Unit

5 SOCIAL, POLITICAL, ECONOMIC AND CULTURAL ISSUES IN THEPHILIPPINES

LEARNING OBJECTIVES:
1. Effectively communicate using various techniques and genres, their historical analysis of a particular
event or issue that could help others understand the topic.
2. Propose recommendations/solutions to present day problems based on their understanding.
3. Analyze social, political, economic, and cultural issues besetting the country using the lens of history.
4. Recognize that some problems of today are consequences of the decisions and events that happened
in the past.
5. Create an infographic on the salient features of the Constitution.

PRETEST: Write T if the statement is correct and F if incorrect. Write your answer before the number.
_____1.The Americans introduced the concept of private property to the Filipinos.
_____2.The Filipino people may propose changes in the constitution by referendum.
_____3.A change in the 1987 Constitution will drastically change Filipino lives.
_____4.The 1987 Constitution is a direct response against Marcos dictatorship and tyranny.
_____5.Changes in the Constitution is only valid and effective if ratified or approved by the President.
_____6.The Hacienda sugar plantation is owned by the Ayala family.
_____7.The 1987 Constitution sets limitation on the exercise of the power to tax.
_____8.With martial law, the whole Philippines was declared a land reform.
_____9.Failure to pay tax is punishable by law.
_____10Taxation requires voluntary contribution from inhabitant to support the government.

LESSON 1: THE AGRARIAN REFORM OF THE PHILIPPINES

CARP, or the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program, is the redistribution of public

and private agricultural lands to farmers and farmworkers who are landless, irrespective of
tenurial arrangement. CARP’s vision is to have an equitable land ownership with empowered
agrarian reform beneficiaries who can effectively manage their economic and social
development to have a better quality of life.

One of the major programs of CARP is Land Tenure Improvement, which seeks to hasten distribution of
lands to landless farmers. Similarly, the Department offers Support Services to the beneficiaries such as

A Self-regulated Learning Module 92

infrastructure facilities, marketing assistance program, credit assistance program, and technical support
programs. Furthermore, the department seeks to facilitate, resolve cases and deliver Agrarian Justice.

The legal basis for CARP is the Republic Act No. 6657 otherwise known as Comprehensive Agrarian
Reform Law (CARL) signed by President Corazon C. Aquino on June 10, 1988. It is an act which aims to
promote social justice and industrialization, providing the mechanism for its implementation, and for other
purposes.

Agrarian Reform History.

Even before the Spaniard came into these Islands, the idea of private ownership of land was not
prevalent. Land was commonly owned by the community or barangay, cultivated communally or
individually by members of the barangay.
When the Spaniard came in 1521, common ownership of land slowly took the backseat, and private
property became dominant, paving the way to Encomienda system.

The encomienda was a vehicle used to collect taxes from Filipinos, who tilled the land and
surrendered part of their produce to the encomendero as tribute in the form of agricultural crops,
poultry, woven mats, etc. Towards the end of the 18th century, there was a mad scramble for wealth
thru world trade. Thus, encomienda were replaced by haciendas.

Pre-Spanish Period: “This land is Ours God gave this land to us”
Before the Spaniards came to the Philippines, Filipinos lived in villages or barangays ruled by chiefs or
datus. The datus comprised the nobility. Then came the maharlikas (freemen), followed by the aliping
mamamahay (serfs) and aliping saguiguilid (slaves). However, despite the existence of different
classes in the social structure, practically everyone had access to the fruits of the soil. Money was
unknown, and rice served as the medium of exchange.

Spanish Period: “United we stand, divided we fall”

When the Spaniards came to the Philippines, the concept of encomienda (Royal Land Grants)
was introduced. This system grants that Encomienderos must defend his encomienda from external
attack, maintain peace and order within, and support the missionaries. In turn, the encomiendero
acquired the right to collect tribute from the indios (native).
The system, however, degenerated into abuse of power by the encomienderos The tribute soon
became land rents to a few powerful landlords. And the natives who once cultivated the lands in
freedom were transformed into mere share tenants.

First Philippine Republic “The yoke has finally broken”

When the First Philippine Republic was established in 1899, Gen. Emilio Aguinaldo declared in
the Malolos Constitution his intention to confiscate large estates, especially the so-called Friar lands.
However, as the Republic was short-lived, Aguinaldo’s plan was never implemented.

American Period: “Long live America”

Significant legislation enacted during the American Period:

A Self-regulated Learning Module 93

 1. Philippine Bill of 1902 – Set the ceilings on the hectarage of private individuals and corporations
may acquire: 16 has. for private individuals and 1,024 has. for corporations.
2. Land Registration Act of 1902 (Act No. 496) – Provided for a comprehensive registration of land
titles under the Torrens system.
3. Public Land Act of 1903 – introduced the homestead system in the Philippines.
4. Tenancy Act of 1933 (Act No. 4054 and 4113) – regulated relationships between landowners and
tenants of rice (50-50 sharing) and sugar cane lands.

The Torrens system, which the Americans instituted for the registration of lands, did not solve
the problem completely. Either they were not aware of the law or if they did, they could not pay the
survey cost and other fees required in applying for a Torrens title.

Commonwealth Period: “Government for the Filipinos”

President Manuel L. Quezon espoused the "Social Justice" program to arrest the increasing
social unrest in Central Luzon.
Significant legislation enacted during Commonwealth Period:
1. 1935 Constitution – "The promotion of social justice to ensure the well-being and economic
security of all people should be the concern of the State"
2. Commonwealth Act No. 178 (An Amendment to Rice Tenancy Act No. 4045), Nov. 13, 1936 –
Provided for certain controls in the landlord-tenant relationship.
3. National Rice and Corn Corporation (NARIC), 1936 – Established the price of rice and corn
thereby help the poor tenants as well as consumers.
4. Commonwealth Act. No. 461, 1937 – Specified reasons for the dismissal of tenants and only
with the approval of the Tenancy Division of the Department of Justice
5. Rural Program Administration, created March 2, 1939 – Provided the purchase and lease of
haciendas and their sale and lease to the tenants.
Commonwealth Act No. 441 enacted on June 3, 1939 – Created the National Settlement
Administration with a capital stock of P20,000,000.
When the First Philippine Republic was established in 1899, Gen. Emilio

Japanese Occupation: “The Era of Hukbalahap”

The Second World War II started in Europe in 1939 and in the Pacific in 1941. Hukbalahap
controlled whole areas of Central Luzon; landlords who supported the Japanese lost their lands to
peasants while those who supported the Huks earned fixed rentals in favor of the tenants.
Unfortunately, the end of war also signaled the end of gains acquired by the peasants. Upon the
arrival of the Japanese in the Philippines in 1942, peasants and workers organizations grew strength.
Many peasants took up arms and identified themselves with the anti-Japanese group, the
HUKBALAHAP (Hukbo ng Bayan Laban sa Hapon).
Philippine Republic: “The New Republic”
After the establishment of the Philippine Independence in 1946, the problems of land tenure
remained. These became worst in certain areas. Thus the Congress of the Philippines revised the
tenancy law.

President Manuel A. Roxas (1946-1948) enacted the following laws:

A Self-regulated Learning Module 94

 1. Republic Act No. 34 . This established the 70-30 sharing arrangements and regulating share-
tenancy contracts.
2. Republic Act No. 55 – This provides for a more effective safeguard against arbitrary ejectment
of tenants.

Elpidio R. Quirino (1948-1953) enacted the following law:

1. Executive Order No. 355 issued on October 23, 1950 -- Replaced the National Land Settlement
Administration with Land Settlement
2. Development Corporation (LASEDECO) which takes over the responsibilities of the Agricultural
Machinery Equipment Corporation and the Rice and Corn Production Administration.

Ramon Magsaysay (1953-1957) enacted the following laws:

1. Republic Act No. 1160 of 1954 -- Abolished the LASEDECO and established the National
Resettlement and Rehabilitation Administration (NARRA) to resettle dissidents and landless
farmers. It was particularly aimed at rebel returnees providing home lots and farmlands in
Palawan and Mindanao.
2. Republic Act No. 1199 (Agricultural Tenancy Act of 1954) -- governed the relationship between
landowners and tenant farmers by organizing share-tenancy and leasehold system. The law
provided the security of tenure of tenants. It also created the Court of Agrarian Relations.
3. Republic Act No. 1400 (Land Reform Act of 1955) -- Created the Land Tenure Administration
(LTA) which was responsible for the acquisition and distribution of large tenanted rice and corn
lands over 200 hectares for individuals and 600 hectares for corporations.
4. Republic Act No. 821 (Creation of Agricultural Credit Cooperative Financing Administration) --
Provided small farmers and share tenants loans with low interest rates of six to eight percent.

President Carlos P. Garcia (1957-1961)

1. Continued the program of President Ramon Magsaysay. No new legislation passed.

President Diosdado P. Macapagal (1961-1965) enacted the following law:

2. Republic Act No. 3844 of August 8, 1963 (Agricultural Land Reform Code) -- Abolished share
tenancy, institutionalized leasehold, set retention limit at 75 hectares, invested rights of pre-
emption and redemption for tenant farmers, provided for an administrative machinery for
implementation, institutionalized a judicial system of agrarian cases, incorporated extension,
marketing and supervised credit system of services of farmer beneficiaries.
3. The RA was hailed as one that would emancipate Filipino farmers from the bondage of tenancy.

President Ferdinand E. Marcos (1965-1986)

 Proclamation No. 1081 on September 21, 1972 ushered the Period of the New Society. Five
days after the proclamation of Martial Law, the entire country was proclaimed a land reform area
and simultaneously the Agrarian Reform Program was decreed.
 President Marcos enacted the following laws:
1. Republic Act No. 6389, (Code of Agrarian Reform) and RA No. 6390 of 1971 -- Created the
Department of Agrarian Reform and the Agrarian Reform Special Account Fund. It
strengthens the position of farmers and expanded the scope of agrarian reform.

A Self-regulated Learning Module 95

 2. Presidential Decree No. 2, September 26, 1972 -- Declared the country under land reform
program. It enjoined all agencies and offices of the government to extend full cooperation
and assistance to the DAR. It also activated the Agrarian Reform Coordinating Council.
3. Presidential Decree No. 27, October 21, 1972 -- Restricted land reform scope to tenanted
rice and corn lands and set the retention limit at 7 hectares.

President Corazon C. Aquino (1986-1992)

The Constitution ratified by the Filipino people during the administration of President Corazon C.
Aquino provides under Section 21 under Article II that “The State shall promote comprehensive rural
development and agrarian reform.”
On June 10, 1988, former President Corazon C. Aquino signed into law Republic Act No. 6657 or
otherwise known as the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL). The law became effective on
June 15, 1988. Subsequently, four Presidential issuances were released in July 1987 after 48 nationwide
consultations before the actual law was enacted.
President Corazon C. Aquino enacted the following laws:
1. Executive Order No. 228, July 16, 1987 – Declared full ownership to qualified farmer-
beneficiaries covered by PD 27. It also determined the value remaining unvalued rice and
corn lands subject of PD 27 and provided for the manner of payment by the FBs and mode
of compensation to landowners.
2. Executive Order No. 229, July 22, 1987 – Provided mechanism for the implementation of
the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP).
3. Proclamation No. 131, July 22, 1987 – Instituted the CARP as a major program of the
government. It provided for a special fund known as the Agrarian Reform Fund (ARF), with
an initial amount of Php50 billion to cover the estimated cost of the program from 1987-
1992.
4. Executive Order No. 129-A, July 26, 1987 – streamlined and expanded the power and
operations of the DAR.
5. Republic Act No. 6657, June 10, 1988 (Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law) – An act
which became effective June 15, 1988 and instituted a comprehensive agrarian reform
program to promote social justice and industrialization providing the mechanism for its
implementation and for other purposes. This law is still the one being implemented at
present.
6. Executive Order No. 405, June 14, 1990 – Vested in the Land Bank of the Philippines the
responsibility to determine land valuation and compensation for all lands covered by CARP.
7. Executive Order No. 407, June 14, 1990 – Accelerated the acquisition and distribution of
agricultural lands, pasture lands, fishponds, agro-forestry lands and other lands of the public
domain suitable for agriculture.

President Fidel V. Ramos (1992-1998)

When President Fidel V. Ramos formally took over in 1992, his administration came face to face
with publics who have lost confidence in the agrarian reform program. His administration committed to
the vision “Fairer, faster and more meaningful implementation of the Agrarian Reform Program.
 President Fidel V. Ramos enacted the following laws:

A Self-regulated Learning Module 96

 1. Republic Act No. 7881, 1995 – Amended certain provisions of RA 6657 and exempted
fishponds and prawns from the coverage of CARP.
2. Republic Act No. 7905, 1995 – Strengthened the implementation of the CARP.
3. Executive Order No. 363, 1997 – Limits the type of lands that may be converted by setting
conditions under which limits the type of lands that may be converted by setting conditions
under which specific categories of agricultural land are either absolutely non-negotiable for
conversion or highly restricted for conversion.
4. Republic Act No. 8435, 1997 (Agriculture and Fisheries Modernization Act AFMA) –
Plugged the legal loopholes in land use conversion.
5. Republic Act 8532, 1998 (Agrarian Reform Fund Bill) – Provided an additional Php50 billion
for CARP and extended its implementation for another 10 years.

President Joseph E. Estrada (1998-2000)

“ERAP PARA SA MAHIRAP’. This was the battle cry that endeared President Joseph Estrada
and made him very popular during the 1998 presidential election.
President Joseph E. Estrada initiated the enactment of Executive Order N0. 151, September 1999
(Farmer’s Trust Fund) – Allowed the voluntary consolidation of small farm operation into medium and
large scale integrated enterprise that can access long-term capital.
During his administration, President Estrada launched the Magkabalikat Para sa Kaunlarang
Agraryo or MAGKASAKA. The DAR forged into joint ventures with private investors into agrarian sector
to make FBs competitive. However, the Estrada Administration was short lived. The masses who put
him into office demanded for his ouster.

President Gloria Macapacal-Arroyo (2000-2010)

The agrarian reform program under the Arroyo administration is anchored on the vision “To
make the countryside economically viable for the Filipino family by building partnership and promoting
social equity and new economic opportunities towards lasting peace and sustainable rural
development.”
Land Tenure Improvement - DAR will remain vigorous in implementing land acquisition and
distribution component of CARP. The DAR will improve land tenure system through land distribution
and leasehold.
Provision of Support Services - CARP not only involves the distribution of lands but also
included package of support services which includes: credit assistance, extension services, irrigation
facilities, roads and bridges, marketing facilities and training and technical support programs.
1. Infrastructure Projects - DAR will transform the agrarian reform communities (ARCs), an area
focused and integrated delivery of support services, into rural economic zones that will help in the
creation of job opportunities in the countryside.
2. KALAHI ARZone - The KALAHI Agrarian Reform (KAR) Zones were also launched. These
zones consist of one or more municipalities with concentration of ARC population to achieve
greater agro-productivity.
3. Agrarian Justice - To help clear the backlog of agrarian cases, DAR will hire more paralegal
officers to support undermanned adjudicatory boards and introduce quota system to compel
adjudicators to work faster on agrarian reform cases. DAR will respect the rights of both farmers
and landowners.

A Self-regulated Learning Module 97

 President Benigno Aquino III (2010-2016)
President Benigno Aquino III vowed during his 2012 State of the Nation Address that he would
complete before the end of his term the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP), the center
piece program of the administration of his mother, President Corazon Aquino.
The younger Aquino distributed their family-owned Hacienda Luisita in Tarlac. Apart from the
said farm lots, he also promised to complete the distribution of privately-owned lands of productive
agricultural estates in the country that have escaped the coverage of the program.
Under his administration, the Agrarian Reform Community Connectivity and Economic Support
Services (ARCCESS) project was created to contribute to the overall goal of rural poverty reduction
especially in agrarian reform areas.
Agrarian Production Credit Program (APCP) provided credit support for crop production to
newly organized and existing agrarian reform beneficiaries’ organizations (ARBOs) and farmers’
organizations not qualified to avail themselves of loans under the regular credit windows of banks.
The legal case monitoring system (LCMS), a web-based legal system for recording and
monitoring various kinds of agrarian cases at the provincial, regional and central offices of the
DAR to ensure faster resolution and close monitoring of agrarian-related cases, was also launched.
Aside from these initiatives, Aquino also enacted Executive Order No. 26, Series of 2011, to
mandate the Department of Agriculture-Department of Environment and Natural Resources-
Department of Agrarian Reform Convergence Initiative to develop a National Greening Program in
cooperation with other government agencies.

President Rodrigo Roa Duterte (2016 – present)

Under his leadership, the President wants to pursue an “aggressive” land reform program that
would help alleviate the life of poor Filipino farmers by prioritizing the provision of support services
alongside land distribution.
The President directed the DAR to launch the 2nd phase of agrarian reform where landless farmers
would be awarded with undistributed lands under the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP).
Duterte plans to place almost all public lands, including military reserves, under agrarian reform.
The President also placed 400 hectares of agricultural lands in Boracay under CARP. Under his
administration the DAR created an anti-corruption task force to investigate and handle reports on alleged
anomalous activities by officials and employees of the department.
The Department also pursues an “Oplan Zero Backlog” in the resolution of cases in relation to
agrarian justice delivery of the agrarian reform program to fast-track the implementation of CARP.

TASK1: Read each item below and answer the question in a separate document. (52 points)

1. How did the Spanish government distribute lands on the Filipino Farmers? (10 points)
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________

2. What were the problems with the early agrarian policies? Give 1 and explain(10 points)

A Self-regulated Learning Module 98

 __________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________

3. Which of the early agrarian laws are really beneficial to tenant farmers? Justify your answer.(10 points)
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________

4. What do you think is the most significant agrarian law? Justify your answer(10 points)
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________

5. With so many agrarian reform law, why do you think farmers remain dissatisfied? Justify your answer
(10 points)
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________

6. Who was considered as the “Father of Agrarian Reform? (2 points)

______________________________________________

NAME: ____________________________________ SCORE: ______/52

SCHEDULE AND SECTION: ___________________ DATE: __________

CRITERIA 1 3 5 SCORE
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5
Relevance of The essay did not Answer is brief Answer is
answer to the answer the with insufficient complete;
question question detail. Unrelated sufficient detail
issues were provided to
introduced and/or support
minor errors in assertions;
content. answer focuses
only on issues
related to the
question; factually
correct.
Thoroughness None of the Most of the basic Deals fully with the
of answer relevant details details are entire question.
were included included but some
are missing.
TOTAL SCORE

A Self-regulated Learning Module 99

 TASK 2: List a particular issue in the country that spans in the different periods in Philippine
agrarian reform history and propose solutions or recommendations afterward.

Periods Issue/s Solutions/ recommendations

1. Spanish Period

2. American Period

3. Commonwealth
Period

New Republic

4. President Manuel A.
Roxas
5. Elpidio R. Quirino

6. Ramon Magsaysay

7. President Carlos P.
Garcia
8. President Diosdado
P. Macapagal
9. President Ferdinand
E. Marcos
10. President Corazon
C. Aquino (1986-1992)
11. President Fidel V.
Ramos
12. President Joseph E.
Estrada
13. President Gloria
Macapacal-Arroyo
14. President Benigno
Aquino III

A Self-regulated Learning Module 100

 LESSON 2: PHILIPPINE TAXATION

Taxation is defined in many ways. Commonly heard definitions include:

It is the process by which the sovereign, through its law making body, races revenues use to
defray expenses of government.
It is a means of government in increasing its revenue under the authority of the law, purposely used to
promote welfare and protection of its citizenry.
It is the collection of the share of individual and organizational income by a government under the authority
of the law.
Taxation is a reality that all the citizens must contend with for the primary reason that the
government raises revenue from the people they govern to be able to function fully. In exchange for the
taxes that people pay, the government promises to improve the citizens’ lives through good governance.
Taxation, as a government mechanism to raise funds, developed and evolved through time, and in the
context of the Philippines, we must understand that it came with our colonial experience.
Taxation is the inherent power of the sovereign, exercised through the legislature, to impose
burdens upon the subjects and objects within its jurisdiction, for the purpose of raising revenues to carry
out the legitimate objects of the government. It is the power of the sovereign to impose burdens or charges
upon persons, property or property rights for the use and support of the government to be able to
discharge its functions.
The primary purpose is to generate funds or revenues use to defray expenses incurred by the
government in promoting the general welfare of its citizenry and for public expenditure. Other purposes are
to equitably contribute to the wealth of the nation.
Taxes imposed at the national level are collected by the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR), while those
imposed at the local level (i.e., provincial, city, municipal, barangay) are collected by a local treasurer's
office.
Principle of Equity, Uniformity and progressivity of Taxation
Section 28 (c), Article VI of the Constitution provides that “the rule of taxation shall be uniform and
equitable and that Congress shall evolve a progressive system of taxation.”
The tax is uniform when it operates with the same force and effect in every place where the subject of
it is found. "Uniformity" means all property belonging to the same class shall be taxed alike. It does not
signify an intrinsic, but simply a geographic, uniformity (Churchill & Tait vs. Conception, 34 Phil. 969).
Uniformity does not require the same treatment; it simply requires reasonable basis for classification.
The concept of uniformity in taxation implies that all taxable articles or properties of the same class
shall be taxed at the same rate. It requires the uniform application and operation, without discrimination,
of the tax in every place where the subject of the tax is found. It does not, however, require absolute
identity or equality under all circumstances, but subject to reasonable classification.

A Self-regulated Learning Module 101

 The concept of equity in taxation requires that the apportionment of the tax burden be, more or less,
just in the light of the taxpayer’s ability to shoulder the tax burden and, if warranted, on the basis of the
benefits received from the government. Its cornerstone is the taxpayer’s ability to pay.
Progressive Tax requires that the rate or amount of tax increases as the amount of the income or
earning to be taxed increases.

Evolution of Philippine Taxation

Pre – Colonial Period (900 – 1521). The Government were called “Barangays”. There was no national
government to called. There was no “datu” strong enough to unite the archipelago into one nation. Some
barangays however united to form a confederation. It was headed by a ruler called “datu” or raja”.
The Ancient Filipinos practice paying taxes for the protection from their “datu”. The collected tax or
tribute was called “buwis” or “handug”. Non-payment of taxes was already punishable during this period.
The chieftain’s family members were enjoying exemption from paying taxes.
The judicial process was influenced by religion and by waiting the intervention of the deities wherein the
Datu served as the chief judge who was assisted by group of elders in the barangay that acted as
members of the jury.
There were four classes.
1. Maharlika class (includes datu) were the nobility of pure royal descent .
2. Timawa or the warrior class composed of free men, neither chiefs nor slaves". They required to
render military service to the datu in hunts, land wars or sea raids . They could acquire property,
acquire any job they want, pick their own wives, and acquire an Alipin. They were however
expected to pay taxes, and support the Maginoo class. They are the only class to pay taxes,
and hence they are importance in the community.
3. Alipin (commoners and slave). They renders services to the tumao and timawa for debts or
favors. The Alipin did not likely make any money for their services, and hence they do not pay
taxes.
4. The priestly class were scribes that are tasked to record history, and keep track of tributes and
taxes that were expected from the governed.

Spanish period. During this period tax is being imposed to support the colony, several taxes and
monopolies were established.
The government introduced a “New Income – Generating means”. Examples are the following:
1. Manila – Acapulco Galleon Trade (1565 – 1815)
The Spanish government continued trade relations with these countries and Manila
became the Center of Commerce-China, Japan, Maluccas, Siam, India, Cambodia, Borneo.
Galleon Trade is a ship trade going back and forth yearly between Manila and Acapulco.
The fundamental income is generating business for the Spanish. The Galleon trade brought
silver from Nueva Castilla and silk from China by way of Manila. During the Galleon trade, force
labor was a character of Spanish colonial taxation and was required from the Filipinos. Male
Filipinoswere obligated to serve which results to deaths in seventeenth century.

2. Polo Y Servicio (Forced Labor).

A Self-regulated Learning Module 102

 This revolved within the framework of the Encomienda System. Men ranging from 16 to
60 years of age were obligated to give 40 days personal services to community projects. One
could be exempted from the polo by paying a fee called falla (which was worth one and a half
real).

3. Bandala
Bandala system was implemented by Spanish authorities in the Philippines that requires
native Filipino farmers to sell their goods to the government.
Bandala (from the Tagalog word “mandala” , a round stack of rice stalks to be threshed),
an annual forced sale and requisitioning of goods such as rice.

4. Encomienda System (1570)

A Compliance with the decree issued by King Philip II in 1558, distributed lands in Cebu
to loyal Spanish subjects. The encomienda was not actually a land grant but was a favor from
the kind under which the Spaniard receiving his favor was given the right to collect tributes–or
taxes–from the inhabitants of the area assigned to him. The man who received this favor was
called an encomendero. The encomienda was, therefore, a public office.

The encomenderos were required by law to perform the following duties:

a. to give protection to the natives
b. to help the missionaries convert the natives to Christianity
c. to promote education

5. Tribute/ “Buwis
When Spaniards came, they started to collect “tributos” (tributes). The purpose of it is to
develop and improve the islands and to maintain it as well. Also, the collect tributes are for the
government officials’ salary and for the expenses of the clergy.
The “buwis” (tribute), which could be paid in cash or kind, with tobacco, chickens,
produce, gold, blankets, cotton, rice, or other products depending on the region of the
[Link] duties and income tax were also collected.
In 1884, the payment of tribute was put to a stop because of the “cedula” wherein
colonists were required to pay for personal identification. Everyone over the age of 18 was
obliged to pay their cedula.
During the 17th and 18th centuries, the Contador de' Resultas served as the Chief Royal
Accountant whose functions were similar to the Commissioner of Internal Revenue. He was the
Chief Arbitrator whose decisions on financial matters were final except when revoked by the
Council of Indies.
Taxation in the Philippine during Spanish colonial period was characterized by a heavy
burden place.

Taxation under the Americans. The Americans aimed to make the economy self-sufficient by running
the government with the possible sum revenue and create surplus in the budget.
From 1898 to 1903, the Americans followed the Spanish system of taxation with some
modifications. Later on, the Urbana would be replaced by tax on real state, which became known as land
tax. The problem with the tax was that land titling in the rural area was very disorderly. The Internal
Revenue Law of 1904- was passed as a reaction to the problems of collecting land tax.
It prescribed ten major sources of revenue:

A Self-regulated Learning Module 103

 1. Licensed taxes on firms dealing in alcoholic beverages and tobacco,
2. Excise taxes on alcoholic beverages and tobacco products,
3. taxes on banks and bankers,
[Link] stamp taxes
5. Cedula
6. Taxes on insurance and insurance companies
7. Taxes on forest products
8. Mining concession
9. Taxes on business and manufacturing
10. Occupational licenses

Taxation During The Commonwealth Period. New measures and legislation were introduced to make
the taxation system appear more equitable during the commonwealth. Income tax rate were increased in
1936, adding a surtax rate on individual net income in excess of 10,000. Income tax rates of corporation
were also increased.
In 1937 the cedula tax was abolished which appeared to be progressive move. In 1940 a residence tax
was imposed on every citizen aged 18 years old and every corporation.
Fiscal Policies at Present. The policy of taxation in the Philippines is governed chiefly by
the Constitution of the Philippines and three Republic Acts.
Fiscal Policy
 Constitution: Article VI, Section 28 of the Constitution states that "the rule of
taxation shall be uniform and equitable" and that "Congress shall evolve refers to the
a progressive system of taxation" "measures
employed by
 National law: National Internal Revenue Code—enacted as Republic Act governments to
No. 8424 or the Tax Reform Act of 1997and subsequent laws amending it; stabilize the
the law was most recently amended by Republic Act No. 10963 or the Tax economy,
Reform for Acceleration and Inclusion Act and, specifically by
manipulating the
 Local laws: major sources of revenue for the local government units (LGUs)
are the taxes collected by virtue of Republic Act No. 7160 or the Local levels and
Government Code of 1991, and those sourced from the proceeds collected allocations of
by virtue of a local ordinance. taxes and
government

TASK .Answer the following questions briefly. (20 points)

1. How important is tax in a government? (10 points)

___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________

2. How can the government improve tax collections without imposing much tax to the consumer?
(10 points)
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________

A Self-regulated Learning Module 104

NAME: _________________________________ SCORE: _________/20
SCHEDULE and SECTION: ________________ DATE: _____________

CRITERIA 1 3 5 SCORE
Q1 Q2
Relevance of The essay did not Answer is brief with Answer is complete;
answer to the answer the question insufficient detail.
sufficient detail
question Unrelated issuesprovided to support
were introduced assertions; answer
and/or minor errors focuses only on
in content. issues related to the
question; factually
correct.
Thoroughness of None of the relevant Most of the basic Deals fully with the
answer details were included details are included entire question.
but some are
missing.
TOTAL SCORE /10 /10

LESSON 3: FILIPINO-AMERICAN RELATIONS

Free trade agreement is a pact between two or more nations to reduce barriers to imports and exports
among them. Under a free trade policy, goods and services can be bought and sold across international
borders with little or no government tariffs, quotas, subsidies, or prohibitions to inhibit their exchange. The
concept of free trade is the opposite of trade protectionism or economic isolationism ([Link]).

Bell Trade Act and Parity Rights

By the virtue of the Philippine Rehabilitation Act of 1946, the United States committed to provide
rehabilitation aid in the amount of $620 million. However, grant of the aid was conditional upon the acceptance
by the Philippine government of the “parity provision” of the Bell Trade Act. The revised trade agreement of
1955 allowed the American investors into all types of business enterprises.
Faced with straitened circumstances, the Philippine government under President Manuel Roxas
accepted the “parity” clause of the trade agreement of 1946, maneuvering into passage of “the parity “
amendment to the 1935 Constitution by both houses of the Congress.

Read and with a learning buddy answer the question that follows.

A Self-regulated Learning Module 105

 Message
of
His Excellency Manuel Roxas
President of the Philippines
On the Ratification of the Executive Agreement with the U.S.A

[June 21, 1946]

Source: [Link]
urging-ratification-of-executive-agreement-with-the-usa-june-21-
1946/#:~:text=The%20Bell%20Act%2C%20or%20Philippine,to%20Filipino%20citizens%20and%20corporations.

MR. SPEAKER, MR. PRESIDENT, MEMBERS OF THE CONGRESS:

I have asked that this joint session be called in order that I may report to the Congress on the actions now
required to provide for future trade and economic relations with the United States.

The American Congress has lately passed a Philippine Trade Act and a Philippine War Damage Act Those two
acts provide the pattern of United States aid for our reconstruction and for the rehabilitation of our national
economy. Without this assistance we are faced immediately by disaster. Without the helping hand thus extended
to us, I do not believe we can survive.

I do not pretend to tell this Congress that this legislation or the money voted us by the United States Congress
will automatically accomplish the rehabilitation of the Philippines. It is my duty to advise you that we must look
forward to years of sacrifice and toil to accomplish our aims. Our future is grim, brightened only by the patriotic
determination of the Filipino people to succeed, at whatever cost.

In my report to the Congress on the state of the nation, I described our present precarious economic condition.
We are today living through the most crucial period of our life as a nation. Each day brings its crisis to our
attention. We are faced by difficulties and decisions which test our capabilities to lead our people.

The obstacles are great and numerous. They will require all our wisdom and courage. One of our sources of
hope is the help we have been offered by the United States. That nation which is about to grant us our freedom
has also tendered to us the means of solving our economic problems, a protected place in the American market
for 28 years and funds to help us rebuild our shattered land.

Such are the purposes of the Trade Act and the War Damage Act. I am directing your attention today largely to
the Trade Act which grants us the protection of American tariff preferences.

The American Congress, in order to provide those trade preferences, had to cut across all the protective features
of American tariff law. These preferences are being offered exclusively to the Philippines.

A new and unprecedented legal formula had to be devised. That formula consists of an Executive Agreement to
be negotiated by the President of the United States with the President of the Philippines. Authorization for the
Agreement is contained in section 401 of the Trade Act. That section also requires the acceptance by the

A Self-regulated Learning Module 106

Philippine Congress of the Agreement and the implementation by law of all the terms of that Agreement. We
must agree to continue these provisions in force after we become a Republic and finally we must agree to take
steps to amend our Constitution to provide certain rights for American citizens which are now at variance with
the Constitution. I am already authorized by the United States Congress to enter into such an Executive
Agreement with the President of the United States but it is expressly provided that this Agreement cannot be
proclaimed and put into effect until this Congress accepts the Agreement by law.

I wish to report to the Congress, therefore, that I am proceeding to negotiate this Executive Agreement in
accordance with the provisions of the Trade Act. As soon as it is complete and duly signed, I will submit it to this
Congress for approval. I hope to be able to present the Agreement to you early next week. I am making every
effort to hasten the conclusion of negotiations in order to give the Congress as much time as possible to reach
a decision.

This Congress has never been asked to deliberate upon a more vital matter. Your decision will determine the
fate of this nation for the next generation. I need not ask the gentlemen of the Congress to lay politics and political
expediency aside. I know that regardless of party or faction every one of you recognizes his heavy responsibility.
I ask merely that you examine all the facts and make your decisions accordingly. My recommendations are well
known by now. I propose that you approve the Executive Agreement that I will soon transmit to you. It is my
considered judgment that to do otherwise would be to invite economic and finally political catastrophe.

The Trade Act and some of its provisions have been under violent attack in some parts of the press and in some
public circles during the past two months. I would like to be able to say that public discussion has been in
progress. I am afraid I cannot describe what has been going on as discussion. There have been
misrepresentations and misstatements of fact. Some political leaders have been willing to make capital out of a
question which should be above politics. I shall undertake, in the course of this report, to present the facts
regarding this legislation and to correct some of the gross misrepresentations which have been made. I have no
doubt as to what your decision will finally be. Yet I feel that the Filipino people have the right to be correctly
informed, to have their fears set at rest, and to view in intelligent perspective the proposals which have been
made.

There are perhaps some plausible arguments against some portions of the Philippine Trade Act. If I had been
permitted to promulgate it by personal edict, it would have been different in many respects from the Act we are
considering today. But no one man can hope to see his own ideas completely accepted in an act of Congress.
It is well if that this is so.

Let me recall, for the benefit of those who might not know, the procedure by which the United States Congress
enacts legislation. There are introduced into the Congress at every session an average of 8,000 different
measures. Of this tremendous number no more than a few hundred are ever acted upon. The rest die in
committee. Many desirable proposals suffer this fate. Any controversial measure to be approved by Congress
must have a support so widespread as to demand priority over all others clamoring for congressional attention.
Many proposals urgently desired by the national administration never see the light of day. In a Congress occupied
by so many various and conflicting concerns, there is no other way.

Those of us who are old enough to remember can well recall the difficulties we faced in getting Philippine
legislation through past Congresses when national problems in the United States were far less complex than
they are today. It was only by a coalition of divergent interests that the first independence act was forced through
the American Congress. It took that same coalition, backed irresistibly by an administration in the first flush of its
early prestige, to secure the passage of the Tydings-McDuffie Act.

A Self-regulated Learning Module 107

Today we have one strong advantage in Congress that we never had before: wholehearted and unselfish
concern for our welfare. But all the sectional and economic interests must still be reckoned with and must be
reconciled in any piece of major legislation affecting them.

Moreover, each administrative department of the federal government is called upon to make a minute inspection
of all legislation to insure that it is in conformity with the overall policies of the United States. The views of all
these departments must be taken into consideration. There is established by these means a long and dangerous
gauntlet of individual guardians of particular interests and policies. Such a system is inevitable for the
maintenance of a continuous national policy in a nation so huge and with interests so vast.

I have gone into some detail in sketching this background. It was not without reason. I hope you will now realize
how difficult it is to get legislation which satisfies any particular group or which conforms to any ideal plan.

The Trade Act had to run such a gauntlet. For six months it was considered by the various committees of
Congress. It was entirely revised no less than five times during this process. In the end it required no less than
the personal intervention of President Truman to effect a reconciliation of many viewpoints and interests.

Filipino officials representing this Government during the framing of this legislation desired at first perpetual free
trade but later agreed to 20 years of free trade. Senator Tydings proposed twelve years of gradually increasing
tariffs. The State Department insisted upon the elimination of preferences at the earliest possible date. The
Agriculture Department was opposed to granting the Philippines a sugar quota. There were other departments
which had similar strong views on various aspects of the legislation. In September, 1945, the first Bell Bill was
introduced providing 20 years of free trade. A few weeks later the first Tydings Bill was introduced providing
twelve years of gradually increasing tariffs. In October, Senator Tydings introduced a second bill prescribing
twelve years of declining trade preferences and authorizing 100,000,000 dollars in war damages. In November,
President Truman brought about the compromise between the Bell and Tydings proposals. Senator Tydings,
President Osmeña, Representative Bell, High Commissioner McNutt and representatives of the administrative
departments agreed to a plan for 8 years of free trade and 25 years of gradually decreasing preferences. The
period of declining preferences was later shortened to 20 years. That is substantially the proposal which is before
us today.

Many hearings were held on this measure before both the House Ways and Means and the Senate Finance
Committees. Those hearings extended over a period of six months. The Philippine representative in Congress,
Commissioner Romulo, testified many times. High Commissioner McNutt testified at great length and on many
occasions. President Osmeña sent letters to the Congress which are in the record for all to read. As long ago as
last October 12 he appealed for the passage of the Bell Bill. Commissioner Romulo has consistently asked the
approval of this measure in all its various forms. Commissioner McNutt spent two and a half months in
Washington, from February until April, in a supreme and finally successful effort to get this legislation through.
Without his patient and tireless efforts, I do not believe that any of the Philippine legislation would have been
passed before now.

The Trade and War Damage bills were finally approved in April of this year. Much has been said recently
regarding so-called onerous provisions in these Acts. But all the violent protests are of very recent vintage. It is
a fact that there was no formal protest from Philippine sources until this legislation was on the point of
passing―on the eve of our national elections, to be exact. Let us examine some of these protests, with some
reference, perhaps, to their timing. I shall speak first of all of section 341 of the Trade Act, which provides
as follows:

“The disposition, exploitation, development, and utilization of all agricultural, timber, and mineral lands of the
public domain, waters, minerals, coal, petroleum, and other mineral oils, all forces and sources of potential

A Self-regulated Learning Module 108

energy, and other natural resources of the Philippines, and the operation of public utilities, shall, if open to any
person, be open to citizens of the United States and to all forms of business enterprise owned or controlled,
directly or indirectly, by the United States citizens.”

This is the so-called equal rights provision. In order to fulfill the obligations imposed upon us by this provision we
must amend our Constitution. Had I been in Washington at the time, I would have vigorously protested against
its unilateral quality and, had it been insisted upon, I would have suggested other means of accomplishing the
same objective. If we trace the legislative history of this provision, we will find that it was in the first version of
the Bell Bill introduced on September 25th, 1945. It was accepted at that time by the Commonwealth
Government. I have assurance that it was approved by a former Secretary of Finance as well as by the head of
the Commonwealth Government. No opposition to it was even expressed until November 16th, when it was
mildly suggested by the Resident Commissioner that this provision should better be, included in a treaty of
friendship. But the same provision persisted in every successive version of the Bell Bill. It was insisted upon
most vigorously by Representative Harold Knutson, the author of what is now known as the Knutson Amendment.

Today we are faced by the fact that section 341 is a part of the Trade Act. There is no way of divorcing it from
the Trade Act. If I could, I would remove it, not because of the alleged dangers it holds for us—I believe these to
be non-existent―but rather because of the manner and form in which it is included. I do not believe that these
reasons should weigh too heavily with us at this time, confronted as we are with the fact that this provision is
part of the law. I have no fear whatsoever that the granting to American citizens of rights equal to those of
Filipinos in the development of our natural resources will bring about an imperialistic exploitation of our country.
This was not the intention of Congress. I am certain it will not happen.

It is perhaps too distant in the past for most of us to remember, but it is most interesting to note, that the provision
in our Constitution protecting our natural resources from exploitation is not of Filipino but of American origin. The
prevention of this exploitation has been the constant concern of the American Government from the very
beginning of the occupation in 1898. Our laws restricting the acquisition of public lands and the development of
our mineral resources can be traced back to the first Philippine Bill approved by the United States Congress in
1902. These wise provisions were implemented by the Philippine Commission and consistently repeated in the
successive organic acts until finally these provisions found lodgment in our Constitution.

It seems to me therefore that to suspect the American Congress of conspiring to open the flood-gates to an
imperialistic deluge, is to deny every fact we know. To impute this motive to the United States Government is to
ascribe evil to virtue itself and to put an ugly countenance upon the noble stewardship maintained here by the
United States for the past 48 years. A nation that for these many years has striven patiently and at great cost to
uplift us politically and socially, a nation that has preserved for us our national patrimony so that when we shall
become independent we may enjoy it in full measure and pass it on to our posterity—such a nation does not
deserve the scurrilous attacks which have lately been made. I can ascribe those attacks only to lack of
information or to malice. They do not befit our dignity as a people or nation. They arouse resentment among our
trusted friends in Congress to whom it is proposed that we appeal for redress.

Today those who make these attacks are furnishing ammunition to the enemies of democracy elsewhere in the
world. They are besmirching the good name of the nation which, more than any other, is the hope of all the
underprivileged and defenseless peoples of the earth.

No, I will not attribute such motives to the American Congress. I will not believe that Congress intended any
unworthy purpose. The Congressional intent was simply to invite and encourage American capital to invest in
the Philippines and aid in our rehabilitation. The equal rights provision was not designed as a protection for
American interests already here—it is intended to reassure potential investors that the Philippines is a safe area
for enterprise, safe against discrimination for the next 28 years. Every responsible Filipino leader I know desires

A Self-regulated Learning Module 109

American capital enterprise and know-how to participate actively in our reconstruction. Our rehabilitation would
be impossible without such assistance. The only question is the means of inviting that capital to venture here.
Congress selected a means with which we may disagree as to form. We cannot disagree as to the objective. To
seek the elimination of that provision at this time would be to warn American investors and American enterprise
not to come to the Philippines. That would be suicidal for us. I will not propose it.

That does not mean that we should not be on guard against ruthless exploitation and imperialism. We must
maintain a constant vigilance against the dangers of such exploitation by persons of any alien nationality, or
even by Filipinos. We now have ample legal safeguards to accomplish that. The Government need not open up
lands or resources for development or can halt at any time the dissipation of such resources. The Government
itself can assume the responsibility of their development. The Government has the power to expropriate public
utilities; the Government has the power to tax and control conditions of employment. Of course we shall not use
those powers except to prevent abuses. But if abuses occur, we shall not hesitate to use the legal authority that
is already available or set up new devices of restriction and control to protect our national interests. The Executive
Agreement will set up no barriers to our exercise of all legal means to prevent predatory exploitation or the
domination of our economy by selfish economic interests. Commissioner McNutt himself has publicly urged us
to maintain such safeguards. And in the very remote possibility that the American Government should ever
change its policy and seek to further imperialistic designs here, we have the recourse of terminating the Executive
Agreement on five years’ notice.

I wish to emphasize again and again that all the arguments which have been made against this provision have
been based not on facts but on fears. I refuse to be frightened by the ghost of imperialism. Americans have had
equal rights—potentially more than equal rights― for 48 years in the Philippines. America could have made of
the Philippines a Belgian Congo. I look about me and see no evidence of outrageous exploitation. Instead of
being made slaves we have been freed. Instead of teaching us obedience, America has taught us love of liberty.
Instead of overseers, America has sent us teachers. Since 1913, the balance of trade between the United States
and the Philippines has been heavily in our favor in every single year until the outbreak of the war. If this provision,
whatever its form, will help us survive economically as an independent nation, I will go along with it for the
emergency period. I do not propose to sacrifice the national welfare on the altar of pride. I will not be Lazarus on
a heap of ruins.

At the proper time I shall propose the required amendment to our Constitution but I shall recommend it as an
Ordinance appended to the Constitution to be effective only during the life of the Executive Agreement.

I will now refer to section 402, sub-section (f). This is the provision pegging the peso to the dollar. It has been
cited as an infringement upon our sovereignty and free choice. Those who make that citation forget, perhaps,
that the peso is already pegged to the dollar in the Bretton Woods International Monetary Agreement which has
been duly ratified by the Philippine Senate. In a world searching for security, the stability of monetary values is
an economic essential. We cannot expect to retain the freedom to raise or lower the value of our peso and retain
the confidence of traders in other parts of the world. As far as pegging the peso to the dollar is concerned, the
dollar is the standard of value for all world currencies today. By connecting our peso with the American dollar,
we stand within the magic and charmed circle of standard value, the dollar area, to which all currencies are being
attracted today. This provision does no more than require us to do something which it is to our own unquestioned
interest to do. But if this arrangement should work a hardship on us, we are not without recourse. The ratio of
the peso to the dollar can be changed with the approval of the President of the United States.

Some voices have been raised in protest against the absolute quotas provided for certain of our exports to the
United States. It is said that this is discrimination. Such a charge cannot in my judgment be maintained. These
quotas are the very same—in the case of cigars, our new quota is greater―that we had in the American market
before the war. The quotas were originally established as a compromise to allay the opposition of American

A Self-regulated Learning Module 110

commodity interests who had protested in years past against unlimited imports from the Philippines on a duty-
free basis in competition with similar American commodities.

These quotas are now being continued in the post-independence period as an offset against the trade
preferences we are given. But these fixed quotas are now a source of considerable advantage to us. By
establishing a ceiling on the amount of these commodities we can ship to the United States, we are automatically
forced, after our production reaches quota limits, to diversify in other non-quota fields. That is one advantage we
gain. A second benefit lies in the 28-year insurance of these quotas. We are assured for that period of time of
having a market for these goods up to the amount of our quota. No other country has such an assurance.

In the case of sugar, all producing areas including those inside continental United States are under quota, but
none of these areas has a quota assurance for a period longer than two years. In the Philippines we are given a
28-year guarantee, a guarantee which supersedes any sugar act which Congress might pass in the future. The
same is true of cordage.

The President of the United States is given authority to establish quotas on other Philippine commodities entering
the United States when those imports threaten American producing interests. That is also a fair safeguard. As
long as the United States grants us the privilege of preferential tariffs, we must respect America’s right to
safeguard her own interest against Philippine products which have a market in the United States as a result of
tariff protection.

We are told that there are no quotas on American commodities entering the Philippines. For the time being we
desire none. We want as many imports as we can possibly get. If, during the course of the 28 years of the
Agreement, we find any Philippine industry threatened by imports from America, we are free, in my judgment, to
establish quotas on those imports or devise other means of protecting our infant industries. I find nothing
unreciprocal about this provision.

One other aspect of the rehabilitation legislation against which criticisms have been leveled is the so-called tie-
up between the Trade Act and the War Damage Act. That connection is established by section 601 of the War
Damage Act which provides that no war damage payments in excess of 1,000 pesos may be made to private
individuals or corporations until the Executive Agreement has been proclaimed to be in effect by the President
of the United States. This provision has been described as a club to require our acceptance of the Bell Act. I
consider this allegation to be completely baseless. Honestly speaking, I see no particular purpose in section 601
since to my mind the Trade Act is as essential, if not more so, to our national welfare as the War Damage Act
and it is inconceivable to me that the Executive Agreement provided in the Trade Act could be rejected. There
is a natural and organic connection between the two Acts. In the original Tydings version they were both in the
same bill and were separated only for reasons of legislative convenience to make simultaneous consideration in
the Senate and the House possible.

Actually and legally section 601 associates only part of the war damage payments with the Executive Agreement.
Regardless of whether we accept the Executive Agreement, the P240,000,000 for the reconstruction of our public
buildings, roads, bridges, and harbors are still to be spent in our behalf. The P200,000,000 worth of surplus
property will still be transferred to us. Private war damage payments up to 1,000 pesos are to be made in any
event. The other payments are made contingent upon the effectiveness of the Executive Agreement only
because they are part of the pattern of economic reconstruction. It would be senseless, for instance, to make
payment for the reconstruction of a sugar central or a coconut mill if there were no market for the sugar or the
coconut oil. It was the clear and consistent intention of Congress that the War Damage funds be used for the
rehabilitation of industries destroyed by war. Special and careful provision is made in the War Damage Act to
prevent individuals from collecting war damages and transferring the payments out of the Philippines. Buildings
and structures must be rebuilt or in process of rebuilding, as a condition precedent to receiving war damage

A Self-regulated Learning Module 111

payments. Hence it was decided that these payments would not be authorized unless there were trade provisions
permitting these industries to exist.

Let us not imagine that the war damage authorization represents a windfall of dollars ready to be distributed
among us for whatever purposes might meet individual fancies. These funds are carefully earmarked and their
expenditure safeguarded so that they must be used for rehabilitation purposes. But these funds alone are only
a part of the amount of money that will be needed to rebuild our land. Vast amounts of fresh capital must be
attracted to accompany the war damage money to give us a productive economy adequate to our needs. Of the
$620,000,000 authorized for war damage payments, $400,000,000 is set aside to compensate for damage to
private property. That $400,000,000 must be divided among all the claimants and the number of claimants will
total more than half a million. According to the survey of the War Damage Corporation of the United States
Government, total losses suffered by private persons and corporations amounted to $464,420,000. Damage
inflicted on church property amounted to $139,000,000. These figures are today considered extremely
conservative. All these losses must be met out of the $400,000,000 authorized by Congress. These losses
include automobiles, household furniture, and office equipment. The buildings which were damaged include club
houses, auditoriums and theaters. The amount of money which will be paid out for the rehabilitation of productive
enterprises is but a part of the total available amount. And if that amount is the only money we have for the
rehabilitation of our economy, those who pin all their hopes on war damage payments may look forward to a
rude awakening.

It was not the intention of Congress to make these payments a bribe to induce our acceptance of the Trade Act,
because Congress well knew the war damage money is but a fraction of the capital we require. The Bell Act
provision and the subsequent encouragement of trade and productive enterprise are in themselves intended as
an inducement and as a lure for capital investment here. Without that investment we are lost. No bank will lend
us money unless we have a productive economy. We cannot have a productive economy without markets and
without the capital required to produce for those markets. The three elements of our rehabilitation are first, a
market for our goods; second, capital to enable us to revive our production; and third, labor and enterprise to
produce. To coordinate this trilogy the United States Congress provided, first, trade preferences; second,
assurances to capital; and third, a part of the funds we will need to rebuild and reconstruct. To strike out any one
of these elements is to destroy the whole of the master plan for our rehabilitation.

I have gone into great detail in regard to the so-called onerous provisions of the Trade Act. It might be well by
contrast to recite the beneficial provisions regarding which there can be no question.

The Trade Act provides eight years of completely free trade and twenty years of gradually increasing tariffs or
declining duty-free quotas as the case may be. For sugar and cordage, for instance, increasing tariffs are
provided. For coconut oil, tobacco products and some others which could not withstand the imposition of any
tariffs, declining duty-free quotas are stipulated.

These are provisions which have never been made for any other foreign country on earth. These are provisions
which violate America’s basic international trade policies. Yet without these provisions, our industries cannot
even begin to function. The tariff preferences are basically and fundamentally essential to us.

When consideration of this legislation was begun seven months ago, it was believed an impossible task to secure
congressional approval of such provisions. But in the end, they were approved.

The tariff duties, when they begin to be assessed against our products in 1954, are to be assessed at the lowest
world duty charged to any nation in the world including Cuba. That means that Cuba, for instance, which has
enjoyed a 20 per cent preferential in the American market since 1901, will be at a disadvantage compared to the
Philippines until 1974.

A Self-regulated Learning Module 112

It also means that products which are found on the free list for Cuba, and for Cuba alone, as, for instance
manganese, will be on the free list for the Philippines for the full 28-year period of the Agreement.

We are guaranteed a two-cent preferential in processing taxes on our copra, also for 28 years, thus guaranteeing
for that period an exclusive market in the United States for Philippine copra. No other country can compete in
the face of this preferential.

Whereas, the United States agrees to tie its hands in the allocation of sugar quotas and in the assessment of
processing taxes on coconut oil for those 28 years, we make no such concession. This is a provision completely
unilateral in our favor, completely non-reciprocal.

The United States, under this Act, in effect revises all its tariff laws, all its reciprocal trade agreements with all
the countries in the world, departs from its own international trade policy, and sets up a special trade relationship
with the Philippines.

It might be well for us to remember that our forthcoming independence is a free grant by the United States.
Added to that grant are the economic privileges I have already referred to. The nation whose productive power
and armed might brought Germany and Japan to their knees is committed to the guarantee of our security and
of our survival. We could have no more magnificent sponsor of our independence.

We are a prostrate nation. The apparent well-being of some of our citizens today leads them to puff up with
dignity, like the bullfrog of Aesop’s fable. But let us look at the real plight of our people, and the real situation
which stares at us from every quarter.

What if we reject the Executive Agreement, and assert our pride and dignity and demand that Americans stay
out of the Philippines and refrain from making investments here? What is our situation then? What are our
prospects, on the one hand of obtaining a better bill, and on the other of getting along without the Trade Act at
all? In the first place, I do not believe we could at this time get a better Act. After July 4th, we will be without
congressional representation. Any proposition submitted to Congress in our behalf after July 4th must be the
product of an inter-departmental agreement within the United States Administration. I do not think such an
agreement possible without months of deliberation. And while these deliberations are going on, the Congress
will adjourn. This is an election year in the United States.

While the present Congress is favorably disposed toward us, I cannot forecast the complexion or attitude of the
next Congress.

We, ourselves, are not agreed on what a perfect trade formula would be. Some are against free trade. Some are
for perpetual free trade. Some wish our pre-war industries revived. Some wish them to remain destroyed.

Should we be so foolish as to ask the United States Government to reconsider, I doubt if there would be
legislation enacted before 1948. I doubt whether it would be as satisfactory legislation as that which we have
today.

What of the other alternative, of dispensing with the Trade Act entirely?

Let us look at the facts of life. After July 4th, without this Executive Agreement, we will be on a full foreign duty
basis, like any other foreign nation, with respect to the United States.

A Self-regulated Learning Module 113

The sugar, tobacco, and coconut oil industries will be dead. So, too, will be embroideries, and pearl buttons, and
probably cordage. Our exports for some years to come will consist of copra and abaca, and chrome. There will
even be a tariff against our manganese. It will be many months before we can mine gold again.

That means, at pre-war production levels, an income from exports of approximately 60 million pesos, using
current prices as a standard. Our imports this year from the United States will be valued at approximately 600
million pesos. If we are to rehabilitate ourselves, the amount of imports must be increased next year. The result
will be that at the end of 1947, we will have denuded the Philippines of practically every peso and every centavo
which the American GI’s and others brought in here, the so-called nest-egg on which we have been living and
doing business for the past 18 months. We will be penniless.

It is easy to say that we can raise our own food and live, as we lived under the Japanese. Do we wish to push
our people back into the middle ages of subsistence and economic isolationism? Of course, we do not. But
unless we attract capital from abroad, and even more important, unless we can begin immediately to increase
our exports of our major cash crops, we are doomed to disaster and worse.

We must be reminded that should we reject this Trade Act, and deprive ourselves of preferential markets, we
prejudice completely our applications for loans from the United States Government. No government would lend
us money in the absence of a productive economy that would permit us to repay the loan.

I do not think that there is any question of confronting such a situation. There is no reason to expect that this
Congress will refuse to meet this question in its true light.

I have described and defended the Trade Act at great length. I sincerely believe that we have only one choice,
and that is, to accept it. Let me point out to the Congress, that were we to be actuated by partisan considerations,
the majority party might oppose this legislation. We are not responsible for it. We had nothing to do with its
formulation or passage. But we do not intend to take a partisan attitude toward a question which involves our
national existence.

One supplementary reason for this stand is our strong conviction that, as we approach independence, we must
establish firmly the principle of continuity of foreign policy. I know of no more vital principle for the promotion of
the respect of the world for our nationhood, for our stability, for our political maturity. I will not put this Government
in a position of denying the commitments entered into with the United States by the last administration, merely
for a doubtful political advantage. I believe it my patriotic duty to follow this policy. I hope to see developed among
our people an understanding that politics halts at the water’s edge. We will not, we must not, play politics with
our commitments abroad.

I have placed before you a momentous choice. There is no time for delay. We cannot gamble with the lives of
our people. They must have assurance of future work. We must draw now the pattern of national reconstruction
to permit the development of a broader, a richer, a more productive economy, than we ever had in the past.

All the dreams we have dreamed, of democracy, of social security, of agrarian reform, of prosperity and
happiness for our people, hinge on your actions and your debates. By the wisdom of your decisions hangs the
fate of this nation. In imposing this responsibility upon you, I need not go further. I need not indicate to you at
any greater length the course you should follow.

I appeal to your patriotism and to the love I know every member here holds for his native land, to act in good
conscience for the welfare of his country. Chart now the course this nation must follow in the years to come. Tell
our people now that you have faith in our nation and in the ability of their Government to safeguard them from

A Self-regulated Learning Module 114

evil. Tell them that their struggles and sacrifices of the past four years were not in vain, and that the Republic of
the Philippines is soon to reap the benefits of those sacrifices and struggles.

The basic blueprint of our economic recovery is here. It is for you to accept. It is for you even to reject. I assure
the Congress that in accepting and in implementing the program that has been designed, they will be giving to
the people of the Philippines, and to our friends and well-wishers throughout the world, the signal that we are on
our way in a great crusade, 18,000,000 strong, to reach the haven of economic security which all the world is
seeking today.

******

NOTE.―The President was authorized by Congress on July 3, 1946, in the last law of the Commonwealth,
No.733, to enter into this executive agreement by which the Philippines binds itself to carry out the provisions of
U. S. Public Law 371, approved on April 30, 1946, entitled “An Act to Provide for the Trade Relations between
the United States and the Philippines, and for Other Purposes.”

The Bell Act, or Philippine Trade Act of 1946 as this law is generally known, required the amendment of the
Philippine Constitution so as to allow American citizens and corporations to exploit the natural resources and
operate public utilities, which privilege was restricted to Filipino citizens and corporations. Without this
constitutional amendment, the Philippines would not be able to enjoy the trade and other privileges offered in
the Trade Act as well as in its companion measure, the Philippine Rehabilitation Act of 1946, otherwise known
as the War Damage Act.

TASK: Answer the following the following questions based on the message of President Manuel
Roxas.

1. Based on the message of President Manuel Roxas, what is Bell Trade Act and Parity Rights all about?
________________________________________________________________________________________

2. Describe the situation in the Philippines after WWII.

_______________________________________________________________________________________

3. What are the reasons why there is a need to amend the 1935 Constitution?
_______________________________________________________________________________________

4. Do you think that the content of the Bell Trade Act and the Parity clause is just and fair to the Filipinos?
Justify your answer.
_______________________________________________________________________________________

5. Identify the advantages and disadvantages of the parity rights.

_______________________________________________________________________________________

6. If you are the president of the country that time, will you amend the Constitution to pave the way for Parity
Act? Justify your answer.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________

A Self-regulated Learning Module 115

 LESSON 4: THE PHILIPPINE CONSTITUTIONS

A Constitution refers to the body of rules and maxims in accordance with which the
powers of sovereignty are habitually exercised. The purposes are: a) to prescribe the
permanent framework of a system of government; b) to assign to the several departments their
respective power and duties; and c. To establish certain first principles on which the government
is founded. An unconstitutional act is not a law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties; it
affords no protection; it creates no office; it is inoperative as if it had not been passed at all (See
Art 7 Civil Code).
The Constitution of the Philippines is the supreme/fundamental law of the land. The Constitution
currently in effect was enacted in 1987, during the administration of President Corazon C. Aquino, and is
popularly known as the “1987 Constitution.” Philippine constitutional law experts recognize three other
previous constitutions as having effectively governed the country:
a. The 1935 Commonwealth Constitution
b. The 1973 Constitution
c. 1986 Freedom Constitution
Constitutions for the Philippines were also drafted and adopted during the short-lived governments of
President Emilio Aguinaldo (1898) and Jose P. Laurel (1943).

Evolution of the Philippine Constitution

1899 (Malolos) Constitution. The Philippines had long been used as a trading port in Asia, and this led to
their colonization by the Spanish and later by the Americans. The Spanish converted most of the population to
Catholicism and the religion remains the dominant one in the country. During the latter part of more than 300
years of Spanish rule, nationalist sentiment began to grow among groups of Indios (which was how the
Spanish referred to the Filipinos), fuelled in large measure by the writings of national hero Jose Rizal (later
executed by the Spanish authorities) and other ilustrados (the Filipino intellegensia). A revolution was launched
against Spain and the revolutionaries declared Philippine independence in Kawit, Cavite on June 12, 1898.
What became known as the Malolos Congress was convened on September 15, 1898 and the first Philippine
Constitution, called the Malolos Constitution, was approved on January 20, 1899, ushering what is called the
First Philippine Republic. In the Spanish-American War of 1898, the revolutionaries sided with the Americans,
hoping that, with the defeat of Spain, independence would be granted by the US to the Philippines. This,
however, did not happen. After Spain ceded (or sold) the islands to the United States in the Treaty of Paris, the
US immediately proceeded to brutally suppress the Philippine independence movement.

1935 Constitution. In 1916, the US passed the Jones Act which specified that independence would only
be granted upon the formation of a stable democratic government modelled on the American model, not the
French model as the previous constitution had been. The US approved a ten-year transition plan in 1934 and
drafted a new constitution in 1935. World War II and the Japanese invasion on December 8, 1941, however,
interrupted that plan. After heroic Filipino resistance against overwhelming odds finally ended with the fall of
Bataan and Corregidor in 1942, a Japanese “republic” was established, in reality, a period of military rule by

A Self-regulated Learning Module 116

the Japanese Imperial Army. A new constitution was ratified in 1943 by Filipino collaborators who were called
the Kapisanan sa Paglilingkod ng Bagong Pilipinas (Kalibapi). An active guerilla movement continued to resist
the Japanese occupation. The Japanese forces were finally defeated by the Allies in 1944 and this sorry
chapter came to a close.

Philippine independence was eventually achieved on July 4, 1946. The 1935 Constitution, which featured
a political system virtually identical to the American one, became operative. The system called for a President
to be elected at large for a 4-year term (subject to one re-election), a bicameral Congress, and an independent
Judiciary.

Salient features of the 1935 Constitution include the following:

a. A bicameral legislature composed of a senate and House of Representatives
b. The President is elected to a four-year term together with the Vice-President without
re-election
c. Rights of suffrage by male citizens of the Philippines who are twenty-one years of
age or over and are able to read and write;
d. Extension of the right of suffrage to women within two years after the adoption of the
constitution.

1973 Constitution. Ferdinand Marcos was elected president in 1965 and was re-elected in 1969, the
first president to be so re-elected. Desirous of remaining in power beyond his legal tenure, he declared martial
law in 1972, just before the end of his second and last term, citing a growing communist insurgency as its
justification. He then manipulated an ongoing Constitutional Convention and caused the drafting of a new
constitution – the 1973 Constitution – which allowed him to rule by decree until 1978 when the presidential
system of the 1935 Constitution was replaced with a parliamentary one. Under this new system, Marcos held
on to power and continued to govern by decree, suppressing democratic institutions and restricting civil
freedoms.

The 1973 Constitution, promulgated after Marcos’ declaration of Martial law, was supposed to introduce
a parliamentary-style of government. Legislative power was vested in a National Assembly whose members
were elected for six-year terms. The President ideally supposed to be elected as the symbolic and purely
ceremonial head of State from the Members of the National Assembly from a six-year term and could be re-
elected to an unlimited number of terms61.

The 1973 Constitution was a deviation from the Philippines’ commitment to democratic ideals. . Marcos
abolished Congress and ruled by presidential decree (P.D.) from September 1972 until 1978, when a
parliamentary government with a legilature called the National Assembly replaced the presidential system. But
Marcos exercised all the powers of president under the old system plus the powers of prime minister under the
new system.

The 1987 Constitution. Corazon C. Aquino began her term by repealing many of the Marcos-era
regulations that had repressed the people for so long. In March, she issued a unilateral proclamation
establishing a provisional constitution. This constitution gave the President broad powers and great authority,
but Aquino promised to use them only to restore democracy under a new constitution. This new constitution
was drafted in 133 days by an appointed Constitutional Commission of 48 members and ratified by the people
in a plebiscite held on February 2, 1987. It was largely modeled on the American Constitution which had so
greatly influenced the 1935 Constitution, but it also incorporated Roman, Spanish, and Anglo law.

A Self-regulated Learning Module 117

 The 1987 Constitution established a representative democracy with power divided among three separate
and independent branches of government: the Executive, a bicameral Legislature, and the Judiciary. There
were three independent Constitutional Commissions as well: the Commission on Audit, the Civil Service
Commission, and the Commission on Elections. Integrated into the Constitution was a full Bill of Rights, which
guaranteed fundamental civil and political rights, and it provided for free, fair, and periodic elections. In
comparison with the weak document that had given Marcos a legal fiction behind which to hide, this
Constitution seemed ideal to many Filipinos emerging from 20 years of political repression and oppression.

Significant features of the 1987 Constitution.

The Constitution establishes the Philippines as a “democratic and republican State,” where sovereignty
resides in the people and all government authority emanates from them (Section 1, Article II). Consistent with
the doctrine of separation of powers, the powers of the national government are exercised in min by three
branches – the executive branch headed by the President, the legislative branch composed of the congress
and the judicial branch withthe Supreme Court occupying the highest tier of judiciary.
Basic Principles Underlying the 1987Constitution
1. Recognition of the Aid of almighty God
2. Sovereignty of the People
3. Renunciation of war as an instrument of national policy
4. Supremacy of civilian authority over military
5. Separation of the Church and State
6. Recognition of the importance of the family as basic social institution and of the vital
role of youth in nation building
7. Guarantee of human rights
8. Government through suffrage
9. Separation of power
10. Independence of Judiciary
11. Guarantee of local autonomy
12. High sense of public service morality and accountability
13. Nationalization of natural resources and certain private enterprises affected by public interest
14. Non—suability of the State
15. Rule of the majority; and
16. Government of laws and not men

TASK 1: Compare and Contrast the different Philippine constitutions

1935 Constitution 1973 Constitution 1987 Constitution

A Self-regulated Learning Module 118

 Tasks 2: Answer the following questions briefly.

1. Discuss the relevance of having a Constitution?

________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________

2. Do you think there is a need to change the existing constitution? Reason out your answer.
________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________

Some Key Terms and Names to Remember

 Agrarian reform  Taxation

 Land reform  Constitution
 BIR  Eminent domain
 Free Trade  Parity Rightd

A Self-regulated Learning Module 119

 TASK1: Read about Tax Reform for Acceleration and Inclusion (TRAIN) LAW.

Tax Reform for Acceleration and Inclusion (TRAIN)

The Tax Reform for Acceleration and Inclusion (TRAIN) or the Republic Act No. 10963 was signed into
law by President Rodrigo Duterte on December 19, 2017 and implemented on January 1, 2018. It was the
initial package of the Comprehensive Tax Reform Program, which aims to rationalize the Philippine tax system.
The TRAIN Law seeks to generate enough revenue over the next three years, and on and on, so that the
government can provide better services, work on infrastructure projects that will help us develop economically,
and put an end to the country’s complex tax system.
The overarching goal of the first package of the TRAIN is to "create a simpler, fair, and more efficient
system through this program, the richer tax payers of the Philippines will pay a greater contribution to enable
the government to execute its programs and services targeted to the general improvement of the country,
especially the less fortunate.

Salient provisions of TRAIN LAW

There are six (6) main key provisions, three (3) additional excise taxes, and four (4) financial taxes.
1. Simplified Value Added Tax
The government's aim to elevate the less fortunate in the Philippines and drive development is
exemplified as the TRAIN repeals 54 out of 61 of the non-essential VAT exemption. In order to
protect these less fortunate persons, as well as small and micro businesses, they are exempted
from VAT on goods and services of marginal establishments.
2. Income Tax
The TRAIN lowers the Personal Income Tax (PIT)f or all taxpayers except the rich". Additionally,
minimum-wage earners are still exempted from PIT. The Law also ensures a minimum wage earner
who incurs a small raise will not have his overall salary (with the PIT deducted) less than minimum
wage. Also, married couples where both parties are working may be exempted up to a total of
₱500,000. This does not include the exemption from the first ₱90,000 of their thirteenth month pay
and additional bonuses. Finally, Self-employed and professionals with gross sales below VAT can
only pay 8% flat tax instead of their income and personal tax
3. Cars
There shall be levied, assessed and collected an ad valorem tax on automobiles based on the
manufacturers or importer’s selling price.
4. Excise Tax of petroleum products
This tax aims to increase efforts towards decreasing the consumption of harmful fuel, and
veering towards a healthier, more sustainable future. The price of fuel also varies due to the global
inflation of oil.
Gas prices and diesel are yet another high-impact item under TRAIN, especially because these
excise taxes have not been touched since 1997. Excise taxes cover those consumer products and
goods with negative effects and affect those who use more of it by asking them to pay more.
5. Sugar

A Self-regulated Learning Module 120

 The SSB (Sugar-Sweetened Beverages) tax will promote a healthier Philippines". It achieves this
by reducing the increasing number of diabetes and obesity cases, through raising awareness, promoting
the consumption of healthier products and encourages companies to innovate healthier alternatives.
TRAIN imposes new taxes of ₱6 per liter on drinks containing sweeteners and ₱12 per liter on
drinks containing high-fructose corn syrup. Milk, 100% natural juice and 3-in-1 instant coffee drinks are
exempt from the excise tax.

6. Simplified Estate and Donor's Tax

The TRAIN aims to simplify property purchases, transfers and donations in order to make the
land market more efficient thus ensuring the usage of properties is maximized. The estate tax is now
reduced to 6% based on the net value of the property. It also has a standard deduction of ₱5 million as
well as a ₱10 million exemption on the family home. The donor tax is also reduced to 6% of the net
donations for gifts above ₱250,000 on a yearly basis.

7. Additional Excise Taxes.

There are three additional excise taxes, namely coal, cosmetics and tobacco:
Coal Excise Tax. Coal is a cheap source for power generation and has its uses in multiple
industries such as the chemical and pharmaceutical industries. It is also a prime ingredient
for activated carbon, carbon fibre and silicon metal. However, it remains a major source for air
pollution in the Philippines. The aim of the excise tax is to shift towards renewable energies and
generate additional income for building infrastructures and social services.
Cosmetics Tax. Starting 2018, all cosmetic surgeries, aesthetic procedures, and body
enhancements intended to improve, alter, or enhance a person's appearance are now subject to a
tax of 5%. However, procedures necessary to ameliorate a deformity arising from, or directly related
to a congenital or developmental defect or abnormality, a personal injury resulting to an accident or
trauma, or disfiguring disease, tumour, virus or infection are tax -exempted.
Tobacco Tax. The excise tax on cigarettes aims to reduce the amount of smokers and
respiratory and cardiovascular diseases one can catch from the act, as well as generate additional
revenue for health oriented programs and services.

8. Financial Taxes
There are four taxes that were adjusted along with the TRAIN Law. Firstly, the documentary
stamp tax was increased by 100% except on loans with only 50% increase, but not for savings,
property, and non-life insurance. Secondly, the final tax on foreign currency deposit unit (FCDU)
was increased from 7.5% to 15% of interest income. Thirdly, capital gains tax of non-traded stock
was increased from 5% to 10% of final net gains. Finally, the stock transaction tax was increased
from 0.5% to 0.6% of total transaction value.
9. Finally, there are three additional taxes that do not fall under the aforementioned categories. These
are the tax on lottery winnings and PCSO prizes, documentary stamp tax, and mining tax. With the
implementation of the TRAIN Law, all PCSO lotto prizes are taxed at 20% if the prize exceeds
₱10,000. The documentary stamp tax has been doubled, resulting in stamp taxes ranging from
₱1.50 to ₱3.00. Finally, excise tax rates on all non-metallic minerals and quarry resources, and all
metallic minerals including copper, gold and chromite, will be doubled, from 2% to 4%, as well as
excise tax on indigenous petroleum, which will be doubled from 3% to 6%.

Economic Implications of TRAIN

In response to the need to upgrade the country’s public infrastructure, we have embarked on an
expansionary fiscal policy. We will spend P8 to P9 trillion (or $160 to $180 billion) for public infrastructure from
2017 to 2022. The infrastructure budget will rise from 5.4% of GDP in 2017 up to 7.3% of GDP in 2022.

A Self-regulated Learning Module 121

 In like manner, investment in social services will also steadily increase to 40% of the national budget or
9.2% of GDP in 2022.
To finance such expansionary fiscal strategy, the government has adopted a two-pronged approach. First,
we have decided to expand the deficit ceiling from 2% to 3% of GDP. Second, we intend to increase revenue
effort, defined as total revenues as percent of GDP, by reforming the tax system and improving tax
administration.
TRAIN is an essential tool in our expansionary fiscal strategy. It will not only generate additional resources
for priority programs and projects but also make our fiscal program more sustainable.

Mitigating Measures and Inflation Outlook With TRAIN

The most controversial aspect of TRAIN is the adjustment in excise taxes for petroleum products and the
taxes on sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs). For the petroleum products, the last time the taxes were reset
was in 1997.
For the sugar-sweetened beverages, there is a compelling health argument aside from a revenue argument in
imposing the “sugar taxes”.
Admittedly, some households will be worse off as a result of TRAIN. But in order to compensate for the
inflationary impact of TRAIN, we have set aside P200 per month per household to the poorest 50% of
households. This means that some 10 million households will benefit from this mitigating measure.
In effect, TRAIN takes into consideration the immediate, the medium, and the long-run effects of the law.
Admittedly, it is not a perfect law, but on balance it is a big plus for the economy.

TASK1: After reading about the TRAIN LAW, write a reaction paper stating your position on the
issue. A Reaction Paper is a type of assignment which requires personal opinion and
conclusions on a given topic.

NAME: ____________________________________ SCORE: _______/50

SCHEDULE and SECTION: ____________________ DATE: ___________

CRITERIA 10 7 5 3
Content and - Content is - Content is - Content is not - Content is
Development comprehensive, accurate and comprehensive and incomplete.
(x2) accurate, and persuasive. /or persuasive. - Major points are
persuasive. - Major points are - Major points are not clear and /or
- Major points are stated. addressed, but not persuasive.
stated clearly and - Responses are well supported. Questions were not
are well supported. adequate and - Responses are adequately /20
- Responses are address inadequate or do answered.
excellent, timely assignment. not address
and address - Content and assignment.
assignment purpose of the - Content is
including course writing are clear. inconsistent with
concepts. regard to purpose
- Content and and clarity of
purpose of the thought.
writing are clear.

A Self-regulated Learning Module 122

 Organization -Structure of the - Structure is mostly - Structure of the - Organization and
and Structure paper is clear and clear and easy to paper is not easy to structure detract
(x2) easy to follow. follow. follow. from the message
- Paragraph - Paragraph - Paragraph of the writer.
transitions are transitions are transitions need - Paragraphs are /20
logical and maintain present. improvement. disjointed and lack
the flow of thought - Conclusion is - Conclusion is transition of
throughout the logical. missing, or if thoughts.
paper. provided, does not
- Conclusion is flow from the body
logical and flows of the paper.
from the body of the
paper

Mechanics - Rules of capitalization - Rules of - Paper contains Paper contains

(x1) aand punctuation are capitalization and few capitalization, numerous
fffollowed; spelling is punctuation are punctuation and capitalization,
ccorrect. followed with minor spelling errors. punctuation, and
Language is clear and errors. - Language lacks spelling errors. /10
precise; sentences Spelling is correct clarity or includes - Language uses
display consistently the use of some jargon or
strong, varied structure. jargon or conversational tone
conversational
tone.
TOTAL SCORE /50

TASK 2 :Make an Infographic on the salient features of the 1987 Philippine Constitution.

According to the Oxford English Dictionary, an infographic (or information graphic) is “a visual
representation of information or data”. An infographic is a collection of imagery, charts, and minimal text that
gives an easy-to-understand overview of a topic.

10 7 5 3

CRITERIA Excellent Good Fair Needs SCORE

improvement

*Appropriate *Most details *Few details *No details to

details support support main idea support main idea support main
main idea idea
*Accurate *Lacking accurate *Information is
*Accurate and information for information not accurate
Content detailed almost all subject *Information /20
information matter * Inadequate does not support
(X2) information is not the topic
*Information *Information is clearly supportive
adequately mostly adequate of visual’s purpose
supports purpose and supportive of
visual’s purpose

A Self-regulated Learning Module 123

 *Topic and title *Topic and *Topic and title *Topic and title are
are clear and title are mostly are difficult to not clearly
easily identified clear and identify identified
* Main idea is easily * Main idea not
clearly appropriate identified clearly stated *No main idea
to topic *Main idea is *Few
*All illustrations appropriate to illustrations *Illustrations do
complement topic complement not complement /10
purpose of visual *Most purpose of purpose of visual
Focus illustrations visual
complement
(x1) purpose of
visual

Visual Appeal *Outstanding use *Adequate use *Inappropriate *Little attempt to

of color, design, of color, use of color, use color, design
(x1) and space design, and design, and and space
*Original and space space appropriately
creative design *Design is * Design lacks
*Overall design is adequate creativity * Design is dull /10
pleasing and *Overall *Lack of
harmonious design is harmonious * Project has
mostly design in sloppy
pleasing and presentation appearance
harmonious

Mechanics *Free of *Mostly free of * Frequent *Too frequent

grammatical grammatical grammatical grammatical errors
(x1) errors errors errors
*Words are legible *Most words * Presentation *Distractive
elements make /10
and pertinent to are legible and is illegible and
topic pertinent to confusing illustration
topic ineffective

TOTAL SCORE /50

A Self-regulated Learning Module 124

 LINK IT!

Sustainable Development Goal 16 (SDG16) aims to promote the rule of law at the national and
international levels and ensure equal access to justice for all.
The rule of law is a principle of governance in which all persons, institutions and entities, public and
private, including the State itself, are accountable to laws that are publicly promulgated, equally enforced and
independently adjudicated, and which are consistent with international human rights norms and standards. It
requires, as well, measures to ensure adherence to the principles of supremacy of law, equality before the law,
accountability to the law, fairness in the application of the law, separation of powers, participation in decision-
making, legal certainty, avoidance of arbitrariness and procedural and legal transparency.
A rule of law framework that includes the following:

 Constitution or its equivalent, as the highest law of the land;

 A clear and consistent legal framework, and implementation thereof;
 Strong institutions of justice, governance, security and human rights that are well structured, financed,
trained and equipped;
 Transitional justice processes and mechanisms; and
 A public and civil society that contributes to strengthening the rule of law and holding public officials and
institutions accountable.
(Source: [Link]
[Link]#:~:text=The%20rule%20of%20law%20is,international%20human%20rights%20norms%20and)

Reflect on the importance of rule of law in a democratic country such as the Philippines.

15 10 5 1

Complete Explanation of topic Partial or Inadequate

explanation of is satisfactory, with incomplete explanation of topic
CONTENT topic, with specific, mostly sufficient explanation of with inadequate or
accurate, and evidence, but topic, with missing evidence
relevant mostly general. insufficient and many factual
information. More detail evidence and errors
needed. Some inaccuracies
factual errors

15 10 5 1

Information is Student presents Reader has Sequence of

ORGANIZATION logical, interesting information in difficulty following information is
sequence which logical sequence work because difficult to follow
reader can follow. which reader can student jumps
follow. around

A Self-regulated Learning Module 125

 EVALUATION OF THE COURSE

1. What lesson or activity did I enjoy most? Why?

________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________

2. What is the most important lesson which I can apply in my daily life?
________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________

3. What are the new insights/discoveries that I learned?

________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________

4. What topic/s do I find least important?

________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________

5. What possible topics should have been included?

________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________

A Self-regulated Learning Module 126

 REFERENCES

Agoot, L. (2019). Cordillera region a result of successful peace talks. Retrieved from
[Link]

Albano, E. (2004). Political law [Link] City : ChanRobles Publishing Company

Alporha, V. C. &Candelaria, J P. (2018).Readings in Philippine [Link]: Rex Book Store.

Bahatan, F. D. (2009). Cordillera autonomy: Looking around and father back. Retrieved from
[Link]

Bantoyog (2015).MacliingDulag. Retrieved from [Link]

Batutung et. al (2018). The readings in Philippine History. Manila: Mindshapers Co., Inc.

[Link] (no date).Guide on Philippine Taxation. Retrieved on May 16, 2020 from
[Link]
Bontoc Museum. Retrieved from [Link] bontoc-
museum/a/poi-sig/1190374/1318446
Briones, L.(1996) Philippine public fiscal administration City of Mandaluyong, Philippines
: Fiscal Administration Foundation
Camagay, Maria Luisa T. & Ancheta, Jopol Alvin C. & Bernal, Michael S. & Guiang, Francisco Jayme Paolo
A. & Malban, Francis Justine M. & Ramos II, Dondy Pepito G. (2018). Unraveling the past : readings in
Philippine history. Quezon City : Vibal Group, Inc

Constantino, R., & Constantino, L. R. (1975). The Philippines: A past revisited. Quezon City: R. Constantino

[Link] ([Link]).Agrarian Reform Histoty. Retrieved on May 16, 2020 from [Link]
us/agrarian-reform-history/
[Link] (2018).TRAIN: Driving the Philippine Economy in 2018. Retrieved on May 28, 2020 from
[Link]
philippine-economy-in-2018
“Declaration of Philippine Independence.”In The Laws of the First Philippine Republic (The Laws of Malolos),
edited by Sulpicio Guevara, 203-206. Manila: National Historical Commission, 1972

Dhwty (2020).Unique and Unsettling: The Hanging Coffins of Sagada, Philippines. Retrieved from
[Link]

Ecological Equity (n.d.). Philippines: The cordillera peoples’ struggle. Retrieved from
[Link]
life-land-and-resources/

Encarnacion, E., Guerrero M. ,&Villegas, R. (2018) In Focus: Balintawak: The Cry for a Nationwide Revolution
Retrieved on May 16, 2020 from [Link]
nationwide-revolution/

A Self-regulated Learning Module 127

Filipiknow (2019).Unusual Cemetery: The Hanging Coffins of Sagada. Retrieved from
[Link]

Florendo, M. B. (n.d.). Ethnic history (Cordillera). Retrieved from [Link]

3/subcommissions/subcommission-on-cultural-heritagesch/historical-research/ethnic-history-cordillera/

Gobaguio (n.d.). Camp john hay. Retrieved from [Link]

Gobaguio (2012).Teachers camp celebrates 100 Years. Retrieved from [Link]
[Link]#.Xr-EwmhKjIU

Gottschalk, Louis. 1969. Understanding History: A Primer of historical Method. New York. Alfred A. Knopf
Hent (2019). Cordi leaders commit support to reg’l autonomy quest. Retrieved from
[Link]

Makabenta, Yen. 2019 January 31. Magellan never went to Butuan. The manila [Link] from
[Link]
butuan/504604/
Malacanang (n.d.).Mansion house. Retrieved from [Link]
house/
Mamalateo (2019). Reviewer on Taxation. Rex: Manila

Molintas, J. M. (n.d.). The Philippine indigenous peoples’ struggle for land and life: Challenging legal text.
Retrieved from [Link]

Nachura, A. (2017)Outline/Reviewer in political law. Quezon City : VJ Graphic Arts, Inc.

National Commission of Indigenous People (n.d.).IPRA and NCIP. Retrieved from [Link]
content/uploads/2015/10/[Link]

Official Gazette of the Philippines. Indigenous peoples right act of 1997 also known as Republic Act 8371.
Retrieved from [Link]

Official Gazette (n.d) The Judicial Branch retrieved on September 26, 2018 from
[Link]

Piedad-Pugay, Chris antonette.2012 September [Link] Two Faces of the Cavite [Link] from
[Link]
Pigafetta, Antonio. “First Voyage Around the World.” In the Philippine Islands, Vol. 33, edited by E. Blair and J.
Robertson, 175, 177, 179, 181. Cleveland: A.H. Clark, 1909. Reprinted by Cacho Hermanos, 1973
Philippine Archives Collection (2016).Kiangan national shrine. Retrieved from
[Link]

Philippine Military Academy (n.d.).History, traditions, and general information. Retrieved from
[Link]
Primer (n.d.).Baguio Museum. Retrieved from [Link]

A Self-regulated Learning Module 128

Primer (n.d.).MuseonKordilyera. Retrieved from [Link]
Philtravelcenter (n.d.). Baguio city: Best of the islands of Philippines. Retrieved from
[Link]
Suarez, R. (2002) Political law [Link] : Rex Book Store
The official Gazette of the [Link] of President Corazon Aquino during the joint session of the U.S.
Congress. Retrieved from [Link]
during-the-joint-session-of-the-u-s-congress-september-18-1986/.

Tikkanen, A. (n.d.). Banaue rice terraces. Retrieved from [Link]

terraces

Torres, J.V. (2018). BATIS: sources in Philippine history. Quezon City : C & E Publishing;

Uckung, P. (2012). The Rizal Retraction and other Cases. Retrieved on May 17, 2020 from
[Link]
Ungus Sr. P & Ungus Jr, P (2014).Agrarian Law and Social [Link] : Rex Book Store
United Nations Educational, Scientific & Cultural Organization (n.d.).Kabayan Mummy Burial Cave. Retrieved
from [Link]
Vecaldo, R., Clemente, R. &Tamangen, A. (2015). Effectiveness of Bodong as an alternative dispute
resolution: A glimpse of Kalingas’ peace talks. Retrieved from [Link]
[Link]

A Self-regulated Learning Module 129

A Self-regulated Learning Module 130