Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
By Alvic Padilla
The Local Government Code (LGC) of 1991 paved the way for greater local autonomy in an effort to bring
government closer to the doorsteps of the people. As local governments take on greater roles in the provision of
public services, they require greater resources and the means to generate these. At the same time, greater
decentralization brings with it the need to strengthen mechanisms for transparency and accountability in local
government budgeting and spending.
Fiscal autonomy refers to the broad latitude or leeway given to local governments in accessing revenues,
disbursing and utilizing funds1 and is considered as an essential component of local autonomy. Autonomy is
however something entirely different from accountability. Possessing autonomy does not negate the critical
need to ensure accountability and fully penalize those who fail to properly report their activities.
To give one an idea of how much financial resources are managed by local governments, Table 1 shows the
combined incomes of provinces, municipalities and cities in the country as of the year 2008.
Table 1. LGU Incomes for 2008 (Figures in Pesos)
Income Source
All Provinces
All Municipalities
All Cities
Local Sources
9,821,846,779
17,128,731,358
62,601,564,387
52,235,133,716
74,790,259,390
49,536,617,307
Extraordinary Receipts/Aids
833,178,873
945,906,535
741,372,546
1,177,518,391
1,277,840,833
2,741,465,406
Inter-Local Transfers
950,432,423
147,962,918
148,072,534
TOTAL INCOME
65,018,110,182
94,290,701,034
115,769,092,179
The table shows that the combined incomes of all cities in 2008 reached almost PhP 115.8 billion (USD 2.57
billion) while the combined income of all provinces and municipalities amount to almost PhP 160 billion (USD
3.56 billion). As local governments receive, generate, disburse and utilize more public funds, citizens need to
monitor local officials managing these funds properly and effectively and so help ensure the resources are used
to provide the necessary public services in their respective localities.
This background paper seeks to provide general readers with a basic understanding of local incomes and
expenditures so they will be able to play their role as civic watchdogs. It discusses three main points: how local
governments generate income and where they are sourced; the local budget process to illustrate how these
resources are allocated and utilized; and the ways how and where citizens can intervene and help strengthen
transparency and accountability in the management of local public finances.
The local governments power to generate its own financial resources is guaranteed by Article 10 Section 5 of
the Constitution:
Each local government unit shall have the power to create its own sources of revenues and to levy taxes, fees,
and charges subject to such guidelines and limitations as the Congress may provide, consistent with the basic
policy of local autonomy. Such taxes, fees, and charges shall accrue exclusively to the local governments.
Two important points can be deduced from the said provision: one, that local sources of income can be through
tax and non-tax revenue measures; and, two, that collections from these sources shall go to the local
government concerned.
Local governments are given the power to adopt and implement tax and non-tax measures to generate funds.
Section 130 of the LGC, however, requires that these measures are consistent with the following principles:
1. Taxation shall be uniform in each local government unit;
2. Taxes, fees, charges and other impositions shall:
a. be equitable and based as far as practicable on the taxpayers ability to pay;
b. be levied and collected only for public purposes;
c. not be unjust, excessive, oppressive, or confiscatory;
d. not be contrary to law, public policy, national economic policy, or in restraint of trade;
2
The collection of local taxes, fees, charges and other impositions shall in no case be let to any private
person;
3
The revenue collected pursuant to the provisions of this Code shall inure solely to the benefit of, and be
subject to disposition by, the local government unit levying the tax, fee, charge or other imposition unless
otherwise specifically provided herein; and,
4
Each local government unit shall, as far as practicable, evolve a progressive system of taxation.
Table 2 below shows the incomes of local governments in 2008 as first presented in Table 1, but with a more
detailed classification on the source of income. It shows that real property tax is a significant source of local tax
revenues for provinces where it accounts for PhP 4 billion of the PhP 5.5 billion total tax revenues. While it is
comparatively less in all cities (PhP 20.9 billion out of PhP 47.1 billion), the amount is still very significant.
Table 2. Local Government Income by Source, 2008
Income Source
All Provinces
All Municipalities
All Cities
Local Sources
9,821,846,779
17,128,731,358
62,601,564,387
Tax Revenue
5,574,452,159
10,094,534,420
47,146,044,927
4,098,343,164
4,746,313,628
20,954,203,450
Business Tax
719,090,916
4,821,538,436
23,339,458,738
Other Taxes
757,018,079
526,682,356
2,852,382,740
Non-Tax Revenue
4,247,394,620
7,034,196,937
15,455,519,460
Regulatory Fees
218,569,216
1,698,587,896
3,518,088,625
Service/User Charges
974,450,340
847,376,748
2,401,732,047
2,089,856,778
3,467,886,612
4,737,870,170
Toll Fees
66,203,367
3,407,879
Other Receipts
964,518,285
954,142,314
4,794,420,739
52,235,133,716
74,790,259,390
49,536,617,307
IRA
50,151,233,330
72,915,125,500
48,794,841,092
Other Shares
2,083,900,386
1,875,133,890
741,776,215
Extraordinary Receipts/Aids
833,178,873
945,906,535
741,372,546
1,177,518,391
1,277,840,833
2,741,465,406
Inter-Local Transfers
950,432,423
147,962,918
148,072,534
TOTAL INCOME
65,018,110,182
94,290,701,034
115,769,092,179
Other examples of tax revenues apart from real property tax are the tax on transfer of real property ownership;
tax on business of printing and publication, franchise tax, tax on sand, gravel and other quarry resources,
professional ax, amusement tax, business tax, and community tax. Table 2 shows that the cities are able to
mobilize the most tax revenues, amounting to PhP 47 billion (USD 1.04 billion), most of which are from
business taxes, which is not surprising since these are urban areas.
Tax measures are adopted by local governing public officials and bodies (e.g. local chief executives and
sanggunian or legislative councils). This means that citizens can and should intervene and assert their
participation in the formulation and deliberation of local tax policymaking.
Non-tax revenues on the other hand includes those derived from fees and charges such as fees for sealing and
licensing of weights and measures, fishery rentals, and other fees collected by the local government for services
rendered (e.g. payment for securing a barangay clearance). Table 2 also shows the significant contribution of
non-tax revenues. Across all class of LGUs, it is however less than collections from tax revenues.
The amounts allocated for each class of LGU is further distributed to determine the share of each province, city
and municipality using the following criteria:
Population 50 percent
Land area 25 percent
This is why many local governments are wary of attempts to redraw municipal boundaries since it will directly
affect their revenues.
From the above formula, one can infer that the following factors can affect the amount of IRA each LGU gets:
Tax revenue performance of the national government. Effectiveness and efficiency of tax administration,
tax leakages/evasion, certain tax exemptions, all impact on the actual level of internal revenue
collections. Since the IRA is based on revenue collections, poor tax revenue effort will stunt the amount
of the IRA for LGUs.
LGUs with larger population size and/or land area will tend to have a greater share of the IRA.
The greater the number of LGUs among each class will impact on the share of each LGU. If Congress
converted several municipalities into cities, there would be more LGUs that will share the 23 percent
allocation for cities.
It is also worth bearing in mind that the Constitution provides the mandatory and automatic release of the IRA
to the LGUs.
The second significant Constitutional provision on LGU share in national resources is Section 7 of Article IX
which states that:
Local governments shall be entitled to an equitable share in the proceeds of the utilization and development of
the national wealth within their respective areas, in the manner provided by law, including sharing the same
with the inhabitants by way of direct benefits.
Section 290 of the LGC operationalized this provision stating that:
Local government units shall, in addition to the internal revenue allotment, have a share of forty percent (40%)
of the gross collection derived by the national government from the preceding fiscal year from mining taxes,
royalties, forestry and fishery charges, and such other taxes, fees, or charges, including related surcharges,
interests, or fines, and from its share in any co-production, joint venture or production sharing agreement in the
utilization and development of the national wealth within their territorial jurisdiction.
In addition, LGUs are also entitled a share on the proceeds derived by a government agency or governmentowned or controlled corporation engaged in the utilization and development of the national wealth. The LGUs
share shall be 1 percent of the gross sales or receipts of the preceding calendar year or 40 percent of the mining
taxes, royalties, forestry and fishery charges and such other taxes, fees or charges, including related surcharges,
interests, or fines the government agency or GOCC would have paid if it were not otherwise exempt, whichever
is higher. The allocation for such shares of the LGUs is determined as such: 20 percent for province, 45 percent
for component city/municipality, and 35 percent for barangays.
Whereas the IRA is shared across all LGUs, the recipient of the shares on the earnings from utilization of the
national wealth is directed to LGUs where such national wealth are located.
Table 2 shows the magnitude of shares of LGUs in internal revenue and national wealth. It shows that about
PhP 72 billion (USD 1.6 billion) of IRA went to municipalities, PhP 50 billion (USD 1.1 billion) to provinces
and PhP 48.7 billion (USD 1.08 billion) to cities.
with Makati generating PhP 8.47 billion (USD 188 million) and Guihulngan only yielding PhP 288.133 million
(USD 6.4 million). The same is true for the two municipalities wherein Pantabangan generated income
amounting to more than 20 times that of Lumbaca Unayan.
Table 4 shows the percent distribution of the incomes of the same LGUs. This presentation is useful when one
is interested to know which sources of income an LGU is most dependent on. There are LGUs such as Makati
City and Pantabangan which have a strong local revenue base with up to 92 percent and 76.8 percent of total
incomes, respectively, are sourced local tax and non-tax revenues. In contrast, local revenues of Samar and
Lumbaca Unayan are practically nil relative to its total income. These two LGUs are highly dependent on the
IRA from the national government. Lumbaca Unayan is entirely dependent on IRA while Samar and
Guihulngan are almost entirely dependent as well with a staggering 98.95 percent and 96.29 percent of their
respective incomes coming from IRA.
Table 4. Percent Distribution in Incomes of Selected LGUs, 2008
Palawan is only 36.78 percent dependent on IRA but it sources 60 percent of its income from other shares from
national government which brings the total shares it receives from national taxes to 97.23 percent. The
Malampaya gas exploration and development in the province has entitled Palawan to equitable shares in the
proceeds from utilization and development of their natural resources.
1. On or before July 15th of each year, the local treasurer is required to submit to the local chief executive
a certified statement containing the following:
a. actual income and expenditures during the immediately preceding year;
b. actual income and expenditures of the first two quarters of the current fiscal year; and,
c. estimated income and expenditures for the last two quarters of the current fiscal year.
2
A Local Finance Committee is convened which is composed of the local planning and development
officer, the local budget officer and the local treasurer. The committee is tasked to deliberate and submit to the
local chief executive the following:
a. Estimation of a reasonable income projection for the ensuing year;
b. recommendations on the appropriate tax and revenue measures or borrowing appropriate to
support the budget;
c. recommendations on the level of annual expenditures and the ceilings of spending for economic,
social and general services based on the LGUs approved local development plan; and,
d. recommendations on the amount to be allocated for capital outlay under each development
activity or infrastructure project.
2
Heads of the LGUs departments and offices prepare and submit budget proposals for the ensuing year
to the local chief executive.
Based on these submissions, the local chief executive prepares the executive budget for the ensuing year to the
local legislative council/sanggunian not late than October 16th of the current year. According to the LGC,
failure to submit such budget on the date prescribed shall subject the local chief executive to such criminal
and administrative penalties as provided for under this Code and other applicable laws.
Budget authorization
Upon receipt of the budget documents from the local chief executive, the sanggunian is then tasked to enact,
through an ordinance, the annual budget of the LGU for the ensuing fiscal year before the end of the current
year. Ideally, the sanggunian should study, scrutinize and deliberate the estimated income and proposed budget.
Legislative approval is important because it is the sanggunian which has the power to appropriate the budget.
Appropriation refers to an authorization made by ordinance, directing the payment of goods and services from
local government funds under specified conditions or for specific purposes.4
Once a budget is passed by the legislature, the appropriations ordinance is subject to review by authorities
depending on the nature of the LGU. The Department of Budget and Management (DBM) reviews the
appropriation ordinance of provinces, highly-urbanized cities, independent component cities, and municipalities
within Metro Manila. The sangguniang panlalawigan (provincial council) is tasked to review the ordinance of
component cities and municipalities. The review process ensures that the budgets prepared and approved by
these LGUs are within the budgetary requirements and general limitations as prescribed in the Code.5
Budget execution
The LGC states that the responsibility for the execution of the annual budget and the accountability therefore
shall be vested primarily in the local chief executive.
Budget execution involves the activities related to the disbursement of funds to be used for pre-identified
programs, projects, activities contained in the approved budget. It involves the exercise of local executive of
mechanisms to program and control cash disbursements. An important mechanism for control is the power to
issue allotments by the local chief executive. Allotments are essentially authorizations to departments/offices to
incur obligations of specific amounts to be paid out of local government funds.
Budget accountability
The Commission on Audit and DBM have promulgated rules and regulations that seek to strengthen
accountability mechanisms in local finance. The New Government Accounting System (NGAS) issued by the
COA contains detailed guidelines for local government units in accounting for all incomes, disbursements and
budgetary accounts. It also specifies in great detail a financial reporting system which requires, among others,
the preparation of year-end financial statements such as balance sheet, statement of income and expenses, and
statement of cash flows. More importantly, the COA conducts audits of local government finances and
publishes these audit reports on their website.
most needed for the development of communities. Statutory requirements for preparation and submission of
budgetary and financial reports, while necessary, are not enough to strengthen mechanisms for accountability.
Citizens involvement in local fiscal administration is essential in ensuring that those holding public office
consistently perform their duties and responsibilities in line with the best interest of the people. Members of the
public therefore need to monitor and ultimately play a role in influencing the funding priorities of local officials
since the funds ultimately belong and aim to serve and support the people. Philippine Public Transparency
Reporting Project
(The author is an assistant professor at the UP National College of Public Administration and Governance.)
1. Agra, A. Seminar Handout, Survey of Supreme Court Decisions on Local Autonomy and Local
Governments from January 1, 1992 to July 31, 2005, August 15, 2005, Ateneo Professional Schools,
Makati City
2. Cardona, M. and A. Punzalan. Government Accounting, 2008 Edition. Manila: GIC Enterprises & Co.
pp. 243
3. Cuaresma, J. and S. Ilago. Local Fiscal Administration in the Philippines. Local Government Center, UP
college of Public Administration. 1996 pp 35
4. Cardona, M. and A. Punzalan. Government Accounting, 2008 Edition. Manila: GIC Enterprises & Co.
pp 242
5. Section 324 and 325 of the LGC. Examples of these are that the total appropriated amount shall not
exceed the estimated income, and mandatory setting aside five percent (5%) of the estimated revenue as
calamity fund.