PCGG SITTING ON THE PROBLEM

How much billions were lost during the martial law regime in our country? The most prominent family, the perpetrators of plunder, has  been able to make a political comeback yet nary an ethical  squeak from the Presidential Commission on Good Government has been heard. 

Mr. Marcelo Tecson, a certified public accountant and concerned citizen has followed up his question dated July 23, 2018 to the PCGG this November more than a year of sitting on the problem.  Please read the following:

To:  PCGG Chairman REYNOLD MUNSAYAC            Date: July 23, 2018

Subject: (1^st) Follow up of PCGG’s reply to the repeatedly recommended use of Al Capone or TAX EVASION METHOD in the recovery of martial law ill-gotten wealth 

 We hereby reiterate the following request in the October 18, 2017 email to you, included in the papers stamped received by your office on November 23, 2017, enclosed here as EXHIBIT A:

      Pursuant to Section 5 (a) of RA 6713, I hereby request your reply to the following follow-up questions on my recommended PCGG resort to the Al Capone or tax evasion method in the recovery of martial law ill-gotten wealth, subject of my previous communications to PCGG:

1. Do you agree to the validity and feasibility of using the tax evasion method in running after martial law ill-gotten wealth?

.

2. If you agree, may I know what action you have already taken on my recommendation?  

.

3. If you do not agree, may I know why?

.

As reported by media (the latest news is shown at the back page), PCGG has been losing in its recovery of martial law ill-gotten wealth because it has followed a very difficult and tedious approach—proving that the wealth is ill-gotten and thus subject to government forfeiture. Unfortunately, this accusation is hard to prove because corruption is done in utmost secrecy and the corrupt did not sign official receipts for the proceeds of their crime.  

However, there is the Al Capone or TAX EVASION METHOD that is not difficult to pursue because the shreds of evidence needed are easy to produce:  FIRST, claimants’ affidavit—submitted to Sandiganbayan—swearing ownership    of the allegedly lawfully acquired wealth, which shifted the burden of proof to PCGG; and SECOND,  testimony by the BIR Commissioner that there were no income and estate and inheritance taxes paid on the obviously untaxed wealth. PCGG has refused to follow this method for unexplained reason.

 As arranged by Atty. Ma. Luisa Narvadez, Marcelo L. Tecson met with  two PCGG officers at the PCGG office on November 23, 2017. They agreed to issue a written reply or email on what PCGG has done on the recommendation and the reason for it. However, up to now PCGG has not issued a written reply.  Hence, this follow-up letter.     

  

MARCELO  L. TECSON                       .

A CPA and Concerned Citizen                 

Email: martecson@yahoo.com    

https://www.istockphoto.com/