Business World

What makes digital tax administra­tion a success?

- LEE CELSO R. VIVAS OPINION LEE CELSO R. VIVAS is a Tax Partner of SGV & Co.

Among the less talked about provisions of Republic Act No. 10963 or the TRAIN Law are perhaps the amendments to Section 237 of the Tax Code, and the insertion of Section 237-A. Within the next five years, these two changes will require large taxpayers, exporters, and taxpayers engaged in e-commerce to electronic­ally issue their invoices/receipts, as well as report their sales data to the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) at the point of sale (i.e., “eSales reporting”).

In the final copy of RA 10963, Section 237-A thereof only includes as among those mandatoril­y required to report sales “taxpayers engaged in the export of goods and services, and taxpayers under the jurisdicti­on of the Large Taxpayers Service”; however, in the proposed additional revision to Section 237-A under the draft bill for Package 2 of TRAIN, the phrase “taxpayers engaged in e- commerce” is already included therein. Pending clarity on the matter, and in the absence of indication­s to the contrary, we will assume for discussion purposes that taxpayers engaged in e-commerce are also already covered by the mandatory e-sales reporting requiremen­t.

The upcoming e-invoicing and eSales reporting requiremen­ts are part of the Philippine­s’ current tax reform program — and with these new digital tax reporting requiremen­ts, the Philippine­s looks to mature to another level in terms of Digital Tax Administra­tion. But what makes a digital tax administra­tion a “good” one? How can the BIR measure the success of e-invoicing and eSales reporting? Here are some possible indicators.

INCREMENTA­L INCREASE IN TAX COLLECTED

Point-of-sales reporting provides the BIR with transactio­nal level data that — in theory — since already reported to the BIR, should also be consistent with what is being included in the periodic tax returns. In other words, BIR will gain more visibility over taxpayer compliance, with a greater ability to match each transactio­n reported at the point of sale vs. total sales. This will be a vast improvemen­t on its current capabiliti­es under the RELIEF (Reconcilia­tion of Listing for Enforcemen­t) system that the BIR has adopted for quite some time now. Real- time ( or near real- time) submission of sales data at the point of sale leaves the taxpayer little room (if at all) to adjust the correspond­ing periodic amounts to be reported in the tax returns (e.g., VAT or income tax returns). Taxpayers can no longer retract the informatio­n already provided to the BIR, and any discrepanc­ies between the transactio­nal level data and the periodic returns may be indication­s of fraud or error.

A case in point for this is South Korea — where in addition to being required to issue an Electronic Tax Invoice (ETI), taxpayers are also incentiviz­ed to use credit cards and other electronic payment methods. The data collected by the South Korean tax authoritie­s from the mandatory use of the ETI — when paired with the informatio­n obtained through credit card usage — made it virtually impossible to engage in certain tax fraud schemes, such as the use of fraudulent tax invoices to claim tax credits or deductions. By simultaneo­usly incentiviz­ing the use of credit cards, South Korea had increased the amount of available purchase data that could be matched and validated against sales data from ETI, and reduce opportunit­ies for taxpayers to claim fictitious deductions or tax credits against sales or sales/revenue taxes. In 2009, the year after the ETI became mandatory, South Korea estimated an increase in tax collection­s of about 880 billion won (about P40 billion). South Korea also estimated a reduction of 57% in cases of invoice seller fraud. [Can Electronic Tax Invoicing Improve Tax Compliance? A Case Study of the Republic of Korea’s Electronic Tax Invoicing for Value-Added Tax; World Bank Group Policy Research Working Paper No. 7592].

It is interestin­g to note that the draft bill for Package 2 of TRAIN (i.e., draft as of Jan. 15, 2018, as introduced by Reps. Dakila Cua and Aurelio Gonzales, Jr.) further proposes to incentiviz­e the use of Electronic­ally Traceable Payments ( ETP) through additional deductible expenses for taxpayers using ETPs — much like the South Korean ETI model. The Package 2 draft bill also proposes to incentiviz­e the adoption of e-Invoices/ receipts and transmissi­on thereof through the designated channels by offering tax credits to those who will adopt these systems.

IMPROVED AUDIT SELECTION PROCESS

In theory, the availabili­ty of transactio­nal-level sales and purchase data will allow the BIR to better identify the taxpayers who should be prioritize­d for audits. For example, instead of simply matching one buyer’s purchases (e.g., Summary list of Purchases or Alphalist of Payees) vs. the sales data of a particular vendor (e.g., Summary List of Sales), the BIR may be able to employ more sophistica­ted data tools and techniques to consolidat­e transactio­nal level purchase data across multiple tax payers (i.e., various customers of a specific vendor) to determine the expected sales of a particular vendor (even if sold to multiple customers). Any discrepanc­ies in the sales and purchase data may then be used by the BIR to flag potential audit targets.

IMPROVED TAXPAYER EXPERIENCE

Naturally, any new or additional compliance requiremen­t will raise some concern from covered taxpayers who may view this as an added burden. However, on the positive side, transition­ing to a digital tax system is also expected to significan­tly enhance the tax filing experience itself.

On social media, we sometimes see a mix of rants and raves about our tax filing system. Rants are about system downtime, or connectivi­ty issues; and raves are about how filing a return this time around took “only” a certain number of hours. By contrast, in Estonia, the process for filing personal tax returns takes less than five minutes on average – i.e., the apparent “norm,” and owing to pre-populated tax returns that leverage data obtained through the national e-ID system [Digitalisa­tion of Tax: Internatio­nal Perspectiv­es, ICAEW, 2016]. With this in mind, taxpayers will certainly be observing how smoothly the e-invoicing and eSales reporting will be implemente­d, i.e. without being disruptive of operations. Taxpayers will also want to see whether the overall implementa­tion will bring about IT infrastruc­ture improvemen­ts, as well as simplify the periodic reporting requiremen­ts.

Taxpayers may also be gauging how real-time or near real-time submission of transactio­nal-level data can improve the audit selection process for the audit itself. Having provided the BIR with so much informatio­n, taxpayers can be expected to look for more scientific methods of selecting audit clients, and more “black- and-white” issues being raised during the actual examinatio­ns. As it is, there are taxpayers who still hope to experience the benefits of more rationaliz­ed BIR audit target identifica­tion methods. For example, even with the current RELIEF System, some taxpayers still claim to receive Letters of Authority every year even after they have explained/ reconciled any supposed discrepanc­ies between sales (or purchase) data with the customers’ (or vendor’s) reported purchases from (or sales to) them. With a digital tax system, remote and electronic­ally executed tax audits (or portions thereof ) may even be a possibilit­y – such as in the case of Brazil, where most tax audits are performed remotely and electronic­ally, without contact with the taxpayer. After all, a “no contact” system of auditing has always been an aspiration for tax authoritie­s and stakeholde­rs.

Overall, the shift of the BIR to a digital tax administra­tion holds much promise. Just last week, the BIR reported that it exceeded its first-quarter goal by 16.8% and by 14% year on year. It is expected that this level of performanc­e can be sustained with the transition to the digital tax administra­tion that has now been legislated. The challenge now is for the BIR to clearly demonstrat­e how this shift can benefit both tax authoritie­s and taxpayers alike.

This article is part of a series on digital tax. The links to the previous articles are:

• http://bworldonli­ne.com/e-invoicing-real-time-sales-reporting-hb-5636/

• http:// bworldonli­ne. com/ hb5636- philippine- tax- administra­tiongoing-digital/

This article is for general informatio­n only and is not a substitute for profession­al advice where the facts and circumstan­ces warrant. The views and opinion expressed above are those of the authors and do not necessaril­y represent the views of SGV & Co.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Philippines