En Banc]. [2] v. Welfare

En Banc]. (https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt2l) Id. at 602.

(https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt3l) Dissenting Opinion of J. Leonen in Manila Memorial Park, Inc. v. Secretary of Social Welfare and Development, 722 Phil. 538, 621-644 (2013) [Per J. Del Castillo, En Banc]. (https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt4l) Rep. Act No. 9257, sec. 4(a) or the Expanded Senior Citizens Act of2003, Rep. Act No. 9442, sec.

32 or the Magna Carta of Persons with Disability, and Implementing Rules and Regulations of Rep. Act No. 9442, sec. 5.1 and 6.1.d. (https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt5l) Rep. Act No. 9257, sec.

4(a), Rep. Act No. 9442, sec. 32, and Implementing Rules and Regulations of Rep. Act No. 9442, sec. 5.1 and 6.1.d.

(https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt6l) Republic Act No. 9257 amended Republic Act No. 7432 (Senior Citizens Act) which had an income ceiling for the grant of the discount to senior citizens and which allowed establishments to claim the cost of the discount as a tax credit. Rep. Act No. 7432, sec. 4 provides: Section 4.

Privileges for the Senior Citizens. - The senior citizens shall be entitled to the following: a) the grant of twenty percent (20%) discount from all establishments relative to utilization of transportation services, hotels and similar lodging establishment, restaurants and recreation centers and purchase of medicine anywhere in the country: Provided , That private establishments may claim the cost as tax credit[.] (https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt7l) An Act Amending Republic Act No. 7277 (2007). (https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt8l) 722 Phil. 538 (2013) [Per J. Del Castillo, En Banc].

(https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt9l) 553 Phil. 120 (2007) [Per J. Azcuna, En Banc]. (https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt10l) Id. at 578-579.

(https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt11l) Dissenting Opinion of J. Leonen in Manila Memorial Park, Inc. v. Secretary of Social Welfare and Development , 722 Phil. 538, 632-636 (2013) [Per J. Del Castillo, En Banc]. (https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt12l) Chamber of Real Estate and Builders" Association, Inc. v. Romulo , 628 Phil. 508, 529-530 (2010) [Per J. Corona, En Banc].

(https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt13l) Id. (https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt14l) Id. (https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt15l) Abakada Gura Party List v. Ermita, 506 Phil. 1, 306 (2005) [Per J. Austria-Martinez, En Banc].

(https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt16l) 506 Phil. 1 (2005) [Per J. Austria-Martinez, En Banc]. (https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt17l) Abakada Gura Party List v Ermita, 506 Phil. 1, 306 (2005) [Per J.Austria-Martinez, En Banc]. (https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt18l) Chamber of Real Estate and Builders' Association, Inc. v. Romulo, 628 Phil. 508, 529-530 (2010) [Per J. Corona, En Banc].

(https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt19l) CONST. (1987), art. VI, sec.

28 provides: Section 28. (1) The rule of taxation shall be uniform and equitable. The Congress shall evolve a progressive system of taxation.n ...

(https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt20l) Commissioner v. Algue, Inc., 241 Phil. 829, 836 (1988) [Per J. Cruz, First Division]. (https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt21l) Id.

(https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt22l) Chamber of Real Estate and Builders" Association, Inc. v. Romulo, 628 Phil. 508, 530 (2010) [Per J. Corona, En Banc]. (https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt23l) Id.

(https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt24l) Id. (https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt25l) Dissenting Opinion of J. Leonen in Manila Memorial Park, Inc. v. Secretary of Social Welfare and Development, 722 Phil. 538, 633 (2013) [PerJ. Del Castillo, En Banc].

(https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt26l) Id. (https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt27l) Id. (https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt28l) Tan v. Del Rosario, Jr., 307 Phil. 342, 349-350 (1994) [Per J. Vitug, En Banc].

(https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt29l) Id. (https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt30l) Dissenting Opinion of J. Leonen in Manila Memorial Park, Inc. v. Secretary of Social Welfare and J Development, 722 Phil. 538, 627-632(2013) [Per J. Del Castillo, En Banc]. (https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt31l) Id.

(https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt32l) Id. Footnote 23: Revenue in the economic sense is not usually subject to such simplistic treatment. Costs must be taken into consideration.

In economics, to evaluate the combination of factors to be used by a profit-maximizing firm, an analysis of the marginal product of inputs is compared to the marginal revenue. Economists usually compare if an additional unit of labor will contribute to additional productivity. For a more comprehensive explanation, refer to P.A. SAMUELSON AND W.D. NORDHAUS, ECONOMICS 225-239 (Eighteenth Edition, 2005).

(https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt33l) Dissenting Opinion of Manila Memorial Park, Inc. v. Secretary of Social Welfare and Development, 722 Phil. 538, 627-632 (2013) [Per J. Del Castillo, En Banc]. Footnote 24: To determine the price for both ordinary customers and senior citizens and persons with disability that will retain the same level of profitability, the formula for the price for ordinary customers is Pc= Ro/(0.8Qs + Qc) where Ro is the total revenue before the senior citizen discount was given. (https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt34l) Dissenting Opinion of J. Leonen in Manila Memorial Park, Inc. v. Secretary of Social Welfare and I Development, 722 Phil. 538, 627--632 (2013) [Per J. Del Castillo, En Banc].

Footnote 26: Another algebraic formula will show us how costs should be minimized to retain the same level of profitability. The formula is C1 = C0 -[(20% x Pc) x Qs] where: C1 =Cost of producing all quantities after the discount policy C0 =Cost of producing all quantities before the discount policy PC = Price per unit for Ordinary Citizens QS =Quantity Sold to Senior Citizens (https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt35l) Manila Memorial Park, Inc. v. Secretary of Social Welfare and Development, 722 Phil. 538, 581 (2013) [Per J. Del Castillo, En Banc]. (https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt36l) Id.at581-583.

(https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt37l) Ponencia, pp. 17-I 8; The ponencia found that the financial statements of the petitioners do not show : that their incurred losses were due to the discounts. It noted that what depeleted the income of the company was its direct costs and operating expenses. It also observed that the records did not show the percentage of regular customers vis-a-vis the senior citizens and persons with disability.

Additionally, it found that the entire sales and other services offered to the public must be considered. A singular transaction or the purchases made by senior citizens and persons with disability alone cannot be the sole basis of the law's effect on the profitability of the business. It likewise pointed out that the petitioners did not show how it adjusted to the changes brought by the provisions.

It noted the admission that the losses were due to its failure take measures tp address the new circumstances brought by the provisions. It asserted that it is inaccurate that the petitioners are not provided a means to recoup their losses. It is not automatic that the change in tax treatment will result in loss of profits considering the law does not place a limit on the amount that they may charge for their items.

It also failed to note that business decisions must consider laws in effect. (https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#fnt38l) Lagcao vs. Judge Labra, 483 Phil. 303, 312 (2004) [Per J. Corona, En Banc]. (https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt39l) Republic v. Vda.

de Castel/vi, 157 Phil. 329, 344-347 [Per J. Zaldivar, En Banc]. (https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt40l) Reyes vs. National Housing Authority, 443 Phil. 603, 610-611 (2003) [Per J. Puno, Third Division]. (https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt41l) CONST.

(1987), art. III, sec. 9.

(https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt42l) 520 Phil. 457 (2006) [Per J. Chico-Nazario, First Division]. (https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt43l) Id. at 476-478.

(https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt44l) Benguet Consolidated Mining Co. v. Pineda, 98 Phil. 711-739, 722 (1956) [Per J. J.B.L. Reyes, Second Division]; See also Heirs of Zari v. Santos, 137 Phil. 79 (1969) [Per J. Sanchez, En Banc]. (https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt45l) Id.; See also Heirs of Zari v. Santos, 137 Phil. 79 (1969) [Per J. Sanchez, En Banc]. (https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt46l) Id.; See also Heirs of Zari v. Santos, 137 Phil. 79 (1969) [Per J. Sanchez, En Banc].

(https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt47l) Benguet Consolidated Mining Co. v. Pineda , 98 Phil. 711-739 (1956) [Per J. J.B.L. Reyes, Second Division]. (https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt48l) Id. at 722.

(https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt49l) Manila Memorial Park, Inc. v. Secretary of Social Welfare and Development , 722 Phil. 538 (2013) [Per J. Del Castillo, En Banc]. (https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt50l) Id. at 640--642.

(https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt51l) CONST. (1987), art. VI, sec.

28 provides: Section 28. (1) The rule of taxation shall be uniform and equitable. The Congress shall evolve a progressive system of taxation.n ...

(https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#rnt52l) CONST. (1987), art. VI, sec.

28 provides: Section 28. (I) The rule of taxation shall be uniform and equitable. The Congress shall evolve a progressive system of taxation.

The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation [](javascript:history.back\(1\)) [](https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr199669so2017.html#top)