Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 713 views

    Airlift Asia Customs Brokerage vs. Court of Appeals

    Uploaded by

    Alfonso Vargas
    The BOC issued CAO 3-2006 requiring customs brokers to obtain accreditation from the BOC in order to practice before it. Petitioners challenged the validity of this order. The RTC found in favor of petitioners, but the CA reversed. The SC ruled that (1) under RA 9280, the power to regulate customs brokers was transferred to the PRBCB, not the BOC, and (2) CAO 3-2006 amounted to an unauthorized licensing requirement restricting the practice of customs brokers, which is prohibited by RA 9280. Thus, the BOC does not have the authority to issue such an order regulating customs brokers.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Airlift Asia Customs Brokerage vs. Court of Appeals

    Uploaded by

    Alfonso Vargas
    713 views2 pages
    The BOC issued CAO 3-2006 requiring customs brokers to obtain accreditation from the BOC in order to practice before it. Petitioners challenged the validity of this order. The RTC found in favor of petitioners, but the CA reversed. The SC ruled that (1) under RA 9280, the power to regulate customs brokers was transferred to the PRBCB, not the BOC, and (2) CAO 3-2006 amounted to an unauthorized licensing requirement restricting the practice of customs brokers, which is prohibited by RA 9280. Thus, the BOC does not have the authority to issue such an order regulating customs brokers.

    Original Description:

    Tax case digest on Powers of Bureau of Customs

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The BOC issued CAO 3-2006 requiring customs brokers to obtain accreditation from the BOC in order to practice before it. Petitioners challenged the validity of this order. The RTC found in favor of petitioners, but the CA reversed. The SC ruled that (1) under RA 9280, the power to regulate customs brokers was transferred to the PRBCB, not the BOC, and (2) CAO 3-2006 amounted to an unauthorized licensing requirement restricting the practice of customs brokers, which is prohibited by RA 9280. Thus, the BOC does not have the authority to issue such an order regulating customs brokers.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    713 views2 pages

    Airlift Asia Customs Brokerage vs. Court of Appeals

    Uploaded by

    Alfonso Vargas
    The BOC issued CAO 3-2006 requiring customs brokers to obtain accreditation from the BOC in order to practice before it. Petitioners challenged the validity of this order. The RTC found in favor of petitioners, but the CA reversed. The SC ruled that (1) under RA 9280, the power to regulate customs brokers was transferred to the PRBCB, not the BOC, and (2) CAO 3-2006 amounted to an unauthorized licensing requirement restricting the practice of customs brokers, which is prohibited by RA 9280. Thus, the BOC does not have the authority to issue such an order regulating customs brokers.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    G.R. No.

    183664

    July 28, 2014

    AIRLIFT ASIA CUSTOMS BROKERAGE vs. COURT OF APPEALS

    Facts:

    CAO 3-2006 was issued by the then Commissioner (BOC) , It covers the Rules and Regulations
    Governing the Accreditation of the Customs Brokers Transacting with the BOC and essentially
    requires the accreditation by the BOC of customs brokers who intend to practice before the BOC.
    Brokers who want to practice are required to apply for accreditation and to obtain a Certificate of
    Accreditation.
    Petitioners assailed the validity of CAO 3-2006 through an action for declaratory relief before the
    Regional Trial Court of Manila. Issued without authority, and violates their right to practice their
    profession.
    RTC decided in favour of petitioners.
    o This power, initially lodged with the Commissioner of the Civil Service under Section 3409 of
    the Tariff and Customs Code of the Philippines (TCCP), had been transferred upon the
    passageof RA 9280 to the Professional Regulatory Board for Customs Brokers (PRBCB), which
    is under the supervision and administrative control of the Professional Regulation
    Commission (PRC).
    o CAO 3-2006 imposed an additional qualification not found in the law.
    CA reversed the RTC
    o Although an added burden to brokers, nevertheless bore a reasonable connection to the
    BOCs aim to ensure accountability and integrity in the transactions involving customs duties
    and tariff laws.
    ISSUE : WON the BOC can validly issue such Customs Administrative Order NO
    o Prior to the passage of RA 9280, the TCCP (specifically, Sections 3401 to 3409 thereof)
    governed the entry, regulation, and supervision of the customs broker profession.
    Sections 3401 and 3402 of the TCCP required all applicants for customs brokers
    certificates to pass a written examination given by the Board of Examiners for
    Customs Brokers under PRC supervision. BOC Commissioner was ex officio chairman.
    Suspension/revocation also filed with Board of Examiners.
    The enactment of RA 9280, however, brought about significant changes.
    In lieu of the Board of Examiners, RA 9280 created the PRBCB. whose
    members are appointed by the President from a list of recommendees
    submitted by the PRC which has supervisory and administrative control over
    the PRBCB. Significantly, RA 9280 excluded the BOC Commissioner as
    member of the PRBCB.
    Some of the powers of the PRBCB is to supervise and regulate the licensure,
    registration, and practice of customs brokers profession; and to Register
    successful examinees in the licensure examination and issue the
    corresponding Certificate of Registration and Professional Identification Card;
    o CAs argument: It remains in the general power. It adds that "[t]o strip the BOC
    [Commissioner] of any disciplinary and supervisory authority over license customs brokers
    would not only cripple the [BOCs] efforts on anti smuggling and raising revenue.
    This general grant of power should yield to specific grant of power to CSC
    commissioner in the TCCP (Sec 3409) regarding the rules and regulation in the
    practice of the brokerage profession.
    o CAO 3-2006 amounts to a licensing requirement that restricts the practice of profession of
    customs brokers and is prohibited by RA 9280.
    CA: intends to regulate only the practice before the BOC, which is claimed to be one
    aspect
    SC: Notably, with the exception of consulting with clients, and teaching tariff
    and customs administration, most of the above-enumerated activities involve

    G.R. No. 183664

    July 28, 2014

    AIRLIFT ASIA CUSTOMS BROKERAGE vs. COURT OF APPEALS

    dealing with the BOC. In other words, a large part of a custom brokers work
    involves practice before the BOC.
    Moreover, a reading of CAO 3-2006 does not appear to be restricted only to
    "practice before the BOC."

    You might also like