Skip to content

8 banks ask SC to stop gov’t from imposing tax on PEACe Bonds

Let’s see how President Aquino will resolve this because it involves people who helped him in his bid for the presidency.

Lorenz Neil Santos, InterAksyon.com

Who's going to pay the tax now?
Eight banks on Monday asked the Supreme Court to stop the government from imposing a 20-percent final withholding tax on P35 billion worth of the controversial Poverty Eradication and Alleviation Certificates (PEACe) government bonds, which will mature on Tuesday, October 18.

In their 65-page petition, the banks urged the high tribunal to stop the government – particularly the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) and the Bureau of Treasury – from implementing BIR ruling 370-2011, which would impose a 20-percent final withholding tax on PEACe bonds sold in 2001.

The eight banks that filed the petition are Banco De Oro, Bank of Commerce, China Banking Corporation, Metropolitan Bank and Trust Company, Philippine Bank of Communications, Philippine National Bank, Philippine Veterans Bank and Planters Development Bank.

Petitioners said the BIR ruling that retroactively applies to the government bonds sold in 2001 is prohibited under the 1997 Tax Code “for being extremely prejudicial to the bondholders, including petitioners who relied in good faith on the BIR declaration that the bonds are exempt from final tax.”

The government, through the National Treasury, is set to pay bond holders P35 billion, including P24.3 billion in interest income or discount.

The Caucus of Development NGO networks or CODE-NGO, through Rizal Commercial Banking Corp., bought the bonds on Oct. 16, 2001 at the discounted rate of P10.17 billion and at 12.75 percent interest.

The government earlier said that it expected to collect about P4.83 billion in tax from the matured bonds.

In 2001, the Bureau of Treasury offered government bonds to the government securities eligible dealers through an auction.

The Rizal Commercial Banking Corporation won the bid and was awarded P35 billion worth of government bonds for only P10.17 billion at a yield to maturity rate of 12.75 percent that will mature on October 18. It in turn sold the bonds in the secondary markets at P11.9 billion.

The banks said they bought the bonds on assurances laid down by various BIR memoranda that the bonds shall not be subject to a 20-percent final withholding tax.

But with the recent BIR ruling, petitioners said, their constitutional rights have been violated.

“Such unilateral imposition of the 20-percent final withholding tax on the interest/discounts realized on the government bonds only on the eve of its maturity with nary any prior consultation with the petitioners and other bondholders also amounts to confiscation of the petitioners’ property without due process,” petitioners said.

Petitioners said deep and liquid capital markets are “the essential building blocks for each country’s economy, supplying the funds for economic growth and job creation.”

However, they said, the “threatened refusal of the government to pay the full face value of the Government bonds to its contractual undertaking and material representation at the time of their issuance, operates as a fraud on investors to their grave or irreparable injury or prejudice, which, in turn, adversely affects their perception of the Philippines as an investiment destination.”

Published inFinance

9 Comments

  1. MPRivera MPRivera

    singilin ng tax ang mga bank petitioners, mabayaran sila o hindi ang magpapasan ng pagbabayad niyan ay ang taong bayan din. tuwang tuwa ang mga kumitang laway at kapal lamang ng mukha ang puhunan.

    letseng gobyerno ‘yan! kahit sino ang nakaupo ay walang silbi sa dapat pagsilbihan dahil ang pinoproteksyunan ay ‘yung mga masisibang namuhunan upang maluklok ang utuutong mamumuno.

  2. Tama ka MPRivera………..kahit sinong nakaupo walang silbi……bagsak pa rin ang bansa……madami kasing mga rebelde na pasaway….

  3. Supreme Court orders TRO on 20% Peace Bond Tax.

    I knew it would come to this. The complaining banks and their clients would definitely fight this to its bitter end. How long it will take? No one knows, but the 20% tax will still not be paid until this is resolved by (oh, well) THIS Supreme Court! The 20% meanwhile is held in escrow.

    The irreparable damage this will cause the country’s image and reputation as a stable and predictable business destination further erodes the much-needed investor confidence, to say the least, and these bunglings will not help alleviate the sad state of the slow trickle of new foreign investments.

    We have been overtaken by Vietnam, but hey, Cambodia’s latest numbers suggest they are out to threaten us soon. For all we care, and at the rate we’re going, we’re probably headed towards the tail end of ASEAN in a decade. I won’t be surprised the military junta-led Myanmar/Burma will clobber us, too and we’ll be sending our women as DHs to Rangoon!

    Dammit, jail Arroyo, Yuchengco, CODE-NGO we don’t care who else. But puh-leeze, fuckin leave us businessmen alone!

  4. Ellen, since not all your readers are FB subscribers, allow me to post this article in full.

    4 things you need to know about PEACe bonds tax issue
    by Move.PH on Tuesday, October 18, 2011 at 7:49pm

    By Lala Rimando and Katherine Visconti

    Neither the PEACe bonds investors nor the national treasury was favored by the Supreme Court decision on October 18.

    The high court issued the 11th hour decision on a tax issue that was hanging over the controversial financial instrument that matured also on October 18.

    In question was P4.9 billion, representing withholding tax equivalent to 20% of the P24.3 billion interest earnings due to bondholders who bought Poverty Eradication and Alleviation Certificates or PEACe Bonds.

    While there was no final decision yet on whether the 10-year bonds were subject to tax, the Supreme Court said that P4.9 billion should be set aside in an escrow fund in the meantime.

    The Supreme Court acted on a petition for a temporary restraining order (TRO) filed by banks who were wholesalers or retailers in selling the bonds to individual or corporate investors in 2001.

    Why is the PEACe bonds controversial and why is the tax issue an issue now?

    Below are five key things to know about an effort that started as a pro-poor financing program to one that

    1. Promises, promises

    The tax issue on the PEACe bonds focused on these questions:
    Will the Philippine government honor a promise?
    Was that promise wrong?

    In an October 17 ruling, the tax agency basically decided not to honor the promise: The interest earnings aggregating to P24.3 billion would be paid on October 18, tax free.

    The P24.3 bilion gross interest would be part of the P35 billion that the national treasury was supposed to pay investors in full.

    Consider this: If investors put their money on a regular bond, a withholding tax would be slashed from their interest earnings. It was precisely because the PEACe bonds were sold as tax-free in 2001 that investors found the these bonds attractive. They were going to be P4.9 billion richer on October 18 if this was kept.

    But the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) said that promise of a tax-free investment was wrong from the start.

    The tax agency, now under the Aquino administration, said this rule applies to all: Financial products issued by the Philippine government must be slapped with a 20% withholding tax.

    The PEACe bonds were issued by the Bureau of Treasury (BTr), another revenue-generating agency, should be considered a “deposit substitute” and is taxable.

    Eight banks that sold PEACe bonds sought relief from the Supreme Court on October 17. The Supreme Court acted on their petition for a TRO the crucial day after.

    Banks are the frontliners in this whole scheme. They interact directly or indirectly with clients when they were dangling the sweetened product in 2001. They needed to deal with clients again come October 18.

    2. Timing issue

    The PEACe bonds matured on October 18, the day of reckoning. The Philippine government was meant to fulfill its original promise: Pay investors the P35 billion it owes them.

    Bankers literally “banked on” the government’s ability to pay all P35 billion–principal plus interest–due to PEACe bond investors.

    Normally, investing in government-issued debt notes are risk-free, and the zero-coupon PEACe bonds should have been no exception.

    In “zeroes”, an industry lingo for bonds that pay clients on a one-time-big-time basis, investors let their money “sleep” with the debt issuer, in this case the Philippine government, without receiving interest earnings over the entire life of the bond. They receive the principal and the accumulated interest on maturity day itself.

    Of the P35 billion, bulk or P24.3 billion represents the interest earnings for the investors. However, the Supreme Court issued a TRO that mandated the government to pay the entire P35 billion to the banks who acted as the retailers. In turn, the banks were required to set aside 20% of the remaining bonds in escrow as the high court deliberates on whether to allow the bonds to remain tax-free or not.

    No one wins but no one loses either. The mainly banks and insurance companies who bought the PEACe bonds in the secondary market don’t get their promised return but they also don’t have to pay P4.96 billion in taxes.

    Meanwhile the government is in wait and see mode but the escrow ensures BIR will collect revenue if the bonds are taxable.

    3. Illegal or immoral?

    Critics of the PEACe bonds have yet to prove that the deal was illegal. The tax issue is an easier route for the government to pin down the message that there was wrongdoing at all.

    Another nagging criticism is that the deal was immoral. They said the transaction carries features of rent-seeking and influence-peddling in the name of the poor.

    They said rules were relaxed for the PEACe bond since it had an unpleasant mix of money, family and politics.

    The deal was set up months after former President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo rose to power in 2001. The key player, Code-NGO, a consortium, had helped put her there by mobilizing street protests against then sitting president Joseph Estrada.

    In a 2002 interview with Newsbreak the then Code-NGO national coordinator Danilo Songco said the only capital the NGO had was its “credible track record” in socio-civic work and the “goodwill of Edsa 2.”

    The head of CODE-NGO, Marissa Camacho, and the Finance Secretary at the time the deal was transacted, Jose Isidro Camacho, are siblings. They inhibited from the transaction and had claimed the process was transparent.

    The process went like this: Code-NGO’s banker, Yuchengco-led Rizal Commercial Banking Corporation (RCBC) bought the bonds from the Bureau of Treasury for P10 billion with a coupon rate of 12%. Code-NGO had a share of P1.4 billion, of which only P1.3 billion went to an endowment fund for pro-poor projects.

    Critics said RCBC cornered the deal through Code-NGO’s clout. Its unit, RCBC Capital, then re-sold the 10-year bonds to other wholesalers, which included banks and insurance firms.

    The tax exemption, a sweetener, was added to the bond issue to make it attractive to investors.

    Tax chief Kim Henares said they raised the tax issue on the PEACe bonds in keeping with the agency’s efforts to run after tax evaders’ wayward cash.

    4. Investments and debts

    The tax issue on the PEACe bonds has little direct economic impact on ordinary citizens who are largely not part of the bond market. Not known to be sophisticated savers, most Filipinos who don’t have millions in spare funds consider bonds unaffordable.

    But it touched on three economic aspects: revenues, debts, and investor confidence. Anything that impacts these would eventually be felt down the economic food chain in terms of social services, jobs, prices, among others.

    Involved in the revenue and debt angles of the PEACe bonds controversy were two of the government’s biggest money-makers: the BIR and the Bureau of Treasury.

    Treasury-issued PEACe bonds are debts that the government owe investors. This is a relationship that has been interpreted many ways. One is that the PEACe bonds contributed to a growing national debt. Another is that the money from PEACe bond investors partly funded important social services that the government have to spend for.

    Financially speaking, the Arroyo government has already spent the borrowed funds and the Aquino government now has to pay for it.

    At the core of both interpretations is the fact that the government does not raise enough revenues to fund its growing expenses. The Philippines has been nursing a budget deficit for decades, perennially plugged by borrowings.

    If the Supreme Court finally decides to consider that the PEACe bonds are taxable, the P4.9 billion now in escrow could be considered an unexpected windfall. It could help plug this year’s deficit expected to reach about P300 billion.

    The fate of the holders of PEACe bonds has been a must-watch among investors who are usually averse about uncertainties or unfulfilled promises. After all, government-issued bonds are supposed to be risk-free.

  5. Sa lumalaganap na sa buong mundo “Occupy Wall Street” protest vs corporate greed na kasama na rin ang Pinas, hindi malayong maging isa sa mga issue itong tax exemption na hinihingi ng 8 banko sa tinubo nila sa PEACe bonds transactions.

  6. joeseg, ang kaso ng Peace Bonds Tax sa Pinas malayo naman sa corporate greed. Government greed nga e.

Leave a Reply