02 Quezon City v. ABS CBN Broadcasting Corp.

DIGESTS FOR TAXATION II UA&P LAW 2018
Quezon City v. ABS CBN Broadcasting Corp.

GR No. 166408, 6 October 2008
FACTS:
 Petitioner City Government of Quezon City by virtue of their own 1993 revenue code
imposed a franchise tax on all business operating within its jurisdiction. Meanwhile, in
1995, ABS-CBN was granted the franchise to install and operate radio and television
broadcasting stations in the Philippines under RA 7966, which provided that it shall pay a
franchise tax in lieu of all taxes on this franchise or earnings thereof.
 ABS-CBN had been paying local franchise tax imposed by QC. However, in view of the
above provision in RA 9766, the corporation developed the opinion that it is not liable to
pay the local franchise tax imposed by Quezon City. Consequently, ABS-CBN paid under
protest the local franchise tax imposed by QC from 1995 to 1997. Subsequently, ABS-CBN
filed a written claim for refund for the local franchise tax they already paid to the city in
the total amount of P14,233,582.29.
 For failure to obtain any response from the city government, ABS-CBN filed a complaint
before the RTC seeking the declaration of nullity of the imposition of local franchise tax
by the city government of Quezon City for being unconstitutional. It likewise prayed for
the refund of the local franchise tax in the amount of P19,944,672.66.
 Quezon City argued that the “in lieu of all taxes” provision in R.A. No. 9766 could not have
been intended to prevail over a constitutional mandate which ensures the viability and
self-sufficiency of local government units. Petitioners argue that the
in lieu of all taxes” provision in ABS-CBN’s franchise does not expressly exempt it from
payment of local franchise tax. They contend that a tax exemption cannot be created by
mere implication and that one who claims tax exemptions must be able to justify his claim
by clearest grant of organic law or statute. Further, that taxes collectible by and payable
to the local government were distinct from taxes collectible by and payable to the
national government, considering that the Constitution specifically declared that the
taxes imposed by local government units “shall accrue exclusively to the local
governments.” Lastly, the City contended that the exemption claimed by ABS-CBN under
R.A. No. 7966 was withdrawn by Congress when the Local Government Code (LGC) was
passed. In addition, Quezon City insisted that the claim for refund must fail because of
the absence of a prior written claim for it.
 RTC ruled in favor of ABS-CBN declaring as invalid the imposition on and collection from
ABS-CBN of local franchise tax and ordered the refund of all payments made. On appeal,
the CA dismissed the petition of Quezon City as the issues raised were purely legal
questions cognizable only by the SC. Hence, this petition.
ISSUE:
Whether or not the phrase “in lieu of all taxes” indicated in the franchise of the respondent
appellee (Section 8 of RA 7966) serves to exempt it from the payment of the local franchise tax
imposed by the petitioners-appellants.
RJTS
HELD: NO
RATIO:
 Taxes are what civilized people pay for civilized society. They are the lifeblood of the
nation. Thus, statutes granting tax exemptions are construed stricissimi juris against the
taxpayer and liberally in favor of the taxing authority. A claim of tax exemption must be
clearly shown and based on language in law too plain to be mistaken. Otherwise stated,
taxation is the rule, exemption is the exception. The burden of proof rests upon the party
claiming the exemption to prove that it is in fact covered by the exemption so claimed.
 The basis for the rule on strict construction to statutory provisions granting tax
exemptions or deductions is to minimize differential treatment and foster impartiality,
fairness and equality of treatment among taxpayers. He who claims an exemption from
his share of common burden must justify his claim that the legislature intended to exempt
him by unmistakable terms. For exemptions from taxation are not favored in law, nor are
they presumed. They must be expressed in the clearest and most unambiguous language
and not left to mere implications. It has been held that exemptions are never presumed;
the burden is on the claimant to establish clearly his right to exemption and cannot be
made out of inference or implications but must be laid beyond reasonable doubt. In other
words, since taxation is the rule and exemption the exception, the intention to make an
exemption ought to be expressed in clear and unambiguous terms.
 Section 8 of R.A. No. 7966 imposes on ABS-CBN a franchise tax equivalent to three (3)
percent of all gross receipts of the radio/television business transacted under the
franchise and the franchise tax shall be “in lieu of all taxes” on the franchise or earnings
thereof. The “in lieu of all taxes” provision in the franchise of ABS-CBN does not expressly
provide what kind of taxes ABS-CBN is exempted from. It is not clear whether the
exemption would include both local, whether municipal, city or provincial, and national
tax. What is clear is that ABS-CBN shall be liable to pay three (3) percent franchise tax and
income taxes under Title II of the NIRC. But whether the “in lieu of all taxes provision”
would include exemption from local tax is not unequivocal. As adverted to earlier, the
right to exemption from local franchise tax must be clearly established and cannot be
made out of inference or implications but must be laid beyond reasonable doubt. Verily,
the uncertainty in the “in lieu of all taxes” provision should be construed against ABS-
CBN. ABS-CBN has the burden to prove that it is in fact covered by the exemption so
claimed. ABS-CBN miserably failed in this regard. In fine, since ABS-CBN failed to justify its
claim for exemption from local franchise tax, by a grant expressed in terms “too plain to
be mistaken” its claim for exemption for local franchise tax must fail.
 Likewise, the “in lieu of all taxes” clause in the franchise of ABS-CBN has become functus
officio with the abolition of the franchise tax on broadcasting companies with yearly gross
receipts exceeding Ten Million Pesos. ABS-CBN is no longer subject to a franchise tax, it is
now liable for VAT.
RJTS
RJTS

02 Quezon City v. ABS CBN Broadcasting Corp.

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

02 Quezon City v. ABS CBN Broadcasting Corp.

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

02 Quezon City v. ABS CBN Broadcasting Corp.

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

DIGESTS FOR TAXATION II UA&P LAW 2018

Quezon City v. ABS CBN Broadcasting Corp.

You might also like