Scribd
Upload
439 views1 page

Kapatiran V Tan (VAT)

EO 273 adopted a value-added tax (VAT) through amendments to the tax code. Petitions sought to nullify EO 273, arguing it was unconstitutional and that the VAT was oppressive, discriminatory, and violated due process and equal protection. The court held that EO 273 did not violate the constitution and that the VAT satisfied the requirements of a valid tax by operating uniformly on all non-exempt goods and services at a constant 10% rate, and was equitable by only imposing on businesses with over P200,000 in annual sales.

Uploaded by

Kenneth Rafols
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
439 views1 page

Kapatiran V Tan (VAT)

EO 273 adopted a value-added tax (VAT) through amendments to the tax code. Petitions sought to nullify EO 273, arguing it was unconstitutional and that the VAT was oppressive, discriminatory, and violated due process and equal protection. The court held that EO 273 did not violate the constitution and that the VAT satisfied the requirements of a valid tax by operating uniformly on all non-exempt goods and services at a constant 10% rate, and was equitable by only imposing on businesses with over P200,000 in annual sales.

Uploaded by

Kenneth Rafols
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

KAPATIRAN V.

TAN


FACTS:
The four (4) consolidated petitions seek to nullify Executive Order No. 273 (EO
273), which amended certain sections of the National Internal Revenue Code and
adopted the value-added tax (VAT), for being unconstitutional; that the VAT is
oppressive, discriminatory, regressive, and violates the due process clause and equal
protection clauses and other provisions of the 1987 Constitution.

ISSUE:
Whether or not EO 273 is in violation of the 1987 Constitution, particularly the
provision stating that taxation shall be uniform and equitable.

HELD:
No. The court sees that EO 273 satisfies all the requirements of a valid tax. A
tax is considered uniform when it operates with the same force and effect in every place
where the subject may be found. Also, equity and uniformity in taxation means that all
taxable articles or kinds of property of the same class shall be taxed at the same rate.

In the case at bar, the sales tax adopted in EO 273 is applied similarly on all
goods and services sold to the public, which are not exempt, at the constant rate of 0%
or 10%. In addition, the disputed tax is also equitable since it is imposed only on sales
of goods or services by persons engage in business with an aggregate gross annual
sales exceeding P200,000.

You might also like