Title
Commissioner of Internal Revenue vs. American Express International, Inc.
Case
G.R. No. 152609
Decision Date
Jun 29, 2005
Amex Philippines sought a VAT refund for zero-rated services; SC upheld zero-rating, invalidated ultra vires BIR ruling, and affirmed refund entitlement.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 151895)

Undisputed Facts

  1. Amex Philippines is a VAT-registered Philippine branch.
  2. For 1997, it amended quarterly VAT returns to reclassify its Philippine-performed services as zero-rated.
  3. It filed for refund within two years of the close of the relevant taxable quarter.
  4. Consideration for its services was paid in acceptable foreign currency, inwardly remitted and accounted for per Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas regulations.

Petitioner's and Respondent's Arguments

Respondent argued:
A. Section 102(b)(2) mandates zero-rating for services performed in the Philippines paid in acceptable foreign currency.
B. Input taxes on domestic purchases related to zero-rated sales are refundable under Section 112 of the Tax Code and RR 5-87, Sec. 8(a).

CIR contended:

  1. Refund claims are presumptively invalid absent clear statutory grant.
  2. Administrative rulings may require “consumption abroad” for zero-rating.
  3. Procedural compliance under Sections 204(c) and 229 of the Tax Code must be strictly established.

Issue

Whether respondent is entitled to a refund of ₱3,352,406.59 as excess input VAT for 1997 based on zero-rating under Section 102(b) of the Tax Code.

Applicable Law

Section 102(b), NIRC of 1986 as amended:
(1) Processing, manufacturing or repacking of goods for export, zero-rated if paid in acceptable foreign currency and accounted for per BSP rules.
(2) Services other than (1), performed in the Philippines by VAT-registered persons, zero-rated if consideration is paid in acceptable foreign currency and accounted for per BSP rules.

RR 5-87, Sec. 8(a) and RR 7-95, Sec. 4.102-2(b)(2): mirror this provision, confirming zero-rating without additional qualifications. RR 5-96 amended Sec. 4.102-2(b)(2) to illustrate additional services but did not limit scope.

Court’s Analysis

  1. Destination Principle Exception
    The VAT system generally taxes services at their place of consumption, but Section 102(b) expressly zero-rates qualifying services performed in the Philippines.

  2. Requirements for Zero-Rating
    a. Service performed in the Philippines
    b. Service falls under Section 102(b)(2) (“other” services)
    c. Payment in acceptable foreign currency inwardly remitted and duly accounted for

Respondent’s facilitation service meets all three.

  1. Consumption versus Performance
    The Court rejected the CIR’s “consumed abroad” requirement, clarifying that zero-rating depends on statutory criteria, not on where the benefit is used.

  2. Administrative Rulings
    • VAT Ruling No. 080-89 correctly applied zero-rating to respondent’s services.
    • VAT Ruling No. 040-98’s “consumed abroad” requirement is ultra vires, contravenes clear statutory language, and cannot be retroactive to prejudice respondent under Section 246 of the Tax Code.

  3. Statutory Interpretation
    Section 102(b)(2) is clear and categoric

...continue reading

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