EN BANC
G.R. No. 210551, June 30, 2015
JOSE J. FERRER, JR., Petitioner, v. CITY MAYOR HERBERT BAUTISTA, CITY COUNCIL OF QUEZON CITY, CITY TREASURER OF QUEZON CITY, AND CITY ASSESSOR OF QUEZON CITY, Respondents.
D E C I S I O N
PERALTA, J.:
Before this Court is a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court with prayer for the issuance of a temporary restraining order (TRO) seeking to declare unconstitutional and illegal Ordinance Nos. SP-2095, S-2011 and SP-2235, S-2013 on the Socialized Housing Tax and Garbage Fee, respectively, which are being imposed by the respondents.
SECTION 3. IMPOSITION. A special assessment equivalent to one-half percent (0.5%) on the assessed value of land in excess of One Hundred Thousand Pesos (Php100,000.00) shall be collected by the City Treasurer which shall accrue to the Socialized Housing Programs of the Quezon City Government. The special assessment shall accrue to the General Fund under a special account to be established for the purpose.Effective for five (5) years, the Socialized Housing Tax (SHT) shall be utilized by the Quezon City Government for the following projects: (a) land purchase/land banking; (b) improvement of current/existing socialized housing facilities; (c) land development; (d) construction of core houses, sanitary cores, medium-rise buildings and other similar structures; and (e) financing of public-private partnership agreement of the Quezon City Government and National Housing Authority (NHA) with the private sector.3 Under certain conditions, a tax credit shall be enjoyed by taxpayers regularly paying the special assessment:
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
SECTION 7. TAX CREDIT. Taxpayers dutifully paying the special assessment tax as imposed by this ordinance shall enjoy a tax credit. The tax credit may be availed of only after five (5) years of continue[d] payment. Further, the taxpayer availing this tax credit must be a taxpayer in good standing as certified by the City Treasurer and City Assessor.On the other hand, Ordinance No. SP-2235, S-20135 was enacted on December 16, 2013 and took effect ten days after when it was approved by respondent City Mayor.6 The proceeds collected from the garbage fees on residential properties shall be deposited solely and exclusively in an earmarked special account under the general fund to be utilized for garbage collections.7 Section 1 of the Ordinance set forth the schedule and manner for the collection of garbage fees:
The tax credit to be granted shall be equivalent to the total amount of the special assessment paid by the property owner, which shall be given as follows:
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary1. 6th year - 20%Furthermore, only the registered owners may avail of the tax credit and may not be continued by the subsequent property owners even if they are buyers in good faith, heirs or possessor of a right in whatever legal capacity over the subject property.4
2. 7th year - 20%
3. 8th year - 20%
4. 9th year - 20%
5. 10th year - 20%
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
SECTION 1. The City Government of Quezon City in conformity with and in relation to Republic Act No. 7160, otherwise known as the Local Government Code of 1991 HEREBY IMPOSES THE FOLLOWING SCHEDULE AND MANNER FOR THE ANNUAL COLLECTION OF GARBAGE FEES, AS FOLLOWS:The collection of the garbage fee shall accrue on the first day of January and shall be paid simultaneously with the payment of the real property tax, but not later than the first quarter installment.8 In case a household owner refuses to pay, a penalty of 25% of the garbage fee due, plus an interest of 2% per month or a fraction thereof, shall be charged.9ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
On all domestic households in Quezon City;On all condominium unit and socialized housing projects/units in Quezon City;
LAND AREA IMPOSABLE FEELess than 200 sq. m. PHP 100.00201 sq. m. – 500 sq. m. PHP 200.00501 sq. m. – 1,000 sq. m. PHP 300.001,001 sq. m. – 1,500 sq. m. PHP 400.001,501 sq. m. – 2,000 sq. m. or more PHP 500.00On high-rise Condominium Units
FLOOR AREA IMPOSABLE FEELess than 40 sq. m. PHP25.0041 sq. m. – 60 sq. m. PHP50.0061 sq. m. – 100 sq. m. PHP75.00101 sq. m. – 150 sq. m. PHP100.00151 sq. m. – 200 sq. [m.] or more PHP200.00
a) High-rise Condominium – The Homeowners Association of high- rise condominiums shall pay the annual garbage fee on the total size of the entire condominium and socialized Housing Unit and an additional garbage fee shall be collected based on area occupied for every unit already sold or being amortized. b) High-rise apartment units – Owners of high-rise apartment units shall pay the annual garbage fee on the total lot size of the entire apartment and an additional garbage fee based on the schedule prescribed herein for every unit occupied.
A respondent is said to be exercising judicial function where he has the power to determine what the law is and what the legal rights of the parties are, and then undertakes to determine these questions and adjudicate upon the rights of the parties.For a writ of certiorari to issue, the following requisites must concur: (1) it must be directed against a tribunal, board, or officer exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions; (2) the tribunal, board, or officer must have acted without or in excess of jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction; and (3) there is no appeal or any plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law. The enactment by the Quezon City Council of the assailed ordinances was done in the exercise of its legislative, not judicial or quasi-judicial, function. Under Republic Act (R.A.) No. 7160, or the Local Government Code of 1991 (LGC), local legislative power shall be exercised by the Sangguniang Panlungsod for the city.15 Said law likewise is specific in providing that the power to impose a tax, fee, or charge, or to generate revenue shall be exercised by the sanggunian of the local government unit concerned through an appropriate ordinance.16ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
Quasi-judicial function, on the other hand, is “a term which applies to the actions, discretion, etc., of public administrative officers or bodies … required to investigate facts or ascertain the existence of facts, hold hearings, and draw conclusions from them as a basis for their official action and to exercise discretion of a judicial nature.”
Before a tribunal, board, or officer may exercise judicial or quasi-judicial acts, it is necessary that there be a law that gives rise to some specific rights of persons or property under which adverse claims to such rights are made, and the controversy ensuing therefrom is brought before a tribunal, board, or officer clothed with power and authority to determine the law and adjudicate the respective rights of the contending parties.14
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
SEC. 2. Petition for prohibition. - When the proceedings of any tribunal, corporation, board, officer or person, whether exercising judicial, quasi-judicial or ministerial functions, are without or in excess of its or his jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction, and there is no appeal or any other plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law, a person aggrieved thereby may file a verified petition in the proper court, alleging the facts with certainty and praying that judgment be rendered commanding the respondent to desist from further proceeding in the action or matter specified therein, or otherwise granting such incidental reliefs as law and justice may require.In a petition for prohibition against any tribunal, corporation, board, or person – whether exercising judicial, quasi-judicial, or ministerial functions – who has acted without or in excess of jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion, the petitioner prays that judgment be rendered, commanding the respondents to desist from further proceeding in the action or matter specified in the petition. In this case, petitioner's primary intention is to prevent respondents from implementing Ordinance Nos. SP-2095 and SP-2235. Obviously, the writ being sought is in the nature of a prohibition, commanding desistance.
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
6.3 The Assessor’s office of the Id.ntified LGU shall:Petitioner has adduced special and important reasons as to why direct recourse to Us should be allowed. Aside from presenting a novel question of law, this case calls for immediate resolution since the challenged ordinances adversely affect the property interests of all paying constituents of Quezon City. As well, this petition serves as a test case for the guidance of other local government units (LGUs). Indeed, the petition at bar is of transcendental importance warranting a relaxation of the doctrine of hierarchy of courts. In Social Justice Society (SJS) Officers, et al. v. Lim,24 the Court cited the case of Senator Jaworski v. Phil. Amusement & Gaming Corp.,25 where We ratiocinated:6.4 The Treasurer’s office shall:
- immediately undertake an inventory of lands within its jurisdiction which shall be subject to the levy of the Social Housing Tax (SHT) by the local sanggunian concerned;
- inform the affected registered owners of the effectivity of the SHT; a list of the lands and registered owners shall also be posted in 3 conspicuous places in the city/municipality;
- furnish the Treasurer’s office and the local sanggunian concerned of the list of lands affected;
- collect the Social Housing Tax on top of the Real Property Tax, SEF Tax and other special assessments;
- report to the DOF, thru the Bureau of Local Government Finance, and the Mayor’s office the monthly collections on Social Housing Tax (SHT). An annual report should likewise be submitted to the HUDCC on the total revenues raised during the year pursuant to Sec. 43, R.A. 7279 and the manner in which the same was disbursed.
Granting arguendo that the present action cannot be properly treated as a petition for prohibition, the transcendental importance of the issues involved in this case warrants that we set aside the technical defects and take primary jurisdiction over the petition at bar. x x x This is in accordance with the well-entrenched principle that rules of procedure are not inflexible tools designed to hinder or delay, but to facilitate and promote the administration of justice. Their strict and rigid application, which would result in technicalities that tend to frustrate, rather than promote substantial justice, must always be eschewed.26B. Locus Standi of Petitioner
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
It is a general rule that every action must be prosecuted or defended in the name of the real party-in-interest, who stands to be benefited or injured by the judgment in the suit, or the party entitled to the avails of the suit.“Legal standing” or locus standi calls for more than just a generalized grievance.28 The concept has been defined as a personal and substantial interest in the case such that the party has sustained or will sustain direct injury as a result of the governmental act that is being challenged.29 The gist of the question of standing is whether a party alleges such personal stake in the outcome of the controversy as to assure that concrete adverseness which sharpens the presentation of issues upon which the court depends for illumination of difficult constitutional questions.30ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
Jurisprudence defines interest as "material interest, an interest in issue and to be affected by the decree, as distinguished from mere interest in the question involved, or a mere incidental interest. By real interest is meant a present substantial interest, as distinguished from a mere expectancy or a future, contingent, subordinate, or consequential interest." "To qualify a person to be a real party-in-interest in whose name an action must be prosecuted, he must appear to be the present real owner of the right sought to be enforced."27
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
Litis pendentia, as a ground for the dismissal of a civil action, refers to a situation where two actions are pending between the same parties for the same cause of action, so that one of them becomes unnecessary and vexatious. It is based on the policy against multiplicity of suit and authorizes a court to dismiss a case motu proprio.There is substantial identity of the parties when there is a community of interest between a party in the first case and a party in the second case albeit the latter was not impleaded in the first case.38 Moreover, the fact that the positions of the parties are reversed, i.e., the plaintiffs in the first case are the defendants in the second case or vice-versa, does not negate the identity of parties for purposes of determining whether the case is dismissible on the ground of litis pendentia.39ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
x x x x
The requisites in order that an action may be dismissed on the ground of litis pendentia are: (a) the identity of parties, or at least such as representing the same interest in both actions; (b) the identity of rights asserted and relief prayed for, the relief being founded on the same facts, and (c) the identity of the two cases such that judgment in one, regardless of which party is successful, would amount to res judicata in the other.
x x x x
The underlying principle of litis pendentia is the theory that a party is not allowed to vex another more than once regarding the same subject matter and for the same cause of action. This theory is founded on the public policy that the same subject matter should not be the subject of controversy in courts more than once, in order that possible conflicting judgments may be avoided for the sake of the stability of the rights and status of persons, and also to avoid the costs and expenses incident to numerous suits.
Among the several tests resorted to in ascertaining whether two suits relate to a single or common cause of action are: (1) whether the same evidence would support and sustain both the first and second causes of action; and (2) whether the defenses in one case may be used to substantiate the complaint in the other.
The determination of whether there is an identity of causes of action for purposes of litis pendentia is inextricably linked with that of res judicata, each constituting an element of the other. In either case, both relate to the sound practice of including, in a single litigation, the disposition of all issues relating to a cause of action that is before a court.37
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
Section 187. Procedure for Approval and Effectivity of Tax Ordinances and Revenue Measures; Mandatory Public Hearings. – The procedure for approval of local tax ordinances and revenue measures shall be in accordance with the provisions of this Code: Provided, That public hearings shall be conducted for the purpose prior to the enactment thereof: Provided, further, That any question on the constitutionality or legality of tax ordinances or revenue measures may be raised on appeal within thirty (30) days from the effectivity thereof to the Secretary of Justice who shall render a decision within sixty (60) days from the date of receipt of the appeal: Provided, however, That such appeal shall not have the effect of suspending the effectivity of the ordinance and the accrual and payment of the tax, fee, or charge levied therein: Provided, finally, That within thirty (30) days after receipt of the decision or the lapse of the sixty-day period without the Secretary of Justice acting upon the appeal, the aggrieved party may file appropriate proceedings with a court of competent jurisdiction.The provision, the constitutionality of which was sustained in Drilon v. Lim,40 has been construed as mandatory41 considering that –
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
A municipal tax ordinance empowers a local government unit to impose taxes. The power to tax is the most effective instrument to raise needed revenues to finance and support the myriad activities of local government units for the delivery of basic services essential to the promotion of the general welfare and enhancement of peace, progress, and prosperity of the people. Consequently, any delay in implementing tax measures would be to the detriment of the public. It is for this reason that protests over tax ordinances are required to be done within certain time frames. x x x.42The obligatory nature of Section 187 was underscored in Hagonoy Market Vendor Asso. v. Municipality of Hagonoy:43cralawlawlibrary
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
x x x [T]he timeframe fixed by law for parties to avail of their legal remedies before competent courts is not a “mere technicality” that can be easily brushed aside. The periods stated in Section 187 of the Local Government Code are mandatory. x x x Being its lifeblood, collection of revenues by the government is of paramount importance. The funds for the operation of its agencies and provision of basic services to its inhabitants are largely derived from its revenues and collections. Thus, it is essential that the validity of revenue measures is not left uncertain for a considerable length of time. Hence, the law provided a time limit for an aggrieved party to assail the legality of revenue measures and tax ordinances.”44Despite these cases, the Court, in Ongsuco, et al. v. Hon. Malones,45 held that there was no need for petitioners therein to exhaust administrative remedies before resorting to the courts, considering that there was only a pure question of law, the parties did not dispute any factual matter on which they had to present evidence. Likewise, in Cagayan Electric Power and Light Co., Inc. v. City of Cagayan de Oro,46 We relaxed the application of the rules in view of the more substantive matters. For the same reasons, this petition is an exception to the general rule.
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
An ordinance carries with it the presumption of validity. The question of reasonableness though is open to judicial inquiry. Much should be left thus to the discretion of municipal authorities. Courts will go slow in writing off an ordinance as unreasonable unless the amount is so excessive as to be prohibitive, arbitrary, unreasonable, oppressive, or confiscatory. A rule which has gained acceptance is that factors relevant to such an inquiry are the municipal conditions as a whole and the nature of the business made subject to imposition.70For an ordinance to be valid though, it must not only be within the corporate powers of the LGU to enact and must be passed according to the procedure prescribed by law, it should also conform to the following requirements: (1) not contrary to the Constitution or any statute; (2) not unfair or oppressive; (3) not partial or discriminatory; (4) not prohibit but may regulate trade; (5) general and consistent with public policy; and (6) not unreasonable.71 As jurisprudence indicates, the tests are divided into the formal (i.e., whether the ordinance was enacted within the corporate powers of the LGU and whether it was passed in accordance with the procedure prescribed by law), and the substantive (i.e., involving inherent merit, like the conformity of the ordinance with the limitations under the Constitution and the statutes, as well as with the requirements of fairness and reason, and its consistency with public policy).72ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
It is a fundamental principle that municipal ordinances are inferior in status and subordinate to the laws of the state. An ordinance in conflict with a state law of general character and statewide application is universally held to be invalid. The principle is frequently expressed in the declaration that municipal authorities, under a general grant of power, cannot adopt ordinances which infringe the spirit of a state law or repugnant to the general policy of the state. In every power to pass ordinances given to a municipality, there is an implied restriction that the ordinances shall be consistent with the general law. In the language of Justice Isagani Cruz (ret.), this Court, in Magtajas vs. Pryce Properties Corp., Inc., ruled that:LGUs must be reminded that they merely form part of the whole; that the policy of ensuring the autonomy of local governments was never intended by the drafters of the 1987 Constitution to create an imperium in imperio and install an intra-sovereign political subdivision independent of a single sovereign state.78 “[M]unicipal corporations are bodies politic and corporate, created not only as local units of local self-government, but as governmental agencies of the state. The legislature, by establishing a municipal corporation, does not divest the State of any of its sovereignty; absolve itself from its right and duty to administer the public affairs of the entire state; or divest itself of any power over the inhabitants of the district which it possesses before the charter was granted.”79ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibraryThe rationale of the requirement that the ordinances should not contravene a statute is obvious. Municipal governments are only agents of the national government. Local councils exercise only delegated legislative powers conferred on them by Congress as the national lawmaking body. The delegate cannot be superior to the principal or exercise powers higher than those of the latter. It is a heresy to suggest that the local government units can undo the acts of Congress, from which they have derived their power in the first place, and negate by mere ordinance the mandate of the statute.Municipal corporations owe their origin to, and derive their powers and rights wholly from the legislature. It breathes into them the breath of life, without which they cannot exist. As it creates, so it may destroy. As it may destroy, it may abridge and control. Unless there is some constitutional limitation on the right, the legislature might, by a single act, and if we can suppose it capable of so great a folly and so great a wrong, sweep from existence all of the municipal corporations in the State, and the corporation could not prevent it. We know of no limitation on the right so far as to the corporation themselves are concerned. They are, so to phrase it, the mere tenants at will of the legislature.
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
This basic relationship between the national legislature and the local government units has not been enfeebled by the new provisions in the Constitution strengthening the policy of local autonomy. Without meaning to detract from that policy, we here confirm that Congress retains control of the local government units although in significantly reduced degree now than under our previous Constitutions. The power to create still includes the power to destroy. The power to grant still includes the power to withhold or recall. True, there are certain notable innovations in the Constitution, like the direct conferment on the local government units of the power to tax, which cannot now be withdrawn by mere statute. By and large, however, the national legislature is still the principal of the local government units, which cannot defy its will or modify or violate it.77
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
In recent years, the increasing social challenges of the times expanded the scope of state activity, and taxation has become a tool to realize social justice and the equitable distribution of wealth, economic progress and the protection of local industries as well as public welfare and similar objectives. Taxation assumes even greater significance with the ratification of the 1987 Constitution. Thenceforth, the power to tax is no longer vested exclusively on Congress; local legislative bodies are now given direct authority to levy taxes, fees and other charges pursuant to Article X, Section 5 of the 1987 Constitution, viz:Fairly recently, We also stated in Pelizloy Realty Corporation v. Province of Benguet85 that:
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary“Section 5. Each Local Government unit shall have the power to create its own sources of revenue, to levy taxes, fees and charges subject to such guidelines and limitations as the Congress may provide, consistent with the basic policy of local autonomy. Such taxes, fees and charges shall accrue exclusively to the local governments.”This paradigm shift results from the realization that genuine development can be achieved only by strengthening local autonomy and promoting decentralization of governance. For a long time, the country’s highly centralized government structure has bred a culture of dependence among local government leaders upon the national leadership. It has also “dampened the spirit of initiative, innovation and imaginative resilience in matters of local development on the part of local government leaders.” The only way to shatter this culture of dependence is to give the LGUs a wider role in the delivery of basic services, and confer them sufficient powers to generate their own sources for the purpose. To achieve this goal, Section 3 of Article X of the 1987 Constitution mandates Congress to enact a local government code that will, consistent with the basic policy of local autonomy, set the guidelines and limitations to this grant of taxing powers x x x84
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
The rule governing the taxing power of provinces, cities, municipalities and barangays is summarized in Icard v. City Council of Baguio:Indeed, LGUs have no inherent power to tax except to the extent that such power might be delegated to them either by the basic law or by the statute.87 “Under the now prevailing Constitution, where there is neither a grant nor a prohibition by statute, the tax power must be deemed to exist although Congress may provide statutory limitations and guidelines. The basic rationale for the current rule is to safeguard the viability and self-sufficiency of local government units by directly granting them general and broad tax powers. Nevertheless, the fundamental law did not intend the delegation to be absolute and unconditional; the constitutional objective obviously is to ensure that, while the local government units are being strengthened and made more autonomous, the legislature must still see to it that (a) the taxpayer will not be over-burdened or saddled with multiple and unreasonable impositions; (b) each local government unit will have its fair share of available resources; (c) the resources of the national government will not be unduly disturbed; and (d) local taxation will be fair, uniform, and just.”88ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibraryIt is settled that a municipal corporation unlike a sovereign state is clothed with no inherent power of taxation. The charter or statute must plainly show an intent to confer that power or the municipality, cannot assume it. And the power when granted is to be construed in strictissimi juris. Any doubt or ambiguity arising out of the term used in granting that power must be resolved against the municipality. Inferences, implications, deductions – all these – have no place in the interpretation of the taxing power of a municipal corporation. [Underscoring supplied]In conformity with Section 3, Article X of the 1987 Constitution, Congress enacted Republic Act No. 7160, otherwise known as the Local Government Code of 1991. Book II of the LGC governs local taxation and fiscal matters.86
x x x x
Per Section 5, Article X of the 1987 Constitution, “the power to tax is no longer vested exclusively on Congress; local legislative bodies are now given direct authority to levy taxes, fees and other charges.” Nevertheless, such authority is “subject to such guidelines and limitations as the Congress may provide.”
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
SECTION 130. Fundamental Principles. – The following fundamental principles shall govern the exercise of the taxing and other revenue-raising powers of local government units:On the Socialized Housing Tax
(a) Taxation shall be uniform in each local government unit;
(b) Taxes, fees, charges and other impositions shall:
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary(1) be equitable and based as far as practicable on the taxpayer’s ability to pay;SECTION 133. Common Limitations on the Taxing Powers of Local Government Units. – Unless otherwise provided herein, the exercise of the taxing powers of provinces, cities, municipalities, and barangays shall not extend to the levy of the following:
(2) be levied and collected only for public purposes;
(3) not be unjust, excessive, oppressive, or confiscatory;
(4) not be contrary to law, public policy, national economic policy, or in restraint of trade;
(c) The collection of local taxes, fees, charges and other impositions shall in no case be let to any private person;
(d) The revenue collected pursuant to the provisions of this Code shall inure solely to the benefit of, and be subject to the disposition by, the local government unit levying the tax, fee, charge or other imposition unless otherwise specifically provided herein; and,
(e) Each local government unit shall, as far as practicable, evolve a progressive system of taxation.
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary(a) Income tax, except when levied on banks and other financial institutions;SECTION 151. Scope of Taxing Powers. – Except as otherwise provided in this Code, the city, may levy the taxes, fees, and charges which the province or municipality may impose: Provided, however, That the taxes, fees and charges levied and collected by highly urbanized and independent component cities shall accrue to them and distributed in accordance with the provisions of this Code.
(b) Documentary stamp tax;
(c) Taxes on estates, inheritance, gifts, legacies and other acquisitions mortis causa, except as otherwise provided herein;
(d) Customs duties, registration fees of vessel and wharfage on wharves, tonnage dues, and all other kinds of customs fees, charges and dues except wharfage on wharves constructed and maintained by the local government unit concerned;
(e) Taxes, fees, and charges and other impositions upon goods carried into or out of, or passing through, the territorial jurisdictions of local government units in the guise of charges for wharfage, tolls for bridges or otherwise, or other taxes, fees, or charges in any form whatsoever upon such goods or merchandise;
(f) Taxes, fees or charges on agricultural and aquatic products when sold by marginal farmers or fishermen;
(g) Taxes on business enterprises certified to by the Board of Investments as pioneer or non-pioneer for a period of six (6) and four (4) years, respectively from the date of registration;
(h) Excise taxes on articles enumerated under the National Internal Revenue Code, as amended, and taxes, fees or charges on petroleum products;
(i) Percentage or value-added tax (VAT) on sales, barters or exchanges or similar transactions on goods or services except as otherwise provided herein;
(j) Taxes on the gross receipts of transportation contractors and persons engaged in the transportation of passengers or freight by hire and common carriers by air, land or water, except as provided in this Code;
(k) Taxes on premiums paid by way of reinsurance or retrocession;
(l) Taxes, fees or charges for the registration of motor vehicles and for the issuance of all kinds of licenses or permits for the driving thereof, except tricycles;
(m) Taxes, fees, or other charges on Philippine products actually exported, except as otherwise provided herein;
(n) Taxes, fees, or charges, on Countryside and Barangay Business Enterprises and cooperatives duly registered under R.A. No. 6810 and Republic Act Numbered Sixty-nine hundred thirty-eight (R.A. No. 6938) otherwise known as the “Cooperative Code of the Philippines” respectively; and
(o) Taxes, fees or charges of any kind on the National Government, its agencies and instrumentalities, and local government units.
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
The rates of taxes that the city may levy may exceed the maximum rates allowed for the province or municipality by not more than fifty percent (50%) except the rates of professional and amusement taxes.
SECTION 186. Power To Levy Other Taxes, Fees or Charges. – Local government units may exercise the power to levy taxes, fees or charges on any base or subject not otherwise specifically enumerated herein or taxed under the provisions of the National Internal Revenue Code, as amended, or other applicable laws: Provided, That the taxes, fees, or charges shall not be unjust, excessive, oppressive, confiscatory or contrary to declared national policy: Provided, further, That the ordinance levying such taxes, fees or charges shall not be enacted without any prior public hearing conducted for the purpose.
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
Property has not only an individual function, insofar as it has to provide for the needs of the owner, but also a social function insofar as it has to provide for the needs of the other members of society. The principle is this:Police power, which flows from the recognition that salus populi est suprema lex (the welfare of the people is the supreme law), is the plenary power vested in the legislature to make statutes and ordinances to promote the health, morals, peace, education, good order or safety and general welfare of the people.93 Property rights of individuals may be subjected to restraints and burdens in order to fulfill the objectives of the government in the exercise of police power. 94 In this jurisdiction, it is well-entrenched that taxation may be made the implement of the state’s police power.95ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibraryPolice power proceeds from the principle that every holder of property, however absolute and unqualified may be his title, holds it under the implied liability that his use of it shall not be injurious to the equal enjoyment of others having an equal right to the enjoyment of their property, nor injurious to the right of the community. Rights of property, like all other social and conventional rights, are subject to reasonable limitations in their enjoyment as shall prevent them from being injurious, and to such reasonable restraints and regulations established by law as the legislature, under the governing and controlling power vested in them by the constitution, may think necessary and expedient.92
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
Sec. 43. Socialized Housing Tax. – Consistent with the constitutional principle that the ownership and enjoyment of property bear a social function and to raise funds for the Program, all local government units are hereby authorized to impose an additional one-half percent (0.5%) tax on the assessed value of all lands in urban areas in excess of Fifty thousand pesos (P50,000.00).The rationale of the SHT is found in the preambular clauses of the subject ordinance, to wit:
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
WHEREAS, the imposition of additional tax is intended to provide the City Government with sufficient funds to initiate, implement and undertake Socialized Housing Projects and other related preliminary activities;The above-quoted are consistent with the UDHA, which the LGUs are charged to implement in their respective localities in coordination with the Housing and Urban Development Coordinating Council, the national housing agencies, the Presidential Commission for the Urban Poor, the private sector, and other non-government organizations.98 It is the declared policy of the State to undertake a comprehensive and continuing urban development and housing program that shall, among others, uplift the conditions of the underprivileged and homeless citizens in urban areas and in resettlement areas, and provide for the rational use and development of urban land in order to bring about, among others, reduction in urban dysfunctions, particularly those that adversely affect public health, safety and ecology, and access to land and housing by the underprivileged and homeless citizens.99 Urban renewal and resettlement shall include the rehabilitation and development of blighted and slum areas100 and the resettlement of program beneficiaries in accordance with the provisions of the UDHA.101ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
WHEREAS, the imposition of 0.5% tax will benefit the Socialized Housing Programs and Projects of the City Government, specifically the marginalized sector through the acquisition of properties for human settlements;
WHEREAS, the removal of the urban blight will definitely increase fair market value of properties in the city[.]
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
The police power granted to local government units must always be exercised with utmost observance of the rights of the people to due process and equal protection of the law. Such power cannot be exercised whimsically, arbitrarily or despotically as its exercise is subject to a qualification, limitation or restriction demanded by the respect and regard due to the prescription of the fundamental law, particularly those forming part of the Bill of Rights. Individual rights, it bears emphasis, may be adversely affected only to the extent that may fairly be required by the legitimate demands of public interest or public welfare. Due process requires the intrinsic validity of the law in interfering with the rights of the person to his life, liberty and property.As with the State, LGUs may be considered as having properly exercised their police power only if there is a lawful subject and a lawful method or, to be precise, if the following requisites are met: (1) the interests of the public generally, as distinguished from those of a particular class, require its exercise and (2) the means employed are reasonably necessary for the accomplishment of the purpose and not unduly oppressive upon individuals.112ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
x x x x
To successfully invoke the exercise of police power as the rationale for the enactment of the Ordinance, and to free it from the imputation of constitutional infirmity, not only must it appear that the interests of the public generally, as distinguished from those of a particular class, require an interference with private rights, but the means adopted must be reasonably necessary for the accomplishment of the purpose and not unduly oppressive upon individuals. It must be evident that no other alternative for the accomplishment of the purpose less intrusive of private rights can work. A reasonable relation must exist between the purposes of the police measure and the means employed for its accomplishment, for even under the guise of protecting the public interest, personal rights and those pertaining to private property will not be permitted to be arbitrarily invaded.
Lacking a concurrence of these two requisites, the police measure shall be struck down as an arbitrary intrusion into private rights – a violation of the due process clause.111
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
x x x When a municipality has general authority to regulate a particular subject matter, the manner and means of exercising those powers, where not specifically prescribed by the legislature, are left to the discretion of the municipal authorities. x x x Leaving the manner of exercising municipal powers to the discretion of municipal authorities "implies a range of reasonableness within which a municipality's exercise of discretion will not be interfered with or upset by the judiciary."128In this jurisdiction, pursuant to Section 16 of the LGC and in the proper exercise of its corporate powers under Section 22 of the same, the Sangguniang Panlungsod of Quezon City, like other local legislative bodies, is empowered to enact ordinances, approve resolutions, and appropriate funds for the general welfare of the city and its inhabitants.129 Section 16 of the LGC provides:
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
SECTION 16. General Welfare. – Every local government unit shall exercise the powers expressly granted, those necessarily implied therefrom, as well as powers necessary, appropriate, or incidental for its efficient and effective governance, and those which are essential to the promotion of the general welfare. Within their respective territorial jurisdictions, local government units shall ensure and support, among other things, the preservation and enrichment of culture, promote health and safety, enhance the right of the people to a balanced ecology, encourage and support the development of appropriate and self-reliant scientific and technological capabilities, improve public morals, enhance economic prosperity and social justice, promote full employment among their residents, maintain peace and order, and preserve the comfort and convenience of their inhabitants.The general welfare clause is the delegation in statutory form of the police power of the State to LGUs.130 The provisions related thereto are liberally interpreted to give more powers to LGUs in accelerating economic development and upgrading the quality of life for the people in the community.131 Wide discretion is vested on the legislative authority to determine not only what the interests of the public require but also what measures are necessary for the protection of such interests since the Sanggunian is in the best position to determine the needs of its constituents.132ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
WHEREAS, Quezon City being the largest and premiere city in the Philippines in terms of population and urban geographical areas, apart from being competent and efficient in the delivery of public service, apparently requires a big budgetary allocation in order to address the problems relative and connected to the prompt and efficient delivery of basic services such as the effective system of waste management, public information programs on proper garbage and proper waste disposal, including the imposition of waste regulatory measures;Certainly, as opposed to petitioner’s opinion, the garbage fee is not a tax. In Smart Communications, Inc. v. Municipality of Malvar, Batangas,139 the Court had the occasion to distinguish these two concepts:
WHEREAS, to help augment the funds to be spent for the city’s waste management system, the City Government through the Sangguniang Panlungsod deems it necessary to impose a schedule of reasonable fees or charges for the garbage collection services for residential (domestic household) that it renders to the public.
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
In Progressive Development Corporation v. Quezon City, the Court declared that “if the generating of revenue is the primary purpose and regulation is merely incidental, the imposition is a tax; but if regulation is the primary purpose, the fact that incidentally revenue is also obtained does not make the imposition a tax.”In Georgia, U.S.A., assessments for garbage collection services have been consistently treated as a fee and not a tax.140 In another U.S. case,141 the garbage fee was considered as a "service charge" rather than a tax as it was actually a fee for a service given by the city which had previously been provided at no cost to its citizens.
In Victorias Milling Co., Inc. v. Municipality of Victorias, the Court reiterated that the purpose and effect of the imposition determine whether it is a tax or a fee, and that the lack of any standards for such imposition gives the presumption that the same is a tax.We accordingly say that the designation given by the municipal authorities does not decide whether the imposition is properly a license tax or a license fee. The determining factors are the purpose and effect of the imposition as may be apparent from the provisions of the ordinance. Thus, “[w]hen no police inspection, supervision, or regulation is provided, nor any standard set for the applicant to establish, or that he agrees to attain or maintain, but any and all persons engaged in the business designated, without qualification or hindrance, may come, and a license on payment of the stipulated sum will issue, to do business, subject to no prescribed rule of conduct and under no guardian eye, but according to the unrestrained judgment or fancy of the applicant and licensee, the presumption is strong that the power of taxation, and not the police power, is being exercised.”
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
(e) Source reduction – The source reduction component shall include a program and implementation schedule which shows the methods by which the LGU will, in combination with the recycling and composting components, reduce a sufficient amount of solid waste disposed of in accordance with the diversion requirements of Section 20.The solid waste management plan shall also include an implementation schedule for solid waste diversion:
The source reduction component shall describe the following:
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary(1) strategies in reducing the volume of solid waste generated at source;The LGU source reduction component shall include the evaluation and identification of rate structures and fees for the purpose of reducing the amount of waste generated, and other source reduction strategies, including but not limited to, programs and economic incentives provided under Sec. 45 of this Act to reduce the use of non-recyclable materials, replace disposable materials and products with reusable materials and products, reduce packaging, and increase the efficiency of the use of paper, cardboard, glass, metal, and other materials. The waste reduction activities of the community shall also take into account, among others, local capability, economic viability, technical requirements, social concerns, disposition of residual waste and environmental impact: Provided, That, projection of future facilities needed and estimated cost shall be incorporated in the plan. x x x154
(2) measures for implementing such strategies and the resources necessary to carry out such activities;
(3) other appropriate waste reduction technologies that may also be considered, provided that such technologies conform with the standards set pursuant to this Act;
(4) the types of wastes to be reduced pursuant to Section 15 of this Act;
(5) the methods that the LGU will use to determine the categories of solid wastes to be diverted from disposal at a disposal facility through re-use, recycling and composting; and
(6) new facilities and of expansion of existing facilities which will be needed to implement re-use, recycling and composting.
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
SEC. 20. Establishing Mandatory Solid Waste Diversion. – Each LGU plan shall include an implementation schedule which shows that within five (5) years after the effectivity of this Act, the LGU shall divert at least 25% of all solid waste from waste disposal facilities through re-use, recycling, and composting activities and other resource recovery activities: Provided, That the waste diversion goals shall be increased every three (3) years thereafter: Provided, further, That nothing in this Section prohibits a local government unit from implementing re-use, recycling, and composting activities designed to exceed the goal.The baseline for the twenty-five percent (25%) shall be derived from the waste characterization result155 that each LGU is mandated to undertake.156ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
SEC. 47. Authority to Collect Solid Waste Management Fees – The local government unit shall impose fees in amounts sufficient to pay the costs of preparing, adopting, and implementing a solid waste management plan prepared pursuant to this Act. The fees shall be based on the following minimum factors:Rule XVII of the IRR of R.A. No. 9003 sets forth the details:
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary(a) types of solid waste;The fees shall be used to pay the actual costs incurred by the LGU in collecting the local fees. In determining the amounts of the fees, an LGU shall include only those costs directly related to the adoption and implementation of the plan and the setting and collection of the local fees.
(b) amount/volume of waste; and
(c) distance of the transfer station to the waste management facility.
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
Section 1. Power to Collect Solid Waste Management Fees. – The Local SWM Board/Local SWM Cluster Board shall impose fees on the SWM services provided for by the LGU and/or any authorized organization or unit. In determining the amounts of the fees, a Local SWM Board/Local SWM Cluster Board shall include only those costs directly related to the adoption and implementation of the SWM Plan and the setting and collection of the local fees. This power to impose fees may be ceded to the private sector and civil society groups which have been duly accredited by the Local SWM Board/Local SWM Cluster Board; provided, the SWM fees shall be covered by a Contract or Memorandum of Agreement between the respective board and the private sector or civil society group.From the afore-quoted provisions, it is clear that the authority of a municipality or city to impose fees is limited to the collection and transport of non-recyclable and special wastes and for the disposal of these into the sanitary landfill. Barangays, on the other hand, have the authority to impose fees for the collection and segregation of biodegradable, compostable and reusable wastes from households, commerce, other sources of domestic wastes, and for the use of barangay MRFs. This is but consistent with Section 10 of R.A. No. 9003 directing that segregation and collection of biodegradable, compostable and reusable wastes shall be conducted at the barangay level, while the collection of non-recyclable materials and special wastes shall be the responsibility of the municipality or city.
The fees shall pay for the costs of preparing, adopting and implementing a SWM Plan prepared pursuant to the Act. Further, the fees shall also be used to pay the actual costs incurred in collecting the local fees and for project sustainability.
Section 2. Basis of SWM Service Fees
Reasonable SWM service fees shall be computed based on but not limited to the following minimum factors:
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrarya) Types of solid waste to include special wasteSection 3. Collection of Fees. – Fees may be collected corresponding to the following levels:
b) amount/volume of waste
c) distance of the transfer station to the waste management facility
d) capacity or type of LGU constituency
e) cost of construction
f) cost of management
g) type of technology
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrarya) Barangay – The Barangay may impose fees for collection and segregation of biodegradable, compostable and reusable wastes from households, commerce, other sources of domestic wastes, and for the use of Barangay MRFs. The computation of the fees shall be established by the respective SWM boards. The manner of collection of the fees shall be dependent on the style of administration of respective Barangay Councils. However, all transactions shall follow the Commission on Audit rules on collection of fees.
b) Municipality – The municipal and city councils may impose fees on the barangay MRFs for the collection and transport of non-recyclable and special wastes and for the disposal of these into the sanitary landfill. The level and procedure for exacting fees shall be defined by the Local SWM Board/Local SWM Cluster Board and supported by LGU ordinances, however, payments shall be consistent with the accounting system of government.
c) Private Sector/Civil Society Group – On the basis of the stipulations of contract or Memorandum of Agreement, the private sector or civil society group shall impose fees for collection, transport and tipping in their SLFs. Receipts and invoices shall be issued to the paying public or to the government.
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
On all domestic households in Quezon City;For the purpose of garbage collection, there is, in fact, no substantial distinction between an occupant of a lot, on one hand, and an occupant of a unit in a condominium, socialized housing project or apartment, on the other hand. Most likely, garbage output produced by these types of occupants is uniform and does not vary to a large degree; thus, a similar schedule of fee is both just and equitable.159ChanRoblesVirtualawlibraryOn all condominium unit and socialized housing projects/units in Quezon City;
LAND AREA IMPOSABLE FEELess than 200 sq. m. PHP 100.00201 sq. m. – 500 sq. m. PHP 200.00501 sq. m. – 1,000 sq. m. PHP 300.001,001 sq. m. – 1,500 sq. m. PHP 400.001,501 sq. m. – 2,000 sq. m. or more PHP 500.00On high-rise Condominium Units
FLOOR AREA IMPOSABLE FEELess than 40 sq. m. PHP25.0041 sq. m. – 60 sq. m. PHP50.0061 sq. m. – 100 sq. m. PHP75.00101 sq. m. – 150 sq. m. PHP100.00151 sq. m. – 200 sq. [m.] or more PHP200.00
a) High-rise Condominium – The Homeowners Association of high rise condominiums shall pay the annual garbage fee on the total size of the entire condominium and socialized Housing Unit and an additional garbage fee shall be collected based on area occupied for every unit already sold or being amortized. b) High-rise apartment units – Owners of high-rise apartment units shall pay the annual garbage fee on the total lot size of the entire apartment and an additional garbage fee based on the schedule prescribed herein for every unit occupied.
[A] lack of uniformity in the rate charged is not necessarily unlawful discrimination. The establishment of classifications and the charging of different rates for the several classes is not unreasonable and does not violate the requirements of equality and uniformity. Discrimination to be unlawful must draw an unfair line or strike an unfair balance between those in like circumstances having equal rights and privileges. Discrimination with respect to rates charged does not vitiate unless it is arbitrary and without a reasonable fact basis or justification.162On top of an unreasonable classification, the penalty clause of Ordinance No. SP-2235, which states:
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
SECTION 3. Penalty Clause – A penalty of 25% of the garbage fee due plus an interest of 2% per month or a fraction thereof (interest) shall be charged against a household owner who refuses to pay the garbage fee herein imposed.lacks the limitation required by Section 168 of the LGC, which provides:
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
SECTION 168. Surcharges and Penalties on Unpaid Taxes, Fees, or Charges. – The sanggunian may impose a surcharge not exceeding twenty-five (25%) of the amount of taxes, fees or charges not paid on time and an interest at the rate not exceeding two percent (2%) per month of the unpaid taxes, fees or charges including surcharges, until such amount is fully paid but in no case shall the total interest on the unpaid amount or portion thereof exceed thirty-six (36) months. (Emphasis supplied)Finally, on the issue of publication of the two challenged ordinances.
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
SECTION 59. Effectivity of Ordinances or Resolutions. – (a) Unless otherwise stated in the ordinance or the resolution approving the local development plan and public investment program, the same shall take effect after ten (10) days from the date a copy thereof is posted in a bulletin board at the entrance of the provincial capitol or city, municipal, or barangay hall, as the case may be, and in at least two (2) other conspicuous places in the local government unit concerned.On October 17, 2011, respondent Quezon City Council enacted Ordinance No. SP-2095, which provides that it would take effect after its publication in a newspaper of general circulation.163 On the other hand, Ordinance No. SP-2235, which was passed by the City Council on December 16, 2013, provides that it would be effective upon its approval.164 Ten (10) days after its enactment, or on December 26, 2013, respondent City Mayor approved the same.165ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
(b) The secretary to the sanggunian concerned shall cause the posting of an ordinance or resolution in the bulletin board at the entrance of the provincial capitol and the city, municipal, or barangay hall in at least two (2) conspicuous places in the local government unit concerned not later than five (5) days after approval thereof.
The text of the ordinance or resolution shall be disseminated and posted in Filipino or English and in the language or dialect understood by the majority of the people in the local government unit concerned, and the secretary to the sanggunian shall record such fact in a book kept for the purpose, stating the dates of approval and posting.
(c) The gist of all ordinances with penal sanctions shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the province where the local legislative body concerned belongs. In the absence of any newspaper of general circulation within the province, posting of such ordinances shall be made in all municipalities and cities of the province where the sanggunian of origin is situated.
(d) In the case of highly urbanized and independent component cities, the main features of the ordinance or resolution duly enacted or adopted shall, in addition to being posted, be published once in a local newspaper of general circulation within the city: Provided, That in the absence thereof the ordinance or resolution shall be published in any newspaper of general circulation.
SECTION 188. Publication of Tax Ordinances and Revenue Measures. – Within ten (10) days after their approval, certified true copies of all provincial, city, and municipal tax ordinances or revenue measures shall be published in full for three (3) consecutive days in a newspaper of local circulation: Provided, however, That in provinces, cities and municipalities where there are no newspapers of local circulation, the same may be posted in at least two (2) conspicuous and publicly accessible places. (Emphasis supplied)
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
Endnotes:
1Rollo, p. 18.
2 AN ORDINANCE FURTHER AMENDING THE QUEZON CITY REVENUE CODE, AS AMENDED, TO IMPOSE AN ADDITIONAL ONE-HALF PERCENT (0.5%) TAX ON ASSESSED VALUE OF ALL LANDS IN QUEZON CITY EXCEEDING ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND PESOS (P100,000.00) WHICH SHALL ACCRUE TO THE SOCIALIZED HOUSING PROGRAM OF THE CITY GOVERNMENT AS PROVIDED FOR UNDER SECTION 43 OF REPUBLIC ACT NO. 7279, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AND HOUSING ACT (UDHA) OF 1992 AND LOCAL FINANCE CIRCULAR NO. 1-97 OF THE DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE.
3 Secs. 4 and 6. (Rollo, pp. 16-17)
4 Sec. 7. (Id. at 17-18)
5AN ORDINANCE IMPOSING AN ANNUAL GARBAGE FEE ON ALL DOMESTIC HOUSEHOLDS AND PROVIDING PENALTY FOR NON-COMPLIANCE THEREOF.
6Rollo, pp. 23, 33.
7 Sec. 4. (Id. at 22)
8 Sec. 2. (Id.)
9 Sec. 3. (Id.)
10Id. at 3-4; 10-11.
11Id. at 25.
12Id. at 28-48.
13 G.R. No. 89554, July 10, 1992, 211 SCRA 384.
14Liga ng mga Barangay National v. City Mayor of Manila, 465 Phil. 529, 540-541 (2004).
15 See Secs. 48, 457 (a), and 458 (a).
16 Sec. 132.
17 CONSTITUTION, Art. VIII, Sec. 5 (2) (a).
18Social Justice Society (SJS) Officers et al. v. Lim, G.R. No. 187836, November 25, 2014; Rayos v. City of Manila, G.R. No. 196063, December 14, 2011, 662 SCRA 684, 690-691; Diaz v. Secretary of Finance, G.R. No. 193007, July 19, 2011, 654 SCRA 96, 109; and Ortega v. Quezon City Gov’t., 506 Phil. 373, 380 (2005).
19Liga ng mga Barangay National v. City Mayor of Manila, supra note 14, at 543 and Ortega v. Quezon City Gov’t., supra, at 381.
20Ongsuco, et al. vs. Hon. Malones, 619 Phil. 492, 508 (2009).
21 Sec. 455 (a).
22 Sec. 455 (b) (3) (iii).
23 Secs. 170 and 472 (b) (1).
24Supra note 18.
25 464 Phil. 375 (2004).
26Senator Jaworski v. PAGCOR, supra, at 385. (Emphasis ours)
27Miñoza v. Hon. Lopez, et al., 664 Phil. 115, 123 (2011).
28Chamber of Real Estate and Builders' Ass’ns, Inc. v. Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC), et al., 638 Phil. 542, 554 (2010).
29Public Interest Center, Inc. v. Judge Roxas, 542 Phil. 443,456 (2007).
30Id. at 456.
31Disomangcop v. Sec. Datumanong, 486 Phil. 398, 425-426 (2004).
32 578 Phil. 773 (2008).
33 Section 5. The Supreme Court shall have the following powers:
x x x x
(2) Review, revise, reverse, modify, or affirm on appeal or certiorari, as the law or the Rules of Court may provide, final judgments and orders of lower courts in:
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary(a) All cases in which the constitutionality or validity of any treaty, international or executive agreement, law, presidential decree, proclamation, order, instruction, ordinance, or regulation is in question.
(b) All cases involving the legality of any tax, impost, assessment, or toll, or any penalty imposed in relation thereto.
chanroblesvirtuallawlibraryx x x x
34Benavidez v. Salvador, G.R. No. 173331, December 11, 2013, 712 SCRA, 238, 248.
35Subic Telecommunications Co., Inc. v. Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority, et al., 618 Phil. 480, 493 (2009).
36 G.R. No. 197937, April 3, 2013, 695 SCRA 175.
37Film Development Council of the Philippines v. SM Prime Holdings, Inc., supra, at 185-188.
38Solidbank Union v. Metropolitan Bank and Trust Company, G.R. No. 153799, September 17, 2012, 680 SCRA 629, 668.
39Brown-Araneta v. Araneta, G.R. No. 190814, October 9, 2013, 707 SCRA 222, 246.
40 G.R. No. 112497, August 4, 1994, 235 SCRA 135.
41Reyes v. Court of Appeals, 378 Phil. 232 (1999). See also subsequent case of Figuerres v. Court of Appeals, 364 Phil. 683 (1999).
42Reyes v. Court of Appeals, supra, at 238, and Jardine Davies Insurance Brokers, Inc. v. Hon. Aliposa, 446 Phil. 243, 254-255 (2003).
43Hagonoy Market Vendor Asso. v. Municipality of Hagonoy, 426 Phil. 769 (2002).
44Id. at 778.
45Supra note 20.
46 G.R. No. 191761, November 14, 2012, 685 SCRA 609.
47 Sec. 5. Each local government unit shall have the power to create its own sources of revenues and to levy taxes, fees and charges subject to such guidelines and limitations as the Congress may provide, consistent with the basic policy of local autonomy. Such taxes, fees, and charges shall accrue exclusively to the local governments.
48 SECTION 232. Power to Levy Real Property Tax. – A province or city or a municipality within the Metropolitan Manila Area may levy an annual ad valorem tax on real property such as land, building, machinery, and other improvement not hereinafter specifically exempted.
SECTION 233. Rates of Levy. – A province or city or a municipality within the Metropolitan Manila Area shall fix a uniform rate of basic real property tax applicable to their respective localities as follows:
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary(a) In the case of a province, at the rate not exceeding one percent (1%) of the assessed value of real property; and49 134 Phil. 180 (1968).
(b) In the case of a city or a municipality within the Metropolitan Manila Area, at the rate not exceeding two percent (2%) of the assessed value of real property.
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
50 616 Phil. 449 (2009).
51 666 Phil. 122 (2011).
52 352 Phil. 153 (1998).
53 568 Phil. 658 (2008).
54 Section 9. The State shall promote a just and dynamic social order that will ensure the prosperity and independence of the nation and free the people from poverty through policies that provide adequate social services, promote full employment, a rising standard of living, and an improved quality of life for all.
55 110 Phil. 150 (1960).
56 46 Phil. 179 (1924).
57 Section 1. The Congress shall give highest priority to the enactment of measures that protect and enhance the right of all the people to human dignity, reduce social, economic, and political inequalities, and remove cultural inequities by equitably diffusing wealth and political power for the common good.
To this end, the State shall regulate the acquisition, ownership, use, and disposition of property and its increments.
Section 2. The promotion of social justice shall include the commitment to create economic opportunities based on freedom of initiative and self-reliance.
58 Sec. 2. Declaration of State Policy and Program Objectives. – It shall be the policy of the State to undertake, in cooperation with the private sector, a comprehensive and continuing Urban Development and Housing Program, hereinafter referred to as the Program, which shall:
(a) Uplift the conditions of the underprivileged and homeless citizens in urban areas and in resettlement areas by making available to them decent housing at affordable cost, basic services, and employment opportunities[.] x x x
59 Sec. 43. Socialized Housing Tax. – Consistent with the constitutional principle that the ownership and enjoyment of property bear a social function and to raise funds for the Program, all local government units are hereby authorized to impose an additional one-half percent (0.5%) tax on the assessed value of all lands in urban areas in excess of Fifty thousand pesos (P50,000).
60 88 Phil. 60 (1951).
61Supra note 49.
62Rollo, p. 37.
63 135 Phil. 572 (1968).
64Supra note 49.
65 70 Phil. 726 (1940).
66 G.R. No. 104786, January 27, 1994, 229 SCRA 554.
67Supra note 53.
68 Section 47. Authority to Collect Solid Waste Management Fees. – The local government unit shall impose fees in amounts sufficient to pay the costs of preparing, adopting, and implementing a solid waste management plan prepared pursuant to this Act. The fees shall be based on the following minimum factors:
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary(a) types of solid waste;The fees shall be used to pay the actual costs incurred by the LGU in collecting the local fees. In determining the amounts of the fees, an LGU shall include only those costs directly related to the adoption and implementation of the plan and the setting and collection of the local fees.
(b) amount/volume of waste; and
(c) distance of the transfer station to the waste management facility.
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
69 Section 46. Solid Waste Management Fund. – There is hereby created, as a special account in the National Treasury, a Solid Waste Management Fund to be administered by the Commission. Such fund shall be sourced from the following:
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary(a) Fines and penalties imposed, proceeds of permits and licenses issued by the Department under this Act, donations, endowments, grants and contributions from domestic and foreign sources; andThe Fund shall be used to finance the following:
(b) Amounts specifically appropriated for the Fund under the annual General Appropriations Act.
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary(1) products, facilities, technologies and processes to enhance proper solid waste management;LGUs are entitled to avail of the Fund on the basis of their approved solid waste management plan. Specific criteria for the availment of the Fund shall be prepared by the Commission.
(2) awards and incentives;
(3) research programs;
(4) information, education, communication and monitoring activities;
(5) technical assistance; and
(6) capability building activities.
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
The fines collected under Sec. 49 shall be allocated to the LGU where the fined prohibited acts are committed in order to finance the solid waste management of said LGU. Such allocation shall be based on a sharing scheme between the Fund and the LGU concerned.
In no case, however, shall the Fund be used for the creation of positions or payment of salaries and wages.
70Victorias Milling Co., Inc. v. Municipality of Victorias, etc., supra note 49, at 194, as cited in Progressive Development Corporation v. Quezon City, 254 Phil. 635, 646 (1989). and Smart Communications, Inc. v. Municipality of Malvar, Batangas, G.R. No. 204429, February 18, 2014, 716 SCRA 677, 695.
71Legaspi v. City of Cebu, G.R. No. 159110, December 10, 2013, 711 SCRA 771, 784-785; White Light Corp., et al. v. City of Manila, 596 Phil. 444, 459 (2009); Social Justice Society (SJS), et al. v. Hon. Atienza, Jr., supra note 53, at 699-700; and See City of Manila v. Hon. Laguio, Jr., 495 Phil. 289, 307-308 (2005).
72Legaspi v. City of Cebu, supra, at 785.
73City of Manila v. Hon. Laguio, Jr., supra note 71, at 308.
74Tan v. Pereña, 492 Phil. 200, 221 (2005).
75City of Manila v. Hon. Laguio, Jr., supra note 71, at 308.
76 482 Phil. 544 (2004).
77Batangas CATV, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, supra, at 564-565. Social Justice Society (SJS), et al. v. Hon. Atienza, Jr., supra note 53, at 710-711.
78Batangas CATV, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, supra not 76, at 571.
79Id. at 570.
80City of Manila v. Hon. Laguio, Jr., supra note 71, at 337.
81Legaspi v. City of Cebu, supra note 71, at 785.
82National Power Corp. v. City of Cabanatuan, 449 Phil. 233, 261 (2003).
83Id.
84Id. at 247-249.
85 G.R. No. 183137, April 10, 2013, 695 SCRA 491.
86Pelizloy Realty Corporation v. Province of Benguet, supra, at 500-501.
87MERALCO v. Province of Laguna, 366 Phil. 428, 433 (1999).
88Id. at 434-435.
89 See LGC, Secs. 18 and 129.
90 1987 CONSTITUTION, Art. XII, Sec. 6.
91Supra note 53.
92Social Justice Society (SJS), et al. v. Hon. Atienza, Jr., supra note 53, at 707.
93Id. at 700-701.
94Id. at 703.
95 See Rep. of the Phils. v. Judge Caguioa, 562 Phil. 187 (2007) (withdrawal of the tax exemption on cigars and cigarettes, distilled spirits, fermented liquors and wines brought directly into the freeports under R.A. No. 9334); Southern Cross Cement Corporation v. Philippine Cement Manufacturers Corporation, 503 Phil. 485 (2005) (imposition of general safeguard measures); Republic of the Philippines v. COCOFED et al., 423 Phil. 735 (2001) (on the Coconut Consumer Stabilization Fund or coconut levy funds under P.D. No. 276); Caltex Philippines, Inc. v. Commission on Audit, G.R. No. 92585, May 8, 1992, 208 SCRA 726 (on the Oil Price Stabilization Fund under P.D. No. 1956, as amended); Gaston v. Republic Planters Bank, 242 Phil. 377 (1988) (stabilization fees to accrue to a Development and Stabilization Fund under P.D. No. 388); Philippine Airlines, Inc. v. Commissioner Edu, 247 Phil. 283 (1988) (motor vehicle registration fees under R.A. No. 4136); Tio v. Videogram Regulatory Board, 235 Phil. 198 (1987) (tax on sale, lease or disposition of videograms under P.D. No. 1987); Republic of the Philippines v. Bacolod-Murcia Milling Co., 124 Phil. 27 (1966) (special assessment for the Sugar Research and Stabilization Fund under R.A. No. 632);and Lutz v. Araneta, 98 Phil. 148 (1955) (levy on owners or persons in control of lands devoted to the cultivation of sugar cane and ceded to others for a consideration in favor of the Sugar Adjustment and Stabilization Fund under Commonwealth Act 567).
96 Approved on March 24, 1992.
97 See Sec. 42.
98 Sec. 39.
99 Sec. 2.
100 "Blighted lands" refers to the areas where the structures are dilapidated, obsolete and unsanitary, tending to depreciate the value of the land and prevent normal development and use of the area. (Sec. 3 [c])
101 Sec. 26.
102 "Socialized housing" refers to housing programs and projects covering houses and lots or homelots only undertaken by the Government or the private sector for the underprivileged and homeless citizens which shall include sites and services development, long-term financing, liberalized terms on interest payments, and such other benefits in accordance with the provisions of R.A. No. 7279. (Sec. 3 [r])
103 Sec. 15.
104 Sec. 21.
105 Sec. 21.
106 Sec. 29.
107 Sec. 29.
108 LGC, Sec. 17 (b) (4), in relation to (b) (3) (viii).
109City of Manila v. Hon. Laguio, Jr., supra note 71, at 308.
110Supra note 71.
111City of Manila v. Hon. Laguio, Jr., supra note 71, at 312-313; See also White Light Corp., et al. v. City of Manila, supra note 71, at 467.
112Social Justice Society (SJS), et al. v. Hon. Atienza, supra note 53, at 702.
113City of Manila v. Hon. Laguio, Jr., supra note 71, at 326.
114Id.
115Id.
116Social Justice Society (SJS), et al. v. Hon. Atienza, Jr., supra note 53, at 708.
117Id., See also City of Manila v. Hon. Laguio, Jr., supra note 71, at 328.
118 See Tio v. Videogram Regulatory Board, 235 Phil. 198, 206 (1987).
119Id.
120Id. at 206.
121 See Ennis v. City of Ray, 595 N.W. 2d 305 (1999) and Village of Winside v. Jackson, 553 N.W. 2d 476 (1996).
122 See Jacobson v. Solid Waste Agency of Northwest Nebraska (SWANN), 653 N.W. 2d 482 (2002); Ennis v. City of Ray, supra; and City of Hobbs v. Chesport, Ltd., 76 N.M. 609 (1966).
123Ennis v. City of Ray, supra.
124Id.
125Jacobson v. Solid Waste Agency of Northwest Nebraska (SWANN), supra note 122.
126 See id.
127Jacobson v. Solid Waste Agency of Northwest Nebraska (SWANN), supra note 122.
128Ennis v. City of Ray, supra note 121.
129 LGC, Sec. 458.
130Batangas CATV, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, supra note 76, at 561.
131 LGC, Sec. 5 (c).
132See Social Justice Society (SJS), et al. v. Hon. Atienza, Jr., supra note 53, at 703.
133 LGC, Sec. 3 (i).
134 LGC, Sec. 17 (b) (4), in relation to (b) (2) (vi).
135 Approved on January 26, 2001.
136 LGC, Secs. 2 (g) and 10.
137 LGC, Sec. 153.
138 LGC, Sec. 131 (g) and (l).
139Supra note 70, at 690-691.
140Monticello, Ltd. v. City of Atlanta, 499 S.E. 2d 157 (1998).
141Martin v. City of Trussville, 376 So. 2d 1089 (1979).
142 "In order to constitute double taxation in the objectionable or prohibited sense the same property must be taxed twice when it should be taxed but once; both taxes must be imposed on the same property or subject-matter, for the same purpose, by the same State, Government, or taxing authority, within the same jurisdiction or taxing district, during the same taxing period, and they must be the same kind or character of tax." (Villanueva, et al. v. City of Iloilo, supra note 63, at 588.
143 See Ennis v. City of Ray, supra note 121; and Town of Eclectic v. Mays, 547 So. 2d 96 (1989).
144 See Iroquois Properties v. City of East Lansing, 408 N.W. 2d 495 (1987).
145 Sec. 2 (a) and (d).
146 Sec. 10.
147 Sec. 21.
148 Sec. 3 (jj).
149 Adopted in December 20, 2001.
150 Rule XI, Sec. 1.
151Id.
152 Republic Act No. 9003 (2001), Sec. 16.
153Id.
154 Sec. 17.
155 Sec. 17 of R.A. No. 9003 provides:
SEC. 17. The Components of the Local Government Solid Waste Management Plan. – The solid waste management plan shall include, but not limited to, the following components:
x x x x
(b) Waste characterization – For the initial source reduction and recycling element of a local waste management plan, the LGU waste characterization component shall identify the constituent materials which comprise the solid waste generated within the jurisdiction of the LGU. The information shall be representative of the solid waste generated and disposed of within that area. The constituent materials shall be identified by volume, percentage in weight or its volumetric equivalent, material type, and source of generation which includes residential, commercial, industrial, governmental, or other sources. Future revisions of waste characterization studies shall identify the constituent materials which comprise the solid waste disposed of at permitted disposal facilities.
x x x x
156 See DENR Administrative Order No. 2001-34, Rule VII, Sec. 7.
157Rollo, p. 50.
158 LGC, Secs. 130 and 186.
159 See City of New Smyrna Beach v. Fish, 384 So. 2d. 1272 (1980).
160Rollo, p. 51.
161City of New Smyrna Beach v. Fish, supra note 159.
162Id.
163 Sec. 9.
164 Sec. 10.
165Rollo, p. 23.
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrarycralawred