BIR-ULAP WORKSHOP ON REVENUE GENERATION
"Enhancing BIR-LGU Partnership in Revenue Generation"
BIR National Head Office, Quezon City
October 12, 2000

P R O C E E D I N G S

Opening Ceremonies

Invocations were led by Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) Deputy Commissioner Lilia Guillermo. This was followed by the singing of the Philippine National Anthem. Welcome remarks were delivered by BIR Deputy Commissioner Oscar Sevilla.

 

Commissioner Sevilla said that the BIR has experienced shortfalls that reached Php24 billion based on 1998 collection target of Php398 billion. This leaves about Php129 billion more to be collected. The bureau has been under pressure to look for ways of improving tax collection through new and non-traditional sources of revenue. The workshop will help in finding solutions to problems. The BIR will be furnished more data by the LGUs that will hopefully improve its data base. LGUs have the power to do this, being responsible for the issuance of local business permits. As a matter of course, LGUs will be encouraged to be more cooperative, conscious and responsible in withholding taxes and remitting these to the BIR. Better revenues mean higher local Internal Revenue Allotments (IRA) for LGUs.

Plenary Session

Role of the Department of the Interior and Local Government in Revenue Generation

DILG Asst. Secretary Julius Topacio

The DILG recognizes the merits and intentions of the Memorandum of Agreement being entered into by the joint parties that is anticipated to result in intensified tax collection. LGUs are one of the most overlooked sources of national revenue. In the past, the municipality of San Juan spearheaded efforts to intensify tax collection down to the barangays, as barangay captains were in the best position to recognize taxpayers. They are familiar with property owners as well. BIR needs access to such information. This is now realized by LGUs through the Union of Local Authorities of the Philippines (ULAP). The DILG has a role to play in monitoring compliance to realty tax laws, and takes measures to ensure that LGUs are cooperating. The department welcomes this move.

Role of LGUs in Tax Collection and Remittance

Gov. Joey D. Lina

National President, ULAP

In an earlier discussion with Commissioner Fonacier, the ULAP indicated that it has a role to play in the collection of taxes, as LGUs are directly affected to the tune of 40% of the revenue tax collection three years preceding the current year that goes to provinces, cities, municipalities and barangays. If this collection is low, or of the targets of BIR are not met, the national and local governments face problems. The 40% IRA share is inputted into the budget prepared by LGUs in advance. The basis of computation is the approved codal formula, reckoned three years before the current year. Whether this amount will be given is variable because the BIR still stands to collect those taxes. In case of shortfalls, the release of IRA is affected. LGUs understand this situation.

BIR is the main actor in collecting revenues, but LGUs can play a supporting role. The collection of the real property, franchise, professional and other taxes have been entrusted to LGUs. Best practices have been forwarded in the performance of this role such as that of Laguna’s "Go, Laguna, go!" program. LGUs have been very active but the reality is that many of them are 99% heavily dependent on IRA. Others are 90% dependent. The rest of the percentage comes from local taxes.

It is not true that LGUs are batting merely for the IRA. The fact remains that there are many LGUs that are underdeveloped - the formula for IRA computation and distribution could stand improvement but it is nevertheless an equalizer. A lot of LGUs are doing something positive about it. The talk with Fonacier was followed by discussions with BIR deputy commissioners. ULAP identified areas of improvement and came up with the workshop concept and the draft of a joint agreement and covenant of partnership.

Since the LGUs have become holding agents of the BIR, their roles were defined and specified in the draft agreement, wherein they are to:

1. Provide BIR with an updated annual alphabetical list of taxpayers who were issued municipal permits for submission every March 1 beginning CY 2001;

2. Require presentation of documents prior to the renewal of business permits such as income tax return for the preceding quarter or year, VAT percentage tax returns, BIR registration certificates, and annual registration fee payments;

3. Furnish BIR regional district offices quarterly lists of contractors and copies of the respective government contracts entered into by LGUs;

4. Include the tax information number (TIN) as part of essential requirements in all applications for government permits, licenses, clearance, official papers, and the Community Tax Certificates;

5. Remit taxes through local chief executives, municipal treasurers and accountants on dates prescribed by law;

6. Submit a semestral update of current fair market value of properties from the assessors’ office to the assessment division of the BIR;

7. Submit an annual alphabetical list of professionals issued Professional Tax Receipts;

8. Assist in the dissemination of tax reminders and other information that may be agreed upon;

9. Assist the BIR in promoting its raffle program and campaigns;

10. Submit to the BIR Revenue Accounting Division requirements relative to the computation and issuance of the 40% mining tax, franchise gaming tax and special privilege tax;

11. Assist RDOs in locating unregistered and delinquent taxpayers; and

12. Assist BIR in accessing tax records of LGUs

The non-remittance of taxes collected is unfair on the part of those who remit - since remittances are eventually pooled and distributed even to LGUs who fail to remit. Tax collection is a reflection of people’s willingness to pay taxes. Without this, the tax collection can be difficult. LGUs should perform their tasks well, as taxes are the lifeblood of people in government.

COA Findings: Local Tax Collection & Remittance

Atty. Divinia Alagon

For 1999, local governments showed higher efficiency in the collection of income and revenues needed to support their operations, posting a record of 93.18 percent compared to their 1998 performance of 89.59 percent. Their income for this year totalled Php120.15 billion in contrast to the previous year’s Php100.22 billion, resulting in an increase of 20.08 percent

The biggest share of LGU income came from tax revenues which comprised Php104.84 billion or 87.11 percent of total income. The rest of LGU earnings came from operating and miscellaneous income, capital revenues, grants-in-aid, extraordinary receipts, and borrowings, to which LGUs also resorted.

Of the 16 regions, the National Capital Region (NCR), Region IV or Southern Tagalog and Region III or Central Luzon were the top three income earners for 1999, with with collections of Php252.37 billion, Php16.86 billion and Php9.90 billion respectively. On the other hand, CARAGA, Cordillera Administrative Region (CAR) and the Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) were the lowest performing regions, with contributions of Php3.53 billion, Php3.00 billion, and Php2.66 billion respectively. Overall, Central Mindanao posted the highest percentage of increase in tax collection at 41.75 percent. This was followed by ARMM with 36.86 percent and Region IX with 34.94 percent. These figures reflect the state of LGU tax collection countrywide, and were drawn from the financial statements that were consolidated and analyzed by COA.

The overall COA findings was that: LGUs were not able to fully harness their revenue raising powers, compelled to depend heavily on the IRA as the main source of income, thus defeating the purpose of local autonomy. Only LGUs in NCR were able to do harness local income sources averaging 64.75 percent of total income.

A pie chart on the revenue audit of LGU income sources showed that the IRA accounted for the biggest portion equivalent to 63 percent. The next biggest slices of the pie came form RPT (11%) and receipts from economic enterprises (11). Thinner slices came from business taxes and licenses (9%), grants, aid and borrowings (5%), and amusement tax (1%).

Auditors attributed the LGUs’ income shortfalls to the following:

Laxity in monitoring of land improvements and machineries

  • Failure to intensify collection through information drives and tax campaigns

  • Failure to avail of legal remedies to enforce collection provided under the Local Government Code (LGC).

    • With regard to business licenses and taxes, the LGC authorizes LGUs to levy taxes, fees and charges on businesses operating within their jurisdictions. Collections from business taxes and licenses amounted to Php10.5 billion or 8.7 percent of total revenues in 1999. Per estimates, the LGUs could have realized as much as Php581 million more had they taken the following measures:

    Formulate policy guidelines that ensure declaration of correct tax bases

  • Examine taxpayers’ books of account on a regular basis

  • Tap possible income sources by legislating/updating and implementing tax ordinances and

  • Avail of remedies provided under the LGC to enforce tax collection

    • A revenue audit was likewise conducted by COA on LGUs’ amusement tax performance. The results of audit attributed the low performance to:

    • Laxity in monitoring the earnings of promoters and operators of amusement places;

    • Failure to fully implement LGU tax ordinances, and

    • Failure to avail of legal remedies to enforce collections authorized by the LGC

    COA thus strongly recommends that LGUs should devise plans and strategies to enhance its tax generation activities to include tax mapping of real properties, updating/computerization of taxpayers records and tax collection information dissemination. The availment of legal remedies to enforce collections provided under the LGC should be enforced to instill awareness among taxpayers.

    Proposed Amendments to the 1991 Local Government Code

    Atty. Terry Domogho

    Office of Senator Aquilino Pimentel, Jr.

    Section 6, Article 10 of the Constitutions says that the LGUs are entitled to a just share of the national taxes. RA 7160 stipulates that LGUs are entitled to their share of the internal revenue allotment. However, there is a difference between national taxes and taxes collected by the BIR. Senate Bill 2064 embodies the amendments to the LGC that include changes in parameters applied in taxation that would enable LGUs to widen their tax bases. In brief, these amendments include definitions and modifications, as follows:

    • Amusement places are defined as places where one seeks entertainment. These were expanded to include golf courses, recreation centers. Taxes will be charged not only for admission but equally fir participation in activities and the payment of rentals for spaces;

    • Taxes imposed on cargo vessels weighing five tons and less;

    • Taxes on public utilities and issuance of all licenses or permits for driving and operation these utilities within the LGUs;

    • Taxes on quasi-public corporations like government banks, financing and investment institutions, gambling and gaming enterprises operated by the central government or its agents and instrumentalities, including individuals and entities;

    • Taxes on businesses operating on franchises granted by Congress, national government agencies, and other LGUs including power transmission and distribution, communications, gaming enterprises, etc.;

    • Permit to extract sand, gravel and other quarry products as authorized by the local chief executive;

    • Professional fees to be determined by the local sanggunian; taxing powers of barangays that could impose business taxes on retail stores not exceeding an income of Php50,000 preceding the current calendar year;

    • Taxing powers of municipalities on businesses not exceeding 2½ percent based on gross receipts preceding the current calendar year and adjusted according to the capability of those businesses operating in the area;

    • Persons authorized to collect local taxes are provoincial and municipal/city treasurers. Arguments have been raised to the treasurer being a member of the board of political canvassers. An amendment was made to appoint members other than the treasurer who are responsible to the national as well as the local governments. This will be further discussed in future venues.

    On the 20% development fund, guidelines issued by the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) or EO189 do not appear to be rational. It is the budgets of LGUs that operationalize development plans crafted by the Local Development Council and approved by the sanggunian. This becomes final, and no other authority should overrule this.

    Revenue Generation: A Macroperspective Analysis

    For: BIR Commissioner Dakila B. Fonacier

    by Deputy Commissioner Estelita Aguirre

    Tax administration is not an easy task but a duty to be fulfilled. For the BIR, tax administration is a development tool rather than an onerous duty. In the performance of this function, the support of the private sector is urgently needed. The BIR’s latest revenue collection of Php397 billion contributed about 72 percent to the national income. This performance could be continually improved with the adoption of the following major initiatives to augment collection:

    Operational initiative:

    • Installation of nationwide electronic metering machine to provide needed information

    • Assumption of full blast audit
    • Intensified efforts to collect delinquent accounts

    Partnership initiative:

    • Initiative to enter into a Memorandum of Agreement with the Department of Finance (DOF), DILG and LGUs to reinforce the withholding tax system and establish linkages of assistance to bureau

    The withholding tax system accounts for an increasing share in tax revenue collections, as it captures millions of individual taxpayers. The country’s largest employer and contractor should take the lead in its compliance - the government that employs millions in health, social services, infrastructure, etc.

    Law enforcement has a distinct role to play in tax compliance. If the law is to be enforced, government should be the first to abide by it. Revenues from LGUs amounting to Php2.22 billion in various kinds of taxes represent one percent of total revenues. The bureau of aware that there is a lot of room for improvement as far as LGU compliance is concerned. It is appreciative of the efforts of local agents and their voluntariness. Collaborative efforts by means of "united forces" achieve best results.

    Open Forum

    Panelists

    Governor Joey Lina, LPP-ULAP

    Mayor Rey Roquero, League of Munitipalities

    Vice Governor Eduardo Chatto, ULAP

    Marty Lao-Lim, Liga ng Barangay

    Julius Topacio, DILG

    Question.

    There was a delay in the remittance of withholding taxes by one mayor, who thought that local officials should receive an additional compensation for their part as collectors of BIR withholding taxes.

    Elaboration.

    Many mayors in the province of Isabela lagged behind the remittance of their taxes, and one of them has been very vocal. The ruling was explained that LCEs should be liable for tax collection and other responsibilities. Perhaps a supplemental law could be enacted to this effect

    Answer.

    Corresponding charges should be filed against the errant officials. A mayor’s duty is germaine to his position. It should be viewed in the same way that LGUs have the responsibility to collect GSIS premiums. Local income is derived from IRA. Without such an effort to collect taxes, no IRA is forthcoming. The increase of the general fund will result in an increase in local earnings.

    Question.

    Can BIR use its influence to pressure LGUs to add a provision in their respective tax ordinances regarding mandatory issuance of official sales receipts?

    Answer.

    The MOA prescribes penalties for the non-issuance of receipts. It is the BIR that imposes this but the assistance of LGUs is solicited, particularly in the display of poster announcements in strategic public places. District officers and regional directors can be approached on this matter.

    Comment.

    There is an existing national law covering LGU involvement.

    Clarification.

    In the course of tax campaigns, blank walls are often encountered and the legal basis questioned. There seems to be a further need for local sanggunians to impose penalties in their local tax ordinances.

    Comment.

    Local treasurers find that national laws are often violated by establishments, but in their apprehension, BIR officials are not around. It is only the local treasurers who are left to take care that these laws are complied with.

    Comment.

    This can be solved by a deputization agreement with the LGU.

    BIR.

    Deputization is not necessary because LGUs have inspectors. BIR prevails upon LGUs whose inspectors should report the non-issuance of receipts. BIR only has a few people in disparate groups of islands. Licenses are based on gross receipts.

    Asec Topacio.

    It is for this reason that barangay captains can be instrumental and may be deputized by the BIR.

    Question.

    Do LGUs have a formal program to ferret out persons who engage in business but who are not registered?

    Answer.

    This refers to municipal businesses. The mayor issues the permits. The municipal government has a monitoring unit that could identify these establishments. But whether this is operational or not is relative. Otherwise, collections suffer.

    Question.

    Is it true that shares from the tobacco law were not remitted in full since 1992?

    Answer.

    This is not true. BIR collects excise tax on Virginia tobacco. Certificates were issued on amounts that were collected, from which 15% was computed and remitted as LGU shares. However, the DBM has jurisdiction over this matter that should be referred to them. BIR is not responsible for releasing this amount but only certifies on the amount. The basis for the computation is the three-year collection on value added tax by municipalities and cities.

    Note.

    ULAP has already communicated with the Department of Justice (DOJ) for appropriate ruling on this matter.

    Question.

    Since tax credit certificates are not considered cash collections, can LGUs share in these no-payment returns?

    Answer.

    COA has not encountered issues of this nature. Based on the nature of tax credit certificates, these are non-cash items. It presupposes the previous receipt of cash. On the dates that this cash were received, LGUs have already realized their share.

    Question.

    Can BIR avail of LGU Graphic Information System (GIS) base maps?

    Answer.

    The bureau is developing a similar system that can be enhanced if access is provided to LGU-designed GIS. The information will assist BIR in locating properties for zonal and property valuation purposes.

    Comment.

    The municipality of Benguet has developed a GIS that can be made easily available. A MOA provision could validate this.

    Question.

    Income on Community Tax Certificates now accrues to LGUs in view of which BIR has been lax in its administration of CTCs. It even accepts Income Tax Returns (ITRs) without CTC attachments, but requires CTCs nevertheless for IRA shares.

    Answer.

    There is no need for BIR to regulate CTCs as this has been delegated to LGUs. CTCs are required for income tax purposes, but determination of actual amounts should be determined by LGUs.

    Comment.

    Old residence certificates were examined for accuracy. We cannot expect correctly filed CTCs in cases of voluntary income tax returns.

    Answer.

    A space was provided in ITR forms for the declaration of the correct income amount which can in turn be verified by LGUs concerned.

    Comment:

    Income taxes are due in April whereas CTCs are issued in January. The authority to check CTC reportings by engaging businesses does not rest with the BIR which has no legal bases to assess local taxes.

    Comment.

    Technicalities encountered in declarations can be indicated in the MOA

    Comment.

    An additional function for BIR is proposed as follows: "that it shall require business establishments to present Certificates of Tax Clearance of paid local taxes, from local treasurers prior to the registration of newly started business, renewal of registration of business and in the granting of authority for the printing of its invoices and official receipts."

    Comment:.

    BIR and local treasurers want to issue their respective certifications. Coordination between local treasurers and the BIR should be made.

    Comment.

    Taxpayers are already burdened on tax amounts they have to pay. If renewal of business permits are contingent on the presentation of all requirements, LGUs are on the losing end. If these requirements are not complied with, we cannot realize the payment of business tax.

    Question.

    When remittances are delayed, there are penalties and surcharges but if they are made in advance, nothing is done. What is the penalty for late remittance? Could the period for remittance be extended for at least a month to allow sufficient time for documentation? Can penalties also be waived since LGUs are mere withholding agents?

    Answer.

    The Tax Code imposes penalties on late remittances. This forum can agree on a policy that would improve BIR-LGU understanding in this regard. The 10-day grace period for withholding tax remittance cannot be extended or condoned because it is a codal provision. Previous commissioners have been lenient on failures, but the current management abides by the law. The condonation of past due accounts (about Php1.3 billion) have been raised to the Commissioner but no reply has been made. With regard to emoluments, in the sixties, municipal treasurers who collected revenues were granted honoraria. In places where there are no collection agents, we have proposed the institution of a Php400 monthly honoraria but this was not approved by DBM. If this is the proposal of LCEs, it has to be tabled for legislation.

    Question.

    Many LGUs impose and collect franchise tax on public utility jeeps and buses granted franchise by LTFRB.

    Answer

    This is part of proposed changes to the LGC (Senate Bill 2064).

    Review of Key Issues

    Atty. Mercelinda O. Yap

    BIR-HREA

    The more salient issues discussed included:

    DILG

    • Need to forge a partnership between the BIR and LGUs

    • Need to obtain support from LGUs through local tax agents, i.e., barangay captains

    ULAP

    • Cited formula for IRA computation

    • LGUs and BIR must agree to help each other, since 99% of LGUs are still IRA dependent

    • Some taxes are not remitted on time or at all; the command responsibility should rest on the local chief executives

    • LGUs must furnish the BIR with accurate information on the current fair market value of properties to enable the agency to know whether zonal valuations are up-to-date

    • LGUs should assist the BIR in locating delinquent taxpayers since the latter are known to local authorities

    • People must know by heart the need to pay taxes, hence, the expediency for the covenant

    COA

    • Only about three regions namely NCR, III and IV performed well while CARAGA, CAR and ARMM scored low.

    Amendments to LGC

    • Senate Bill 2064 has expanded to include activities in the amusement tax
    • Public utilities operating in the provinces are subject to tax imposition

    • Businesses operating in the cities and municipalities are all subject to taxation

    • EO 189 states that development plans approved by sanggunians are final and that the local budgets operationalize the plan.

    BIR

    • Set in place systems for improved collection of taxes: Revenue Regulation 6-2000 and Revenue Memorandum Order 70-98 rule that delinquent accounts can be settled by compromise settlement.

    Comment.

    What will happen to the MOA between BIR and BLGF? These current MOA seems to favor only the BIR and not the LGUs since the furnishing of information is a one-way-route from the LGU to the BIR.

    Answer.

    This will not be displaced by the new MOA since the latter summarizes all information from various sources until a final output or covenant incorporating all changes will result.

    III. Workshop Proper

    Presentation and Critiquing of Proposed MOA

    Melchor Ramos

    BIR-ACIR

    The new Memorandum of Agreement was modified, amended and corrected on the basis of the following salient comments:

    1. LGU Provisions

    Format 2

    • Renewals presume that there were pre-existing documents, hence taxpayers complied with taxation laws.

    • Income tax returns refer to taxes formerly filed; these previous returns are required for the availment of business permits. The tax declaration is already indicative of tax amounts to be paid.

    • Business permit taxation should be classified for each of the four different types of LGUs: province, city, municipality and barangay

    • The BIR requests the assistance of LGUs in the availment of vital information - it is the function of BIR to go after delinquent taxpayers, in the course of which it will likewise extend to LGUs the information they need.

    • Around 70 percent of LGU income originates from the IRA, the remaining 30% from internal sources. The provisions in the MOA appear to enhance income from IRA but not from internal sources.

    • Reckoning period of three years is being amended to two years.

    • LGUs are not obliged to furnish the BIR with information other than that stipulated in the MOA

    • LGUs may inform the BIR of documentary deficiencies in the remarks column

    Issue 4: TIN

    • Executive Order 98 was issued requiring the indication of TIN in all government and private sector transactions.

    Issue 5: Withholding tax responsibilities

    • Revenue Memorandum 70-98 defines the responsibilities of withholding agents and responsible officials, including heads of offices, officials holding highest positions, accountants, etc., and is inclusive of all LGU offices.

    • The most responsible official in the LGU to be designated as withholding agent is the municipal accountant. An instance occurred in the past wherein another official was made to pay for the difference in the computation of the liability.

    • Question - Who executes the withholding function? The ultimate executor should be pinpointed from all the officials involved. Signatories to the withholding document are not responsible for the two actions, namely withholding and remittance.

    • Answer - all the three are jointly and severally responsible for the requirement as a team.

    • Will the terms used be generic or specific?

    • The reference to Revenue Memorandum 70-98 should thus be removed

    • It is not the municipal accountant who prepares the voucher for the withholding taxes but the municipal treasurer. However, practices vary from one municipality to another.

    • The provision should begin as follows: "The local government unit shall . . ."

    Issue 6: Update of current fair market valuation

    • The requirement is too burdensome and one suggestion would be for the report to be given on two occasions - 1) when there is a revision and 2) upon request.

    Issue 7. PTRs

    • There is a need to clarify whether these professionals are board passers or not, but taxes still have to be paid regardless of the distinction

    • The definition of professionals is based on board passage; LGUs only have professional listings, and it is not possible for them to provide information on professionals’ annual gross receipts

    • Suggest the inclusion of professional and occupational taxes (to conform with income tax filing) on the bases of gross receipts; professional persons’ permits to operate is a different matter

    Issue 9.

    • Include all other reminders of information as suggested by ULAP

    Issue 10.

    • The certificates are required of LGUs handling agency franchises in gaming, mini-hydro operation, etc.

    Issue 12. Access to records.

    • Can BIR divulge information on individual taxpayers records? This is not possible as this violates Section 270 of the tax code as amended. Otherwise, the BIR could be criminally charged and convicted. Even without the MOA, the BIR could compel LGUs, private agencies or individuals to submit pertinent taxation records.

    • In cases where LGUs need information to verify the accuracy of submitted gross receipts, the BIR should certify the veracity of the records if it could not divulge information.

    • Exception can be taken through the intercession of the President or pertinent courts of law. Reword the provision to the effect that information may be obtained by LGUs subject to limitations of the Tax Code.

    • On their part, LGUs cannot divulge information on taxpayer information without the sanction of the taxpayer concerned.

    2. DILG Provisions

    The Whereas Portion should indicate that DILG should assist the BIR in effecting compliance with BIR rules and regulations.

    Issue 3.

    • Clarification of DILG role in the declaration of economic zones is no longer necessary as a pertinent circular has been issued citing this function. Portion deleted.

    BIR Provisions

    Issue 1. IRA

    • The BIR is still instituting deductions from the IRA. Over the last few years since the Code was enacted, there were items that were already deducted. The formula is clearly "in accordance with provisions in the LGC. . ." When the language of the law is that unequivocal, there is no other interpretation. Beforehand, there was no physical segregation of funds or that a certain amount of funds were so deducted - the law refers exclusively to the actual collection. By executive fiat, this could be amended. ULAP has a pending resolution to this effect with the DOJ.

    Issue 2. Computation of tax certificates

    • On 2% of 5% gross income in the operation of local economic zones, LGUs should be furnished information on the entitlements. The province of Laguna was deprived of its legitimate share from the RPT in once case. A ruling should emanate from the DOF or PEZA on this matter.

    • The law itself is general and does not identify the recipients of the share.

    • The DOF has jurisdiction over the real property valuation in economic zones - the RPT is a provincial tax, but the 2% goes only to the municipalities, waiving the right of the provincial governments.

    • In the case of Subic and Clark, continguous municipalities should share in the proceeds of the RPT but the BIR was in no position to identify these municipalities.

    • Under RA 7227, the PEZA law was amended dividing the total 5% into: 3% to the BIR, 2% to the city or municipality concerned.

    • In a joint circular with PEZA, only lands owned by developers are taxable; those exempted by previous law will continue to be exempt.

    Issue 3. CTC

    • Laguna previously used to collect Php2 for every Php5,000 but now, the bases is the current value of real property which can be cumbersome.

    • A recommendation for a return to the assessed value system should be made

    Include as a BIR function the following

    • The BIR should immediately notify LGUs concerned of the early remittance amounts or issue reminders to taxpayers on consequences of late remittances.

    • BIR campaigns are limited to announcements on the tax calendar.

    • Include DOF, BIR, DILG, and the leagues in D, items 2 and 3

    The Memorandum of Agreement, as amended is attached to this proceedings as Annex 1.

    Speech of the Keynote Speaker Secretary Jose T. Pardo

    delivered by Asst. Secretary Gil Beltran

    Department of Finance

    This partnership is an expression of commitment by various agencies to the ideals of taxation. Revenue tax collection has played a significant role in the development of economies. Tax administration has to be shouldered by all offices of government that should oversee the faithful compliance of tax laws. Government should be the first to observe these laws.

    This is a period of emerging partnerships between the BIR and government entities. Collaborative efforts should continue to be undertaken. The urgent economic situation makes it imperative for everyone to take immediate action. The Memorandum of Agreement is commendable and indicative of the success of tax administration.

    MOA Signing

    It was agreed that a date be set for the signing of the MOA at the office of the Secretary of Finance.

    Closing

    There being no other business to transact, the conference was adjourned.