As I See It

Stradcom has no income, so is not liable for income tax


As the name suggests, an income tax is a tax on income. If there is no income, there is nothing to tax. So why is the  Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) trying to collect P300 million in income taxes from Stradcom, the IT provider of the Land Transportation Office (LTO)? Instead of earning a net income, Stradcom has been operating at a loss—P524 million in 2011.

The LTO owes Stradcom over P4 billion for services rendered. Stradcom does the registration of land transport vehicles and makes the license plates. The LTO does not want to pay, saying it does not know whom to pay since another group, the Sumbilla group, is also claiming ownership of Stradcom.

Several days ago, the Supreme Court ruled that Stradcom is owned by the  Quiambao group. It said those with  the Sumbilla group are neither officers, directors nor stockholders of the corporation, and that the cases the group has filed against the Quiambao group are “nuisance suits.”

Still, the LTO refuses to pay Stradcom the P4 billion that it owes the corporation, alleging that the Sumbilla group has filed a motion for reconsideration.

But it is a well-settled rule that a decision in intra-corporate disputes is immediately executory. The reason is to allow the corporation to operate normally so that it would not suffer business reverses. The LTO, therefore, is duty-bound to pay Stradcom the P4 billion it owes the corporation.

Perhaps, because of this, the BIR is dunning Stradcom P300 million in deficiency taxes for the year 2011. But Eric Pilapil, vice president for legal affairs of Stradcom, told a press forum last Saturday that Stradcom had no net income in 2011 and, in fact, incurred a net loss of P524 million for that year.

“Stradcom’s income tax return (for 2011) declared a loss of P524 million,” Pilapil said. “There is still no net income so no income tax is due.”

The LTO paid Stradcom P1 billion in January this year, but it still owes Stradcom P4 billion. Is it this P1 billion that the BIR is taxing? But the BIR said it is charging Stradcom for “deficiency taxes in income earned in 2011,” the same year that Stradcom declared in its income tax return a net loss of P524 million. So what net income is there to tax?

Or perhaps the BIR is collecting taxes from the P4 billion that Stradcom still has to collect from the LTO. Stradcom promises to pay the BIR the moment the LTO pays its debts.

However, it does not look like the LTO wants to pay anytime soon, not until the high court resolves the motion for reconsideration of the Sumbilla group.

Unless the problem is solved soon, things are bound to get worse. Last Aug. 5, the BIR served warrants of garnishment on Stradcom to compel it to pay the deficiency taxes. The warrants froze whatever bank accounts Stradcom still has and the computers and other equipment that Stradcom uses in its operations. Pilapil said the garnishment is crippling the operations of Stradcom and may result in a system shutdown.

When that happens, the LTO will have to do the processing of vehicle registration manually, which means vehicle owners will have to wait many, many months before their vehicles can be registered and issued license plates.

“Stradcom has done everything that it can to prevent a system shutdown,” Pilapil said, “to the extent of incurring loans, in the interest of public service. However, this garnishment further cripples the corporation’s operations on top of LTO’s continuing refusal to make regular payments.”

The LTO stopped paying Stradcom regularly in September 2011. The LTO has not been paying Stradcom for almost three years now.

“We have daily operation expenses,” Pilapil said. “We have in fact been operating at a loss just so the LTO will not experience a system shutdown…. If there is a shutdown, this must be considered a force majeure and beyond our control. We hope the LTO and the transacting public will understand and sympathize with out dilemma.”

* * *

I can understand BIR’s sometimes “heartless” insistence on collecting taxes: It is short of its collection target, just like the Bureau of Customs. President Aquino’s P2.26-trillion budget for 2014, the biggest in Philippine history, needs plenty of funds. Especially because the budget department, instead of reducing or abolishing the hated pork barrel—as the general public demands because it results in the loss, or theft, of billions of taxpayers’ pesos—has increased its appropriations in the proposed 2014 budget.

From January to May this year, the BIR has met a month’s collection target only once. But bear in mind that the BIR has set its sights on contributing 55 percent of the administration’s budget for next year—that’s a whopping P1.253 trillion to collect by the end of the year.

That is why the BIR is desperately running after alleged tax evaders, filing cases against them (but the Department of Justice is not prosecuting them) and collecting hefty fines from delinquent companies.

But why is it not running after the importers of luxury vehicles, which are an anachronism in a poor country like the Philippines? Yes, it did go after and succeeded in collecting P1 billion in taxes from PGA Cars Inc., the distributor of Porsche, Lamborghini, Bentley and Audi.

But why is it not going after the two other importers of luxury cars—CATS-Mercedes-Benz and BMW? Records show that the BIR has assessed CATS P1.9 billion, but this amount has remained uncollected until now. BMW still has no assessment. Why, oh why?

Get Inquirer updates while on the go, add us on these apps:

Inquirer Viber

Disclaimer: The comments uploaded on this site do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of management and owner of We reserve the right to exclude comments that we deem to be inconsistent with our editorial standards.

  • krbico

    lets face it, most of the government officials are corrupt under the “daang matuwid” no reforms, no projects are being implemented or simply delaying everything are just part of the corruption process where after PNoy step down basic government services including regulatory functions like LTO will be in state of decay. This state of decay of government services & functions is what this corrupt people is waiting for. They will suddenly fast track everything from contracts to procurements where same corrupt people from hybernation will benefit and the cycle of corruption continues. If present LTO heads remains without alternative IT provider and bidding remains a problem then they should not meddled between corporate issues of stradcom. At the end of the day LTO owes stradcom and this must be paid out base on their previous process same as how they do it prior stradcom corporate issues started. Instead of meddling they should focus on finding alternatives if stradcom seize operating and be ready to take over the system and not telling the media that they are ready to go manual as this would look like daang pabalik not the daang matuwid. Going back on tax issue there are many things to consider, stradcom may have registered an income however they may have not enough cash to pay those obligations like taxes due to the non payment made by LTO which BIR may also on the right side to find way to collect even if it means shutting down Stradcom and crippling what is already crippled LTO operations.

  • just_and_equitable

    Another one of Neal Cruz’ trial by a publicist…

  • Fulpol

    uncollected revenue.. is that taxable?

    • Edward Castro


      • Fulpol


    • Kenjie Hasaki

      But If they record it as “deferred revenue” due to reason cited by JOSE RIZAL above, it would only translate to “deferred tax liability”.

  • eight_log

    STRADCOM … no income???? Sinong niloloko ninyo??? Nagkakaasuntuhan pa nga kung sino ang may ari niyan … ibig sabihin nyan ehhh napakaganda ang kinikita dyan …. Kung tutuong nalulugi … bakit ayaw bitiwan yang negosyong yan???? Just use your logic!!!!!!!!!


    Regardless, whether it is collected, or not, if the recognized revenue (on the Income Statement) is taxable or subject to tax, then it is taxable period.
    The defense of non-collection of revenue is not a real defense if the revenue of an entity is taxable. It could be that the defense of StradCom of that “taxable revunue under dispute” making such revenue to be non-recognizable and to be written-off on the books of account, because of the “probable legal non-recognition” of it by the client (LTO) thereby causing the non-payment of it by the latter, if any.
    This time, Mr. Neal H. Cruz, you don’t see it as clearly as it is.


    There are 2 books of accounts insofar as the company’s books of is concern (esp. Income Statement or Profit & Loss Statement) – 1) that in accordance with IFRS/GAAP; and; 2) that in accordance with BIR, where specific expenses are considered deductible against the Revenue to come up with a Taxable Net Income.
    Saying it to the press, that StradCom is at loss may not be accurate because of the reasons above-mentioned.
    Most accountants know it. The very reason why not all that is exposed on the media may not be accurate because there are factors that only professionals can understand that the majority masses can not.

    • bay_cpa

      well said sir

    • bay_cpa

      Tsaka liable ka pa din sa tax even though nagooperate ka at a loss.

    • bay_cpa

      well said sir

  • boybakal

    The LTO owes Stradcom over P4 billion for services rendered

    If LTO owes Stradcom P4 billon, it means it is AR accounts receivable on the books of Stradcom.
    AR is not a loss but Income to be collected under Asset column unless declared as Bad debts.
    Once the P&L or Income Statement is prepared….for sure there is no Net Loss but Net Profit before tax.
    That tax is the BIR is trying to collect.

  • AllaMo

    And, why can we believe that a company will continue to provide services when it is not earning and even, much more, operating at a humongous loss? Hindi ba’t ipinag-tanggol pa nang kabarilan ni pnoy itong stradcom na ito.

  • batukan

    there lies the problem of privatizing government work, LTO is now in the mercy of Stradcom. Those wise guys better think again in privatizing customs and other revenue collecting offices.

  • Kenjie Hasaki

    I am not an expert in tax. This is just my opinion.

    Well, I guess the company should record those 4 billion as deferred revenue. This means that stadcom only issues invoice/receipt on what is just collected. They can counter argue while the 4 billion is a paper revenue, it is not yet actually earned and hence, not taxable. Remember that BIR may consider cash basis in recognizing income. Also, if the Philippines is truly business friendly, they would not collect taxes on something that is not actually earned.

    However, on the other hand, even if they apply percentage of completion (of service) method in recognizing income, the same would still be taxable if the services had been 100% completed already by 2011. So the best is to recognize those as deferred revenue.

To subscribe to the Philippine Daily Inquirer newspaper in the Philippines, call +63 2 896-6000 for Metro Manila and Metro Cebu or email your subscription request here.

Factual errors? Contact the Philippine Daily Inquirer's day desk. Believe this article violates journalistic ethics? Contact the Inquirer's Reader's Advocate. Or write The Readers' Advocate:

c/o Philippine Daily Inquirer Chino Roces Avenue corner Yague and Mascardo Streets, Makati City,Metro Manila, Philippines Or fax nos. +63 2 8974793 to 94


editors' picks