Marcos deficiencies: Covering the Marcoses’ unpaid estate tax

NEWS ABOUT the Marcos family’s unpaid estate tax has sparked public discussion, highlighting the need for well-informed sources and historical context in media coverage. 

Journalists consulted tax experts and former officials in concerned agencies to explain the issues, while providing some explanation from the Marcoses. Giving two sides of the story if standard journalism practice, but reports should make every effort to establish the facts and present the evidence at hand to ensure public understanding. If the report fails to do this, presenting two conflicting sides may merely obscure the truth and confuse the public. 

Start of discussion

In a September 2021 column, former Supreme Court Justice Antonio Carpio spotlighted the issue of the Marcos family’s unpaid estate taxes. The piece recalled the Bureau of Internal Revenue’s (BIR) assessment at the time of former president Ferdinand E. Marcos’ death, which yielded a tax estimate on the Marcos estate at over PHP203 billion.

Carpio urged the BIR to renew written demands to the Marcos heirs to resolve their tax liabilities.

In November 2021, TV5’s Frontline Tonight noted a petition to cancel Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s certificate of candidacy filed by martial law detainees. The group represented by human rights lawyer Ted Te argued that Marcos Jr.’s tax convictions, as well as his family’s estate tax deficiencies qualify as crimes of moral turpitude. The report included a comment from former Comelec chair Christian Monsod, who echoed the petitioners’ sentiments. During this  period, the discussion about the petitions  against Marcos Jr. focused on his failure to file income tax returns as governor and vice governor – not on the unpaid estate taxes.

In January and early February this year, the Comelec junked petitions seeking to cancel Marcos Jr.’s COC or to disqualify him from the elections, their arguments focused only on  his non-payment of income taxes The estate tax issue fell under the public radar with media’s failure to sustain its coverage. 

It gained traction only when Marcos’ rival presidential candidate, Manila Mayor  Isko Moreno, called attention to it during a press conference on February 28 GMA News, Manila Bulletin, and Rappler reported on the issue and Moreno’s promise that if he won, the collected Marcos estate tax would fund the government’s COVID-relief operations. 

Ernest Ramel, president of Moreno’s party Aksyon Demokratiko, reiterated Moreno’s comments on March 3 and dared Marcos to address the controversy. 

The Inquirer reported the Marcos camp’s defense on the same day, which highlighted their claim that the properties involved remain “under litigation.” Vic Rodriguez, Marcos’ chief-of-staff and spokesman, referred to an agreement of the Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG) and the BIR in which the two agencies would hold off  any collection attempt until a final decision in the case is reached. 

The report put more emphasis on Rodriguez’ statement and only briefly mentioned the 1997 Supreme Court ruling holding the BIR assessment on the estate tax as final and executory.

PCGG, BIR belie Marcos claims

GMA News, Business World, CNN Philippine, and Philstar.com reported  the  clarification by PCGG Commissioner John Agbayani, who stressed that despite their verbal agreement, the BIR assessment of estate taxes is indeed final and executory. GMA noted Ramel’s saying that Rodriguez’ legalese barred full understanding of the case, that the Supreme Court had upheld the BIR in collecting the unpaid amount. 

On March 16, ABS-CBN News and Rappler followed up on developments including the Aksyon Demokratiko, a party list in Congress,  writing to the BIR to confirm if they had attempted to collect the Marcoses’ unpaid estate tax. Rappler reported the response of BIR chief Caesar Dulay on March 14 that the agency had written a demand to the Marcos family on December 2, 2021 to settle their tax liabilities.

Public affairs programs sought other sources. CNN Philippines’ The Source featured former PCGG and Comelec Chair Andres Bautista on March 24, who said during the interview that the assessment of PHP203 billion in estate tax has been upheld in the 1997 SC ruling. Another former PCGG Chair, Ruben Carranza, was interviewed on the same show on March 29 and expressed the same views in his assessment of the Marcos estate tax case. Carranza also hit Marcos’ camp for obfuscating the circumstances of the case in their statements.

Other candidates react

Media reports on the Comelec-organized presidential debates on March 20 highlighted the agreement of candidates Leni Robredo, Ping Lacson, and Leody de Guzman with Moreno, who proposed during the program that amid the rising costs of living, the government should collect the Marcos family’s unpaid taxes to provide for social services.

Prior to the debate which he did not attend, media picked up the complaint of Marcos Jr. about being a victim of fake news, without reference to the tax issue, quoting him without context or background. More recently in a Teleradyo interview, Sen. Imee Marcos, questioned why the estate tax issue was being raised ahead of the elections, sustaining the Marcos narrative that this was all part of campaign propaganda.   

Print outlets highlight Marcos defense

Media coverage largely depended on the exchange of quotes, instead of emphasizing the finality of the SC ruling on the estate taxes.

Some broadsheets, meanwhile, abetted the propagation of the Marcoses’ narrative.

The Manila Times, the Manila Bulletin, and The Philippine Star, on April 3 and 4, ran front-page stories centered on the Marcos defense in the estate tax case. The Times report,  “Tax experts clear Marcoses,” cited Marcos ally and former senator Juan Ponce Enrile as its primary source, who repeated the Marcos camp’s position that the interested properties are still under litigation. The Bulletin, meanwhile, cited anonymous BIR officials who had arrived at a “consensus” that the Marcos heirs cannot be sued over their tax deficiencies.

The Philippine Star’s main source was George Briones, Partido Federal ng Pilipinas legal counsel, who echoed Enrile’s claims.

Public affairs programs seek clarification

Explainers on television discussed the system of the estate tax  weeks after the issue first broke.

Speaking to One News’ The Chiefs on April 4, Carranza argued against the sources in the Bulletin report, and emphasized that the 1997 Supreme Court ruling cannot be overturned, regardless of  any consensus reached among the unnamed BIR officials.

The issue of real estate taxes is central to the revenue system, affecting families who leave behind properties and funds to their heirs. Presidential candidates cannot dismiss these obligations because should they win they are expected to uphold the law. 

Journalists should continue consulting independent experts on the subject. But more than views pro or con, media discourse should broaden the scope of coverage to instruct voters about the central function of taxes. 

Tax offenses can never be lightly dismissed, especially when these cases involve those who have the means. After all, even citizens with very little means contribute their share through the system of sales and value-added taxes. 

If those with little are systematically paying their dues, how can anyone allow the wealthy  such impunity?