The hunter and the dog

After two days without provision, the hunter and the dog were already starving. The hunter then proceeded to cut his dog’s tail and after cooking it, ate it

First the caveat: taxation was one of the subjects I hated most in law school. I am not good at arithmetic either. You can challenge the assumptions that I made. All I am trying to do is find out how much a wage income earner really benefits from the Tax Reform for Acceleration and Inclusion (TRAIN) law.

Let us assume that a taxpayer earns compensation income of P250,000 a year for which he pays an annual income tax of say, P50,000 before TRAIN. Since the new law now exempts compensation income not exceeding P250,000 from taxation, the P50,000 that otherwise would have gone to the government as income tax now becomes the taxpayer’s savings, an addition to his take home pay.

Or is it? Let’s say that the taxpayer has four children who are all in school. Since they do not own a car, they have to take the jeepney. The old fare was P6 pesos. After TRAIN, the amount doubled because of the additional excise on oil and oil products.

The P50,000 savings from income tax translates to P4,166 per month or P139 per day. The additional fare is six pesos; round trip is 12 pesos. Assuming that the children’s school and the taxpayer’s place of work is only one ride away from home, this means that the taxpayer has to shell out an additional P60 a day for fare alone. That leaves only P79 left daily from the “savings” from income tax.

The taxpayer’s family has to eat. The prices of commodities have risen because of the TRAIN law. Considering their size, the P79 daily savings may not be enough to cover the additional costs brought about by the new tax law.

The late Talyux Bacalso used to tell a story about the hunter who found himself lost in the woods with his dog. After two days without provision, the hunter and the dog were already starving. The hunter then proceeded to cut his dog’s tail and after cooking it, ate it. Seized with pity for his hungry dog, the hunter gave the latter a piece of its cooked tail. The dog was happy.

I hope that we are not the dog and the government not the hunter.

Did the Court of Appeals really clear Cebu City South District Rep. Rodrigo Abellanosa of any wrongdoing in the Cebu City scholarship controversy?

I have not read the court decision, only the newspaper reports on it and it seems to me that the Court did not declare that the congressman did not violate any law nor committed any offense. What the decision merely said was that Abellanosa could not be punished anymore because of the condonation doctrine.

Abellanosa, it may be recalled, was found guilty of misconduct by the Ombudsman for participating in a contract between his school, the Asian College of Technology, and the city government of Cebu even if at that time he was a Cebu city councilor. He appealed the decision.

In deciding the case, the Court said that Abellanosa could not be punished anymore because the people of the Cebu City south district have forgiven him by electing him their congressman. The question of guilt or innocence was never passed upon but if you were Abellanosa why would that matter?

Will someone from his depleted and foodstarved regime please inform him that I too have a Nuclear Button, but it is much bigger and more powerful one than his, and my Button works.

US PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP, REACTING TO NORTH KOREAN LEADER KIM JONGUN’S TAUNT ON HIS COUNTRY’S NUCLEAR BUTTON