BIR Ruling No. 379-15

October 29, 2015 BIR RULING NO. 379-15 R.A. 8424, Sec. 270; BIR Ruling No. 044-12 GMA News and Public Affairs EDSA cor. Timog Avenue Quezon City Attention: Jamaica Jane Pascual Researcher Gentlemen : This refers to your letter dated July 6, 2015 relative to your request for data on non-individual delinquent taxpayers from 2010 to the present. It is represented that the news organization is producing a news story on past and present contractors and developers of the Department of Public Works and Highways with an analysis on contractors that do not comply with our tax laws. In reply, please be informed that Section 270 of the National Internal Revenue Code 1997, as amended (NIRC), provides that: "SEC. 270. Unlawful Divulgence of Trade Secrets . Except as provided in Section 71 of this Code and Section 26 of Republic Act No. 6388, any officer or employee of the Bureau of Internal Revenue who divulges to and person or makes known in any other manner than may be provided by law information regarding the business, income, or estate of any taxpayer, the secrets, operation, style or work, or apparatus of any manufacturer or producer, or confidential information regarding the business of any taxpayer knowledge of which was acquired by him in the discharge of his official duties, shall upon conviction for each act or omission, be punished by a fine of not less than Fifty thousand pesos (P50,000), but not more than One hundred thousand pesos (P100,000), or suffer imprisonment of not less than two (2) years but not more than five (5) years or both." xxx xxx xxx From the foregoing, this Office denies the request on the ground that the information requested falls under the "unlawful divulgence" rule, thus, BIR personnel cannot divulge the said information. (BIR Ruling No. 44-2012 dated February 9, 2012) It should also be noted that the divulgence of the said information may affect current investigations on the taxpayers involved. This ruling is being issued on the basis of the foregoing facts as represented. However, if upon investigation, it will be disclosed that the facts are different, then this ruling shall be considered null and void. Very truly yours, (SGD.) KIM S. JACINTO-HENARES Commissioner of Internal Revenue