One for the books

E·N·Q·U·I·R·Y
DEMAREE J.B. RAVAL

One for the books
Sunday, 12 05, 2004

Some women would rather scratch themselves when something itches them, rather than request their husbands to do it. One such feisty lady is Mrs. Teresa Suplico, and the source of her irritation comes from the House of Representatives. But instead of requesting - some say, commanding - her firebrand spouse Rolex to do the unpleasant albeit necessary deed, she has decided to do it herself. She is now on a warpath, and the object of her wrath is her husband’s colleague in the House.

Mrs. Suplico, the owner of Goodwill Bookstore, is waging a fight against Congressman Salacnib Baterina’s House Bill No. 3105, which has a provision that seeks to repeal the value-added tax exemption on the “sale, importation, printing or publication of books.”

Mrs. Suplico knows whereof she speaks. As head of the Philippine Association of Booksellers, she is well aware that the Philippines is just one notch below Bangladesh, which takes the top slot in the ranking of illiteracy among Asian countries. Mrs. Suplico suspects that Baterina, despite the revenue-generating rationale of the bill, is out to grab for the Philippines the shameful distinction of being No. 1 in this category of negative reputations.

Why, indeed, should Congress legislate the cost of books into more prohibitive levels, out of the reach of Badong and Miling in barangay San Roque? The maddening haste to remedy the fiscal crisis that this government brought upon itself need not unnecessarily burden the acquisition of books of knowledge.

A survey commissioned by the National Book Development Board (NBDB) recently has revealed that many Filipinos consider books as a cost that lies in the outer fringes of their disposable income. The removal of the VAT exemption will surely make books more costly. More Filipinos will most likely will think twice before buying books, regardless of whether they are blissfully unaware that taxes have been passed on to them after the withdrawal of exemptions.

This “withdrawal pains,” as I call it - for surely it is such a pain to the passionate bibliophile - will not be only confined to the population at large. The government itself will also suffer from the jacked-up cost since the Department of Education is the biggest buyer of books. It procures 84% of all basic education textbooks for the public school system. With the ever growing student population, a rise in the cost of books will mean that the ideal one-textbook-per-student ratio will become just another meaningless, hollow objective that doddering academicians would dearly love to expound on. To provide quality education for all, the government has to ensure that books are affordable.

Books are certainly more important than newspapers and magazines for the education of our children. Sadly, the already steep prices of books have driven our children to settle for the lurid sidewalk tabloids and magazines to read about the latest showbiz gossip and ogle at pictures of naked ladies. No additional intellection required there. Thus, it comes as a surprise that Baterina proposes to retain the VAT exemption of newspapers and magazines, while repealing that of books. Something strikes me as not sensible here: to exclude books, while putting newspapers and magazines in the exempt list, would be violative of the equal-protection clause. Considering that books are on equal footing with newspapers and magazines as channels of information and knowledge, imbued with public interest, and no substantial distinction appears among them, the proposed classification is immediately seen as arbitrary, oppressive and discriminatory.

As regard to imported books, these should still be exempted from VAT, especially in the case of scientific and technical books; otherwise, they also will become more expensive. Faced with a dearth of these books written and published by Filipinos, students have taken to downright illegal photocopying and piracy. The 2002 Report of the International Intellectual Property Alliance mentions that, in the Philippines, “unauthorized photocopying of textbooks is widespread.” And here’s another one: the Philippines topped them all in the recent tabulation of copyright violators in the Asia Pacific Region, presented last month during the International Federation of Reproduction Rights Organizations Symposium in Singapore!

Taxing the importation of books is even violative of the 1950 Florence Agreement adopted by the UNESCO, of which the Philippines is a signatory. The Agreement encourages the free flow of information and mandates the free circulation of education, scientific or cultural materials, by abolishing all restrictions (like customs duties and other charges) to that free circulation. Thus, to withdraw the exemption of books from the coverage of VAT would be a clear curtailment of the free flow of information.

I would not mind so much - as my friend Dan Pinto would - if Congress taxed booze and cigarettes to high heavens, but I know he’d get his hackles up if they withdrew the exemption of books from the coverage of VAT. For him, it would be a tyrannical tax on his limited knowledge which he once in a while seeks to upgrade through books.

But seriously now: It must be emphasized that the full exchange of ideas and knowledge, and the widest possible dissemination of the diverse forms of self-expression is one of the principal vehicles of intellectual progress. A highly literate citizenry is essential to national development. Which is why the Book Industry Development Act (R.A. No. 8047), a brainchild of Sen. Edgardo Angara, seeks to develop the industry through a provision for incentives and assistance, to make books accessible to the greatest number. The Act exempts books from the coverage of VAT - Angara made sure of that. Ever since his UP presidency days, he has toiled over the problem of the book industry’s need for a climate of public support toward the printed word. And the Act created that climate.

In these times of uncertainties, it would do well for Congress to stock the national mind, not the national coffers where anyone would most likely dip his hand. After all, did not presumptive President Arroyo say that the fiscal crisis has already miraculously blown over? If her claim is true, then there is certainly no more need for Bill 3105.

The solution to the fiscal problem lies not in the withdrawal of the VAT exemptions on certain goods and services, but in improved implementation. In 2003, the National Tax Research Center (NTRC) estimated a yearly loss of P127 billion from uncollected taxes, VAT included. P85.4 billion, or two-thirds of the yearly leakages, come from non-payment of income tax, while the remaining third, P41.6 billion, has been lost from uncollected VAT. Thus, to withdraw the exemptions of certain goods and services from the coverage of VAT is mere knee-jerk reaction. Mrs. Suplico, together with the NBDB, it seems, are on the right track.

Meanwhile, there’s this new book on the life of Bill Clinton that I’d like to buy, but my wife says we can’t afford it. So I’m spending Sunday afternoon curled up reading my dog-eared copy of Pagsarmingan by Gil Raval.


For comments about this website:Webmaster@tribune.net.ph

The Daily Tribune © 2004