Pacquiao vs. Henares

[blu bizcuitz]

---

OT:


OnT:
I think gi cover up nasad ang issue ni napoles ani. and other more important issues. tsk tsk tsk. wani wani nasad.

palit ko ticket ani...

[ghostie2472]

BIR is exercising fair play. Manny is begging for public sympathy.
Ang ni sympathize kay wa naluoy sa ilang kaugalingon nga nagbayad sila.

The way I see it, there's nothing "fair" with this. BIR should have frozen Pacman's accounts BEFORE the fight and not after the fight. It's a disrespectful thing to do, wait til the fight is over and then BOOM, bank accounts get frozen.

[cliff_drew]

The way I see it, there's nothing "fair" with this. BIR should have frozen Pacman's accounts BEFORE the fight and not after the fight. It's a disrespectful thing to do, wait til the fight is over and then BOOM, bank accounts get frozen.

The garnishment happened before the fight.

Two weeks before his comeback fight in Macau on Sunday, the BIR reportedly issued a warrant of garnishment which led to the freezing of Pacquiao's bank deposits.

Henares to Pacquiao: Don't use BIR as excuse | Headlines, News, The Philippine Star | philstar.com

[ghostie2472]

The garnishment happened before the fight.



Henares to Pacquiao: Don't use BIR as excuse | Headlines, News, The Philippine Star | philstar.com

"Reportedly" Then why was the accounts frozen after the fight? For those 2 weeks, ngano maka transact paman si Pacman sa iyang mga bank accounts? The warrant was "reportedly" issued pero the bank accounts were frozen 2 weeks later and after the fight? Accounts were frozen at the bank's discretion? I don't think so.

"Once na may notice of garnishment na ipinadala ang BIR, 'yung mga bangko hindi na papayagang mag-withdraw ang sinumang account holder base doon sa notice,"

That means the accounts should have been frozen once na receive na ang notice gikan sa BIR. Playing safe lang ang BIR. Had the accounts been frozen before the fight and Pacman chose not to fight in the ring as a protest, or anything like that, it would have been a total mess and BIR would be in the spotlight taking all the heat.

[Nefarian]

Dili jud malikayan nga giilad rani siya sa mga tawng pa as if mga friends daw. Ug naay mga bad influence sa kiliran aw tabla. Gi take advantage ni sa mga marokoy na tawo kay mao lagi highschool ra si pacman. Sa left ear naay gasulti nga "makalusot ra lagi ta anang dili mobayad sa tax" unya sa right ear iyang konsensya nag ingon "bayari na ang tax manny ayaw pasilaw sa kwarta".

Gikawatan na pinatago si Manny unya karon nahulog siyag fall guy.

[Crinkles11]

BIR: Pacquiao misdeclared

[Renz8]

Pacman paid more than a P100M in Taxes way back in 2008 but by 2009 he only paid 7M&Pacman himself confirms this.......so BIR has every right to suspect kay dako kaayo deprensya but Pacman himself is willing to talk&pay if ever duna sya bayranan so it's better for both parties to sit&talk negotiate rather than talking about the case in media something is wrong somewhere so this has to be solve.....IF Pacman is very willing to pay taxes in the US then there is no reason for him not to pay correct taxes here but I think it's just an honest mistake on the side of Pacman if ever duna sayop dili nya kungdi sa iya mga accountants&lawyers w/c btw dri sa ato mangita jud na sila paagi nga mo gamay ang bayaran sa ila mga client w/c is TIKAS jud!!!!!

[mandix]

if ma proven nga he owes the BIR , then just pay up

[alfalfa]

Manny Pacquiao Believed Bob Arum Was Stealing Money From Him | Robert Littal Presents BlackSportsOnline

Cong Manny should have dealt this matter discreetly.

[alfalfa]

Garnishment of Pacquiao assets illegal sans court order

Former Finance Secret-ary Margarito Teves yesterday reminded the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) that it should have first secured all the necessary documents, particularly a court order, to warrant the garnishment of assets of boxing champion Sarangani Rep. Emmanuel “Manny” Pacquiao.

He stressed that there is a tedious process that needs to be followed before garnishing assets of any individual, whether already charged or still being accused of dodging tax payment.
“My understanding of the law is the agency garnishing any asset should first secure a court order before doing so. Assuming that the BIR has obtained the court order, then it has a legal leg to stand on. If not, the act of garnishment will likely be construed as illegal,” Teves said.

BIR intensifies collection through distraint, garnishment or levy of properties (Revenue Memorandum Order Nos. 30-2007 and 39-2007)

In order to raise additional revenues to meet its revenue goal, the BIR Commissioner, in RMO 30-07, ordered the intensified issuance of Warrants of Distraint / Levy and /or Garnishment on all delinquent accounts.

In RMO 39-07, the Commissioner further specified that the warrants should be issued and served –

1. upon issuance by the Commissioner or Regional Director of the final decision on the disputed assessment against the taxpayer, or

2. upon issuance by the Court of Tax Appeals of its decision upholding the assessment.

Even the filing of a timely appeal to the CTA cannot suspend the payment, levy, distraint and/or sale of any property of the taxpayer for the satisfaction of the tax liability. Only an order issued by the CTA can suspend its enforcement and no Court (except the CTA) can grant an injunction to restrain the collection.

While there are legal issues being raised against this RMO, the BIR is deemed in authority to enforce it unless it is invalidated by the courts. - PUNONGBAYAN & ARAULLO