Back

Mandanas vs. Executive Secretary Ochoa [DISSENTING OPINION, REYES, JR., J.]

CONGRESSMAN HERMILANDO I. MANDANAS; MAYOR EFREN B. DIONA; MAYOR ANTONINO A. AURELIO; KAGAWAD MARIO ILAGAN; BARANGAY CHAIR PERLITO MANALO; BARANGAY CHAIR MEDEL MEDRANO; BARANGAY KAGAWAD CRIS RAMOS; BARANGAY KAGAWAD ELISA D. BALBAGO, AND ATTY. JOSE MALVAR VILLEGAS, PETITIONERS, V. EXECUTIVE SECRETARY PAQUITO N. OCHOA, JR.; SECRETARY CESAR PURISIMA, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE; SECRETARY FLORENCIO H. ABAD, DEPARTMENT OF BUDGET AND MANAGEMENT; COMMISSIONER KIM JACINTO-HENARES, BUREAU OF INTERNAL REVENUE; AND NATIONAL TREASURER ROBERTO TAN, BUREAU OF THE TREASURY, RESPONDENTS. [G.R. No. 208488, July 3, 2018] HONORABLE ENRIQUE T. GARCIA, JR., IN HIS PERSONAL AND OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE 2ND DISTRICT OF THE PROVINCE OF BATAAN, PETITIONER, V. HONORABLE [PAQUITO] N. OCHOA, JR., EXECUTIVE SECRETARY; HONORABLE CESAR V. PURISIMA, SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE; HONORABLE FLORENCIO H. ABAD, SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF BUDGET AND MANAGEMENT; HONORABLE KIM S. JACINTO-HENARES, COMMISSIONER, BUREAU OF INTERNAL REVENUE; AND HONORABLE ROZZANO RUFINO B. BIAZON, COMMISSIONER, BUREAU OF CUSTOMS, RESPONDENTS.

G.R. No. 199802 | 2018-07-03

DISSENTING OPINION
 
REYES, JR., J.:
 
At the root of the controversy is the basis for computing the share of Local Government Units (LGUs) in the national taxes. The petitioners in these cases argue that certain national taxes were excluded from the amount upon which the Internal Revenue Allotment (IRA) was based, in violation of the constitutional mandate under Section 6, Article X of the 1987 Constitution.[1]
 
The ponencia agreed with the petitioners and declared the term "internal revenue" in Sections 284 and 285 of the Local Government Code (LGC)[2] of 1991 as constitutionally infirm. I...