KAPATIRAN NG MGA NAGLILINGKOD SA PAMAHALAAN NG PILIPINAS, INC., vs. TAN

KAPATIRAN NG MGA NAGLILINGKOD SA PAMAHALAAN NG PILIPINAS, INC., vs.

TAN 

G.R. No. 81820 

June 30, 1988

FACTS: 

EO 273 was issued by the President of the Philippines on 25 July 1987, to take effect on 1 January 1988, and which amended certain sections of the National Internal Revenue Code and adopted the VAT.

The VAT is a tax levied on a wide range of goods and services. It is a tax on the value, added by every seller, with aggregate gross annual sales of articles and/or services, exceeding P200,00.00, to his purchase of goods and services, unless exempt. VAT is computed at the rate of 0% or 10% of the gross selling price of goods or gross receipts realized from the sale of services.

The VAT is said to have eliminated privilege taxes, multiple rated sales tax on manufacturers and producers, advance sales tax, and compensating tax on importations. The framers of EO 273 that it is principally aimed to rationalize the system of taxing goods and services; simplify tax administration; and make the tax system more equitable, to enable the country to attain economic recovery.

The VAT is not entirely new. It was already in force, in a modified form, before EO 273 was issued. 

Four (4) petitions, which seek to nullify E. O. No. 273 have been consolidated in this case. 

ISSUE:

Whether VAT is oppressive, discriminatory, regressive, and violates the due process and equal protection clauses and other provisions of the 1987 Constitution.

RULING:

No. EO 273 is not oppressive, discriminatory, unjust and regressive, and is not a violation of the provisions of Art. VI, sec. 28(1) of the 1987 Constitution, which states:

Sec. 28 (1) The rule of taxation shall be uniform and equitable. The Congress shall evolve a progressive system of taxation.

The SC held that petitioners" assertions in this regard are not supported by facts and circumstances to warrant their conclusions. They have failed to adequately show that the VAT is oppressive, discriminatory or unjust. Petitioners merely rely upon newspaper articles which are actually hearsay and have evidentiary value. To justify the nullification of a law, there must be a clear and unequivocal breach of the Constitution, not a doubtful and argumentative implication. 

As the Court sees it, EO 273 satisfies all the requirements of a valid tax. It is uniform. The court cited its ruling in City of Baguio vs. De Leon, were it said:

"A tax is considered uniform when it operates with the same force and effect in every place where the subject may be found."

The disputed sales tax is also equitable. It is imposed only on sales of goods or services by persons engage in business with an aggregate gross annual sales exceeding P200,000.00. Small corner sari-sari stores are consequently exempt from its application. Likewise exempt from the tax are sales of farm and marine products, spared as they are from the incidence of the VAT, are expected to be relatively lower and within the reach of the general public. 

The Court found no reason to impede its application or continued implementation.