Thursday, November 28, 2013

Taxing the "Pambansang Kamao (National Fist)"

From 1988 to 1989, I worked as a Tax Accountant (handling Philippine taxation) for a Law Firm in Makati. Then from 1989 to 1991, I worked as Chief Accountant and as Tax Associate (handling US, Hong Kong, and International taxation) for the Hong Kong branch of the Romulo Law Office. That was more than 20 years ago, and therefore I cannot anymore even the slightest bit consider myself an expert in taxation. Hence, these days, any opinion I have on taxation can only be considered as a layman's opinion, not as an expert's opinion. Pertinently, in my line of work, whenever I deal with taxation issues I can only do so as a “generalist,” and I have to work with fellow CPAs and/or with Tax Lawyers who are the “specialists.”

That said, allow me to share my layman’s perspective on this current tax issue that confronts our “Pambansang Kamao.” To simplify matters, I will focus only on his earnings from the US (and not Macao or wherever else).

-------

Please consider the following:

* If you work in the Philippines, surely you are aware that taxes are immediately deducted and withheld from your earnings. Your employer, or whomever else is the source of your earnings, is "obligated by law" to immediately withhold your taxes. Therefore whether you like it or not, whether you are diligent about paying your taxes or not, or whether you are even aware about it or not, you will definitely still end up paying your taxes. Meanwhile, Philippine Tax laws, just like most other Philippine laws, were originally copied from the laws of the United States. Hence, since Philippine tax laws and US tax laws are similar, I think it is safe to assume that if you earn income in the US, then your taxes are immediately withheld, just like in the Philippines.

* If you live and work in the Philippines, then you will be using and taking advantage of infrastructure and other resources that are available to you in the Philippines. The roads you travel on, the street lamps that light your way, the traffic enforcers that direct your commute, the police force that ensure your safety, and countless other resources. Whether you like it or not, you will be using all of these resources, and they all cost money. This is why you pay taxes to the Philippine government.

* In the same light, if you work in the US, then you will be taking advantage of their resources, thus you will have to pay taxes to the US, not the Philippines.

* If you work and derive earnings in the US, then you must pay US Tax Rates that are more than 30%. Hypothetically speaking, if you will also still have to pay the Philippine government for another layer of taxes that are also worth more than 30% (please note that I am exaggerating in order to drive home a point), then your total taxes will add up to as much 65%, leaving you only 35% for your net take home pay. With a 35% net take home pay, you will only have enough money left to pay for your food and shelter so that you can continue working. In other words, you live to work to live to work, reduced to a robotic existence. In which case, Filipinos might as well never work in the US (or anywhere else abroad) anymore. Pertinently, this is why double taxation is not allowed. (Please note that US tax rates might even be higher than Philippine tax rates, please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax_in_the_United_States#Marginal_tax_rates_for_2013.)

* Based on all the foregoing premises, I think it is safe to assume that when Manny fought in the ring and earned his income in the US, he automatically already paid taxes. There may have been some lapses on his part when it comes to furnishing the Philippine BIR with copies of tax returns and related documents that he submitted to the US Internal Revenue Services or IRS (which is the counterpart of the Philippine Bureau of Internal Revenue or BIR), but IN PRINCIPLE it is unlikely that he has actually committed anything worth being punished for. Come to think of it, since Manny earned much of his boxing income in the US, then if he indeed committed any form of tax evasion, it is the US government (specifically he IRS) that would have already and immediately gone after him. It's really that simple, nothing complicated.

* Moreover, although he did not anymore have to pay taxes to the Philippines, the fact of the matter is that he still remitted a great deal of his "Net-Income-After-Taxes" back to the Philippines -- Paying the salaries of his very many Filipino employees (who are therefore able to support their families), purchasing Philippine commodities and properties, donating to Philippine charities, etc., etc., in other words significantly contributing to the Philippine economy. Come to think of it, isn’t it that the one of the primary reasons that our nation is still able to survive, despite all the corrupt and wealth-grabbing politicians, is that we have so many Filipinos who, just like Manny, work and pay taxes abroad, but remit the rest of their earnings to the Philippines?

-------

* To be perfectly honest, when the news first broke out, I could not understand why they were suddenly going after Manny. It was only after I got to read the two articles posted here below that I finally understood what the tax drama was all about. Like I said, I am merely a “generalist,” and thus what I have written above are merely my “generalist” opinion. To read the opinions of the “specialists” or the “experts,” I respectfully recommend that you please click on the following:

(1) “Manny Pacquiao, the BIR, and Taxation's Power to Destroy” by Atty. Mel Sta. Maria
http://www.interaksyon.com/article/75788/mel-sta--maria--manny-pacquiao-the-bir-and-taxations-power-to-destroy

(2) “Pacquiao – Latest Victim of Hold-order Mindset” by Federico D. Pascual Jr.
http://www.philstar.com/opinion/2013/11/28/1261787/pacquiao-latest-victim-hold-order-mindset

-------

* FINALLY, they say that they are not harassing Manny. Well, this is what I have to say about that:

-- Have you ever experienced receiving a Meralco bill that indicated that your electric bill for the current month is greater than your electric bill for the previous month by as much P1,000? How did you feel? Were you able to sleep that night? Can you imagine therefore what it feels like to receive word that you might owe tax charges of as much as P2.2Billion?

-- Many people say that Manny, or more specifically Manny’s accountants and lawyers, will eventually be able to smoothen all this out, because it’s all just a matter of documentation. I agree. But still, great anxiety and significant grief have already been caused. Indeed, Mommy Dionisia has already been rattled to the bones and made ballistically upset – thank God she did not suffer a heart attack. In other words, the damage has already been done. In most other circumstances, if someone causes you that same level of grief and anxiety, you can sue them for damages, right? But in this case, after the case is finally smoothened out and resolved (which I hope will indeed eventually happen), after all is said and done, Manny's persecutors will probably just shrug it off and pretend it didn't happen. "Kung sobra mang nasaktan at sumama ang loob ni Manny at ng pamilya niya, then sorry na lang, ganun talaga eh." "Wala lang."

-- Manny has already brought so much honor to the country. Yes there are other Filipinos who have also brought honor to the country, such as Lea Salonga, Charice Pempengco, Arnel Pineda, etc., but I think it is safe to say that they -- perhaps even all of them combined -- pale in comparison to Manny. Indeed, Jessica Sanchez (who may even be more famous than the three singers that I have just mentioned) was recently merely a front act for Manny at Macau. Truth be told, I think that the only way that a Filipino (who is not the country's president) can outshine Manny on the world stage is by winning the Nobel Prize. Seriously.

-- Decades ago, the Philippines was unheard of in many parts of the world. Now, when we get hit by a super typhoon, the whole world rushes to our aid, and I think we have gained recognition and respect worldwide because of people like Manny.

-- Therefore, considering that there is a good chance that Manny may have actually already paid all (or at least most of) the taxes that he has to pay, and considering that he has already brought so much honor to the country, is it too much to ask that instead of persecuting him, that they should instead just persistently try to reach out to him and patiently guide him? After all, they have already been far more patient with so many other individuals or companies who are the actual and bigger tax evaders. Any way you look at it, slapping Manny with a notice for a P2.2Billion tax charge (even if it is merely a potential tax charge), and freezing some of his assets a day after he has just brought honor to the country, simply leaves a bad taste in the mouth.

-------

Thursday, November 14, 2013

Rules of Engagement

I. Arguing vis-à-vis Expressing

I can see a lot of heated arguments on FB and on other internet-based fora regarding PNoy's performance as president in the face of super typhoon Yolanda.  There are those who give him the benefit of the doubt, and there are those who choose not to – not anymore.  (I do not consider myself as either outright pro-PNoy or outright anti-PNoy, I prefer not to have a fixed and permanent opinion of him.  I discern on a case to case basis and I try to keep an open mind.)

I can also see that most of the arguments show no promise of resolution and will simply spiral.  Quite typical of arguments involving government and politics.  Therefore, participating in such arguments, in my opinion, is basically pointless -- and thus I choose not to.

Rules for Discussion

However, a person can still express his/her opinion without necessarily engaging in any argument.  For instance, he can express his opinion on his own wall, while steering clear of opposing views in other people's walls. 

After all, a person can express her views simply because she wants to -- which is her basic right -- and not because she wants to argue with anyone.  She can also express her views to affirm others who share the same beliefs, or to provide insights to those who are still in the process of forming their own opinions.

===

II. There is a Right Time and Place

Recently I had a very heated but also very short-lived “debate” with a former schoolmate, in FB.  I wrote a comment on my wall, and this former schoolmate of mine opposed what I said -- on my very same wall.  

But our pertinent comments are not there anymore, we already deleted them, as I said it was a “short-lived” debate. We agreed to abort the debate because it might undermine our friendship.  I do know of people here in FB who used to be friends but who eventually “un-friended” after slugging it out on Democrat versus Republican issues.   The best of friends can become the worst of enemies because of political differences, right or wrong it is true, and thus it may be best to be cognizant and wary of that reality.

At any rate, this schoolmate of mine explained to me (in a private message) that the only reason he opposed my views is that I put it out there.  Since I made my views public, then it meant that I welcomed opposing views, because FB is a public forum.  He made an excellent point, one that I would not argue against.

However, I would like to offer another school of thought.  The thing is, FB may simply be an outlet where you express yourself.  Because sometimes, you do just want to express yourself.  And although you strive to make sense in order to make a contribution to the collective intellect of cyberspace, you don’t necessarily want to engage in a real argument because that is just too much work.  Particularly if people have certain expectations of you, if you ever engage in a debate then you will really have to bring it on – which, as I said, is just too much work.

I’m not saying that people should never express opposing opinions on your wall.  But perhaps when it comes to very hot and divisive topics like politics, and particularly during times that people are more emotionally involved such as in the aftermath of the Yolanda typhoon (or perhaps during election period), then perhaps it is best to be prudent and to tread with caution.  Just like at home or in the office, if your family or colleague says something in frustration, unless the situation really calls for it then it is best not to argue with him on the spot, you wait for the right time and circumstance to do so.  Who knows, he might even retract what he said before you actually get to speak with him.

Besides, there are, after all, internet-based fora out there where engaging in debate is the norm and where you can therefore debate to your heart’s content.  For instance, in the comment sections of CNN, Rappler, and the like, or even in cause-oriented pages on FB.  If you really want to engage in intellectual discourse to further or defend your cause, then perhaps those are the better venues.  But as far as personal pages on FB are concerned, it might be best to discern before you throw down the gauntlet.

Right now I have this friend who is really REALLY expressing his views on his FB wall and his views are quite opposite mine.  I respect him for that and I don’t dare mess with him.   Even if he will tell me that it’s okay to do so, I won’t risk it, as far as I am concerned it’s just not worth it.

===

III. Private Individual vis-à-vis Public Servant

When it comes to private individuals, we must presume innocence unless guilt is thoroughly proven.

But when it comes to public servants (especially people in very high places of power), although we should not immediately presume guilt, we should not presume innocence either.  We must bear in mind that they have all the skills, the resources, and the power to hide the truth.  Therefore if we will not say a word unless we have the complete and unassailable set of evidence, then we may never be able to say anything. 

Besides, PNoy does say that we are his bosses, which after all is not just a figure of speech but is actually the truth. 

Please bear in mind, at home or in the office, if you are the boss, isn’t it that you can question your subordinate anytime, whether or not you have solid and definitive evidence that he has done something wrong?  It a basic practice of quality control, and it is the inherent right and unquestionable prerogative of a boss.

If you can only question someone if you have a complete set of solid, definitive, and water-tight evidence, then you are not his boss.  It’s the other way around.

(Please note that I did not criticize PNoy here, I merely suggested that we as citizens have a right to criticize him as president.)

===

IV. Freedom of Speech

Now, there are these messages going around that basically suggest that people should be silent, that they should not criticize, and just focus on helping the typhoon victims.  I think it is safe to say that those messages are more likely intended for the people who criticize PNoy. 

To my friends who have been passing those sort of messages around, I’m sorry, you know I love you, but that just isn’t cool.  That approach is somewhat “passive-aggressive,” and can also be considered as an “unfair fighting tactic.” 
-- It is “passive-aggressive” because while there is the nice (or passive) overtone that suggests that we should just focus on helping the typhoon victims, there is also the not so nice (or aggressive) undertone that suggests that some people should just shut up. 
-- It is also an “unfair fighting tactic” because while the message is subtle and not “in your face,” it is still ultimately meant to invalidate the people who criticize PNoy.

Besides, just because a person is expressing his views, it doesn't mean that he has not done anything else.  It is perfectly possible to express one's views about the government, while also quietly extending help to the victims of Yolanda. 

And even if indeed a person just wishes to speak her mind, then she is within her rights to do so.  It is a basic human right. 

Moreover, let us all please keep in mind that one of the chief reasons that our country finds it difficult to progress is that we are way too forgiving, we give people the benefit of the doubt way too much.  The Marcoses are back, and not only are they back but they are in Congress.  Estrada is now Mayor of Manila, and only because he did not win the 2010 presidential race which he was very freely allowed to join despite having been pronounced guilty of plunder by the Sandiganbayan in 2007. 
I think it is a good sign that people -- if they find it necessary -- are willing and able to openly express their views against the government.  And fortunately they also finally have the means to do it, specifically through social media. 

It also greatly helps to know that you are not alone, I for one am not afraid to exercise my freedom of speech because I know that we are many (and that I will not be singled out), there is truly strength in numbers.   As I stated at the onset, one of the important reasons that we express ourselves is so that we can affirm and support others who share the same beliefs.

It is democracy at work, and we've come a long way from the repression of dictatorship and martial law.

===

V. Proposed Rules of Engagement

In conclusion, allow me to propose the following rules of engagement:

1. In a forum that is clearly intended to serve as a venue for debate, be it in FB or CNN or wherever, by all means go ahead and state your case, and/or argue against what others have to say, you have a right to do that.
2. But in a platform that is not guaranteed to be a forum for debate (such as personal FB walls), it might be wise to be prudent and to tread with caution.

3. On your own wall, by all means please speak your mind, you have a right do that.
-- I will respectfully read your comment and truly contemplate on it.  I can’t promise that I will agree, but I promise to seriously consider.

Graham's Hierarchy of Disagreement
-- If I will write a comment on your wall, before doing so I will thoroughly think about what I will say, and I will make sure that what I will write is complete, logical, diplomatic, and respectful.  I will not write a lazy and impulsive rant.  I am just a guest on your wall, and thus I promise to properly behave as one.
-- I will not write anything on your wall with the overtone that I agree with you but with the undertone that I actually don’t.  In other words I will be neither sarcastic nor passive-aggressive.  I know that you are intelligent enough to know my true intentions, and I dare not insult your intelligence.
-- If you don’t like what I write on your wall and you feel like deleting it, then please go right ahead.  It’s your wall and thus I respect your right to manage it any way you want.

4. As far as my own wall is concerned, please do for me as I will do for you, as I have just explained.  And if you simply wish to ignore what I have to say, then by all means please do so, you have a right to do that.  But please do not tell me to quiet down, because you do not have the right to do that.


----------------------------------------

REFERENCES

How to Have a Rational Discussion

Argument

----------------------------------------

RECOMMENDED READING

Straight and Crooked Thinking

Don’t Get Defensive: Communication Tips for the Vigilant

----------------------------------------