SECOND DIVISION
G.R. No. 213157, August 10, 2016
NATIONAL GRID CORPORATION OF THE PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, v. OFELIAM. OLIVA, IN HER OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS THE CITY TREASURER OF CEBU CITY, Respondent.
G.R. NO. 213558
OFELIA M. OLLVA, IN HER OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS THE CITY TREASURER OF CEBU CITY, Petitioner, v. NATIONAL GRID CORPORATION OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent.
D E C I S I O N
CARPIO, J.:
It was stated in the Notices of Demand that Transco/NPC was served Notices of Delinquency for all the above properties in 2008 and that failure to pay the amount demanded would result in the Public Auction of the properties above-mentioned.
TAXPAYER'S NAME TAX DEC. NO. CLASSIFICATION PERIOD ASSESSED VALUE (P)AMOUNT DUE (P)
NPC/TRANSCO
C00-019-05574 BLDG. COMM. 2003-2009 5,010,740.00 1,456,459.68 NPC/TRANSCO C00-019-05581 BLDG. COMM. 2001-2009 2,465,320.00 787,957.11 NPC/TRANSGO C00-019-05580 BLDG. COMM. 2004-2009 2,552,760.00 548,445.62 TOTAL P2,792,862.41
On June 17, 2010, the Board issued twin orders: one addressed to [the] City Assessor's Office and the other to the City Treasurer's Office. The gist of the Order is to seek the opposition/comments of both offices as to "whether dr not this case may be given due course."NGCP filed a notice of appeal with memorandum on appeal12 dated 9 December 2010 with the CBAA. NGCP argued that (1) its petition before the LBAA was timely filed; (2) it had the legal personality to file the petition before the LBAA; and (3) NGCP is exempt from payment of the real property taxes subject matter of the second and final notices of demand dated 16 and 21 September 2009 in the total amount of P2,792,862.41.
On July 16, 2010, respondent City Assessor filed his Comment [and] cited that the tax declarations referred to in the subject petition are properties [declared in the name of NATIONAL POWER CORPORATION/TRANSCO.
On July 27, 2010, the Office of the City Attorney, Cebu City, filed its Comment/Opposition to the Petitioner's Motion to Admit Petition, for respondent Cebu City Assessor Eustaquio B. Cesa. For grounds cited therein, it prayed that an Order be issued DISMISSING the instant Petition for being filed out of time.
After;careful examination of the pleadings filed, this Board found merit to the opposition of the respondent [City Assessor]. Hence, the Board hereby DISMISSES the instant petition, as having been filed out of time.
WHEREFORE, the Petition is hereby DISMISSED for lack of merit.
SO ORDERED11
WHEREFORE, the Petition for Review is hereby PARTLY GRANTED. | Accordingly, the Decision dated May 30, 2011, and Order dated November 16, 2011 issued by the Central Board of Assessment Appeals are riereby REVERSED and SET ASIDE.CTA Presiding Justice Roman G. Del Rosario (PJ Del Rosario) wrote a concurring and dissenting opinion, to which Associate Justice Ma. Belen M. Ringpis-Liban concurred. PJ Del Rosario stated that Sections 216 and 218(d) of the Lopal Government Code cannot be made to apply to the real properties under NGCP's control because even though NGCP is engaged in the transmission of electricity, it is not a government-owned or controlled corporation. He also concurred with the opinion that NGCP should not be made liable for real property taxes for the years 2001 to 2008.
Respdndent [City Treasurer of Cebu City] is hereby ORDERED TO REFUND in favor of petitioner [NGCP] the amount of P2,454,3 89.74.
SO ORDERED.22
In G.R. No. 213558, OIC Cuevas raised one issue:ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
- The Honorable Court of Tax Appeals En Banc ruled contrary to prevailing laws and jurisprudence when it held that petitioner NGCP is not exempt from! the payment of real property taxes on the subject properties.
- The Honorable Court of Tax Appeals En Banc ruled contrary to prevailing laws and jurisprudence when it held that the subject properties do not qualify as "special class" of real property under Section 216 of the Local Government Code.25cralawred
The Court qf Tax Appeals committed reversible error in ruling that the City of Cd;bu should refund in favor of NGCP the amount of P2,454,389.74.26To our mind, we consider the following: whether NGCP is liable for the payment of real property taxes on the subject properties and whether the correct amount of taxes was paid and collected.
Section 9. Tax Provisions. - In consideration of the franchise and rights hereby granted, the Grantee [NGCP], its successors or assigns, shall pay a franchise tax equivalent to three percent (3%) of all gross receipts derived by trie Grantee [NGCP] from its operation under this franchise. Said tax shall be in lieu of income tax and any and all taxes, duties, fees and charges of any kind, nature or description levied, established or collected by any authority whatsoever, local or national, on its franchise, rights, privileges, receipts, revenues and profits, and on properties used in connection with its franchise, from which taxes, duties and charges, the Grantee is hereby expressly exempted: Provided, That the Grantee, its successors or[ assigns, shall be liable to pay the same taxes on their real estate, buildings and personal property, exclusive of this franchise, as other corporations are now or hereby may be required by law to pay: Provided, further, That payment by Grantee of the concession fees due to PSALM under the concession agreement shall not be subject to income tax and valueradded tax (VAT).Back in 2003, this ponente discussed the "in lieu of all taxes" clause in a separate opinion in PLDT v. City of Davao32 The Court struck down PLDT's argument that the "in lieu of all taxes" clause in Smart's franchise exempts PLDT from the payment of the local franchise tax imposed by the City of Davao. At first glance, it may seem that the "in lieu of all taxes" clause in Smart's franchise is similarly worded to that of NGCP. Smart's tax provisions in Section 9 of Republic Act No. 7294 read as follows:ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
Tax provisions. - The grantee, its successors or assigns shall be liable to pay, the same taxes on their real estate, buildings and personal property, exclusive of this franchise, as other persons or corporations which are now or hereafter may be required by law to pay. In addition thereto, the grantee, its successors or assigns shall pay a franchise tax equivalent to three percent (3%) of all gross receipts of the business transacted under this franchise by the grantee, its successors or assigns and the said percentage shall be in lieu of all taxes on this franchise or earnings thereof: Provided, that the grantee, its successors or assigns shall continue to be liable for income taxes payable under Title II of the National Internal Revenue Code pursuant to Section 2 of Executive Order No. 72 unless the latter enactment is amended or repealed, in which case the amendment or repeal shall be applicable thereto.Under Republic Act No. 7294, Smart was liable to pay the following taxes: (1) the same taxes on real estate, buildings, and personal property exclusive of the franchise, as other persons Dr corporations are required by law to pay; (2) a franchise tax, which shall be in lieu of taxes on franchise or earnings; and (3) income taxes under the National Internal Revenue Code.
The grantee shall file the return with and pay the tax due thereon to the Commissioner of Internal Revenue or his duly authorized representative in accordance with the National Internal Revenue Code and the return shall be subject to audit by the Bureau of Internal Revenue.
Tax bxemptions must be clear and unequivocal. A taxpayer claiming a tax exemption must point to a specific provision of law conferring oh the taxpayer, in clear and plain terms, exemption from a common burden. Any doubt whether a tax exemption exists is resolved against the taxpayer. Tax exemptions cannot arise by mere implication, much less by an implied re-enactment of a repealed tax exemption clause, xxx.We take note of the pronouncements made in the separate opinion, and apply them to the present set of facts.
x x x x
Smart's franchise states that the 3 percent "franchise tax" shall be "in lieu of all taxes." Clearly, it is the franchise tax that shall be in lieu of all taxes referred to in Section 9, and not the VAT or any other tax. Following the rule on strict interpretation of tax exemptions, the "in lieu of all taxes" clause cannot apply when what is paid is a tax other than the franchise tax. Since the franchise tax on telecommunications companies has been abolished, the "in lieu of all taxes" clause has now become functus officio, rendered inoperative for lack of a franchise tax. Revenue Memorandum Circular No. 5-96 issued by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue stating that the VAT shall be "in lieu of all taxes" since it merely replaced the franchise tax is void for lack of a legal basis.
xxx [T]he "in lieu of all taxes" clause in Smart's franchise refers only to taxes', other than income tax, imposed under the National Internal Revenue Code. The "in lieu of all taxes" clause does not apply to local taxes. The proviso in the first paragraph of Section 9 of Smart's franchise states that the grantee shall "continue to be liable for income taxes payable under Title II of the National Internal Revenue Code." Also, the second paragraph ofi Section 9 speaks of tax returns filed and taxes paid to the "Commissioner of Internal Revenue or his duly authorized representative in accordancje with the National Internal Revenue Code." Moreover, the same paragraph declares that the tax returns "shall be subject to audit by the Bureau of Internal Revenue." Nothing is mentioned in Section 9 about local taxes. The clear intent is for the "in lieu of all taxes" clause to apply only to taxes under the National Internal Revenue Code and not to local taxes. Even with respect to national internal revenue taxes, the "in lieu of all taxes" clause does not apply to income tax.
If Congress intended the "in lieu of all taxes" clause in Smart's franchise to' also apply to local taxes. Congress would have expressly mentioned the exemption from municipal and provincial taxes. Congress could have used the language in Section 9 (b) of Clavecilla's old franchise, as follows:ChanRoblesVirtualawlibraryx x x ;in lieu of any and all taxes of any kind, nature or description levied, established or collected by any authority whatsoever, municipal, provincial or national, from which the grantee is hereby expressly exempted, x x x.However, Cofagress did not expressly exempt Smart from local taxes. Congress used the "in lieu of all taxes" clause only in reference to national internal revenue taxes. The only interpretation, under the rule on strict construction of tax exemptions, is that the "in lieu of all taxes" clause in Smart's franchise refers only to national and not to local taxes.
PLDT cites Philippine Railway Co. v. Nolting [34 Phil. 401 (1916)] to support its claim that the "in lieu of all taxes" clause includes exemption from local taxes. However, in Philippine Railway the franchise of the railway company expressly exempted it from municipal and provincial taxes, as follows:ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrarySuch annual payments, when promptly and fully made 'by the grantee, shall be in lieu of all taxes of every name 'and nature - municipal, provincial or central - upon its capital stock, franchises, right of way, earnings, and all other property owned or operated by the grantee, under this concession or franchise.If anything, Philippine Railway shows the need to avoid ambiguity by specifying thjs taxing authority - municipal, provincial or national - from whose jurisdiction the taxing power is withheld to create the tax exemption. This is not the case in Smart's franchise, where the "in lieu of all taxes" clause refers only to national internal revenue taxes.33
Taxes are not debts; but NGCP's payment of NPC/TRANSCO's tax liabilities made NPC/TRANSCO indebted to NGCP. Article 1236 of the Civil Code is applicable in the present situation: NGCP has an interest in the payment of NPC/TRANSCO's real property taxes from 2001 to 2008. NGCP will not b& able to exercise its franchise should the local government auction the subject properties. The City Treasurer of Cebu City, on the other hand, is bound i to accept NGCP's payment of the taxes due from NPC/TRANSCO.| NGCP's remedy then, is to demand, not from the City Treasurer of Cebu City, but from NPC/TRANSCO the amount of taxes which redounded ito its benefit. Article 1236 provides in part:ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
RPT-DS-FNOD0909-16-020 Year Tax Due Interest Discount Total Amount Due2003 P108,486.00 P78,109.92 - P186,595.922004 108,486.00
78,109.92 - 186,595.922005 108,486.00 78,109.92 - 186,595.922006 150,322.20 108,231.98 - 258,554.182007
150,322.20 102,219.10 - 252,541.302008 130,322.20 66,141.77 216,463.972009 150,322.20 22,548.33 P3,758.06 169,112.47Total P926,746.80
P533,470.94 P3,758.06 Pl,456,459.68 RPT-DS-FNOD0909-21-030 Year Tax Due Interest Discount Total Amount Due2001 P40,324.20 P29,033.42 - P69,357.622002 40,324.20
29,033.42 - 69,357.622003 40,324.20 29,033.42 69,357.[62]2004 40,324.20 29,033.42 - 69,357.[62]2005 40,324.20 29,033.42 - 69,357.[62]2006
73,959.60 53,250.91 - 127,210.512007 73,959.60 50,292.53 - 124,252.132008 73,959.60 32,542.22 - 106,501.822009 73,959.6011,093.94
Pl.848.99 83,204.55Total P497,459.40 P292,346.70 Pl,848.99 P787,957.11 RPT-DS-FNOD0909-21-002 Year Tax Due Interest Discount Total Amount Due2004 P26,636.40 P19.178.21 - P45,814.612005 26,636.40 19,178.21 - 45,814.612006 76,582.80 55,139.62 - 131,722.422007
76,582.80
52,076.30 - 128,659.102008 76,582.80 33,696.43 - 110,279.232009 76,582.80 11,487.42 Pl.914.57 86,155.65Total
P359,604.00 P190,756.19 Pl,914.57 P548,445.62GRAND TOTAL P2,792,862.41
Whoever pays for another may demand from the debtor what he has paid, except that if he paid without the knowledge or against the will of the debtor, he can recover only insofar as the payment has been beneficial to the debtor.However, the City Treasurer of Cebu City may collect real property taxes only in the proper amount. The City Treasurer of Cebu City should refund to NGCP any excess in its payment.
The City Treasurer of Cebu City shall refund to the NGCP any payment which itjmade in excess of the correct amount.
- whether the properties covered by RPT-DS-FNOD0909-16-020, RPT- DS-FNODQ909-21-030, and RPT-DS-FNOD0909-21-002 belong to the special, classes of real property described in Section 216 of the Local Government Code, and assess the appropriate amount of real property tajtes for the years 2001 to 2008; and cralawlawlibrary
- whether the properties covered by RPT-DS-FNOD0909-16-020, RPT- DS-FNOD09O9-21-030, and RPT-DS-FNOD0909-21-002 are used by the National Grid Corporation of the Philippines in connection with its franchise. If the subject properties are not used in connection with NGCP's franchise, then the CBAA should assess the appropriate amount of feal property taxes for the year 2009.
Endnotes:
* On leave.
** On official leave.
1 Under Rule 45 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure.
2Rollo (G.R. No. 213157), pp. 39-59. Penned by Associate Justice Lovell R. Bautista, with Associate Justices Juanito C. Castaneda, Jr., Erlinda P. Uy, Caesar A. Casanova, Esperanza R. Fabon-Victorinq), Cielito N. Mindaro-Grulla, and Amelia R. Cotangco-Manalastas concurring. Presiding Justice Roman G. Del Rosario penned a Concurring and Dissenting Opinion, with Associate Justic'e Ma. Belen M. Ringpis-Liban concurring.
3 Id. at 60-63. Penned by Associate Justice Lovell R. Bautista, with Associate Justices Juanito C. Castaneda, Jr., i Erlinda P. Uy, Caesar A. Casanova, Cielito N. Mindaro-Grulla, Amelia R. Cotangco-Manalastas, and Ma. Belen M. Ringpis-Liban concurring. Presiding Justice Roman G. Del Rosario and Associate Justice Esperanza R. Fabon-Victorino were on leave.
4 Under Rule 45 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure.
5Rollo (G.R. No. 213558), pp. 139-159. Penned by Associate Justice Lovell R. Bautista, with Associate Justices Juanito C. Castaneda, Jr., Erlinda P. Uy, Caesar A. Casanova, Esperanza R. Fabon-Victorino, Cielito N. Mindaro-Grulla, and Amelia R. Cotangco-Manalastas concurring. Presiding Justice Roman G. Del Rosario penned a Concurring and Dissenting Opinion, with Associate Justice Ma. Belen M. Ringpis-Liban concurring.
6 Id. at 183-186. Penned by Associate Justice Lovell R. Bautista, with Associate Justices Juanito C. Castaneda, Jr., Erlinda P. Uy, Caesar A. Casanova, Cielito N. Mindaro-Grulla, Amelia R. Cotangco-Manalastas, and Ma. Belen M. Ringpis-Liban concurring. Presiding Justice Roman G. Del Rosario and Associate Justice Esperanza R. Fabon-Victorino were on leave.
7Rollo (G.R. No.|213157), p. 131; id. at 44. Signed by Registrar of Deeds Emmanuel M. Gimarino as Chairman, and City Prosecutor II Alexander N.V. Acosta as Member. OlC-City Engineer Kenneth Carmelita Enriquez, another Member, was absent.
8Rollo (G.R. No, 213157), pp. 170-186; rollo (G.R. No. 213558), pp. 80-96. Signed by Chairman Ofelia A. Marquez and Members Rafael O. Cortes and Roberto D. Geotina.
9Rollo (G.R. No. 213157), pp. 200-201; rollo (G.R. No. 213558), pp. 111-112.
10Rollo (G.R. No, 213157), pp. 171-172.
11 Id. at 131; rollo (G.R. No. 213558), p. 44.
12Rollo (G.R. No.,213157), pp. 132-163; rollo (G.R. No. 213558), pp. 45-76.
13 Sec. 226. Local. Board of Assessment Appeals. - Any owner or person having legal interest in the property who is not satisfied with the action of the provincial, city or municipal assessor in the assessment of his property may, within sixty (60) days from the date of receipt of the written notice of assessment, appeal to the Local Board of Assessment Appeals of the province or city by filing a petition1 under oath in the form prescribed for the purpose, together with copies of the tax declarations and such affidavits or documents submitted in support of the appeal.
14 Section 9. Tax Provisions. - In consideration of the franchise and rights hereby granted, the Grantee, its successors or assigns, shall pay a franchise tax equivalent to three percent (3%) of all gross receipts derived by the Grantee from its operation under this franchise. Said tax shall in lieu of income tax and any and all taxes, duties, fees and charges of any kind, nature or description levied, established or collected by any authority whatsoever, local or national, on its franchise, rights, privilege's, receipts, revenues and profits, and on properties used in connection with its franchise, from, which taxes, duties and charges, the Grantee is hereby expressly exempted: Provided, That the Grantee, its successors or assigns, shall be liable to pay the same taxes on their real estate, buildings and personal property, exclusive of this franchise, as other corporations are now or hereby may be required by law to pay: Provided, further, That payment by Grantee of the concession fees.due to PSALM under the concession agreement shall not be subject to income tax and value-added tax (VAT).
15 Section 234. Exemptions from Real Property Tax. — The following are exempted from payment of the real property tax:
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary(a) Real property owned by the Republic of the Philippines or any of its political subdivisions except when the beneficial use thereof has been granted, for consideration or otherwise, to a taxable person;
x x x x
16 Section 216 of the Local Government Code reads: Special Classes of Real Property. - All lands, buildings, and other improvements thereon actually, directly and exclusively used for hospitals, cultural, or scientific purposes, and those owned and used by local water districts, and government-owned or controlled corporations rendering essential public services in the supply and distribution of Water and/or generation and transmission of electric power shall be classified as special.
17 Section 218(d) of the Local Government Code provides:ChanRoblesVirtualawlibraryAssessment Levels. - The assessment levels to be applied to the fair market value of real property to determine its assessed value shall be fixed by ordinances of the sangguniang panlalawigan, sangguniang panlungsod or sangguniang bayan of a municipality within the Metropolitan Manila Area, at the rates not exceeding the following:18Rollo (G.R. No! 213157), pp. 187-199; rollo (G.R. No. 213558), pp. 98-110.
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibraryx x x x
(d) On Special! Classes: The assessment levels for all lands buildings, machineries and other improvements:
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
Actual Use Assessment LevelCultural 15%Scientific 15%Hospital 15%Local water districts 10% Government-owned or controlled corporations engaged in the supply and distribution of water and/or generatio and transmission of electric power 10%
19Rollo (G.R. No.| 213157), pp. 200-201; rollo (G.R. No. 213558), pp. 111-112.
20Rollo (G.R. No.' 213157), pp. 202-224; rollo (G.R. No. 213558), pp. 113-135.
21 Supra note 14.
22Rollo (G.R. No. 213157), p. 54; rollo (G.R. No. 213558), p. 154.
23Rollo (G.R. No: 213157), pp. 275-288; rollo (G.R. No. 213558), pp. 160-173.
24Rollo (G.R. Nol 213157), pp. 289-296; rollo (G.R. No. 213558), pp. 174-181.
25cralawred Rollo (G.R. Noi 213157), pp. 17-18.
26Rollo (G.R. Nor 213558), p. 9.
27 Section 2 of RA 6395 provides:ChanRoblesVirtualawlibraryThe National Ppwer Corporation; Its Corporate Life; "Corporation" and "Board" Defined. To carry out the above-stated policy, specifically to undertake the development of hydroelectric generation of pbwer and the production of electricity from nuclear, geothermal and other sources, as well as the transmission of electric power on a nationwide basis, the public corporation created under Commonwealth Act Numbered One hundred twenty and known as the "National Power Corporation" shall continue to exist for fifty years from and after the expiration of its present corporate existence.28 Section 234(c) of RA 7160 provides:ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
x x x xExemptions from Real Property Tax. - The following are exempted from payment of the real property tax: i29 Supra note 17.
x x x x
(c) All machineries and equipment that are actually, directly and exclusively used by local water districts and government owned or controlled corporations engaged in the supply and distribution of water and/or igeneration and transmission of electric power;
x x x x
30 Section 8 of RA 9136 provides:ChanRoblesVirtualawlibraryCreation of the National Transmission Company. - There is hereby created a National Transmission Corporation, hereinafter referred to as TRANSCO, which shall assume the electrical transmission function of the National Power Corporation (NPC), and have the powers and functions hereinafter granted. The TRANSCO shall assume the authority and responsibility of NPC for the planning, construction and centralized operation and maintenance of its high voltage transmission facilities, including grid interconnections and ancillary services.31 Section 1 of RA 9511 provides:ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
X X X XNature and Scope of Franchise. - Subject to the provisions of the Constitution and applicable laws, rules and regulations, and subject to the terms and conditions of the concession agreement and other documents executed with the National Transmission Corporation (TRANSCO) and the Power Sector Assets and Liabilities Management Corporation (PSALM) pursuant to Section 21 of Republic Act No. 9136, which are not inconsistent herewith, there is hereby granted to the National Grid Corporation of the Philippines, hereunder referred to as the Grantee, its successors or assigns, a franchise to operate, manage and maintain, and in connection therewith, to engage in the business of'conveying or transmitting electricity through high voltage back-bone system of interconnected transmission lines, substations and related facilities, systems operations, and other activities that are necessary to support the safe and reliable operation of a transmission system and to construct, install, finance, manage, improve, expand, operate, maintain, rehabilitate, repair and refurbish the present nationwide transmission system of the Republic of the Philippines, The Grantee shall continue to operate and maintain the subtransmission systems which have not been disposed by TRANSCO. Likewise, the Grantee is authorized to engage in ancillary business and any related business which maximizes utilization of its assets such as, but not limited to, telecommunications system, pursuant to Section 20 of Republic Act No. 9136. The scope of the franchise shall be nationwide in accordance with the Transmission Development Plan, subject to amendments or podifications of the said Plan, as may be approved by the Department of Energy of the Republic Of the Philippines.32 447 Phil. 571,5:88-598(2003).
33 Id. at 591-595. Underscoring supplied, boldfacing and italicization in the original.
34Rollo (G.R. No. 21?157), pp. 52-53; rollo (G.R. No. 213558), pp. 152-153.
35 Supra note 16.
36 Supra note 17.
37 Section 217 of the Local Government Code reads: Actual Use of Real Property as Basis for Assessment. - Real property shall be classified, valued and assessed on the basis of its actual use regardless of where located, whoever owns it, and whoever uses it.
38 Section 218 ofjthe Local Government Code reads: Assessment Levels. - The assessment levels to be applied to the fair market value of real property to determine its assessed value shall be fixed by ordinances df the sangguniang panlalawigan, sangguniang panlungsod or sangguniang bayan of a municipality within the Metropolitan Manila Area, at the rates not exceeding the following:ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary(a) On Lands:39 Supra note 14.
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
Class Assessment Levels Residential 20% Agricultural 40% Commercial 50% Industrial 50% Mineral 50% Timberland 20%
(b) On Buildings and Other Structures:
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary(1) Residential, Fair Market Value
Over Not Over Assessment Levels P 175,000.00 0% P 175,000.00 300,000.00 10% 300,000.00 500,000.00 20% 500,000.00 750,000.00 25% 750,000.00 1,000,000.00 30%1,000,000.00
2,000,000.00 35% 2,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 40% 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 50% 10,000,000.00: 60%
(2) Agricultural
Fair Market Value
Over Not Over Assessment Levels P 300,000.00 25% P 300,000.00 500,000.00 30% 500,000.00 750,000.00 35% 750,000.00 1,000,000.00 40% 1,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 45% 2,000,000.00 50%
(3) Commercial / Industrial
Fair Market Value
Over Not Over Assessment Levels P 300,000.00 30% P 300,000.00 500,000.00 35% 500,000.00 750,000.00 40% 750,000.00 1,000,000.00 50% 1,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 60% 2,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 70% 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 75% 10,000,000.00 80%
(4) TimberlandJ
Fair Market Value
Over Not Over Assessment Levels P 300,000.00 45% P 300,000.00 500,000.00 50% 500,000.00 750,000.00 55% 750,000.00 1,000,000.00 60% 1,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 65% 2,000,000.00 70%
(c) On Machineries
Class Assessment Levels Agricultural 40% Residential 50% Commercial 80% Industrial 80%
40 Supra note 37.
41 Supra note 38.