Business Bureaucracy 9, Land title registration

A friend who is still enamored with the idea of more government regulation of markets, Floro Francisco, had a little shock of his life when he experienced government bureaucracies first hand. He posted this yesterday in his fb wall, reposting with his permission. Thanks Floro.

The images I got from the web and just added them here.
------------

Whew, just got back from following up documentary requirements from the BIR, Municipal Hall and the Register of Deeds for the transfer of the land title under my name for a piece of land I bought. Wow so many requirements I had to accomplish and the funny part is I have to submit almost similar requirements to 3 government agencies. And boy the amount of taxes and filing fees I have to pay was a bit shocking: 6.0% for Capital Gains Tax, 1.5% for Documentary Stamps to be paid at the BIR based on the purchase amount of the property. And then you pay also 0.50% for the Transfer Fee of Title at the Munisipiyo. And then another > 1.0% approximately to the Register of Deeds!

On top of these you need to pay the Munisipiyo for a certification of your Tax Declaration and another certification for the Tax Clearance and yet another for the Certification of No Development on the land. And you do not get to know all these payments on the first day you visit them unless you get or better yet make a checklist of the 3 agencies of government. You also had to pay for a Certified Xerox Copy from the Register of Deeds for the Duplicate of the Land Title even if you have a copy of the original owner's duplicate.

It is painstaking hard work and patience. If you play fair like me and do not go through the channel of experts and facilitators lurking around. You might need several months to complete these tasks. If you are not intelligent and ask the right questions to the right people, may be it would take you a year or two to finish everything only for a small piece of land. What if you lacked communication skills and knowledge about documentations? I wonder what happens to the lowly farmers who inherit or buy lands and the agrarian reform beneficiaries who had to deal with such government requirements to get their names on their properties.

I think I should find a politician or become a politician myself to push for reforms in such a bureaucratic mess! No wonder many lazy inheritors just leave their properties to be taken over by knowledgeable government officials and politicians! I think there is injustice there somewhere in terms of the amounts to be paid and the processes to be followed as well as the volume of documentary requirements. Yung ibang maliliit pampa-xerox lang eh wala na, yung pang taxes and processing fees pa kaya mabayaran nila? Some progressive form of taxation in this regard is much needed. A one stop shop processing system that would simplify the procedures need to be pushed! I am actually about to go through the same process for some properties we inherited from our parents and Sister which remain un-acted upon for years since they died because I nor my brother had the material time to do it. It may require that I take a leave from work to attend to these! Ah Bureaucracy! I wish I was born to a Dynasty!

… Ironically in my case mas nahirapan ako sa BIR kung saan mas maraming requirements at mas mahal ang bayarin! Also now you have to be computer literate to deal with BIR kasi you have to fill e-Forms sa eBIR. Paano na ang ka-awawang Magsasaka! Mas madali sa Register of Deeds! Kaya lang yung IT fees nila mahal! Pero tingin ko diskarte sa itaas yung IT Fees At sakop lang ng isang private servicing company yan kasama ng ID system ng SSS, GSIS at Pag-ibig pati ang Drivers License!

Some comments by his friends (I made minor revisions to #1 to make it more readable):

1. may bibilhin govt sa amin (lupa) na maliit lang naman, gagawin service road.. kaso mas malaki daw yung tax na babayaran namen compare sa ibabayad nila.. take note, hindi pa nila nare-release amount ng bayad nila, pero my computation na ng taxes na need bayaran.. at nakakaloka, binigyan kami ng two options, isang mas mataas n babayaran at isang binabaan ng around 3 percent ..whew..

2. yung mga "lazy inheritors" ay hindi talaga "lazy" in the real sense of the word. Marami lang po sa kanila ang walang pambayad sa Estate Taxes, at kung anu-ano pa pong ibang klase ng fees and taxes, para sa transfer ng title sa pangalan ng mga heirs. Idagdag pa ang layo ng locasyon ng namana. Kailangan mo munang umalis sa trabaho upang makasunod sa pinapatupad na proceso ng gobyerno, na kadalasan naman ay nakakalito sa common tao.

3. Don't forget sir that there are Land grabbing syndicates who have ties with officials of LRA and Register of Deeds.

4. These seemingly rigid requirement of the Register of Deeds are the causes of fraud and anomaly in the registration of real properties. It is almost impossible for poor landowners to effect the transfer of title to them!

5. Ha ha funny how you started your cycle, BIR payments agad... The cycle actually starts from acquiring a certified true copy of the title from RD, then Municipal level, then provincial level, then BIR, then the Register of Deeds,,, after this good luck on how soon you can get your title, unless you know somebody from Rd so that release of the title can be expedited!!!

I also commented that it's a good experience for Floro. And we may wonder why many people are still enamored with "more government intervention/regulations" mantra. 

Someone said that the purpose of government is to expand government. Somehow this is true. And that explains why I and other friends campaign and advocate for minimal or limited government, more market competition, more civil society role.

-----------

See also:

Business Bureaucracy 5: Doing Business 2012 Report, August 28, 2012

Business Bureaucracy 6: Presentation at Rotary Club of Manila Bay, February 01, 2013 

Business Bureaucracy 7: Penalizing Small Businesses, February 01, 2013 

Business Bureaucracy 8: Exchanges at Imperium et Populi (Philippines), June 12, 2013

Pilipinas Forum 26: On State-Party Relations

Although I have stopped being a Marxist-socialist by early 90s, somehow I still have some "hang-over" on some Marxist concepts until early 2000s. Here's one such discussion a decade ago, on the relationship between a political party and the state. This is 7 pages long, enjoy.
------------

State-Party Relations

January 2001

Nonoy, et al, Sometime ago I curiously read an article about certain communist intellectuals (not identified) talking about the time when there will be "separation of Party and state" ... just as the separation of church and state in capitalist countries.

They'd mean that the Party would just exert ideological influence and persuasion, not state or police power, to groups of individuals vying for public office over state policies and welfare.

If such were to happen and together with a genuine Bill of Rights, such socialist countries like Vietnam and China would not only catch up but even outdistance western countries. By then there would be a global convergence: social democracy (of the east) = democratic capitalism (of the west).

- Roy Picart

Roy, My understanding of state-party relations is:

(Pol.) Party - defines & explains the policies to the people, must aim to capture state power to implement said policies;

State - implements policies of the victorious pol. party. Though often in multi-party countries, the victorious pol. party enters into alliances with other smaller pol. parties to get majority seats in the legislature and to broaden its mass base and support. But in one-party states like China, Vietnam, N. Korea and Cuba, no need for party alliances as the opposition is always weak.

So in this definition, party-state separation of function is inherent in multi-party states. Such separation of function is also possible in one-party, communist governments. In slowly-democratizing communist govts. like China and Vietnam, state leaders and bureaucrats are not entirely accountable to their respective communist parties but to the general population, majority of whom are not party members. State leaders are striking a balance between their party (which is generally allergic to drastic reforms) and the general public (who want fast, wide-ranging economic liberalization and political democratization).

On social democracy, these are essentially the democratic capitalist states of the west at the moment. Specifically, the welfare states of Scandinavian and Western European countries. These capitalist countries sometimes turn off capitalist enterprises because of the high taxes which their govts. collect to give to the jobless (sometimes encouraging laziness), the sick, to subsidize their farmers, etc.

The convergence that you mention is actually happening now: capitalist countries that act like socialist states, and socialist countries that allow predominance of capitalist enterprises. Vietnam is a socialist country, but the streets of Hanoi, Saigon, Hue, etc. are full of tens of thousands of capitalist enterprises. China is a socialist country but Shanghai, Shenzen, even Beijing, are full of capitalist shops and firms.

Someday, ideologies will become good academic subjects in the schools worldwide, but they will lose their original spirits. They will soon converge with one basic ingredient that unifies their aspirations: information. Information will uplift world economies, substantially reduce poverty as we know it today. But information will never be made perfect for everyone. Just as the next guy has discovered his neighbor's "trade secrets", this neighbor has already developed a new product or service that is far superior to the one that was discovered by his competitor.

- nonoy

Dear Noy and Roy and All:

State-Party Relations:

Classical Marxism situates the relations between state and party within the framework of socialism as the class rule of the proletariat, and socialism as a transitional phase before society could progress to classless and stateless communism. State and party relations also relate to the conept of the "withering away of the state." The classics, in fact, may provide signposts in understanding the remaining socialist experiments.

The basic theoretical postulates on this matter may be outlined as follows:

a) Capitalism is an arrangement of social classes with the bourgeoisie exercising political hegemony over all the others, through the capitalist state;

b) The socialist revolution destroys this hegemony and transfers state power to the proletariat. Hence, Lenin defines socialism as "the dictatorship of the proletariat" or "the proletariat organized as the ruling class";

c) The immediate function of the socialist state is to preserve the dominance of the proletariat, and to serve as the coercive instrument of the the working class. This coercive role means defending the Communist Party and defeating its class enemies, since the CP is the repository of the will of the ruling class (the proletariat). Note that the socialist state, as with all other states, remains a coercive organ of power, existing within society but also above it;

Pilipinas Forum 22: Maynilad Water Rate Hike, 2001

This is an exchange in pilipinasforum@yahoogroups.com more than 10 years ago, sometime in April and June, 2001. I cannot find Part 1 of the exchanges, but this one is good. This is 10 pages long, so as usual, get your popcorn and fave drinks :-)
------

Maynilad Water Rate Hike, Part 2

April 2001

Since 1998, Manila Water (Ayala) has asked for an increase in water rates - before Maynilad did. Since I have been studying the water sector, someone from Bechtel, the Ayala partner, invited me to a discussion wherein he presented the company's plans, such as the Laiban dam. The construction of this dam did not push through because of the very high social cost involved. This guy wants me to help him promote the plan as well as the need for the water rate increase because of negative profits. I was told (by a very reliable source) that the Ayala's underbid at P2/cu.m because they want to make it hard for the Aboitiz to enter the market here in NCR. The Aboitiz gave them a hard time in Cebu.

My study where I estimated the full cost of water (= private cost + user or depletion cost + external cost) was cited. I explained to him that the estimate is for the 'economic value' of water and the revenue from charging the full-cost price should go to the owner of the resource, which is the State as indicated in the constitution. The water distributor or the concessionaire should only get the return from the distribution cost, and the user and external costs of water should go to the State or its representative - the government. Dr. Solon, a consultant of MWSS also opposed the granting of the request of Manila Water.

There is really a need to increase water rates in order to reflect the opportunity cost or the social cost from using a scarce resource. Underestimation of the value of natural resources has resulted in over-exploitation and depletion. Just look at our forests, fisheries, groundwater, etc. The lack of valuation of the impact of water pollution – an external cost - has resulted in the use of water bodies as a free dumping ground of wastes. One issue is who should get the revenues if the full-cost price is charged. One can also argue from the equity aspect. Most of the households connected to the Level III service or piped water supply are middle to upper class who can very well afford a higher water rate. Most of the poor (based on the household survey conducted in 1997/98) buy water from peddlers at much higher rates compared to the concessionaires' rates or form a queue to get water from public faucets (very high opportunity cost of time). Before the privatization, the average price of water was P10/cu.m. The issue then was not the price, but the quality of service.

Pilipinas Forum 3: Is Marxism Still Relevant?

These are the exchanges in pilipinasforum@yahoogroups that I edited, posted in inq7.net in March 12, 2001, 11 pages long. These discussions were made in February 2001.

--------

Is Marxism Still Relevant?

Popoy represented the largest organization with a definite ideology in calling for a socialist Philippines. When he and his group splintered from Joma Sison's CPP-NPA-NDF sometime in 1993, Popoy had at least 4 reasons for doing so:

(1) They reject the "semi-feudal, semi-colonial" mode of production analysis of Joma and the CPP. (2) Hence, they also reject the "national democracy" goal. (3) They reject the Maoist formulation that "the peasants (not workers) are the main army to change society" and that of "encircling the city from the countrysides", and (4) Corollarily, reject that "armed struggle is the primary form of struggle".

Instead, when Popoy and his team of underground people from the Metro Manila-Rizal Regional CPP Command, the explicit formulations are as follows:

1. The Philippines' mode of production is "predominantly capitalist".

2. Hence, the goal should be socialism, not "national democracy" ("national" meaning anti-colonial, "democracy" meaning anti-feudal).

3. The workers (don't own means of production, whether capital, factories, land, technology) are the main army to change things, and urban insurrection is the way to capture state power.

4. Other forms of struggle should be tapped to complement the armed urban struggle (Hence, Popoy and his group then advocated to participate in the 1986 snap elections, whereas Joma and the CPP called for its boycott).

Between the two, Popoy is more sophisticated ideologically than Joma Sison. I would even add that Popoy read and understand classic Marxism and Leninism literature better than Joma and his followers. The ideological debate and organizational rivalry between the 2 largest factions of the Philippine left has somehow worked for their mutual advantage and the workers in general. Just like big corporations benefiting from having fellow big competitors because they all strive to be more dynamic and innovative. How?

Organized workers have more options where they will be organizationally and ideologically affiliated. Before, it was only between the moderate TUCP and the radical KMU, plus other smaller independent labor federations. Popoy's BMP (bukluran ng manggagawang pilipino) represented a 3rd or 4th option for the workers. Just like businessmen and capitalists have options whether they'll be more active with PCCI or MBC or FPI or Rotary, etc.

Second, workers should be given the opportunity to be educated of the socialist alternative, and not just the nat-dem goal. The capitalists and politicians of this country for many years have veered away from the Adam Smith and David Ricardo type of capitalism, so they (the capitalists) gave workers a really bad kind and experience of capitalism. Perhaps approximating the capitalism of the Industrial Revolution in Europe. At the time when Marx called religion "the heart of the heartless world, the soul of the soulless conditions, it is the opium of the people." (though rabid anti-Marxists only quote the last line and omitted the first 2 lines).

Where to, Philippine left? Despite my sympathy and admiration for their hard dedication to politicize and mobilize people, especially the really poorer sectors of our society, I still cannot subscribe to their sentiment that we should immune or delink our economy from globalization and the world economy, that we should keep the protectionist veil and continue regulating many of our industries and the economy, that we should not privatize subsidy-dependent state corporations, etc.

Thus, since I believe that economic liberalization and not protectionism and regulation is the way, and the Philippine left (& the left elsewhere in the world) believe otherwise, I think the Philippine left will remain as a significant political voice in our society, but there's no way that it can seize state power to implement its protectionist advocacies.

--Nonoy Oplas




Nonoy, could you expound more on the leftist agenda? What exactly do they want? Go down the road of North Korea or Cuba? Do not the events in Russia and China discredit the case for Marxism, Leninism or Maoism as the case may be? I am guessing that their ideology was formulated in the 70's - do they account for sweeping changes in technology such as the internet? There are more Filipinos working abroad (5 million I think) versus those in Philippine Manufacturing (about 2 million I think) so what is their role in this workers rebellion.

How does that one go, "The path to hell is paved with good intentions" - socialism and communism do have their appeal but outside the Israeli Kibbutz I cannot see real sustainable successful models.

-- Victor A. Limlingan Jr.