To tax or not to tax: A doctrinal analysis of the taxability of Foreign Currency Deposits in the estate of a depositor
Clicks: 2
ID: 286387
2022
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Emerging Content
0.3
/100
2 views
1 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
EmergingRanked #3,661 of 3,757 articles by views in Malay Journal
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 3,757 in total.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
The case of Commissioner of Internal Revenue (CIR) v. Estate of Romig,1 promulgated by the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA) En Banc last July 19, 2022, applied Republic Act No. 6426 or the Foreign Currency Deposit Act of 1972 (the 1972 FCDA), as amended in 1977 by Presidential Decree 12462 (R.A. 6426 (as amended)) to exempt Foreign Currency Deposits (FX Deposits) from estate tax. The estate of resident alien Charles Romig originally paid estate tax amounting to P26,152.00 which grew to PhP4,565,349.07 upon inclusion of the foreign currency deposit account of Romig on his Hongkong Shanghai Banking Corporation United States Dollar savings account. The estate sought the refund of the alleged erroneously paid estate tax. The CTA ruled based on statutory construction and upheld the principle that a special law, i.e., R.A. 6426 (as amended), being a special law of the foreign currency deposit system, governs over the National Internal Revenue Code of 1997 (1997 NIRC).3 The Romig case was triggered when the CIR took the view that Romig is not entitled to a refund of the estate tax paid for the transfer of the foreign currency deposits to his heirs because the decedent, although an American citizen, is a resident of the Philippines. Basing their arguments on Section 854 of the 1997 NIRC on Gross Estate, the CIR maintained that all of Romig’s properties, wherever situated, are subject to estate tax. The CIR further noted that FX Deposits of a resident alien decedent are neither listed in the allowable deductions from the value of the resident alien decedent’s gross estate under Section 86 (A) of the 1997 NIRC nor is it among the acquisitions and transmissions which are not subject to estate tax under Section 87 of the 1997 NIRC. The CIR also maintained that according to Section 84 of the 1997 NIRC, all persons – whether resident or nonresident of the Philippines – shall be levied and assessed estate tax that must be collected and paid upon the transfer of the net estate as determined in accordance with Sections 85 and 86 of 1997 NIRC. The CTA, however, dismissed the arguments of the CIR, stating that a reading of the pertinent provisions of R.A. 6426 (as amended), and the 1997 NIRC, show that the tax exemption in R.A. 6426 as amended by P.D. 1246 was not repealed with respect to imposition of estate tax to eligible deposits. The
| Reference Key |
persistent_1760658424_68f183f81067d
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Yñiguez, Lisa Carolina D. |
| Journal | Malay Journal |
| Year | 2022 |
| DOI |
DOI not found
|
| URL | |
| Keywords | Keywords not found |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.