Title
Collector of Internal Revenue vs. Rueda
Case
G.R. No. L-13250
Decision Date
Oct 29, 1971
A Spanish national's estate in the Philippines claimed tax exemption for intangible properties under reciprocity laws, with the Supreme Court ruling Tangier, Morocco, qualified as a "foreign country" and met the reciprocity requirement.

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-13250)

Factual Background

Upon the death of Doña María de la Estrella Soriano Vda. de Cerdeira on January 2, 1955, her administrator filed a provisional estate and inheritance tax return covering all properties, including intangible personal assets situated in the Philippines. The Collector of Internal Revenue assessed and collected initial taxes, then issued a second assessment after an amended return claimed exemption for Philippine-located intangible assets valued at ₱396,308.90. The Collector denied the exemption on the ground that Tangier was not a “foreign country” under Section 122 of the National Internal Revenue Code and that its laws did not grant reciprocal treatment. The Collector demanded ₱161,874.95 as deficiency estate and inheritance taxes, including penalties and interest.

Procedural History

  1. Collector’s assessments and denials (1955–1956)
  2. Administrative appeal rejected; deficiency demand maintained
  3. Petition elevated to the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA)
  4. CTA ruled in favor of the estate administrator, holding that Tangier’s laws provided the required reciprocity and that international personality was not a prerequisite to Section 122 exemption
  5. Supreme Court remanded for proof whether Tangier’s “movables” laws encompassed “intangible personal property” (May 30, 1962)
  6. CTA admitted evidence showing Tangier exempted transfers of both corporeal and incorporeal movables without regard to nationality (hearing on September 9, 1963)
  7. Case deemed submitted (July 29, 1969)
  8. Petition for review reacquired by Supreme Court

Applicable Law

National Internal Revenue Code (Commonwealth Act No. 466, as amended) Section 122 proviso:
• Exempts from tax any intangible personal property if, at decedent’s death, the foreign country of residence either did not impose transfer/death taxes on Philippine citizens or granted equivalent exemptions.

Issue Presented

Whether “foreign country” in Section 122 must possess full international personality (statehood under international law) or whether a polity lacking such personality—so long as its law grants reciprocal exemptions—qualifies for the Section 122 exemption.

Court of Tax Appeals’ Decision

The CTA held that:
• “Foreign country” refers to any government that does not tax the intangible personal property of Filipino citizens or grants equivalent exemption, regardless of its international-law status;
• Tangier’s legislation exempted transfers of movables (corporeal and incorporeal), including securities, without imposing death taxes, thus satisfying reciprocity;
• International recognition of Tangier as a sovereign state was unnecessary to invoke Section 122’s exemption.

Supreme Court Analysis

  1. Precedent in Collector of Internal Revenue v. De Lara (102 Phil. 813, 1958) held that California—lacking separate international personality—nonetheless qualified as a “foreign country” under Section 122.
  2. Kiene v. Collector of Internal Revenue (97 Phil. 352, 1955) recognized Liechtenstein—a principal

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.