The urgent need to reverse the erosion of tax revenues “A limited revenue base has constrained the ability of the government to undertake socially necessary spending, especially on infrastructure. And tax collection is an area in which the Philippines conspicuously underperforms its neighbors” Krugman, Paul et al., 1992, “Transforming the Philippine Economy”.
The Philippines urgently needs to raise more public revenues in order to avoid having to cut back essential public services or having to face a higher risk of fiscal crisis. Reforms of the excise tax and VAT systems offer “quick win” solutions in that they could be introduced fairly rapidly and would increase revenues immediately and equitably. Beyond that, it is also advisable to adopt more fundamental reforms to address existing shortcomings in the tax structure and in tax administration. These reforms need to be guided by both efficiency and equity considerations that call for broader tax bases and lower tax rates than characterize the current tax regime in the Philippines. In particular, structural reforms of the tax system must pay close attention to income taxes, both personal and corporate ones. The reforms proposed would improve the progressivity of the tax system, especially if the additional revenues generated allow for higher pro-poor spending.
Collecting enough taxes to finance essential public expenditures has been a perennial challenge for the Philippines. After peaking at 17 percent of GDP in 1997, total tax revenues declined steadily in the aftermath of the East Asian Financial Crisis, falling below 13 percent in 2002 and 2003. At that point, the Philippines faced a fiscal crisis, with an overall fiscal deficit of 5.6 percent of GDP and a debt-to-GDP ratio that reached 100 percent. The Philippine authorities managed to avert a crisis through a set of fiscal measures in 2005 that broadened the base of the value added tax (VAT), increased the VAT rate from 10 to 12 percent, and increased the corporate income tax (CIT) rate from 32 to 35 percent. These reforms succeeded in partially reversing the erosion of tax collections since 1997, but their impact was short-lived as the total tax intake began to decline again after 2006. By 2009, the GDP-share of total tax revenues was projected to be back to where it had been in 2003 (Table 1).
Several factors contributed to the decline in tax effort since 1997. By far the most important is the decline of excise tax revenues. These fell by 1.8 percent of GDP between 1997 and 2008, mainly on account of inflation erosion, accounting for almost two-thirds of the overall 2.9 percent of GDP decline of total revenues over this period. Tax policy reversals after 2005 also share some of the blame. In particular, the 2005 tax reform contained the seeds of its own destruction by including a sunset clause whereby the corporate income tax rate would be cut to 30 percent on January 1, 2009.1 Also, Congress passed various tax-eroding measures since the 2005 tax reforms, and there have been indications of periodic weakening in tax administration.2
(percent of GDP)
Source: Bureau of Treasury, Department of Finance, Bureau of Customs; and World Bank staff projections.
The weak tax collection performance poses a major problem for the Philippines’ development prospects and its poverty reduction efforts. To begin, the low public revenue base leaves public finances very vulnerable to destabilizing shocks. The resulting increase in fiscal risk raises public sector borrowing costs and renders the country less attractive for private investors. To limit the risk of fiscal crisis, the government is forced to cut back public expenditures (weakening the provision of social and public infrastructure services), contributing to a further deterioration of the investment climate – holding back growth and poverty reduction. Moreover, as discussed below, the decline in tax revenues over the last decade has rendered the entire tax system more regressive, further hampering poverty reduction efforts.
Based on these considerations, the Philippines urgently needs to raise its tax revenue intake. This requires the establishment of a sound tax policy framework, complemented by an efficient and well-governed tax administration system. Together, they form the only route to revenue sufficiency and the sustainable financing of essential public goods. Both are also essential components of a sound investment climate that fosters domestic and foreign investment and hence economic growth. Equitable tax laws and the impartial application of those laws are necessary to achieve the objectives of horizontal and vertical equity (paragraph 13). A tax system that does not satisfy both criteria can lead to enormous inequities among taxpayers and to an uneven playing field, undermining fair competition and the efficiency of the market system, while eroding the citizenry’s trust in government and in the political system as a whole.