ITAD BIR Ruling No. 007-13

January 15, 2013 ITAD BIR RULING NO. 007-13 Article 12 Philippines-Japan tax treaty; BIR Ruling No. ITAD 160-12 Yutaka Manufacturing (Philippines), Inc. 110 North Science Avenue Laguna Technopark Bian, Laguna Attention: Naoki Shiraishi President Ma. Fatima Ungson-Liu Head, Administration Division Gentlemen : This refers to your tax treaty relief application filed on April 1, 2009 requesting confirmation that royalties paid by Yutaka Manufacturing (Philippines), Inc. ("Yutaka Philippines") to Yutaka Giken Company Ltd. ("Yutaka Giken") are subject to income tax at the rate of 10 percent pursuant to the Convention between the Republic of the Philippines and Japan for the Avoidance of Double Taxation and the Prevention of Fiscal Evasion with Respect to Taxes on Income ("Philippines-Japan tax treaty") , as amended by a Protocol 1 effective January 1, 2009. Facts Yutaka Giken is a foreign corporation and a resident of Japan based on the Certification of Comprehensive Historical issued by the Company Register in Shizuoka in Japan on July 11, 2008, and on the Residence Certificate issued by the Hamamatshigashi Taxation Office in Japan on April 10, 2009. Yutaka Giken is located at 508-1 Yutaka Machi, Hamamatsu City, Shizuoka, Japan. It is not registered as a corporation or partnership in the Philippines based on the Certification of Non-Registration of Corporation/Partnership issued by the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 5, 2008. On the other hand, Yutaka Philippines is a domestic corporation located at 110 North Science Avenue, Laguna Technopark, Bian, Laguna, Philippines. It is registered with the then Export Processing Zone Authority as an export enterprise under Certificate of Registration No. 94-31 issued on May 23, 1994. On January 12, 1995, Yutaka Philippines and Yutaka Giken entered into a License and Technical Assistance Agreement where Yutaka Giken granted Yutaka Philippines an indivisible, nontransferable and non-exclusive license to manufacture and sell in the Philippines and in other territories, parts for automobiles, motorcycles and other power products by using certain know-how belonging to and developed by Yutaka Giken. This know-how includes all secret, technical information, know-how, data, formula and knowledge relating to the products. In consideration, Yutaka Philippines will pay royalties to Yutaka Giken equivalent to 3 percent of the net selling price of the products which are manufactured and sold by Yutaka Philippines. The royalties are computed every six months (April to September and October to March) and payable on the last day of the month following that in which the invoice for the royalties is received by Yutaka Philippines. The Agreement had an initial term of five years from January 12, 1995 to January 11, 2000 and is automatically renewed thereafter for another period or periods of one year. ATaDHC The Agreement was amended on March 17, 2004 for the purpose of complying with the provisions of the Intellectual Property Code. The amended Agreement now complies with the provisions of the Intellectual Property Code under Certificate of Compliance No. 5-2002-00073 issued by the Intellectual Property Office on April 20, 2004 valid thereon until April 19, 2009. Ruling Relative thereto, please be informed that under Section III (2) of Revenue Memorandum Order No. 1-00 (Procedures for Processing Tax Treaty Relief Application) ("RMO 1-2000") , any availment of tax treaty relief (exemption from income tax or reduction of tax) shall be preceded by an application filed at the International Tax Affairs Division ("ITAD") of this Bureau at least fifteen days before the intended transaction or payment of income, thus: "III. Policies: In order to achieve the above-mentioned objectives, the following policies shall be observed: xxx xxx xxx 2. Any availment of the tax treaty relief shall be preceded by an application by filing BIR Form No. 0901 (Application for Relief from Double Taxation) with ITAD at least 15 days before the transaction i.e., payment of dividends, royalties, etc., accompanied by supporting documents justifying the relief. . ." (Emphasis ours) This condition is emphasized by the Court of Tax Appeals in Mirant (Philippines) Operations Corporation vs. Commissioner of Internal Revenue (C.T.A. Case No. 6382 dated June 7, 2005) where it ruled: DIcTEC "However, it must be remembered that a foreign corporation wishing to avail of the benefits of the tax treaty should invoke the provisions of the tax treaty and prove that indeed the provisions of the tax treaty applies to it, before the benefits may be extended to such corporation . In other words, a resident or non-resident foreign corporation shall be taxed according to the provisions of the National Internal Revenue Code, unless it is shown that the treaty provisions apply to the said corporation, and that, in cases the same are applicable, the option to avail of the tax benefits under the tax treaty has been successfully invoked. Under Revenue Memorandum Order 01-2000 of the Bureau of Internal Revenue, it is provided that the availment of a tax treaty provision must be preceded by an application for a tax treaty relief with its International Tax Affairs Division (ITAD). This is to prevent any erroneous interpretation and/or application of the treaty provisions with which the Philippines is a signatory to. The implementation of the said Revenue Memorandum Order is in harmony with the objectives of the contracting state to ensure that the granting of the benefits under the tax treaties are enjoyed by the persons or corporations duly entitled to the same. The Court notes that nowhere in the records of the case was it shown that petitioner indeed took the liberty of properly observing the provisions of the said order. Petitioner quotes various BIR, as well as ITAD, Rulings issued to several foreign corporations seeking for a tax relief from the office of the respondent. However, not any one of these rulings pertains to the petitioner. It must be stressed that BIR rulings are issued based on the facts and circumstances surrounding particular issue/issues in question and are resolved on a case-to-case basis. It would be thus erroneous to invoke the ruling of the respondent in specific cases, which have no bearing to the case of petitioner." (Emphasis ours) This decision is upheld by the Supreme Court in Resolution G.R. No. 168531 on February 18, 2008. Furthermore, the necessary requirement laid down in RMO 1-2000 is reiterated in subsequent rulings of the Court of Tax Appeals: Deutsche Bank AG Manila Branch vs. Commissioner of Internal Revenue (C.T.A. Case No. 456 dated May 29, 2009), CBK Power Company Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Internal Revenue (C.T.A. Case Nos. 6699, 6844 and 7166 dated March 29, 2010) and Manila North Tollways Corporation vs. Commissioner of Internal Revenue (C.T.A. Case No. 7864 dated April 12, 2011) . IEAHca In view of the foregoing, since the amended Agreement that gives rise to the royalties has been in effect on January 12, 1995, but the TTRA for this purpose was filed only on April 1, 2009, this Office hereby DENIES relief on all royalties paid by Yutaka Philippines to Yutaka Giken before April 16, 2009, 2 pursuant to Section III (2) of RMO 1-2000. Accordingly, said royalties shall be subject to income tax under Section 28 (B) (1) of the National Internal Revenue Code of 1997 ("Tax Code") , as amended, to wit: "SEC. 28. Rates of Income Tax on Foreign Corporations . xxx xxx xxx (B) Tax on Nonresident Foreign Corporation. (1) In General. Except as otherwise provided in this Code, a foreign corporation not engaged in trade or business in the Philippines shall pay a tax equal to thirty-five percent (35%) of the gross income received during each taxable year from all sources within the Philippines, such as interests, dividends, rents, royalties, salaries, premiums (except reinsurance premiums), annuities, emoluments or other fixed or determinable annual, periodic or casual gains, profits and income, and capital gains, except capital gains subject to tax under subparagraph 5(c) and (d) above: * Provided, That effective January 1, 2009, the rate of income tax shall be thirty percent (30%)." On the other hand, the royalties paid to Yutaka Giken on April 16, 2009 and thereafter are subject to a reduced rate of income tax under paragraphs 1, 2 and 4, Article 12 of the amended Philippines-Japan tax treaty, to wit: "Article 12 1. Royalties arising in a Contracting State and paid to a resident of the other Contracting State may be taxed in that other Contracting State. 2. However, such royalties may also be taxed in the Contracting State in which they arise, and according to the laws of that Contracting State, but if the recipient is the beneficial owner of the royalties the tax so charged shall not exceed: a) 15 per cent of the gross amount of the royalties if the royalties are paid in respect of the use of or the right to use cinematograph films and films or tapes for radio or television broadcasting; AHaDSI b) 10 per cent of the gross amount of the royalties in all other cases. xxx xxx xxx 4. The term 'royalties' as used in this Article means payments of any kind received as a consideration for the use of, or the right to use, any copyright of literary, artistic or scientific work including cinematograph films and films or tapes for radio or television broadcasting, any patent, trade mark, design or model, plan, secret formula or process, or for the use of, or the right to use, industrial, commercial or scientific equipment, or for information concerning industrial, commercial or scientific experience." Under Article 12, royalties arising in the Philippines and paid to a resident of Japan may be taxed in the Philippines at a rate not to exceed (a) 15 percent if the royalties are in respect of the use or the right to use of cinematograph films and films or tapes for radio or television broadcasting, and (b) 10 percent in all other cases. Royalties means payments of any kind received as a consideration for the use of, or the right to use, any copyright of literary, artistic or scientific work including cinematograph films and films or tapes for radio or television broadcasting, any patent, trade mark, design or model, plan, secret formula or process, or for the use of, or the right to use, industrial, commercial or scientific equipment, or for information concerning industrial, commercial or scientific experience ("know-how") . Accordingly, since the royalties paid by Yutaka Philippines to Yutaka Giken under the Agreement for the use of know-how on the manufacture of parts for automobiles, motorcycles and other power products are not royalties for the use of cinematograph films and films or tapes for radio or television broadcasting, such royalties paid to Yutaka Giken on April 16, 2009 and thereafter shall be subject to income tax at the rate of 10 percent, pursuant to paragraph 2 (b), Article 12 of the amended Philippines-Japan tax treaty. (BIR Ruling No. ITAD 160-12 dated April 16, 2012) Furthermore, under Section 108 (A) of the Tax Code, the royalties in question, being payments for the use of an intangible property (know-how) in the Philippines, are subject to value-added tax ("VAT"), to wit: "SEC. 108. Value-added Tax on Sale of Services and Use or Lease of Properties . (A) Rate and Base of Tax. There shall be levied, assessed and collected, a value-added tax equivalent to ten percent (10%) of gross receipts derived from the sale or exchange of services, including the use or lease of properties selling price or gross value in money of the goods or properties sold, bartered or exchanged, such tax to be paid by the seller or transferor: Provided, that the President, upon the recommendation of the Secretary of Finance, shall, effective January 1, 2006, 2 raise the rate of value-added tax to twelve percent (12%). . ." DAESTI However, since Yutaka Philippines, originally an enterprise registered with the then Export Processing Zone Authority, is likewise entitled to the same fiscal incentives available to enterprises registered with and administered by the present Philippine Economic Zone Authority ("PEZA") pursuant to Republic Act No. 7916, 3 the Supreme Court ruled, in Commissioner of Internal Revenue vs. Seagate Technology (Philippines) (G.R. No. 153866 dated February 11, 2005) , that: "Applying the special laws we have earlier discussed, respondent as an entity is exempt from internal revenue laws and regulations. This exemption covers both direct and indirect taxes, stemming from the very nature of the VAT as a tax on consumption, for which the direct liability is imposed on one person but the indirect burden is passed on to another. Respondent, as an exempt entity, can neither be directly charged for the VAT on its sales nor indirectly made to bear, as added cost to such sales, the equivalent VAT on its purchases. Ubi lex non distinguit, nec nos distinguere debemus. Where the law does not distinguish, we ought not to distinguish. Moreover, the exemption is both express and pervasive for the following reasons: First, RA 7916 states that 'no taxes, local and national, shall be imposed on business establishments operating within the ecozone.' Since this law does not exclude the VAT from the prohibition, it is deemed included. Exceptio firmat regulam in casibus non exceptis . An exception confirms the rule in cases not excepted; that is, a thing not being excepted must be regarded as coming within the purview of the general rule. Moreover, even though the VAT is not imposed on the entity but on the transaction, it may still be passed on and, therefore, indirectly imposed on the same entity a patent circumvention of the law. That no VAT shall be imposed directly upon business establishments operating within the ecozone under RA 7916 also means that no VAT may be passed on and imposed indirectly. Quando aliquid prohibetur ex directo prohibetur et per obliquum . When anything is prohibited directly, it is also prohibited indirectly." SDcITH Accordingly, since Yutaka Giken, the nonresident lessor of know-how, is not a VAT-registered taxpayer, such royalties paid to it by Yutaka Philippines shall, for VAT purposes, be treated as exempt and not subject to zero percent VAT. In either case, no output VAT is shifted or passed-on to Yutaka Philippines in the process. 4 This ruling is issued on the basis of the facts as represented. However, if upon investigation it shall be disclosed that the actual facts are different, then this ruling shall be without force and effect insofar as the herein parties are concerned. Very truly yours, (SGD.) KIM S. JACINTO-HENARES Commissioner of Internal Revenue Footnotes 1. Protocol Amending the Convention between the Republic of the Philippines and Japan for the Avoidance of Double Taxation and the Prevention of Fiscal Evasion with Respect to Taxes on Income . 2. April 16, 2009 is the fifteenth day after the filing of the TTRA on April 1, 2009. 2. The VAT rate is increased to twelve percent on February 1, 2006, in accordance with the Memorandum of the Executive Secretary to the Secretary of Finance dated January 31, 2006, as circularized by Revenue Memorandum Circular No. 7-2006 (Publishing the Full Text of the Memorandum from Executive Secretary Eduardo R. Ermita dated January 31, 2006 Approving the Recommendation of the Secretary of Finance to Increase the Value Added Tax Rate from Ten Percent to Twelve Percent) dated January 31, 2006. 3. An Act Providing for the Legal Framework and Mechanism for the Creation, Operation, Administration, and Coordination of Special Economic Zones in the Philippines, Creating for this Purpose, the Philippine Economic Zone Authority (PEZA), and for Other Purposes . Section 11 thereof provides: "CHAPTER II GOVERNING STRUCTURES SEC. 11. The Philippine Economic Zone Authority (PEZA) Board. There is hereby created a body corporate to be known as the Philippine Economic Zone Authority (PEZA) attached to the Department of Trade and Industry. . . The existing Export Processing Zone Authority (EPZA) created under Presidential Decree No. 66 shall evolve into the PEZA in accordance with the guidelines and regulations set forth in an executive order issued for this purpose." 4. Revenue Regulations No. 16-2005 (Consolidated Value-Added Tax Regulations of 2005) , as amended, provides: "SEC. 4.106-5. Zero-Rated Sales of Goods or Properties . A zero-rated sale of goods or properties (by a VAT-registered person) is a taxable transaction for VAT purposes, but shall not result in any output tax. However, the input tax on purchases of goods, properties or services related to such zero-rated sale, shall be available as tax credit or refund in accordance with these Regulations." "SEC. 4.109-1. VAT-Exempt Transactions . (A) In general. 'VAT-exempt transactions' refer to the sale of goods or properties and/or services and the use or lease of properties that is not subject to VAT (output tax) and the seller is not allowed any tax credit of VAT (input tax) on purchases. The person making the exempt sale of goods, properties or services shall not bill any output tax to his customers because the said transaction is not subject to VAT."