BIR finds discrepancies in Sereno tax records

Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) Deputy Commissioner Arnel Guballa told the House Justice Committee yesterday that there were discrepancies in the tax records of Supreme Court (SC) Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno.

However, Guballa said the BIR can’t readily reveal its findings to the Committee, unless the agency runs the risk of legal sanction.

“As of now we have made some observations regarding the declarations and there are some discrepancies,” the BIR official told the panel during the resumption of its hearings on the determination of probable cause in the impeachment complaint filed against Sereno.

But Guballa declined to give specifics to the solons, claiming it would violate the confidentiality rule. He noted that Section 270 of the National Internal Revenue Code says the President must first give his approval for such revelation.

Guballa said an exemption to this rule would cover the presentation of evidence at the Senate Impeachment Court, which would be the next phase of the proceedings against Sereno should the congressmen find probable cause.

“We are not obstructing the furnishing of the information, we’re just enforcing the law. We don’t have authority to interpret the law,” Guballa said.

The BIR official pointed out that their actions would set a precedent since “this is the first time that we are being asked by the Committee on Justice.”

“We want to be on the safe side because the law has penal provisions and the Bureau might be susceptible to charges,” explained Guballa, a lawyer.

During the February 7 hearing, Committee chairman, Oriental Mindoro 2nd district Rep. Reynaldo Umali directed resource person Guballa to conduct a formal probe on whether or not Sereno – an appointee of the previous Aquino administration – has been paying the correct taxes based on her income tax returns (ITRs).

This, after the congressmen sought to find out whether or not the Chief Justice paid the right taxes in connection with her alleged R37-million earnings for serving as government counsel in the arbitration proceedings against the Philippine International Air Terminals Co. Inc. (Piatco). Subpoenas issued Guballa’s refusal to divulge didn’t sit well with Quezon City 1st district Rep. Bingbong Crisologo.

“What if the president refuses to give approval? If we don’t get documents, we won’t be able to prosecute. If that’s the case then this point of view of the BIR will be an impairment of the powers of the Committee,” he said.

Referring to the supposed exemption to the rule, Crisologo reckoned that the House panel is technically part of the impeachment court anyway.

Once probable cause is deemed present, the panel will submit the Articles of Impeachment to the Senate after which the congressmen will act as prosecutors in the trial against Sereno.

Committee Vice Chairman Misamis Occidental 2nd district Rep. Henry Oaminal subsequently moved for the issuance of a subpoena duces tecum and subpoena ad testificandum to secure the findings of the BIR investigation.

“We have to issue a subpoena duces tecum so that the BIR also have some document to immediately consult their legal adviser, which is the Office of the Solicitor General, and that would trigger the immediate procurement of the documents,” Oaminal said.

Umali carried the motion after hearing no objection.

The Committee chairman said that while the House could conduct its own probe on Sereno’s tax records, the BIR is still better suited for the task.

“They (BIR) have already submitted (Sereno’s) ITRs, we can have our own findings. But they have better access to information that’s why we’re asking them,” Umali said.

BIR questioned The camp of Chief Justice expressed concern over the BIR’s “arbitrary” conclusion that there were discrepancies in her tax records.

Lawyer Jojo Lacanilao, Sereno’s spokesperson, said in a chance interview that due process must still be observed regarding the tax-related allegations being hurled at his client.

“The BIR was given the authority to investigate, normally the taxpayer must be given the chance to explain),” Lacanilao said in Filipino, referring to Sereno.

He said that even if there's no reply yet from the Chief Justice, there are already conclusions about discrepancies about this and that. All of their questions can be explained. That is what’s worrisome right now, they already have a conclusion. The due process that we're talking about is gone.