Chapter 6

The Philippine Constitution

Overview
Majority of independent states
has a constitution. Such states or
countries thus, adopts the principle
of constitutionalism. Constitution
and constitutionalism are two terms
which are deemed alike but are
different in a sense. Yet, both are
similar with the intent of adoption by
the state. Constitution is the basic
law and the backbone of the
country. The Philippines, United
States of America, Canada and
most of the modern states have
versions of their constitution.
Borgeaud (1892) described the term
constitution as the fundamental
law from which the government of a
state is Source: www,rappler.com
organized, and agreeably to which
the relations of individuals or moral person to the community are determined.
Hence, as an official document which contains provisions, the structure of the
government and its political institutions are designed and established through
this basic document. Moreover, it serves to set out regulations and limits for
the government and citizens.
By adopting the principle of constitutionalism, the state recognizes the
need to limit the power of the government (in opposition to authoritarianism) in
order to protect the individual and collective rights and freedom of the people
therein. Hence, when giving importance to this document, every citizen of the
Philippines is expected to be protected by what 1987 Constitution provides.
Similarly, the former President Corazon C. Aquino issued Proclamation No.
211 of 1988 declaring February 2 of every year as the Constitution Day.
Tracing the development of the Constitution is the same with mapping the
national ideals of the country according to Malcolm (1920). As one of the
dignified Associate Justices in the Supreme Court during the American
occupation, his work Constitutional History of the Philippines provides an
impressive description of the historical development of Philippine Constitution
from their first colonizer until its successor.
Malcolm (1920) opined that the Constitution is the prime cause of the rise
of Filipino’s liberalism and nationalism. Even more important, Malcolm said
that “the growth of Constitution reaches back to a remote past and proceeds
therefrom to an intensely active present.” Hence, what kind of basic law that
Filipinos have at present is either influenced or product of what we had in the
past. In this regard, Malcolm further said that the institution of two countries:
Spain and US have the most influenced to the constitutional development of
Philippine constitution. But it is noteworthy to look into Malcolm’s observation
of the capacity of the Filipinos to add these influences to their indigenous life
and customs which were remained untouched by the foreign contact.
To support this claim, during this period when a number of state papers
and ideal constitutions were prepared by Filipinos. Noteworthy to mention are
the Cartilla and Sanggunian Hukuman, the charter and code of Laws and
Morals of the Katipunan of Emilio Jacinto (1896); the Provisional constitution
of Biak na Bato by Artemio Artacho (1897); a constitution for the islands of
Luzon that was promulgated by Gen. Makabulos; the Constitutional Program
of the Philippine Republic of Apolinario Mabini; a Provisional Constitution
prepared by Mariano Ponce (1898) on the request of Aguinaldo and the
Autonomy projects which were advanced by Pedro Paterno (1898). All of
these, he stated, contributed the evolution of a more important document, the
Malolos Constitution, which the work principally was made by Felipe Calderon.
It is true that the general outline of these documents was naturally based from
Spanish constitution simply because these were the only documents with
which the Filipinos then had familiarity (Malcolm, 1921).
However, the American jurist emphasized that even though Spanish and
American influences emerged in the formulation, amendment and construction
of Filipino’s own constitution, Philippine nationalism would still continuously
stand out for these influences will be rejected due to incompatibilities.
Because Malcolm believed that the outward form may change, but the inward
thought would not.

1899 Malolos Constitution

Regarded as the first significant Filipino document ever produced by the
people’s representatives, the 1899 Malolos Constitution served as the
fundamental law of the first Philippine Republic from 1898 to 1901. A
testament that Filipinos have the capacity to map their own course along with
democratic lines. It was adopted by the Revolutionary Congress (Malolos
Congress) in November 1898 in the village of Barasoain near the city of
Malolos, Bulacan. President Emilio Aguinaldo approved it on December 23,
1898 and promulgated on January 21, 1899.
However, because of the war launched by the Americans in February 1899
and the subsequent invasion of the Philippines, the Malolos Constitution had
never become widely effective. Even though, it left an indelible mark on the
consciousness of the Filipinos especially when its provisions relating to civil
rights were adopted when Americans govern the country through laws.
Nevertheless, this Constitution, from the words of Malcolm (1921) “is
principally of academic interest as a phase of Philippine constitutional
development and as an indication of a Filipino conception of democratic
institutions.” The Malolos Constitution, he claimed, was by no means an
entirely original creation of Filipinos. Hence, so much pride and nationalism
were sensed with President Emilio Aguinaldo words when he promulgated and
ordered that this constitution “should be kept, complied with and executed in
all its parts because it is the sovereign will of the Filipino people” (Malcolm,
1921).
1935 Constitution
The Constitution was enforced as the fundamental law of the Philippines
from 1935 to 1972. This was written in 1934, established the Commonwealth
of the Philippines (1935-1946) and later used by the Third Republic (1946-
1972). The Constitution was written to ensure that United States of America
would live up to its commitment to grant the Philippines independence. As
stated in Section 10 that upon the expiration of the transition period, the
President is directed to “withdraw and surrender all rights of possession,
supervision, jurisdiction, control or sovereignty then existing and exercised by
the US in and over the territory and people of the Philippine Islands….”
Moreover, from the popular sovereignty established by the first
Constitution, according to Kalaw (1935), it was not surprising that the
Commonwealth constitution should provide that the state shall be a republican
state, where sovereignty must also reside in the people, and that from the
people all government authority emanates. In fact, when it provided for a
presidential system, he added, it showed the impact and permanence of
American institutions.
The Constitution had been subjected to two events of amendments: 1940
and 1947. Hence, it was said that the Constitution was the best-written
Philippine charter ever (Kalaw, 1935).

1973 Constitution
In accordance with President Ferdinand Marcos’ Proclamation No 1102,
the 1973 Constitution was ratified on January 17, 1973. It was written by the
1971 Constitutional Convention on December 1972 deemed ratified by the
Citizen’s Assembly held on January 10 to 15 1973.
One of the most most important event in the history that paved the way for
enforcing this constitution was the Martial Law that was declared by President
Marcos citing a growing number of insurgency as its justification. He was
about to end his second and last term in 1973 as provided by the 1935
Constitution but the new promulgated constitution eventually prolongs his
term. Through the Constitutional Convention, the drafting of the Constitution
allowed him to remain in the position until 1978.
Even after Martial Law was lifted in 1981, Pres Marcos continued to rule by
the convenience of being ‘re-elected’ to a six-year term. However, a continued
dissent was matched by thousands of vocal oppositions that paved the way to
more serious events of which the most important was the 1986 EDSA
Revolution which eventually ousted Pres. Marcos and brought the widow of
former Senator Benigno Aquino, Corazon C. Aquino, as the successor.

1987 Constitution
According to Teodoro Locsin Jr., former statesman and spokesman of
President Corazon C. Aquino, the 1973 Constitution was never ratified
believing that the process conducted by the former President Marcos was met
by strong oppositions. After the Snap Election which brought Aquino into
Presidency (along with Pres Marcos declaration of his victory from the said
election), Pres Aquino had no other option but to start anew and break from
the ‘vestiges of a disgraced dictatorship’ (Gavilan, 2016).

President
Corazon Aquino
addresses the
1986
Constitutional
Commission
during its
inaugural
session. Source:
Official Gazette;
rappler. com)

Hence, through Proclamation No. 9 that created 1986 Constitutional

Commission (ConCom), this body was tasked the drafting of a replacement for
the 1973 Constitution. Comprising of 48 individuals who represented all
sectors in the country and headed by Justice Cecilia Munoz-Palma (the first
woman appointed to the Supreme Court in 1973), the draft was approved in
on October 12, 1986 after more or less 111 days of deliberation. Thereafter,
the 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines was presented to
President Corazon C. Aquino on October 15, 1986. It was ratified on February
2, 1987 by a plebiscite. It was proclaimed in force on February 11, 1987.
Conclusion

As Filipinos trace the development of their sense of national ideals, it must be

along with discovering how Filipinos come up and designed their Constitutions
(Malcolm, 1920). The famous American jurist testified that the Constitution is
the principal cause of developing Filipinos’ liberalism and nationalism. The
Philippine Constitution, he believed, is either influenced or product of what
Filipinos had in the past. In this sense, the institution of two conquerors of the
island, Spain and US, are the most influential. But, he also emphasized that
Philippine nationalism would still continuously stand out from these influences
as Filipino leaders were able to reject significant incompatibilities. Thus, he
said, “the outward form may changed, but the inward thought would not.”
Consequently, these concept of liberalism and nationalism are reflected in the
Philippine Constitutions: 1935 Constitution, 1973 Constitution and 1987
Constitution. However, the development and evolution of the state similarly
are continuously observed. As there are several attempts on amending or
revising the present Constitution, Filipinos are likewise being challenged to
retain the previously recognized sense of liberalism and nationalism if there
could be success on this move.
 Chapter 7
Agrarian Reform Policies

Overview
As an agricultural-based
country, there are agrarian
reform measures in the
Philippines which are meant
for agricultural and rural
development in place. In
fact, the Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Program
(CARP), since its
implementation in 1988, has
regarded the country to have
the longest-led land reform
programs (Stevenson,
2012).

Source: Zamora’s Editorial Cartoons

With the mandate of redistributing private and public lands to peasant

beneficiaries, the CARP was then extended in 2009 after having mixed results
after its expiration in 2008. Eventually known as CAPER (CARP with
Extension and Reforms), it expired in 2014, and still evaluated to be far from
accomplished in its intended goal as about 20 percent of its mandated
domains are not yet redistributed (Stevenson, 2012). Thus, the question is
what’s next with the program?
Agrarian justice is an important thrust of the government since it is one of
the major sectors where majority of Filipino workers are poorly compensated.
Recorded injustices in land ownership and tenancy relations brought by
historical distortions in land distribution paved the way for program of agrarian
reform. Hence, from early 1900s to the present, the program has been the
main strategy of the government to resolve these deformities (Ballesteros et
al., 2017).
Historically, the periods of colonization undeniably made the Filipinos suffer
from different abusive conditions as the agricultural lands were taken either
forcibly or administratively by the colonial authorities. During the pre-Spanish
era, Filipinos used to enjoy every fruit of their labor since landownership was
communal as the land was owned by the barangay (village). By being
communal, no private ownership prevailed hence Filipinos then had rights to
till the land and both the tiller and the land, became productive. But as
Spaniards started to grant titles to private individuals and church (friar lands)
through encomienda system, this eventually led to accumulation of the land by
local elites in connivance with the Spanish authorities (Olano, 2006).
On the other hand, the grant of Americans to Filipinos’ long-fought
Independence in 1946, brought them laws in order to improve the lives of the
farmers. Stevenson (2012) points out that the context of agrarian reform
begins decisively with the colonial control of US from the end of 19 th Century.
However, the problems of land tenure remained (Frufonga et al, 2016). More
serious contests over land are found in certain rural areas demonstrated by
peasants against the landowners. This is because United States instituted a
landed oligopoly and cash crop export economy (Stevenson, 2012) that was
significantly found in the sugar industry.
As the Philippine Republic commenced, every President had presented
their own version of agrarian reform program. Most notably and a precursor of
the prevailing agrarian reform program started in the 1960s, during President
Diosdado Macapagal’s administration. The enactment of Agricultural Land
Reform Code of 1963 (RA 3844) regarded the President, in fact as the “Father
of Agrarian Reform”. The law is believed to be the most comprehensive ever
enacted that time as it emphasized the following provisions (Ballesteros et al.,
2017):
“Operation Leasehold (OLH)--which was to convert share tenancy to
leashold with the fixed 25 percent of the average harvest in the three normal
years preceding the Operation;
“Operation Land Transfer (OLT)--which provided for the compulsory
acquisition of private lands (individuals and corporate farms).
Republic Act 3844 was further strengthened by the Agrarian Code of 1972
(PD27) under President Ferdinand Marcos’ administration. Ballesteros et al
(2017) described that PD27 and RA 3844 decreed the same in terms of share
tenancy abolition and institution of leasehold; and decreasing the ceiling on
agricultural landownership to 75 hectares (RA3844) and further to 7 hectares
under PD27.
Unfortunately, according to Bellesteros et al. (2017), the 1963 Agrarian
Code has limited effect to the target beneficiaries because of the insufficient
funding provided by the government for the distribution of land. The budget
that was allocated for land distribution was less than P1.0M intended to four
years (Ballesteros et al., 2017; Putzel, 1990) While PD27 Moreover, due to the
the absence of sustained political will among the implementors as well as
resistance from the landowners, partial impact on various initiated programs
were only obtained.
The most promising enactment after President Marcos is the ratified by his
successor, President Corazon C. Aquino on June 10, 1988, otherwise known
as Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL) or RA6657. This is in
response to the mandate of the 1987 Constitution that regard agrarian reform
as the centerpiece program. Though the previous Constitutions of 1935 and
1973 also mandated policies for social justice and agrarian reform program
respectively, the 1987 enshrined more specific provisions (Frufonga et al.,
2016). These are stipulated in the following provisions:
Article II, Sec. 21: "The State shall promote comprehensive rural
development and agrarian reform."
Article XII, Sec. 21: "State shall promote industrialization and full employment
based on sound agricultural development and agrarian reform, . . ."
Article XIII, Sec. 4: “The state shall, by law, undertake an agrarian reform
program founded on the right of farmers and regular farm workers, who are
landless, to own directly or collectively the lands they till or in the case of other
farm workers, to receive a just share of fruits thereof.”
The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) and its Extension
It was three decades ago when the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program
(CARP) was introduced. This was supported by Republic Act No. 6657 (RA
6657) or also known as the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL) of
1988. The law is considered to be an improvement over the previously
implemented laws as it covers all agricultural lands regardless of the crops
produced (Olaya, 2016).
Similarly, Ballesteros et. al. (2017) described this as an expansion version
of earlier land reform programs as it included both distributive and
redistributive programs. While post war land reform was mainly development
program--involves the distribution of alienable and disposable public
agricultural lands, CARL is centered on the redistributive program--
redistribution of private lands and regulation of tenancy in private lands
(Ballesteros et al., 2017). CARL, moreover, adopted the UN definition of land
reform which considers “an integrated program of measures designed to
eliminate obstacles to economic and social development due to defects in the
agrarian structure” (UN Progress in Land Reform, 1990). From this view,
CARL has the triple goals of equity/social justice, improvement of farming
efficiency and poverty reduction (Ballesteros et al., 2017).
More specifically, the CARL provides that:
“The welfare if the landless and farmworkers will receive the highest
consideration to promote social justice and to move the nation toward sound
rural development and industrialization.”
It also mandates that:
“a more equitable distribution and ownership of lad, with due regard to the
rights of landowners to just compensation and to the ecological needs of the
nation, shall be undertaken to provide farmers and farmworkers with the
opportunity to enhance their dignity and improve the quality of their of their
lives through greater productivity of agricultural lands.”
In addition, the CARP land distribution mechanism was anchored from the
two previous laws, RA3844 and PD27. It emphasizes the reform system of
combined land tenancy regulation, redistribution of private lands and disposal
of public lands. But more importantly, CARP has more comprehensive
coverage-- that provides support services to beneficiaries and considered the
principle of “just compensation” and other incentives to landowners to facilitate
land reform process (Ballesteros et al., 2017). Implementable for a period of
ten (10) years, from June 1988 to Juneo1998, the program was funded of Php
50B.
By the end of 1997, according to Tañada (2006), barely 50 percent of the
lands targeted for distribution had been awarded to tenant farmer and
farmworkers. And in the belief that CARP is significantly important, the
Congress enacted RA 8532 for the purpose of extending the program for
another 10 years and allocating another Php 50B. Thus, expected to have it
completed by 2008.
 However, as early as 2000, the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR)
reported that the program would be needing additional fund based on the
agency’s thorough analysis of CARP financial requirement. Tañada stated
(2006) in his speech “in the light of rising land prices and the increasing
amounts that the Land Bank of the Philippines was ordered by the Special
Agrarian Courts to pay the landowners, as much as Php1M per hectare in the
case of banana plantations, DAR realized that the program needed not just
P100 billion that have so far been appropriated for it under RA657 and
RA8532, but more than twice that amount or a total of more than P200B”.
Clearly, the program needed not just additional funds but also additional
period for its full and complete implementation. Hence, with the signing into
law by Pres Gloria Arroyo of RA 9700 or CARP with Extension and Reform
(CARPER) that is designed to run or five (5) more years or until 2014 with
fund allocation amounting to Php 150B took in effect.
Thirty years (30) after CARPER’s implementation, Ballesteros et al (2017)
paper presented that in terms of area covered and number of target
beneficiaries, the program had significantly accomplished. It stated that the
said program accomplished 70 percent of its estimated non-owner cultivated
agricultural land and 54 percent of total farming households. However, there is
also evidence that program has been poorly targeted in terms of areas
covered and beneficiaries.
The government spent an average amounted to Php 286M or an annual
average of Php 9.87 B from 1987 to 2016. But the study revealed that the
program would needing Php 73 B to Php123 B to completely accomplish the
distribution.
Issues against CARPER has been raised which most of them come from
the supposed beneficiaries of the program. Hacienda Luisita, the 4,916-
hectare owned by the Cojuangcos, particularly has not been completely
distributed among 6,000 farmer-beneficiaries as Supreme Court issued its
final and executory. This delay prompted the SC, according to Panaligan news
report (2017) in Manila Bulletin, to order Department of Agrarian Reform
(DAR) officials to explain the failure to implement its 2011 decision that
mandated its actual distribution.
Similarly, a report published in 2015 by the collaborative work of different
organizations (ANGOC, CARRD, JJCICSI, KAISAHAN, AR, Now!) identified
some of the following issues, namely:
CARP areas that have not been issued with NOCs before June 30, 2014
Landowner resistance
Conflicting claims resulting from informal land transfers, policy gaps,
disregarded landholdings by a single landowner, and conflicting land use.
Distorted accomplishment reports on LAD
Agrarian conflicts and second-generation issues brought by the issuance of
collective CLOA
In this lieu, why House Bill No. 4926 or An Act Mandating the Completion
of the LAD Component of CARP pursuant to RA 6657 was proposed and still
pending in the Congress which intends to address the gaps identified.
Guide Questions
1. Do agrarian reform programs effective enough in the holistic
development of its target beneficiaries in the agriculture sector?
2. Are you in favor for CARPER’s implementation? If yes, how can it be
improved? If not, are there better programs in mind than CARPER?
3. Are you for or against with the proposed law to extend DAR’s
issuance of Notices of Coverage (NOCs)?

Conclusion

Agrarian reform policies and programs that are in place are traceable from
the injustices way back Spanish colonization. Filipinos in pre-colonial era used
to enjoy every fruit of their labor since landownership was communal as the
land was owned by the barangay (village). But the periods of colonization
undeniably made the Filipinos suffer from different abusive conditions as the
agricultural lands were taken either forcibly or administratively by the colonial
authorities. While Spaniards initiated this through the encomienda system,
Americans on the other hand had land tenure policies which resulted to
olipolistic and cash crop export economy and raised serious contests over
land in certain areas.
But as the Philippine Republic commenced, every President had adopted
and implemented different versions of agrarian reform program. Most notably
was in 1960s under President Diosdado Macapagal when Agricultural Land
Reform Code of 1963 (RA 3844) was enacted. This was followed by Agrarian
Code of 1972 (PD27) under President Ferdinand Marcos’ administration and
the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) or RA 6657 in 1998
during Pres. Corazon Aquino. Since implementation of CARP, it has regarded
the country to have the longest-led land reform programs (Stevenson, 2012).
But as it expired in 2014 and the targeted goals are not fully and completely
achieved, deliberations for HB 2646 in the Congress leads the supposed
beneficiaries seemingly hopeless. Findings from different studies conducted
had evaluated the effectiveness of the program and identified certain issues
related to CARPER.
Finally, in deciding such, the government must at all times put priority on
assuring agrarian justice, where majority of the Filipino workers are poorly
compensated and land conflict disputes made them at the most depressing
situations, particularly in rural remote areas.
 Chapter 8
Taxation

Overview
“There is no other way the
government can raise money for the
needs of the Filipino people except
through taxes”, this is a quoted
insight of President Rogrigo Duterte
from Education Secretary Leonor
Briones, a former national treasurer,
which aids the calls from different
sectors on suspending the newly
imposed tax reform law or also
known as TRAIN (Tax Reform for
acceleration and Inclusion or RA
10963) law. It was signed on
December 19, 2017 and aimed to
reduce personal income tax rates
but raise the excise tax on
petroleum products and
automobiles and sugar-sweetened (Source: e-taxhelpzambia.com)
beverages. Thus, the alleged adverse
effect on
the recent increase in petroleum products prices prompted the move for the
suspension of the TRAIN (Lopez, 2018). On the other hand, the President
justifies by pointing out the importance of taxes in order to fund his
administration’s social programs like the free education in pursuance with the
implementation of the Free Higher Education Law (RA 10931).
Taxes are the life-force of every government. It serves as the backbone
and fundamental tool to attain economic stability. Taxes primordial purpose is
to accumulate funds and resources to promote the welfare of the general
public by means of government programs and projects. Without taxes, the
government cannot sustain nor fulfill its mandate towards the public since no
financial resources can support its legitimate and necessary expenses. Danug
(2004) explains that the government would be paralyzed for lack of motive
power to activate and operate it. This is why taxation regards as one of the
inherent power of the state to demand or enforced contributions for public
purpose or purpose from the people (De Leon, 2012).
Historically, coming up with an effective reform program has been the goal
of taxation. Sanciano y Goson (1881) believed that reforming the financial
system in the country has long been felt and demanded as every day the
country requires more public services since its population increases. As taxes
are implied obligations and responsibility of every citizens, looking forward to
its intended benefits could encourage their religious participation and
contribution. Since Spanish colonization, early inhabitants were supposed to
adhere on its purpose, just as how Sanciano y Goson (1881) stated on his
proposal for financial reform, to wit:
 “Why would those people (Filipinos) refuse to pay for services exclusively
for their own welfare? Would they prefer these evils to the establishment of
public services so necessary to them in their present condition if that have to
give a part of their earnings to maintain them? Would not any one indeed
pays that tax in proportion to his earnings if at least he could travel
comfortably within the Islands confident that his person and interests were
safe?”

In this sense, taxes are what the public contribute for civilized social order.
It is mandatory for everyone to contribute in order to raise revenue for building
the nation. People are expected to believe and trust how the government
manage every contribution of the people and that its intended benefits satisfy
the basic need of the public such as education, health, infrastructure and other
social services. Taxes are also sources for government personnel’s salaries.
However, not all members of the public are fully aware of their essential duty
as well as the purpose of taxation. The issues about the unending practices of
graft and corruption which challenges the implementors are still evident
nowadays. Hence, the need of a developmental study of taxes from the
archaic ages to present times is important to understand.

Development of Taxation in the Philippines: Pre-colonial to Present

Pre-colonial to Spanish Occupation

In the course history, the development of taxation through time differ in
terms of its nature, types, collections, payment and penalty. In the pre-
colonial era, it was evidently established that Filipino society already had a
civilized system of administration and one of these is through the indigenous
concept of taxation. Early Filipinos living in barangay give their share to the
datu, the local chieftain. It is religiously presented through their contributions
called ‘handog’ or ‘alay’ (offer). This has been regarded as a customary
practice as a sign of early Filipinos involvement and support to the barangay,
their government (Dery, 2006).

The indigenous concept was later changed after the occupation of the
Spaniards. According to Wolters (1983), the study of Spanish taxation system
has great difficulties due to unreliability of official publication; strong political
controversies in 19th century Spanish politics; contradictions of Spanish
administrative laws; and intensive political unrest and rivalries in the mother
country. But what is often observed, the local elites actively collaborated and
mediated with the Spaniards which is attributed to the establishment of
Spanish colonial government in the archipelago. Plehn (1901) stated that the
original basis of the revenue system was the responsibility of the native
chieftains, the former datus, serving as cabezas de barangay for the taxes
levied against the people in the newly structured communities (Wolters, 1983).
Remuneration for the services was not adequately provided but was justified
on the supposition that cabezas can still claim revenues from their
constituents by virtue of their position as a natural leader (Plehn, 1901).
Taxation in the colony was purposively for the maintenance of the state
apparatus wherein military forces received the large share and small amount
for development purpose.

Until 1987, there were no compilation of decrees, royal orders and the like
relating to taxation. If published, it was usually done by posting in public
building using Spanish, which was difficult to be understood by the Filipinos
(Plehn, 1901).

Plehn (1901) identifies six (6) general heading of the revenues in the
insular budgets:
1. Direct taxes (contribuciones directas) including the personal and
income tax.
2. Indirect taxes (contribuciones indirectas) or the custom duties
3. The monopolies (rentas estancadas) including at various times the
stamp taxes and the sale of quicksilver, salt, playing cards, corrosive
sublimate, gunpowder, spirituous liquors, tobacco and opium
4. Lotteries
5. Public domain (bienes de estado)
6. Miscellaneous and indeterminate revenues (ingresos eventuales)

Tribute paid by the natives commenced in the Philippines right after the
conquest headed by Miguel Lopez de Legaspi and continued until 1884. This
is one of the provisions of the laws of the Indies dating originally from 1523,
which reads (Plehn, 1901):

Since it is a just and reasonable thing, that the Indians, who may be pacified,
and reduced to obedience and vassalage to Us, should render tribute in
recognition of our sovereignty, and should give such services as out subjects
and vassals owe, and as, moreover, they have established among themselves
the custom of paying tribute to their chiefs, we command that they be
persuaded to aid us with tribute, in such moderate amount of the fruits of the
earth, as may from time to time be required by law. (Recopilacion de Leyes
de los Reynos de las Indiasor Recopilacion de las Indias)

Wolters (1983) supported this and distinguished the following types of

taxes during Spanish period:

1. Direct taxes--one of the earliest levies of the Spanish Crown upon their
colonial subjects which was originally a vassalage payment (Priestly,
1916). This was levied on natives, including mestizos (capitacion personal
de Chinos for Chinese).
The unit assessment was the household. Exempted from paying
tributes are:
 Alcaldes
 Gobernadores and cabezas de barangay (or the principalia) and their
sons
 Members of the government officials
  Paupers

Aside from the above-mentioned, Spaniards resident in the islands were

also exempted which proposed to be abolished by Sanciano y Goson
(1881). Being known as first Filipino economist during the Spanish rule,
Goson lobbied for termination of of all class distinctions and instead to
establish proportional equality, that is just and equitable in the exaction of
every tax with consideration of different conditions and capacities of the
taxpayers.
The rate, known as ‘one tribute’, was originally 8 silver reales for each
family or their equivalent, 25 reales de vellon, equal to 1/4 pesos. And
subsequently (1851) to 12 reales fuertes or 1 1/2 pesos (Plehn, 1901). In
1953, tribute was to be paid in kind that led later on to greater food
production. This prevailed during the 17th century. Chicken, rice, coconut
oil and wine were the common goods used for payment Cushner, 1971).
This, according to Wolters (1983) reflects the predominance of a
subsistence economy and the absence of any monetary exchange.
The tribute system was repealed in 1884 and replaced by a graduated
poll tax (or capitacion, head tax). It was collected by means of certificate of
identification or known as cedula personal which requires every resident to
obtain. It has to be carried along even while traveling; a sort of license to
exists and to do business as Elliott (1916) describe. While the tribute was
imposed on households, the cedula was imposed on individuals. According
to Plehn (1901), 16 different classes of cedulas were imposed by
Spaniards according to income category; the highest category paying
37.50 pesos while peasants were paying 1.50 pesos. The system was
believed to be relatively heavy for those in the lowest category and light for
the richer people although it was progressive. Being so, it became the
main source of the income of the government during the last decades of
the Spanish colonial government.

2. Indirect taxes--the tariff laws was developed during the second half of the
19th century. Except for tobacco monopoly, Spain did not have a well-
developed industry for its products neither engage in productive
enterprises on a large scale. The situation, according to Plehn (1901) was
developed by the middle of the century wherein Spanish ships had nearly
all the imports while most of the exports were transported by foreign
vessels. Thus, taxes were in the form of customs duties which were
imposed on imports and exports.

3. Monopolies and lotteries--Taxes on the sale on stamped paper,

manufacture and sale of liquor, and cockpits and opium were monopolies
where Spanish colonial government drew its income. But the most important
of the state monopolies, according to Plehn (1901) was the tobacco which
was introduced in 1781 and abolished in 1882. In this system , the
government identified districts for compulsory cultivation of tobacco,
purchasing of the entire crop at a price determined by the authorities and
sold by its agencies.
4. Labor services--As provided in the Spanish colonial policy, natives have to
render compulsory labor. The skirmishes and encounters in the Southeast
Asian as a result of Hispano-Dutch war in the first half of 17 th century,
required Spanish government in the Philippines to reinforce its naval
defense. This eventually imposed male Filipinos to provide labor for
woodcutting and shipbuilding through the polo system which was organized
by the alcalde mayor of the province. According to Plehn (1901), the burden
of the polo and other levies against the Filipinos have been so heavy that
brought increase in the death rate and the flight to the mountains. It could be
redeemed by paying an annual fee (fallas) of 3 pesos per annum which is to
be collected by the municipal officials.

The system became lighter during the first half of the 19 th century when it
was organized at the municipal level. Polistas rendered services in public
works, especially in building of roads and bridges (tanoria, one week per
year) and for night guard duties (semaneros, one week per year). before
1884, the polo obligation was 40 days a year but later on reduced to 15 days
in that year. It was observed that at the national and provincial levels,
officials were not interested in making use of these services hence, polistas
were very often seen working for private purposes like in the fields or
repairing of municipal officials’ houses.

Polo services was later called prestacion personal (personal services) in

the second half of the 19 th century. The demand for more manpower for
national defense purposes took labor away from local governments (Molters,
1983; Robles 1969).

Tax administration during the 17 th and 18th century was under the Contador
de’ Resultas (Chief Royal Accountant) which functions is similar to the
present Commissioner of Internal Revenue. Under this Spanish treasury
when the Philippines as a colony had to be subsidized from 1521 to 1821 in
the amount of P 250,000 per year because of the poor financial condition of
the Philippines that can be attributed to the poor revenue system of
collection.

American Period--Present

Plehn (1901) described that during American occupation direct taxes was
also imposed to Filipinos. But this system used by US government was the
direct taxes that they have found in operation in the Island--this is why Plehn
believed direct taxes could be traced back. Hence, the primitive tribute
provided by the law for the Indies in 1523 is the evolution of what the law for
the Indies stated.
Under US rule, the Bureau of Internal Revenue was formally organized in
1904 under the Secretary of Finance of which was initially occupied by Henry
Ide (author of the Internal Revenue of 1904). Americans adopted the
implementation of the witholding tax system through RA 690. This method of
collecting income tax upon receipt of the income resulted to the collection of
approximately 25% of the total income tax collected during the said period.
It was during President Ferdinand Marcos administration when the
National Internal Revenue Code of 1977 was promulgated and updated the
1934 Tax Code. When former President Corazon Aquino became the next
President, the value-added tax (VAT) had been the massive campaign and
became the structural reforms as stated in the 1986 Tax reform Program of
her administration. This was followed by the use of the Taxpayer Identification
Number (TIN) and the adoption of the New Payment Control System and
Simplified Net Income Taxation Scheme under the Tax Administration
Program.

Generally, the policy of taxation in the country is chiefly governed by the

1987 Philippine Constitution and three (3) Republic acts, to wit:

 That “the rule of the taxation shall be uniform and equitable” and the
“the Congress shall evolve a progressive system of taxation (Article
VI, Section 28 of 1987 Constitution)
 National Internal Revenue Code or RA No. 8424 or the Tax reform Act
of 1997 and subsequent laws amending it; the law was most recently
amended by RA 10963 or the Tax Reform for Acceleration and
Inclusion Act;
 RA No. 7160 or the Local Government Code of 1991 which provides
for the major sources of revenue for local government units (LGUs)
and those sourced from the proceeds collected by virtue of local
ordinance.

The tax imposed at the national level are collected by the Bureau of
Internal Revenue (BIR) while the local treasurer’s office collected those that
are imposed at the local level such as provincial, city, municipal and barangay.

Basics of Taxation

The Department of Finance (DOF) explains basic principle of tax system in

the country. As stated, taxes are public’s mandatory contributions to the
government as revenue sources for nation-building. People either directly of
indirectly pay their taxes according to their income and/or level of
consumption. Income tax is based on the ability-to-pay principle wherein
people with higher income should pay more while consumption tax is based
on the amount of goods and services utilized such that the more one
consumes, the higher the tax is being paid. Those Filipinos who are residing in
the country are taxed based on income they earned here and abroad. But
Filipinos residing overseas are only taxed based on their income that was
earned in the Philippines. This also applies to resident alien and non-resident
aliens in the Philippines whose tax collected are based on their income in the
country.
The figure below shows the number of taxpayers according to income bracket:

Tax payers include both compensation income earners, and self-employed and professionals. Income/sales
and tax due based on the estimates of DOF. (Source: Date from BIR:
www.dof.gov.ph/taxreform/index.php/tax101/)

Taxes are identified either direct or indirect. Direct taxes are those that are
paid from one’s income and properties. Personal and corporate incomes
taxes, property and capital taxes are examples. Indirect taxes are those that
are collected based on consumption which includes excise taxes, VAT,
percentage taxes, and documentary stamp tax (DST).

TRAIN Law: A Priority Tax Reform of Duterte’s Administration

Tax Reform for Acceleration and Inclusion or TRAIN Law is one and first of
the package of President Rodrigo Duterte’s comprehensive tax reform
program (CTRP). Department of Finance explains that the program seeks to
correct tax system deficiencies by adopting mitigating measures that are
simpler, fairer and more efficient as it live by the goal of redistributing some of
the gains to the poor.
In doing so, TRAIN law would lower and simplify personal income taxes,
estate and donor’s taxes, expanding the value-added-tax (VAT) base,
adjusting oil and automobile excise taxes and introducing excise tax on sugar-
sweetened beverages. These would eventually result to more funds in
infrastructure and social services which can eliminate extreme poverty and
lessen inequality in accessing the basic services particularly in education,
health-care and infrastructures.
The figure below shows the salient features of the TRAIN law:
Source: www.philippinecouncilorsleague.org
Conclusion

Taxes are the life-force of every government. It serves as the backbone

and fundamental tool to attain economic stability. Historically, this has been
proven along with the establishment and evolution of Philippine government.
Thus, the developmental study of taxes from the archaic ages to present times
is important to understand.
Early Filipinos during the pre-colonial era had manifested a civilized
system of administration and one of these is through the indigenous concept
of taxation where barangay datus and other local elites said to be actively
collaborated and mediated with the Spaniards which is attributed to the
establishment of Spanish colonial government in the archipelago. Taxes
during this period were differentiated into types like direct taxes, indirect taxes,
monopolies and lotteries and labor taxes (Wolters, 1983).
During American occupation direct taxes was also imposed to Filipinos
(Plehn, 1901). But this system used by US government was the direct taxes
that they have found in operation in the Island--this is why Plehn believed
direct taxes could be traced back. Hence, the primitive tribute provided by the
law for the Indies in 1523 is the evolution of what the law for the Indies stated.

As stated, taxes are public’s mandatory contributions to the government as

revenue sources for nation-building which the principle behind is legitimized
and chiefly governed by the 1987 Philippine Constitution and three (3)
Republic Acts. In this sense, why every administration initiated different tax
reform programs anchored on these contexts. The very recent of which is the
TRAIN law which pronounced to result to more funds in infrastructure and
social services, but the intended effectiveness is currently being challenged as
massive calls from different sectors are raised.
INTRAMUROS
-Latin for "within the walls"
Intramuros is also called the Walled City, and at the time of the Spanish
Empire was synonymous with the City of Manila. Other towns
and arrabales (suburbs) located beyond the walls are referred to as
"extramuros", Latin for "outside the walls".[3][4] It was the seat of government
and political power when the Philippines was a component realm of
the Spanish Empire. It was also the center of religion, education and
economy. The standard way of life in Intramuros became the standard way
of life throughout the Philippines. The Manila galleons, which sailed the
Pacific for 250 years, carried goods to and from Intramuros (Manila)
and Acapulco, Mexico.
Construction of the defensive walls was started by the Spanish imperial
government in the late 16th century to protect the city from foreign
invasions. The Walled City was originally located along the shores of
the Manila Bay, south of the entrance to Pasig River. Guarding the old city
is Fort Santiago, its citadel located at the mouth of the river. Land
reclamations during the early 20th century subsequently obscured the
walls and fort from the bay. The Battle of Manila in 1945 devastated
Intramuros. It is the place where the occupying Japanese Imperial
Army made their last stand against Allied soldiers and Filipino guerrillas.
The battle destroyed its churches, universities, houses, and government
buildings, most of which dated back to the Spanish Colonial Period.
Intramuros, particularly the Fort Santiago, was designated as a National
Historical Landmark in 1951. The fortifications of Intramuros, collectively
called "Fortifications of Manila", were declared as National Cultural
Treasures, by the National Museum of the Philippines, owing to its
architectural, scientific and archaeological significance. [5] San Agustin
Church, a UNESCO World Heritage Site under the Baroque Churches of
the Philippines, is located within Intramuros.