|
THE
Philippine Long Distance Telephone Co.(PLDT) had
contended the February 10, 2000 and
September 5, 2000 reassessments of the National Telecommunications
Commission (NTC) were contrary to a Supreme Court (SC)
ruling and thus inapplicable.
Not so,
the SC said recently, junking the PLDT petition
assailing the reassessments ruling in G.R. 127937 (NTC
v. Court of Appeals) issued on July 28, 1999, where it
excluded from supervision and regulation fees (SRF)
coverage the capital stocks issued as stock dividends.
Associate Justice Presbitero Velasco Jr. said the Court
of Appeals decision stands because the NTC did not err
in including the value of stock dividends issued by PLDT
in the computation of the SRF.
PLDT had
also argued the case clearly delineates between capital
subscribed and stock dividends to the effect that the
latter are not included in the concept of capital stock
subscribed, because subscribers do not pay for their
subscriptions as no amount is received by the
corporation in consideration of such issuances since
these are effected as mere book entries.
As of
December 31, 2002, the telephone company had paid a
total of P1.24 billion in SRF, of which P1.09 billion
were paid under protest and P103 million in permit fees.
The SRF
is computed on the telcos, broadcast, and other
entities’ capitalization. They pay an SRF of 50 centavos
for every P100 of paid-in capital.
In
upholding the CA ruling, the SC said stock dividends are
part of the outstanding capital stocks of a corporation
which are subject to SRF. “PLDT’s contention, that stock
dividends are not similarly situated as the subscribed
capital stock because the subscribers or shareholders do
not pay for their issuances as no amount was received by
the corporation in consideration of such issuances since
these are affected as a mere book entry, is erroneous.”
According to the SC, dividends, regardless of the form
these are declared, are valued at the amount of the
declared dividend taken from the unrestricted retained
earnings of a corporation. Thus, the value of
declaration in the case of stock dividends is the actual
value of the original issuance of said stocks.
The High
Court said, “Thus, it cannot be said that no
consideration is involved in the issuance of stock
dividends. In fact, the declaration of stock dividends
is akin to a forced purchase of stocks.”
Records
showed that since 1994, the PLDT and the NTC have been
engaged in legal proceedings at the CA and the SC on the
issue of the SRFs.
The SC,
in its
July 28,1999, decision, ordered the NTC to recompute the fees to be
imposed on PLDT on the basis of PLDT capital stock
subscribed or paid, which was defined as the “total
amount of the capital that persons have agreed to take
and pay for.”
However,
the subsequent assessment issued by the NTC for
outstanding SRF also included the amount of stock
dividends in the basis of calculation, which PLDT
believes is contrary to the SC decision.
Due to
NTC’s insistence of its reassessments, PLDT filed with
the CA a petition for certiorari and prohibition with an
application for a temporary restraining order and/or
writ of preliminary injunction to invalidate NTC’s
reassessment.
On
February 12, 2001, the CA dismissed PLDT’s petition and
subsequent motion for reconsideration. |
