was allegedly shown

when she made the false declarations in the Certificate against Forum Shopping before a
notary public in Makati City, despite her knowledge that the material statements she
subscribed and swore to were not true. Thus, Makati City is the proper venue and
MeTC-Makati City is the proper court to try the perjury case against Tomas, pursuant to
Section 15(a), Rule 110 of the 2000 Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure as all the
essential elements constituting the crime of perjury were committed within the territorial
jurisdiction of Makati City, not Pasay City.
16
[16]
Supra note 2.
17
[17]
Ibid.
Referral to the En Banc
The present case was referred to the En Banc primarily to address the seeming
conflict between the division rulings of the Court in the Ilusorio case that is cited as basis
of this petition, and the Sy Tiong case that was the basis of the assailed RTC-Makati City
ruling.
The Cited Ilusorio and Sy Tiong Cases
The subject matter of the perjury charge in Ilusorio involved false statements
contained in verified petitions filed with the court for the issuance of a new owners
duplicate copies of certificates of title. The verified petitions containing the false
statements were subscribed and sworn to in Pasig City, but were filed in Makati City and
Tagaytay City. The question posed was: which court (Pasig City, Makati City and/or
Tagaytay City) had jurisdiction to try and hear the perjury cases?
We ruled that the venues of the action were in Makati City and Tagaytay City, the
places where the verified petitions were filed. The Court reasoned out that it was only
upon filing that the intent to assert an alleged falsehood became manifest and where the
alleged untruthful statement found relevance or materiality. We cited as jurisprudential
authority the case of United States. v. Caet18[18] which ruled:
It is immaterial where the affidavit was subscribed and sworn, so long as it

appears from the information that the defendant, by means of such
affidavit, "swore to" and knowingly submitted false evidence, material to a
point at issue in a judicial proceeding pending in the Court of First
Instance of Iloilo Province. The gist of the offense charged is not the
making of the affidavit in Manila, but the intentional giving of false
evidence in the Court of First Instance of Iloilo Province by means of such
affidavit. [emphasis and underscoring deleted]
18
[18]
Supra note 7, at 378.
In Sy Tiong, the perjured statements were made in a GIS which was subscribed
and sworn to in Manila. We ruled that the proper venue for the perjury charges was in
Manila where the GIS was subscribed and sworn to. We held that the perjury was
consummated in Manila where the false statement was made. As supporting
jurisprudence, we cited the case of Villanueva v. Secretary of Justice19[19] that, in turn,
cited an American case entitled U.S. v. Norris.20[20] We ruled in Villanueva that
Perjury is an obstruction of justice; its perpetration well may affect

the dearest concerns of the parties before a tribunal. Deliberate material
falsification under oath constitutes the crime of perjury, and the crime is
complete when a witness' statement has once been made.
The Crime of Perjury: A Background
To have a better appreciation of the issue facing the Court, a look at the historical
background of how the crime of perjury (specifically, Article 183 of the RPC) evolved in
our jurisdiction.
The RPC penalizes three forms of false testimonies. The first is false testimony
for and against the defendant in a criminal case (Articles 180 and 181, RPC); the second
is false testimony in a civil case (Article 182, RPC); and the third is false testimony in
other cases (Article 183, RPC). Based on the Information filed, the present case
involves the making of an untruthful statement in an affidavit on a material matter.
These RPC provisions, however, are not really the bases of the rulings cited by
the parties in their respective arguments. The cited Ilusorio ruling, although issued by
this Court in 2008, harked back to the case of Caet which was decided in 1915, i.e.,
before the present RPC took effect.21[21] Sy Tiong, on the other hand, is a 2009 ruling
19
[19]
20
[20]
21
[21]
G.R. No. 162187, November 18, 2005, 475 SCRA 495, 512.
300 U.S. 564 (1937). The perjury was based on a false testimony by the
defendant at the hearing before the Senate Committee in Nebraska.
The Penal Code for the Philippines which took effect from July 19, 1887
to December 31, 1931.
that cited Villanueva, a 2005 case that in turn cited United States v. Norris, a 1937
American case. Significantly, unlike Canet, Sy Tiong is entirely based on rulings
rendered after the present RPC took effect.22[22]
The perjurious act in Caet consisted of an information charging perjury

through the presentation in court of a motion accompanied by a false sworn affidavit.
At the time the Caet ruling was rendered, the prevailing law on perjury and the rules on
prosecution of criminal offenses were found in Section 3, Act No. 1697 of the Philippine
Commission, and in Subsection 4, Section 6 of General Order No. 5823[23] for the
procedural aspect.
Section 3 of Act No. 1697 reads:
Sec. 3. Any person who, having taken oath before a competent

tribunal, officer, or person, in any case in which a law of the Philippine
Islands authorizes an oath to be administered, that he will testify, declare,
depose, or certify truly, or that any written testimony, declaration,
disposition, or certificate by him subscribed is true, willfully and contrary
to such oath states or subscribes any material matter which he does not
believe to be true, is guilty of perjury, and shall be punished by a fine of
not more than two thousand pesos and by imprisonment for not more than
five years; and shall moreover, thereafter be incapable of holding any
public office or of giving testimony in any court of the Philippine Islands
until such time as the judgment against him is reversed.
22
[22]
Took effect on January 1, 1932.
23
[23]
Entitled The Law on Criminal Procedure which took effect on April 23,
1900.
This law was copied, with the necessary changes, from Sections 5392 24[24] and
539325[25] of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 26[26] Act No. 1697 was
intended to make the mere execution of a false affidavit punishable in our jurisdiction. 27
[27]
In turn, Subsection 4, Section 6 of General Order No. 58 provided that the venue
shall be the court of the place where the crime was committed.
As applied and interpreted by the Court in Caet, perjury was committed by the
act of representing a false document in a judicial proceeding.28[28] The venue of action
was held by the Court to be at the place where the false document was presented since the
presentation was the act that consummated the crime.
The annotation of Justices Aquino and Grio-Aquino in their textbook on the

RPC [29] interestingly explains the history of the perjury provisions of the present RPC
and traces as well the linkage between Act No. 1697 and the present Code. To quote
these authors:30[30]
29
Art. 180 was taken from art. 318 of the Old Penal Code and art.
154 of Del Pans Proposed Correctional Code, while art. 181 was taken
from art. 319 of the old Penal Code and Art. 157 of Del Pans Proposed
Correctional Code. Said arts. 318 and 319, together with art. 321 of the
24
25
[24]
Every person who, having taken an oath before a competent tribunal, officer, or person, in
any case in which a law of the United States authorizes an oath to be administered, that he will
testify, declare, depose, or certify truly, or that any written testimony, declaration, deposition, or
certificate by him subscribed is true, willfully and contrary to such oath states or subscribes any
material matter which he does not believe to be true, is guilty of perjury.
[25]
The law refers to subornation of perjury.
26
27
[26]
[27]
United States v. Concepcion, 13 Phil. 424 (1909).
28
[28]
People v. Cruz, et al., 197 Phil. 815 (1982).
29
[29]
30
[30]
Id. at 428-429.
Ramon C. Aquino and Carolina Grio-Aquino, 2 THE REVISED PENAL

CODE, 1997 ed.
Id. at 301-302.
old Penal Code, were impliedly repealed by Act 1697, the Perjury Law,
passed on August 23, 1907, which in turn was expressly repealed by the
Administrative Code of 1916, Act 2657. In view of the express repeal of
Act 1697, arts. 318 and 321 of the old Penal Code were deemed revived.
However, Act 2718 expressly revived secs. 3 and 4 of the Perjury Law.
Art. 367 of the Revised Penal Code repealed Act Nos. 1697 and 2718.
It should be noted that perjury under Acts 1697 and 2718 includes
false testimony, whereas, under the Revised Penal Code, false testimony
includes perjury. Our law on false testimony is of Spanish origin, but our
law on perjury (art. 183 taken from sec. 3 of Act 1697) is derived from
American statutes. The provisions of the old Penal Code on false
testimony embrace perjury committed in court or in some contentious
proceeding, while perjury as defined in Act 1697 includes the making of a
false affidavit. The provisions of the Revised Penal Code on false
testimony are more severe and strict than those of Act 1697 on perjury.
[italics ours]
With this background, it can be appreciated that Article 183 of the RPC which
provides:
The penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision

correccional in its minimum period shall be imposed upon any person,
who knowingly makes untruthful statements and not being included in the
provisions of the next preceding articles, shall testify under oath, or make
an affidavit, upon any material matter before a competent person
authorized to administer an oath in cases in which the law so requires.
[emphasis supplied; emphases ours]
in fact refers to either of two punishable acts (1) falsely testifying under oath in a
proceeding other than a criminal or civil case; and (2) making a false affidavit before a
person authorized to administer an oath on any material matter where the law requires an
oath.
As above discussed, Sy Tiong decided under Article 183 of the RPC

essentially involved perjured statements made in a GIS that was subscribed and sworn to
in Manila and submitted to the SEC in Mandaluyong City. Thus, the case involved the
making of an affidavit, not an actual testimony in a proceeding that is neither criminal nor
civil. From this perspective, the situs of the oath, i.e., the place where the oath was taken,
is the place where the offense was committed. By implication, the proper venue would
have been the City of Mandaluyong the site of the SEC had the charge involved an
actual testimony made before the SEC.
In contrast, Caet involved the presentation in court of a motion supported and

accompanied by an affidavit that contained a falsity. With Section 3 of Act No. 1697 as
basis, the issue related to the submission of the affidavit in a judicial proceeding. This
came at a time when Act No. 1697 was the perjury law, and made no distinction between
judicial and other proceedings, and at the same time separately penalized the making of
false statements under oath (unlike the present RPC which separately deals with false
testimony in criminal, civil and other proceedings, while at the same time also penalizing
the making of false affidavits). Understandably, the venue should be the place where the
submission was made to the court or the situs of the court; it could not have been the
place where the affidavit was sworn to simply because this was not the offense charged in
the Information.
The case of Ilusorio cited the Caet case as its authority, in a situation where the
sworn petitions filed in court for the issuance of duplicate certificates of title (that were
allegedly lost) were the cited sworn statements to support the charge of perjury for the
falsities stated in the sworn petitions. The Court ruled that the proper venue should be the
Cities of Makati and Tagaytay because it was in the courts of these cities where the
intent to assert an alleged falsehood became manifest and where the alleged untruthful
statement finds relevance or materiality in deciding the issue of whether new owners
duplicate copies of the [Certificate of Condominium Title] and [Transfer Certificates of
Title] may issue.31[31] To the Court, whether the perjurious statements contained in the
four petitions were subscribed and sworn in Pasig is immaterial, the gist of the offense of
perjury being the intentional giving of false statement, 32[32] citing Caet as authority
for its statement.
The statement in Ilusorio may have partly led to the present confusion on venue
because of its very categorical tenor in pointing to the considerations to be made in the
determination of venue; it leaves the impression that the place where the oath was taken
is not at all a material consideration, forgetting that Article 183 of the RPC clearly speaks
of two situations while Article 182 of the RPC likewise applies to false testimony in civil
cases.
31
[31]
Ilusorio v. Bildner, supra note 8, at 283.
32
[32]
Id. at 284.
The Ilusorio statement would have made perfect sense had the basis for the charge
been Article 182 of the RPC, on the assumption that the petition itself constitutes a false
testimony in a civil case. The Caet ruling would then have been completely applicable
as the sworn statement is used in a civil case, although no such distinction was made
under Caet because the applicable law at the time (Act No. 1697) did not make any
distinction.
If Article 183 of the RPC were to be used, as what in fact appears in the Ilusorio
ruling, then only that portion of the article, referring to the making of an affidavit, would
have been applicable as the other portion refers to false testimony in other proceedings
which a judicial petition for the issuance of a new owners duplicate copy of a Certificate
of Condominium Title is not because it is a civil proceeding in court. As a perjury based
on the making of a false affidavit, what assumes materiality is the site where the oath was
taken as this is the place where the oath was made, in this case, Pasig City.
Procedurally, the rule on venue of criminal cases has been subject to various
changes from the time General Order No. 58 was replaced by Rules 106 to 122 of the
Rules of Court on July 1, 1940. Section 14, Rule 106 of the Rules of Court provided for
the rule on venue of criminal actions and it expressly included, as proper venue, the place
where any one of the essential ingredients of the crime took place. This change was
followed by the passage of the 1964 Rules of Criminal Procedure, 33[33] the 1985 Rules
of Criminal Procedure,34[34] and the 2000 Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure which
all adopted the 1940 Rules of Criminal Procedures expanded venue of criminal actions.
Thus, the venue of criminal cases is not only in the place where the offense was
committed, but also where any of its essential ingredients took place.
33
[33]
Section 14, Rule 110. Place where action is to be instituted. -
(a) In all criminal prosecutions the action shall be instituted and tried in the Court of
the municipality or province wherein the offense was committed or any one of the
essential ingredients thereof took place.
34
[34]
Section 15, Rule 110. Place where action is to be instituted.
(a) Subject to existing laws, in all criminal prosecutions the action shall be
instituted and tried in the court of the municipality or territory wherein the offense
was committed or any one of the essential ingredients thereof took place.
In the present case, the Certification against Forum Shopping was made integral
parts of two complaints for sum of money with prayer for a writ of replevin against the
respondent spouses Eddie Tamondong and Eliza B. Tamondong, who, in turn, filed a
complaint-affidavit against Tomas for violation of Article 183 of the RPC. As alleged in
the Information that followed, the criminal act charged was for the execution by Tomas
of an affidavit that contained a falsity.
Under the circumstances, Article 183 of the RPC is indeed the applicable
provision; thus, jurisdiction and venue should be determined on the basis of this article
which penalizes one who make[s] an affidavit, upon any material matter before a
competent person authorized to administer an oath in cases in which the law so requires.
The constitutive act of the offense is the making of an affidavit; thus, the criminal act is
consummated when the statement containing a falsity is subscribed and sworn before a
duly authorized person.
Based on these considerations, we hold that our ruling in Sy Tiong is more in

accord with Article 183 of the RPC and Section 15(a), Rule 110 of the 2000 Revised
Rules of Criminal Procedure. To reiterate for the guidance of the Bar and the Bench, the
crime of perjury committed through the making of a false affidavit under Article 183 of
the RPC is committed at the time the affiant subscribes and swears to his or her affidavit
since it is at that time that all the elements of the crime of perjury are executed. When the
crime is committed through false testimony under oath in a proceeding that is neither
criminal nor civil, venue is at the place where the testimony under oath is given. If in lieu
of or as supplement to the actual testimony made in a proceeding that is neither criminal
nor civil, a written sworn statement is submitted, venue may either be at the place where
the sworn statement is submitted or where the oath was taken as the taking of the oath
and the submission are both material ingredients of the crime committed. In all cases,
determination of venue shall be based on the acts alleged in the Information to be
constitutive of the crime committed.
WHEREFORE, premises considered, we hereby DENY the petition for lack of

merit. Costs against the petitioners.
SO ORDERED.
ARTURO D. BRION
Associate Justice
WE CONCUR:
RENATO C. CORONA
Chief Justice
ANTONIO T. CARPIO
Associate Justice
PRESBITERO J. VELASCO, JR.

Associate Justice
TERESITA J. LEONARDO-DE CASTRO

Associate Justice
DIOSDADO M. PERALTA
Associate Justice
(On Leave)
LUCAS P. BERSAMIN
MARIANO C. DEL CASTILLO
Associate Justice
Associate Justice
ROBERTO A. ABAD
MARTIN S. VILLARAMA, JR.
Associate Justice
Associate Justice
JOSE PORTUGAL PEREZ
JOSE CATRAL MENDOZA
Associate Justice
Associate Justice
(On Leave)
MARIA LOURDES P. A. SERENO
Associate Justice
BIENVENIDO L. REYES
Associate Justice
ESTELA M. PERLAS-BERNABE
Associate Justice
C E R T I F I C AT I O N
Pursuant to Section 13, Article VIII of the Constitution, I certify that the
conclusions in the above Decision had been reached in consultation before the case was
assigned to the writer of the opinion of the Court.
RENATO C. CORONA
Chief Justice

Updates On Tax

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Updates On Tax

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Updates On Tax

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Republic Act No.

(Sgd.) JUAN PONCE ENRILE

Speaker of the House of

President of the Senate

(Sgd.) EMMA LIRIO-REYES

Secretary General House of

Secretary of the Senate

Approved: MARCH 27, 2012

President of the Philippines

Republic Act No. 10158, March 27, 2012

REPUBLIC ACT NO. 10021

Section 8. Notice to Taxpayers. - A taxpayer shall be duly notified in writing by the

(Sgd.) JUAN PONCE ENRILE

(Sgd.) PROSPERO C. NOGRALES

(Sgd.) EMMA LIRIO-REYES

Approved: March 8, 2010

(Sgd.) MARILYN B. BARUA-YAP

REPUBLIC ACT NO. 10026

(Sgd.) PROSPERO C. NOGRALES

(Sgd.) JUAN PONCE ENRILE

(Sgd.) EMMA LIRIO-REYES

(Sgd.) MARILYN B. BARUA-YAP

Republic of the Philippines

SEC. 131. Payment of Excise Taxes on. Imported Articles.

(3) Cooperative programs to assist tobacco farmers in planting alternative crops or

(Sgd.) JUAN PONCE

Republic Act No. 10653

(Sgd.) FELICIANO BELMONTE

(Sgd.) OSCAR G. YABES

(Sgd.) MARILYN B. BARUA-YA

(Sgd.) BENIGNO S. AQUINO III

Republic Act No. 10378

(3). International Carrier. An international carrier doing business in the Philippines

(Sgd.) JUAN PONCE

(Sgd.) FELICIANO BELMONTE

(Sgd.) EMMA LIRIOREYES

Approved: MAR 7 2013

(Sgd.) MARILYN B. BARUAYAP

(Sgd.) BENIGNO S. AQUINO III

Republic of the Philippines

UNION BANK OF THE,

G.R. No. 192565

PHILIPPINES and DESI

February 28, 2012

Dated April 28, 2010; rollo, pp. 137-143.

The Assailed RTC Decision

In dismissing the petition for certiorari, the RTC-Makati City held:

Order dated March 26, 2009; rollo, pp. 55-56.

Order dated August 28, 2009, pp. 69-70.

30 Phil. 371 (1915).

G.R. Nos. 173935-38, December 23, 2008, 575 SCRA 272.

[I]nsofar as the petitioners stance is concerned[,] the more recent case of

x x x Given the present state of jurisprudence on the matter, it is not

Rollo, pp. 142-143.

Order dated June 9, 2010; id. at 154.

The Courts Ruling

Venue of Action and Criminal Jurisdiction

Venue is an essential element of jurisdiction in criminal cases. It determines not