Title
Chamber of Real Estate and Builders' Association, Inc. vs. Romulo
Case
G.R. No. 160756
Decision Date
Mar 9, 2010
A real estate association challenges the constitutionality of the Minimum Corporate Income Tax and Creditable Withholding Tax on property sales, alleging due process and equal protection violations. The Supreme Court upholds both taxes as valid exercises of the state's taxing power.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 57268)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Parties and Proceedings
    • Petitioner: Chamber of Real Estate and Builders’ Associations, Inc. (CREBA), an association of real estate developers and builders in the Philippines, filed an original petition for certiorari and mandamus under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court.
    • Respondents: The Hon. Executive Secretary Alberto Romulo; the Hon. Acting Secretary of Finance Juanita D. Amatong; and the Hon. Commissioner of Internal Revenue Guillermo Parayno, Jr.
  • Challenged Statutes and Regulations
    • Republic Act (RA) No. 8424 (National Internal Revenue Code of 1997, as amended):
      • Section 27(E) – Minimum Corporate Income Tax (MCIT) of 2% on gross income for domestic corporations beginning the fourth taxable year; carry‐forward of excess; relief provisions; definition of gross income.
      • Section 57 – Authority to impose withholding taxes (final and creditable).
      • Section 58(E) – Requirement of Certificate Authorizing Registration (CAR) from the CIR for transfers of real property subject to withholding.
    • Revenue Regulations (RRs):
      • RR 9-98 – Implementing Section 27(E) on MCIT.
      • RR 2-98 (as amended by RR 6-2001) – Sections 2.57.2(J) and 2.58.2 on creditable withholding tax (CWT) on sales of real property classified as ordinary assets, and CAR requirement.
      • RR 7-2003 – Guidelines to classify real properties as capital or ordinary assets for tax purposes.
  • Petitioner’s Contentions
    • MCIT under Section 27(E) and RR 9-98:
      • Violates due process by taxing gross income (not realized net gain), confiscatory and arbitrary.
      • Imposed even when net income is zero or negative.
    • CWT under RRs 2-98, 6-2001, and 7-2003 on sales of ordinary real properties:
      • Exceeds statutory authority of the Secretary of Finance.
      • Ignores distinction between ordinary and capital assets in RA 8424.
      • Violates due process by collecting tax before determination of net income.
      • Violates equal protection by targeting real estate enterprises only.

Issues:

  • Justiciability
    • Whether there is an actual case or controversy, ripeness, and standing for judicial review.
  • Constitutionality of MCIT
    • Whether Section 27(E) of RA 8424 and its implementing RR 9-98 violate due process or equal protection.
  • Constitutionality of CWT on Sales of Ordinary Assets
    • Whether Sections 2.57.2(J) and 2.58.2 of RR 2-98 (as amended by RR 6-2001) and Sections 4(a)(ii) and 4(c)(ii) of RR 7-2003 exceed statutory authority, or violate due process and equal protection.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.