Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 61 views

    Valentino Tio Vs Videogram, Regulatory Board GR No. L-75697 June 18, 1987

    Uploaded by

    anjo020025
    Valentino Tio challenged the constitutionality of a 30% tax on gross receipts imposed on the videogram industry by the Videogram Regulatory Board. Tio argued the tax was harsh and an unlawful restraint of trade in violation of due process. However, the court upheld the tax, finding it was imposed for the public purpose of regulating the video industry, curbing rampant film piracy, and protecting property and moral rights. The court reiterated that the state has inherent power to select subjects of taxation and singling out a particular class does not violate constitutional limitations, as taxation can be used to implement the state's police power.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    You might also like

    Valentino Tio Vs Videogram, Regulatory Board GR No. L-75697 June 18, 1987

    Uploaded by

    anjo020025
    61 views1 page
    Valentino Tio challenged the constitutionality of a 30% tax on gross receipts imposed on the videogram industry by the Videogram Regulatory Board. Tio argued the tax was harsh and an unlawful restraint of trade in violation of due process. However, the court upheld the tax, finding it was imposed for the public purpose of regulating the video industry, curbing rampant film piracy, and protecting property and moral rights. The court reiterated that the state has inherent power to select subjects of taxation and singling out a particular class does not violate constitutional limitations, as taxation can be used to implement the state's police power.

    Original Description:

    Original Title

    2

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Valentino Tio challenged the constitutionality of a 30% tax on gross receipts imposed on the videogram industry by the Videogram Regulatory Board. Tio argued the tax was harsh and an unlawful restraint of trade in violation of due process. However, the court upheld the tax, finding it was imposed for the public purpose of regulating the video industry, curbing rampant film piracy, and protecting property and moral rights. The court reiterated that the state has inherent power to select subjects of taxation and singling out a particular class does not violate constitutional limitations, as taxation can be used to implement the state's police power.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    61 views1 page

    Valentino Tio Vs Videogram, Regulatory Board GR No. L-75697 June 18, 1987

    Uploaded by

    anjo020025
    Valentino Tio challenged the constitutionality of a 30% tax on gross receipts imposed on the videogram industry by the Videogram Regulatory Board. Tio argued the tax was harsh and an unlawful restraint of trade in violation of due process. However, the court upheld the tax, finding it was imposed for the public purpose of regulating the video industry, curbing rampant film piracy, and protecting property and moral rights. The court reiterated that the state has inherent power to select subjects of taxation and singling out a particular class does not violate constitutional limitations, as taxation can be used to implement the state's police power.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    14.

    VALENTINO TIO VS VIDEOGRAM, REGULATORY BOARD


    GR no. L-75697 June 18, 1987
    It is the inherent power to tax that the state be free to select the subjects of taxation and it has been
    repeatedly held that “inequities which result from a singling out of one particular class for taxation or
    exemption infringe no constitutional limitation. Taxation has been made the implement of the state’s
    police power.
    Facts:
    This petition was filed by petitioner on his own behalf and purportedly on behalf of other videogram
    operators affected. It assails the constitutionality of presidential decree no 1987 entitled “an act creating
    the videogram regulatory board” with broader powers to regulate and supervise the videogram industry.
    In the said act, it imposes a tax of 30% in gross receipts payable to the local government. The petitioner
    stated that that the tax is harsh and unlawful restraint of trade violation of due process clause of the
    Constitution.
    Issue : Whether the 30% tax is unlawful?
    Held:
    No, the levy of the 30% tax is for public purpose. It was imposed primarily to answer the need for
    regulating the video industry, particularly the rampant film piracy, the flagrant violation of property rights
    and the proliferation of pornographic video tapes. It is also an objective of the decree to protect the movie
    industry. It is the inherent power to tax that the state be free to select the subjects of taxation and it has
    been repeatedly held that “inequities which result from a singling out of one particular class for taxation
    or exemption infringe no constitutional limitation. Taxation has been made the implement of the state’s
    police power.

    You might also like