Bir Ruling (Da 576 06)
Bir Ruling (Da 576 06)
Bir Ruling (Da 576 06)
Ronald L. Carreon
Director, Tax & Corporate Services
Gentlemen :
This refers to your letter dated July 28, 2006, requesting on behalf of your
client, Fort Bonifacio Development Corporation (FBDC), confirmation of your
opinion on the tax implications arising from the conveyance of the lots to DPWH and
the lot replacements that FBDC facilitated in transferring to the residents and lot
owners affected by the construction of the KALAYAAN VIADUCT PROJECT of the
DPWH.
Background
The affected residents will be compensated with replacement lots which shall
either come from FBDC relocation lots or from the residual lots surrendered by other
residents, or replacement value of the improvements each had introduced to his lot, or
both. A more detailed outline of the specific lot transfers are attached herewith as
Annex "D".
Rulings Requested
Copyright 2018 CD Technologies Asia, Inc. and Accesslaw, Inc. Philippine Taxation Encyclopedia Second Release 2018 3
condemnation or the threat or imminence thereof is compulsorily or
involuntarily converted. into property similar or related in service or use to the
property so converted. . ."
This doctrine of involuntary conversion has been applied by the US Tax Courts
in cases of involuntary sale of real properties where the landowners are left with no
recourse except to enter into sale agreements with the government. (Maixner v.
Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 30 T.C. 191, 1959; Masser v. Commissioner of
Internal Revenue, 33 T.C. 191, 1959) HEcSDa
Pursuant to the obligation imposed by the DPWH, FBDC is left with no choice
except to provide the relocation lots to the residents in lieu of their eventual
expropriation by the DPWH and applying the doctrine of involuntary conversion, no
taxable gain that may have been derived pursuant to the implementation of the
KALAYAAN VIADUCT PROJECT (BIR Ruling No. 329-92, dated 18 November
1992; BIR Ruling No. DA-158-2002, dated 12 September 2002; BIR Ruling No.
DA-203-03, dated 30 July 2003)
The transfer of the affected lots by the residents to the DPWH is an involuntary
conversion of their lots for public purpose. The residents are constrained to surrender
their lots in lieu of their expropriation. Consequently, the gains, if any, either
consisting of monetary consideration or their acquisition of FBDC provided lots or
residual portion of lots surrendered by other residents, is a result of the involuntary
conversion of their lots surrendered for the purpose of implementing the
KALAYAAN VIADUCT PROJECT. As such, the gain is exempt from capital gains
tax or income tax or withholding tax. (BIR Ruling No. DA-203-03, dated 30 July
2003; BIR Ruling Nos. 373-87 dated 23 November 1987; 429-88 dated 02 September
1988 and 329-92 dated 18 November 1992)
The transfers of portions of residual lots to other affected residents are not
subject to income tax or to capital gains tax or withholding tax on the part of the
residents following the doctrine of involuntary conversion. (BIR Ruling No. 329-92,
dated 18 November 1992; BIR Ruling No. DA-158-2002, dated 12 September 2002;
BIR Ruling No. DA-203-03, dated 30 July 2003)
The transfer of FBDC relocation lots to the residents is not a donation subject
to donors' tax considering that the transfer of the relocation lots is with sufficient
business consideration and is not a mere act of liberality. The enhancement of
Bonifacio Global City, as a result of the implementation of the KALAYAAN
VIADUCT PROJECT, is sufficient business consideration on the part of FBDC to
remove such transfer from the ambit of a donation subject to donor's tax (BIR Ruling
No. 16-05, dated 24 August 2005; BIR Ruling DA-444-05, dated 27 October 2005,
BIR Ruling DA-136-05, dated 7 April 2005).
The contemplated direct transfer of the FBDC replacement lots to the affected
residents is subject to DST under Section 196 of the Tax Code. In BIR Ruling DA
203-03, dated 30 June 2003, the BIR ruled that while the exchange of properties
resulting from an involuntary conversion is not subject to the corporate income tax or
to the capital gains tax nor to the creditable withholding tax, the same shall be subject
to the documentary stamp tax imposed under Section 196 of the Tax Code of 1997.
Copyright 2018 CD Technologies Asia, Inc. and Accesslaw, Inc. Philippine Taxation Encyclopedia Second Release 2018 5
Furthermore, the notarial acknowledgment to the said deed is subject to the
documentary stamp tax of P15.00 pursuant to Section 188 of the same Code.
The transfer of lots by the affected residents both to DPWH and to other
residents, resulting from the implementation of the KALAYAAN VIADUCT
PROJECT, is subject to DST under Section 196 of the Tax Code. The DST shall be
imposed on the total consideration received by the residents which consists of
replacement lots or monetary consideration, or both.
The transfer of the relocation lots by FBDC is subject to the 12% VAT.
Considering that the relocation lots of FBDC were held either for sale or lease in
FBDC's ordinary course of trade or business, their conveyance to the residents shall
be subject to VAT. (Sec. 106 of the Tax Code; Sec. 4.106-3 of RR 16-05; BIR Ruling
No. 024-05, dated 23 December 2005).
The donation of lots to the City of Taguig by FBDC is a completed gift subject
to VAT. The donation by FBDC of its lots to the City of Taguig is a completed gift
that may be treated as a deemed sale transaction under Section 4.1.06-3 of RR 16-05
and Sec. 106 of the Tax Code. This is so because the lots to be donated to the City of
Taguig were held by FBDC either for sale or lease in the ordinary course of its
business.
The transfer of lots by the residents to DPWH is not subject to VAT. The
transfers of the lots from the residents to DPWH are not made in the course of trade
or business nor were the affected lots held by the residents for sale or lease in the
ordinary course of trade or business. The transfer of such lots cannot be considered as
a transaction subject to VAT. (BIR Ruling No. 024-05, dated 23 December 2005).
The residual lots to be transferred to the residents are not held for sale or lease
in the ordinary course of trade or business. The transfers of the residual lots to the
other residents are not made in the course of trade or business nor were the affected
Copyright 2018 CD Technologies Asia, Inc. and Accesslaw, Inc. Philippine Taxation Encyclopedia Second Release 2018 6
lots held by the transferring residents for sale or lease in the ordinary course of trade
or business. Thus, we believe that the transfer of these lots cannot be considered as
transactions subject to VAT. (BIR Ruling No. 024-05, dated 23 December 2005)
TCRPV Resolution No. 82-2005 was issued by the BIR precisely to determine
the zonal value of the FBDC replacement lots and the lots to be donated to the City of
Taguig for purposes of implementing the KALAYAAN VIADUCT PROJECT. The
said resolution was issued by the BIR in response to the request of FBDC for the
valuation of several parcels of lots located at Taguig, Metro Manila, which are
intended to be given to the residents pursuant to FBDC's obligation under the 1996
and 1997 MOAs. Thus, the zonal value of the FBDC relocation lots and the lots to be
donated to the City of Taguig covered by the said resolution should remain as
P7,500.00 per square meter for purposes of the implementation of the KALAYAAN
VIADUCT PROJECT. TCDHIc
Further, the transfer of the replacement lots by FBDC to the affected residents
for the implementation of the KALAYAAN VIADUCT PROJECT satisfies the
condition imposed by TCRPV Resolution No. 82-2005, that the zonal value of
P7,500.00 per square meter applies for expropriation purposes only. Pursuant to its
obligation under the 1996 and 1997 MOAs, FBDC is left with no choice except to
provide the relocation lots to the residents as compensation for the latter's surrender of
lots to DPWH. Hence, such transfer of property is akin to expropriation of lots for
purposes of applying the P7,500.00 per square meter zonal value pursuant to TCRPV
Resolution.
VI. The Zonal Value of the FBDC Lots as Basis in Imposing the VAT and DST
The VAT and DST, which may be imposed on the transfer of the FBDC
relocation lots, should be based on the zonal values of the said lots of P7,500.00 as
per TCRPV Resolution No. 82-2005 considering that the same are higher than the fair
market values of said lots, as stated in the respective tax declarations, which ranges
from P2,000.00 to P2,500.00, with road lots at about P500.00/sq. m.
VI. Ruling as basis for issuance of Certificate Authorizing Registration and Tax
Clearance Certificate
Finally, it also requested that the requested ruling be a sufficient basis for the
BIR to issue the Certificates Authorizing Registration and Tax Clearance Certificates,
for all the property transfers effected pursuant to the details of the attached annexes of
Copyright 2018 CD Technologies Asia, Inc. and Accesslaw, Inc. Philippine Taxation Encyclopedia Second Release 2018 7
properties and the manner of compensation received on account of the
implementation of the KALAYAAN VIADUCT PROJECT, including the subsequent
transfer of properties initially annotated with the right of way in favor of DPWH as
well as the transfers of properties which are presently unregistered/untitled and their
subsequent registration/titling.
BIR Reply
We reply as follows:
On the other hand, sale, exchange or disposing lands and/or buildings which
are not actually used in the business of a corporation and treated as capital assets is
subject to the six percent (6%) capital gains tax imposed under Sec. 27(D)(5) of the
Tax Code.
Copyright 2018 CD Technologies Asia, Inc. and Accesslaw, Inc. Philippine Taxation Encyclopedia Second Release 2018 8
2. Real Estate Developer. — All real properties acquired by the real
estate developer, whether developed or undeveloped as of the time of
acquisition, and all real properties which are held by the real estate developer
primarily for sale or for lease to customers in the ordinary course of his trade
or business or which would properly be included in the inventory of the
taxpayer if on hand at the close of the taxable year and all real properties used
in the trade or business, whether in the form of land, building, or other
improvements, shall be considered as ordinary assets.
The facts in the Herder v. Helvering case were: On January 15, 1934
fire destroyed the milling property owned by the partnership of George
Herder and R. L. Williams. For this loss, the partnership received $50,000 as
fire insurance proceeds. This amount was immediately distributed to the
partners, being pro-hated in accordance with their respective interest in the
partnership, namely, two-thirds to George Herder, and one-third to R. L.
Williams. George Herder received $33,333.67 under such distribution and that
$19,199.50 thereof represented his portion of the total amount received by the
partnership in excess of the adjusted cost basis of the property at the time of
its destruction. ATICcS
The Court held the said gain ($19,199.50) is not a realized income,
hence, not subject to income tax, (supra) pursuant to the rule that no realized
income may be recognized from a compulsory or involuntary conversion of a
property. This doctrine is one of the several doctrines enunciated by the
Courts in the U.S.A. that explain the meaning of the term "income" and
"realized of income".
In view of the foregoing, this Office is of the opinion as it hereby rules that —
Likewise, in BIR Ruling No. DA-203-03 dated 30 June 2003, involving the
land swap transaction between Shoemart, Inc. ("SM") and the PEA, the BIR ruled that
the substitution of the parcel of land that SM involuntarily ceded to PEA partakes of
the nature of an involuntary conversion. The exchange of properties between PEA
and Shoemart is not subject to the corporate income tax or to the capital gains tax nor
subject to the credible withholding tax under Revenue Regulations No. 2-98, as
amended. TDcAIH
Accordingly, following the tax implications arising from the application of the
doctrine of involuntary conversion, no taxable gain may be derived by the residents
and by FBDC pursuant to the implementation of the KALAYAAN VIADUCT
PROJECT.
Assuming arguendo that there is no 1997 MOA to speak of, the acts of
disposition by FBDC of relocation lots in favor of all the affected residents and the
latter of their respective lots may be viewed as a mere swapping of properties. In
short, while the surrender was made to DPWH and the ownership of relocation lots
conveyed in exchange thereof belonged to FBDC, the concept of swapping may still
be resorted to in order to implement the intention of the parties to complete the
Viaduct Project. Technically, the arrangement would call first for actual transfer by
FBDC of such relocation lots to DPWH before the latter can exchange the same for
the properties of affected residents. Thereafter, DPWH may swap the relocation lots
with the properties of affected residents to finally implement the project. If this option
has been made, the transfer by FBDC as the transferor-donor would not be subject to
income tax nor to withholding tax. Likewise, the transfer by FBDC to DPWH would
be a donation to the government which is exempt from donor's tax under Sec.
101(A)(2) of the Tax Code of 1997, as amended.
B. Any gain that may be derived from the transfer of lots by the affected
residents to DPWH is not taxable.
Section 24(D)(1) of the Tax Code of 1997, as amended provides that, "the
provisions of Section 39(B) notwithstanding, a final tax of six percent (6%) based on
the gross selling price or current fair market value as determined in accordance with
Section 6(E) of this Code, whichever is higher, is hereby imposed upon capital gains
presumed to have been realized from the sale, exchange, or other disposition of real
property located in the Philippines, classified as capital assets, including pacto de
retro sales and other forms of conditional sales, by individuals, including estates and
trusts: Provided, That the tax liability, if any, on gains from sales or other
dispositions of real property to the government or any of its political subdivisions or
Copyright 2018 CD Technologies Asia, Inc. and Accesslaw, Inc. Philippine Taxation Encyclopedia Second Release 2018 13
agencies or to government-owned or controlled corporations shall be determined
either under Section 24 (A) or under this Subsection, at the option of the taxpayer."
Under the foregoing proviso, an individual taxpayer has the option to report his
tax liabilities, if any, gains or dispositions of real property to the government or any
of its political subdivisions or agencies either as a transaction subject to capital gains
tax of 6% under the aforesaid Sec. 24(D) of the Tax Code of 1997, as amended or
under Sec. 24(A)(1) of the same Tax Code.
In BIR Ruling DA-203-03 issued to Shoemart, Inc., supra, and citing BIR
Ruling No. 392-92 dated November 18, 1992 and DA-158-2002 dated September 12,
2002, the doctrine of involuntary conversion was applied. Pertinent factual
consideration was made the basis in applying the doctrine, to wit:
"In line with its commitment to comply with the schedule of work in
relation to the development plan, Shoemart (the Developer) timely
commenced and successfully implemented the development works on CBP-1,
Island A under the JVA. In return and in accordance with the terms and
conditions of the JVA, PEA (the Owner) has caused the transfer of the agreed
portion of the developed area equivalent to Six Hundred Four Thousand Three
Hundred Forty Eight (604,348) Square Meters to Shoemart (the Developer)
by way of a Deed of Conveyance in favor of Shoemart. . .
Copyright 2018 CD Technologies Asia, Inc. and Accesslaw, Inc. Philippine Taxation Encyclopedia Second Release 2018 14
and
Copyright 2018 CD Technologies Asia, Inc. and Accesslaw, Inc. Philippine Taxation Encyclopedia Second Release 2018 15
"By way of a Deed of Exchange, Shoemart thereby cedes, transfers
and conveys to PEA its land with an area of Three Thousand Four Hundred
One (3,401) Square Meters, identified as Lot 19 and on the other hand, PEA
cedes, transfer and conveys to Shoemart — its land with an equal area of
Three Thousand Four Hundred One (3,401) Square Meters, identified as Lot
13-A, both lands being situated in CBP-1 Island A, Pasay City. . . .
Accordingly, any gain that may be derived by the residents as a result of the
transfer of their lots to DPWH for the implementation of KALAYAAN VIADUCT
PROJECT are not taxable under the aforecited Sections 24(A)(1) and (D) of the Tax
Code of 1997, as amended. HcaATE
C. Any gain that may be derived from the transfer of residual lots by the
affected residents to other residents is not subject to capital gains tax or income tax
or withholding tax.
In the case of BIR Ruling No. 329-92, supra, a portion of MJC's real property
was expropriated by the DPWH. At the time of expropriation, its net book portion of
MJC's real property (horse racetrack premises) was expropriated by the DPWH for
public purposes (i.e., road improvement premises). At the time of expropriation, its
net book value is P250,000. Its compensation for the said expropriation is
P29,462.440. However, the said compensation is not even enough to repair, restore,
and rehabilitate its racetrack premises and facilities. On the contrary, MJC's contract
for the partial repair, restoration and rehabilitation of the said premises and facilities
is P53,530,000.
The BIR thus ruled that the aforementioned expropriation of MJC's real
property embraced under the involuntary conversion of property doctrine which this
Office relied upon in BIR RULING NO. 373-87, dated November 23, 1987, in the
case of the Mercury Group of Companies.
Copyright 2018 CD Technologies Asia, Inc. and Accesslaw, Inc. Philippine Taxation Encyclopedia Second Release 2018 17
compulsory or involuntary conversion of a property. . . .
Thus, following the same concept this Office hereby opines that the receipt of
compensation by the affected residents whose lots will be encumbered with
annotation of right of way, as well as their eventual transfer to DPWH after securing
permission from DENR pursuant to Presidential Proclamation No. 518, is not subject
to capital gains tax or individual income tax or withholding tax, the same being the
result of an involuntary conversion. In lieu of the standard process of expropriation,
the residents permitted the encumbrance on their lots and allowed them to be used for
public purpose. Such being the case, the resulting gain or income should not be
subject to capital gains tax or income tax or withholding tax on the part of the
residents imposed either under the provisions of Sec. 24(A)(1) or Sec. 24(D) of the
Tax Code of 1997, as amended.
2. Donor's Tax
In BIR Ruling No. 021-96, this Office had ruled that the donation by Fortune
Tabacco Corporation to the Municipal Government of Marikina was exempted from
donor's tax pursuant to then Sec. 94(a)(2) of the 1977 Tax Code, as amended (now
Sec. 101(A)(2) of the Tax Code of 1997, as amended).
In view of the foregoing bases, this Office hereby rules that the direct donation
Copyright 2018 CD Technologies Asia, Inc. and Accesslaw, Inc. Philippine Taxation Encyclopedia Second Release 2018 18
of the lots to the City of Taguig properly falls under the abovecited provision of the
Tax Code as a donation to a political subdivision of the National Government, and
thus, exempt from the imposition of donor's tax.
The transfer of FBDC relocation lots to the residents is not subject to donor's
tax. The transfer of the relocation lots is with sufficient consideration and is not a
mere act of liberality. While FBDC is obliged by DPWH to transfer replacement lots
to the residents in lieu of the eventual expropriation of said replacement lots,
nevertheless, FBDC will be benefited by the KALAYAAN VIADUCT PROJECT.
In previous rulings, this Office has clarified, that where a transfer is made with
a business consideration, the same shall not be subject to donor's tax since there is a
clear absence of donative intent on the part of the transferor. In the instant case; this
Office ruled that "GBCI is not subject to income tax on the amount of P38,459,130.00
suspended or waived or condoned by PPMV. Furthermore, the suspension, waiver or
condonation is not subject to donor's tax since there is no donative intent on the part
of PPMV, but was made solely for business consideration to assist GBCI to continue
with its operations. Since the transfer of the replacement lots by FBDC to the affected
residents is without donative intent because FBDC will be benefited by the
construction of the KALAYAAN VIADUCT PROJECT as it would help spur the
development of Bonifacio Global City, the same is not a taxable donation and thus
not subject to donor's tax. The KALAYAAN VIADUCT PROJECT would lead to the
development of Bonifacio Global City as it will provide easier means of access
between Epifanio Delos Santos Avenue (EDSA) and Bonifacio Global City. The
enhancement of Bonifacio Global City, as a result of the implementation of the
KALAYAAN VIADUCT PROJECT, is sufficient business consideration on the part
of FBDC to exempt such transfer from the imposition of donor's tax. In conformity
with the above cited ruling where the BIR clarified that where a transfer is made with
a business consideration, the same shall not be subject to donor's tax imposed under
Sec. 99(B) in relation to Sec. 98, both of the Tax Code of 1997, as amended, since
there is a clear absence of donative intent on the part of the transferor. DCcTHa
Copyright 2018 CD Technologies Asia, Inc. and Accesslaw, Inc. Philippine Taxation Encyclopedia Second Release 2018 19
KALAYAAN VIADUCT PROJECT would lead to the development of Bonifacio
Global City as it will provide easier means of access between Epifanio Delos Santos
Avenue (EDSA) and Bonifacio Global City. The enhancement of Bonifacio Global
City, as a result of the implementation of the KALAYAAN VIADUCT PROJECT, is
sufficient business consideration on the part of FBDC to exempt such transfer from
the imposition of donor's tax. This is in conformity with the above cited ruling where
this Office had clarified that where a transfer is made with a business consideration,
the same shall not be subject to donor's tax since there is a clear absence of donative
intent on the part of the transferor.
The contemplated direct transfer of the FBDC replacement lots to the affected
residents is subject to DST under Section 196 of the Tax Code of 1997, as amended
by RA 9243. As consistently held by this Office, while the exchange of properties
resulting from an involuntary conversion is not subject to the corporate income tax or
to the capital gains tax nor to the creditable withholding tax, the same shall be subject
to the documentary stamp tax imposed under Section 196 of the Tax Code of 1997.
Furthermore, the notarial acknowledgment to the said deed is subject to the
documentary stamp tax of P15.00 pursuant to Section 188 of the same Code. 2 (2)
The contemplated donation of FBDC lots to the City of Taguig is exempt from
documentary stamp tax because the government stands to benefit from such
transaction and there is no valuable consideration received by FBDC.
rationalizing that because the donation redounds to the benefit of the government and
serves the best interest of the public, donation to the local government is exempt from
DST under Section 196 of the Tax Code. Moreover, since there is no valuable
consideration for the transfer, thus no DST is imposable other than the DST of P15
for each notarial acknowledgement imposed under Section 188 of the Tax Code of
1997, as amended.
The annotation of the easement of right of way on the lots which are prohibited
from being subdivided is not subject to DST under Section 196 of the Tax Code of
1997, as amended. Although the annotation of the right of way creates a real sight
over the subject lots, the same merely involves its creation and it does not involve its
transfer. This proposed annotation of the perpetual easement of right of way on the
affected lots are preparatory steps to be taken by the parties pending the issuance of
the DENR permit for the subdivision of the lots to implement the actual sale of the
properties.
4. Value-Added Tax
The transfer of lots by FBDC to the DPWH as well as its donation to the City
Copyright 2018 CD Technologies Asia, Inc. and Accesslaw, Inc. Philippine Taxation Encyclopedia Second Release 2018 21
of Taguig is subject to Value-added Tax (VAT). The transfers of lots by the residents
are, however, not subject to VAT because they are not primarily held for sale or lease
in the ordinary course of business pursuant to Sec. 109(P) of the Tax Code of 1997, as
amended.
Considering that the relocation lots of FBDC were held either for sale or lease
in FBDC's ordinary course of trade or business, the transfer of relocation lots to the
affected residents shall be subject to VAT pursuant to Sec. 105 in relation to Sec. 106,
both of the Tax Code of 1997, as amended. The VAT shall be imposed on the zonal
value or fair market value, which ever is higher, pursuant to Section 106 (A)(1)(a) of
the Tax Code, as implemented by Section 4.106-3 of RR 16-05. Considering that the
zonal value of the FBDC replacement lots of P7,500.00 is higher than their fair
market value per their tax declaration, their zonal value shall be used as basis for
imposition of the 12% VAT.
The donation of lots to the City of Taguig by FBDC is a completed gift subject
to VAT. Section 4.106-3 of Revenue Regulations (Rev. Regs.) No. 16-05, provides
that a completed gift of property, which is one for sale, lease or use in the ordinary
course of trade or business shall be considered a deemed sale transaction, and thus,
subject to VAT. Pertinent provisions of Rev. Regs. No. 16-05 states as follows:
Pursuant to this provision and in correlation to the deemed sale provision under
Section 106 Tax Code of 1997, as amended, the donation by FBDC of its lots to the
City of Taguig is a completed gift that may be treated as a deemed sale transaction.
This is so because the lots to be donated to the City of Taguig are being held by
FBDC either for sale, lease in the ordinary course of its business. Considering the
foregoing, the said donation is subject to the 12% VAT based on their zonal value
P7,500.00 as this is higher than the fair market value per their tax declarations. AcSHCD
Copyright 2018 CD Technologies Asia, Inc. and Accesslaw, Inc. Philippine Taxation Encyclopedia Second Release 2018 22
C. No VAT on the transfer of lots by the affected residents
However, the foregoing VAT exposure on the transfers by FBDC does not give
rise to a vatable transaction for the residents' transfer of lots to DPWH as well as to
transfers of residual lots to other residents. This is so because the affected residents do
not hold the properties for sale or lease in the ordinary course of trade or business,
unlike the manner by which FBDC held the properties.
In the same BIR Ruling No. 024-05, this Office has also ruled that the transfer
of properties by one corporation to another is not subject to VAT where such
properties are not held for sale or for lease in the ordinary course of trade or business.
Specifically, the BIR ruled:
"In the instant case, the transfer by PSPC of the FIXED Assets of its
LPG business to SGLPI in exchange of the latter's shares of stock pursuant to
a tax-free exchange transaction under Section 40 (C) (2) of the Tax Code of
1997 is by reason a reorganization, a transaction which is not done with
regularity and would no longer be repeated. The assignment of the Fixed
Assets is not undertaken in the course of trade or business or in pursuit of a
commercial or an economic activity, nor is it incidental thereto. The Fixed
Assets are not held by PSPC for sale or for lease in the ordinary course of
trade or business. Furthermore, the Fixed Assets do not constitute PSPC's
stock-in-trade or inventory. Consequently, the assignment of the Fixed Assets
is not subject to VAT."
Based on the foregoing and considering that the residents do not hold the
subject lots for sale or lease in the ordinary course of trade or business, this Office
hereby rules that the transfer of lots by the affected residents are not subject to VAT
pursuant to Sec. 109(P) of the Tax Code of 1997, as amended.
The eventual surrender by the residents of the lots initially annotated with the
right of way is not subject to VAT. The transfer of lots from the residents to DPWH
are not made in the course of trade or business nor were the affected lands held by the
resident for sale, lease or use in the ordinary course of trade or business. The transfer
of such lots cannot be considered as a taxable transaction for purposes of imposing
VAT. 4 (4)
As earlier intimated, the transfer of the lots by FBDC to the affected residents
and to the City of Taguig arises from its obligation imposed by DPWH under the
1996 and 1997 MOAs for the implementation of the KALAYAAN VIADUCT
PROJECT. FBDC is left with no choice except to provide the relocation lots to the
residents in lieu of their eventual expropriation by the DPWH.
This ruling shall serve as sufficient basis for the BIR to issue the Certificates
Authorizing Registration and Tax Clearance Certificates, for all the property transfers
effected in connection with the implementation of the KALAYAAN VIADUCT
PROJECT, including the subsequent transfer of properties initially annotated with the
right of way in favor of DPWH as well as the transfers of properties which are
presently unregistered/untitled and their subsequent registration/titling provided that
FBDC and the concerned parties submit all the necessary Deeds of Exchange
effecting the said transfers to the concerned RDO for evaluation pursuant to the
foregoing.
Finally, this ruling is being issued on the basis of the foregoing facts as
represented. However, if upon investigation, it shall be disclosed that the facts are
Copyright 2018 CD Technologies Asia, Inc. and Accesslaw, Inc. Philippine Taxation Encyclopedia Second Release 2018 24
different, then this ruling shall be considered null and void.
Copyright 2018 CD Technologies Asia, Inc. and Accesslaw, Inc. Philippine Taxation Encyclopedia Second Release 2018 25
Endnotes
1 (Popup - Popup)
1. BIR Ruling No. 329-92 dated November 18, 1992; BIR Ruling Nos. 373-87 dated
Nov. 23, 1987 & 429-88 dated September 2, 1988; DA-158-2002 dated September
12, 2002; DA-203-03 dated June 30, 2003.
2 (Popup - Popup)
2. BIR Ruling DA 203-03, dated 30 June 2003
3 (Popup - Popup)
3. BIR Ruling No. DA-135-01, dated 8 August 2001.
4 (Popup - Popup)
4. BIR Ruling No. 024-05, dated 23 December 2005
Copyright 2018 CD Technologies Asia, Inc. and Accesslaw, Inc. Philippine Taxation Encyclopedia Second Release 2018 26