Pepsi-Cola Bottling Co. v. Municipality of Tanauan G.R. L-31156 PARTIES Pepsi Cola is a domestic corporation with offices and principal place in the Quezon City, Municipality of Tanauan Leyte is a municipal corporation headed by the City Mayor — defendant in this case. FACTS Levies and collects from softdrinks manufactures and producers a tax of 1/16 of a centavo for every bottle of soft drinks ISSUES & RULING Ordinance 23 Ordinance 27 Levies and collects from softdrinks manufactures and producers a tax of P0.01 or once centavo on each gallon of volume capacity. These taxes are denominated as “Municipal Production Tax” In this case, petitioners allege that RA 2264 (2) is unconstitutional because the municipality’s power to tax is an undue delegation of the taxing authority. They also consider both ordinances as illegal since they constitute double taxation Is the Municipality of Tanauan not empowered to tax? The general rule is that taxation is vested to the legislative authority. However, because of doctrine of necessary implication, municipal corporations are empowered to tax since it as granted by the Constitution, the local government has the autonomous authority to create their own sources of revenue and to levy taxes. Does Ordinance 23 & 27 constitute double taxation? NO—the intention of the Municipality of Tanauan is to repeal Ordinance 23, even without express words to that effect. The municipality is clear that they only sought to enforce Ordinance 27 In this case, the Court noted that a sales tax is void since it is beyond t he municipality’s powers to exercise; but in this case Ordinance 27 taxes the number of production and not on the sales — which is allowable within the municipality’s powers.

G.R. L-31156 Pepsi Cola v. Municipality of Tanauan

Download PDF Report

Upload
cecille-carmela-t-de-los-reyes
View
66
Download
0

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

G.R. L-31156 Pepsi Cola v. Municipality of TanauanTaxation; Delegation of Powers; Power of taxation may be delegated to local governments on matters of local concern.—The power of taxation x x x may be delegated to local governments in respect of matters of local concern. This is sanctioned by immoral practice. By necessary implication, the legislative power to create political corporations for purposes of local self-government carries with it the power to confer on such local governmental agencies the power to tax. x x x The plenary nature of the taxing power thus delegated, contrary to plaintiff-appellant’s pretense, would not suffice to invalidate the said law as confiscatory and oppressive. In delegating the authority, the State is not limited to the exact meassure of that which is exercised by itself. When it is said that the taxing power may be delegated to municipalities and the like, it is meant taxes there may be delegated such measure of power to impose and collect taxes as the legislature may deem expedient. Thus, municipalities may be permitted to tax subjects which for reasons of public policy the State has not deemed wise to tax for more general purposes.Same; Due process; Taking of property without due process of law may not be passed over under the guise of taxing power, except when the latter is exercised lawfully.—This is not to say though that the constitutional injunction against deprivation of property without due process of law may be passed over under the guise of the taxing power, except when the taking of the property is in the lawful exercise of the taxing power, as when (1) the tax is for a public purpose; (2) the rule on uniformity of taxation is observed; (3) either the person or property taxed is within the jurisdiction of the government levying the tax; and (4) in the assessment and collection of certain kinds of taxes notice and opportunity for hearing are provided. [Pepsi-Cola Bottling Co. of the Philippines, Inc. vs. Municipality of Tanauan, Leyte, 69 SCRA 460(1976)]

Citation preview

Pepsi-Cola Bottling Co.

v.

Municipality of Tanauan

G.R. L-31156

PARTIES

Pepsi Cola is a domestic

corporation with offices and

principal place in the Quezon

City,

Municipality of Tanauan Leyte

is a municipal corporation

headed by the City Mayordefendant in this case.

FACTS

Levies and collects from

softdrinks manufactures and

producers a tax of

1/16 of a centavo for every

bottle of soft drinks

ISSUES &

RULING

Ordinance 23 Ordinance 27

Levies and collects from

softdrinks manufactures and

producers a tax of

P0.01 or once centavo on each

gallon of volume capacity.

These taxes are denominated as Municipal Production Tax

In this case, petitioners allege

that RA 2264 (2) is

unconstitutional because the

municipalitys power to tax is an undue delegation of the

taxing authority.

They also consider both

ordinances as illegal since they

constitute double taxation

Is the Municipality of

Tanauan not

empowered to tax?

The general rule is that taxation is vested to the

legislative authority.

However, because of doctrine of necessary

implication, municipal corporations are

empowered to tax since it as granted by the

Constitution, the local government has the

autonomous authority to create their own sources

of revenue and to levy taxes.

Does Ordinance 23 &

27 constitute double

taxation?

NOthe intention of the Municipality of Tanauan is to repeal Ordinance 23, even without express

words to that effect. The municipality is clear that

they only sought to enforce Ordinance 27

In this case, the Court noted that a sales tax is

void since it is beyond the municipalitys powers to exercise; but in this case Ordinance 27 taxes

the number of production and not on the saleswhich is allowable within the municipalitys powers.

G.R. L-31156 Pepsi Cola v. Municipality of Tanauan.vsdPage-1