28 C
Manila
Friday, May 3, 2024
Home Blog Page 1005

Letter to the Editor: Very clear how TRAIN runs over the poor, relieves rich

0

These reiterations are in reaction to the article “Assessing TRAIN” by Mr. Filomeno Sta. Ana of the Action for Economic Reforms (AER), which appeared on the January 8, 2018 issue of Business World.

IBON has repeatedly presented its evidence-based analysis of the TRAIN (basing on the Department of Finance data no less) and consistently deepened our explanations to the public. Our 40 years of institutionalisation has equipped us with analysis sets to provide a popular understanding of socio-economic issues.

The Duterte administration claims that the Tax Reform for Acceleration and Inclusion (TRAIN) Law will benefit the poor in terms of lower personal income tax, unconditional cash transfers, and new infrastructure. It also describes the new tax law to be inclusive and even progressive. IBON belies these false claims. Under TRAIN, the poor stand to lose while the rich will gain.

  1. TRAIN will not benefit the poor majority of Filipinos with lower personal income tax. According to the government, 6.8 million low- and middle-income families will be completely exempted because they are earning less than the Php250,000 personal income tax threshold. But this figure includes millions of minimum wage earners or otherwise those in informal work with low and erratic incomes already exempted by law. The 6.8 million families certainly deserve income tax cuts to cope with rising costs of living. But of the country’s total 22.7 million families, the personal income tax cuts for most of the reported 7.5 million personal income tax payers still leaves as much as 15.2 million families without any income tax gains from this measure. Yet, at the very start of 2018, these families have already had to deal with more expensive goods, such as food and drinks, and cooking expenses. Jeepney and bus fares, electricity and other utility fees are bound to increase due to new taxes on oil products including liquid petroleum gas (LPG), kerosene, diesel, and gasoline. Other price hikes abound when the imposition of value-added tax (VAT) on previously exempted services and goods takes effect. Note that the value-added tax slapped on petroleum products per Republic Act 9337 of 2005 drove up inflation from 6.0% in 2004 to 7.6% in 2005.
  2. TRAIN is pro-rich. Government slams TRAIN critics who say that the tax program is anti-poor. Yet it is the country’s richest who are among the biggest gainers from TRAIN’s income tax reforms. The richest 1% of families with incomes of over Php1.5 million or more a year will have an average of Php100,000 to over Php300,000 additional take-home pay annually especially when income taxes are lowered further in 2023. This is on top of how the rich will pay billions of pesos less in estate and donor taxes. Also, the richest 10% already earning an average of Php104,170 monthly according to Department of Finance data, will have Php90,793 more every year. Meanwhile, every chief executive officer (CEO) already earning Php494,471 monthly will have Php88,568 more in their pockets every year.
  3. TRAIN-provided cash transfers are temporary. That TRAIN will provide P200 per month in unconditional cash transfers to the poorest 10 million Filipino households from 2018 to 2020 is an indirect admission by government that the TRAIN’s taxes do put an additional burden on the poor. The relief ends after the third year while the greater TRAIN tax burdens are permanent.
  4. Infrastructure spending is biased away from poor regions, and biased away from the kind of infrastructure projects that the poor directly need or will directly use. There is a general trend of higher infrastructure spending in regions of low poverty incidence, and low infrastructure spending in regions of high poverty incidence. This is observed when comparing the value and regional distribution of the government’s flagship infrastucture projects and poverty incidence by region. For instance, the NCR has the lowest official poverty incidence of 3.9% but takes up the largest chunk of flagship projects at Php343 billion, while the Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) with the highest official poverty incidence of 53.7% accounts for among the least flagship projects at just Php5.4 billion. Also, instead of irrigation, milling factories, and post-harvest facilities; public schools; public hospitals; and mass housing, which millions of poor Filipinos need  for their livelihoods and welfare, the Duterte administration’s flagship projects are mostly big-ticket transportation infrastructure eyed by oligarchs and their foreign counterparts for business, such as roads, bridges, fly-overs, railways, seaports, and airports.
  5. TRAIN remains regressive. The Duterte administration claims that TRAIN is progressive, but this should mean that the people are taxed according to their capacity to pay. On the contrary, the poor stand to bear the greater burden under TRAIN. According to official data, only the richest 20% Filipinos earn the family living wage (FLW or the amount needed by a family of 5 to live decently ) or more (Php30,000 per month on the average for 5 persons). Meanwhile, the poorest 80% earn way below the family living wage, but they are being made to pay the same additional taxes as the richest, while the latter will even be relieved of certain tax obligations. While the middle class deserve lower personal income taxes, it is unjust that those earning millions monthly should be taxed less.

Government can undertake concrete measures towards genuinely progressive taxation by raising direct taxes on the richest such as personal income tax and corporate income tax, while reducing indirect taxes such as VAT and other taxes on consumer products. IBON also proposes steps, which, while temporary, may ease the burden on the poorest: (1) Maintain exemptions on products where the poorest are directly affected; (2) Tax the rich more, specifically, raise taxes on those belonging to the highest income bracket; and (3) Allocate specific budget items for essential social services.

(sgd)

Sonny Africa

IBON Executive Director

TWO JESUSES

TWO JESUSES. Davao City Council’s new majority floor leader, Councilor Jesus Melchor Quitain Jr., and new chairperson on Committee on Ethics and Good government, Jesus Joseph Zozobrado III take oath during the regular session on Tuesday, January 16. (Robby Joy Salveron / davaotoday.com)

Under TRAIN,the poorest will have less and the richest will have more (update)

0

The rich and other higher income groups will have larger take home pay than previously estimated under the new tax law, while the poor will still bear the brunt of paying higher taxes. The highest earning 40% or about 9.1 million households will have even more money in their pockets under the recently passed Tax Reform For Acceleration and Inclusion (TRAIN) Law compared to the original DOF proposal.

Using July 2017 data from the Department of Finance (DOF) on the first year impact of TRAIN, IBON previously estimated that the richest 10% earning an average of Php115,428 monthly will have an additional Php33,795 annually.  But IBON’s computations based on the latest December 2017 DOF data shows that the richest 10%, now estimated by the DOF to be earning an average of Php104,170 monthly, will have an additional Php90,793 annually.

This includes how a chief executive officer (CEO) among the top 0.1% of families already earning Php494,471 monthly will take home an extra Php88,568 annually. This is a reversal of the previous estimate that a CEO among the top 0.1% earning Php706,017 would lose Php20,694, said the group. Middle income and lower-middle families meanwhile take home an additional Php7,880 to Php24,343 under TRAIN.

Meanwhile, the poorest 60% of Filipino households or 13.7 million households will continue to have less money under the new tax law, though figures based on the more recent data are slightly lower than previously estimated. Under TRAIN in 2018, every rice farmer (first and lowest income decile) will lose Php646 annually; every farm worker (second income decile) will lose Php937; every construction worker (third income decile) will lose Php1,141; every private school teacher (fourth income decile) will lose Php1,363; every bookkeeper (fifth income decile) will lose Php1,591; and Php1,887 will be taken from every machine tool operator (sixth income decile).

​Contrary to government claims, majority of Filipinos will not benefit from income tax exemptions from TRAIN. About 15.2 million families who already do not pay income tax because they are minimum wage earners or informal sector workers with erratic incomes will not have any income tax gains. Yet while not getting increased take home pay, they will have to endure price hikes as a direct or indirect effect of higher consumption taxes. (From “Even more money​ for the rich under TRAIN law–IBON”, 12 January 2018 IBON Media Release)

Even more money for the rich under TRAIN law – IBON

0

The rich and other higher income groups will have larger take home pay than previously estimated under the new tax law, while the poor will still bear the brunt of paying higher taxes, said research group IBON. IBON said that the highest earning 40% or about 9.1 million households will have even more money in their pockets under the recently passed Tax Reform For Acceleration and Inclusion (TRAIN) Law compared to the original Department of Finance (DOF) proposal.

Using July 2017 data from the DOF on the first year impact of TRAIN, IBON previously estimated that the richest 10% earning an average of Php115,428 monthly will have an additional Php33,795 annually.  But IBON’s computations based on the latest December 2017 DOF data shows that the richest 10%, now estimated by the DOF to be earning an average of Php104,170 monthly, will have an additional Php90,793 annually.

This includes how a chief executive officer (CEO) among the top 0.1% of families already earning Php494,471 monthly will take home an extra Php88,568 annually. This is a reversal of the previous estimate that a CEO among the top 0.1% earning Php706,017 would lose Php20,694, said the group. Middle income and lower-middle families meanwhile take home an additional Php7,880 to Php24,343 under TRAIN.

Meanwhile, IBON said that the poorest 60% of Filipino households or 13.7 million households will continue to have less money under the new tax law, though figures based on the more recent data are slightly lower than previously estimated. Under TRAIN in 2018, every rice farmer (first and lowest income decile) will lose Php646 annually; every farm worker (second income decile) will lose Php937; every construction worker (third income decile) will lose Php1,141; every private school teacher (fourth income decile) will lose Php1,363; every bookkeeper (fifth income decile) will lose Php1,591; and Php1,887 will be taken from every machine tool operator (sixth income decile).

IBON said that contrary to government claims, majority of Filipinos will not benefit from income tax exemptions from TRAIN. About 15.2 million families who already do not pay income tax because they are minimum wage earners or informal sector workers with erratic incomes will not have any income tax gains. Yet while not getting increased take home pay, they will have to endure price hikes as a direct or indirect effect of higher consumption taxes.

The proposed cash transfers to supposedly minimize the tax impact on poor households are an admission by the DOF that the poor will be burdened with higher spending. Yet these are only temporary and will only be given during the first three years while oil excise taxes continue to increase. The poor will no longer receive the temporary cash transfers after 2020 yet have the permanent burden of higher prices on their basic goods and services.

IBON said that the TRAIN Law only confirms the Duterte administration’s tendency  towards anti-poor and pro-rich policies. ###

In Defense of Blind Items

During times such as these when interconnectivity through the web coerces individuals to respond in real time and intrudes spaces to blur the public and the private spheres, taking caution in naming persons as subjects of discussion becomes imperative. There are merits when one reacts to a particular trigger and delves further into the details of a specific issue, for the sake of clarifying, discussing, and, eventually, arriving at a temporary (but not relative) truth. On the other hand, further problems may arise, too. Publicity, whether good or bad, validates the relevance of persons or groups to societies or circles we are concerned with. Whether we like it or not, we increase the radii, concentric circles, or linked networks of named “controversial” persons, groups, even entities and symbols. For instance, atheists, scholars, or reactionaries who want to disprove the influence of Christ, Rizal, or Marx seem to be too preoccupied by these figures they deem insignificant but never entirely dismissed. Leftists (not sure with Rightists and Centrists, if they have brain-farts mistaken for thought-processes) tend to theorize in order to name abstract concepts, such as, say, “neoliberalism” and its enabling forces including liberal democracy. Consequently, this naming or labelling acknowledges neoliberalism’s power, and proceeds with knowing perhaps its essence and dispositions, understanding the dialectics that gave rise to such a phenomenon, reviewing its history and inclinations, and figuring out how to dismantle its power-structure and to take steps in replacing its material and ideological foundations towards a better society.

Identifying protagonists, antagonists, un-aligned forces and other gray areas above, below, left, and right, serves as a process of organizing key players towards a perceived future. Hence, giving out details or identifying marks of subjects under discussion and corresponding actions regarding the treatment of persons or parties involved shall be handled with utmost care. In his seminal work, Understanding Comics (1993), McCloud shows how additional details narrow down the identification of a drawing: geometrical shapes of faces remind us of a set of persons with similar features, while photo-realistic ones narrow down the possibilities and pertain to [a] particular person/s. Hence, the simplest two-dots- and-line- inside-a- circle resembling the face with two eyes and a closed mouth, the smiley icon proves to be universal; since anyone can identify with it, we have been using its facial expressions (through a range of emoticons or emojis) to digitally approximate and communicate ours.

***

Last week, a certain CV who seemingly initiates a swarm was described but not named. My attempt at making use of a blind item, as consciously indicated in a parenthetical remark, was due to mixed feelings toward popularizing someone whose intent in the first place is to be more popular and to sell his poetry that he branded as one that incites rebellion, perhaps like a cosplayer of Che Guevara who wants to sell shirts or mugs to romanticize guerrilla warfare as a cute thing to do against imperialism, without any perspective of victory, rendering “¡Hasta la victoria siempre!” as nothing but a quotable quote. To somehow pre-empt CV’s wet dream, I decided to discuss his problematic stance of presumed rebelliousness by rendering him as a stereotype or a template of someone who makes a spectacle of himself by apotheosizing himself and his rags-to-riches story (of climbing up the ladder of literary institutions) as an ideal to strive for.

As I also shifted to another pronoun in the previous article not to reduce him to an object but to devoid him of a certain identity, allow me to do so again: “it” (not “he”) is described, but not named. Its actions were discussed, but its personality remains obscured in the pixels of the letters C and V, so other readers unfamiliar with it can identify in their heads their own CV—giving readers an active role beyond being tabula rasas as they fill in the gaps left by the text. Readers do not just read between the lines, they fill out the gaps. The attempt was an application of the metaphor of the aforementioned geometrical face so the graphic variable pertains to a set of possible values, not a photo-realistic depiction that pertains to one absolute, a correct solution. Calling CV by his name might further boost its ego and persecution complex, by making it think that we are indeed talking about it and confirming that it is really not your usual snowflake that it believes it is. Discourses revolving on blind items shall be experiments and processes that I shall reconsider from time to time and eventually employ throughout the year in this column space, whenever necessary: describing and giving a nickname to someone whose ideas about art, literature, and culture merits discussion. If they have established their reputation already, whether good or bad, by themselves or by other means, then naming serves them right.

Not-naming is intended, neither to elude responsibility nor to attract intrigue, but to be as translucent (or even as opaque) as possible, especially before the gaze of what Byung-Chul Han calls “transparent society” (2017), a voluntary auto-exploitative panoptica that has the following characteristics and contents (literally, as these are the titles of the book’s chapter-essays) as the society of: positivity, exhibition, evidence, pornography, acceleration, intimacy, information, unveiling.

Positivity, evidence, acceleration and information can be clustered together, since these features glorify the speed of addition and celebration of the present moment, in contrast to the slowness of narration that paces throughout a temporality towards a certain direction; quantity of “likes” and followers provides instant gratification, while quality of discourse and thought delays satisfaction and bores. Exhibition, pornography, intimacy and unveiling involves naming that contributes to the transparency encouraged by the digital panoptica where everyone is under the surveillance of everyone.

In the case of CV, and other similar word-wars, it can be mistaken as a mere engagement in a polemic just because and so others can watch while eating their popcorns and tiramisus, partnered with their cokes and iced teas. That is not the case. CVs (see, this is not about him/it) spew poison that guilt-trips critical thinking and actual institutional transgressions; hence the need to label such propensities, without turning the individual subject to the celebrity he wanted to be. Not-naming here makes him/it a template, and not a role model. Thereby, dismissing his self-delusions of greatness.

***

Citing the surnames of prominent families is naming and calling them “bureaucrat capitalists” is labelling; the former is necessary for quantitative analysis of their properties and the atrocities committed to preserve private ownership, while the latter is necessary to lump them together and shed light to their class interests and dispositions, so progressive forces may deal with them accordingly. Maybe, naming can be considered as data gathering geared toward insightful (and more productive) hypotheses, accumulated information that could perhaps be organized additives for grander narratives; like exceptional floating swarms that can later constitute a crowd, perhaps? Modifying Walter Benjamin’s words, as quoted by Han (“The beautiful is neither the veil nor the veiled object but rather the object in its veil.”), sometimes, what matters is neither the blind item moniker (like the “CV” veil itself) nor the concealed subject of the blind item (the “real” CV himself) but rather the subject matter of the blind item (CVs in general based on a particular CV).

This is a submitted post

0

fdjskk fdsakl salkflksd fds lkjsdz;lkf djf;lskdj f;ldkjf;lds jf;ldsj f;ksjf; sdkljf;dslj f;ldskjf;lkdsjf;ds f kfk ;aj f;kljas;l jf;ldsjfl;k dsjlkf

Joel Reyes: I’m not leaving PH yet

Former Palawan Governor Joel Reyes, joined by his son, clutches his rosary as he attends the Sandiganbayan’s hearing on the Ombudsman’s motion to have him rearrested for being a flight risk. Photo: Vince F. Nonato.

“I’m not leaving. I’m here. I believe in the rule of law.”

This was former Palawan Governor Joel Reyes’s guarantee, following the Ombudsman’s filing of a motion seeking to order his rearrest and cancel his bail out of fear that he would again escape like he did in 2012.

READ MORE

Celebrity girl barkadas who are #SisterSquadGoals

Girls who empower other girls are truly inspiring. Check out these female celebrity barkadas and the moments when their sister squad made us wish for our own.