7/26/2019 Gomez vs Palomar Digest

1/2

BENJAMIN P. GOMEZ vs ENRICO PALOMARG.R. No. L-23645 October 29 !96"

#AC$%&-This appeal puts in issue the constitutionality of Republic Act 1635,1as amended by Republic Act

2631,2which provides as follows

To help raise funds for the !hilippine Tuberculosis "ociety, the #irector of !osts shall order for theperiod from Au$ust nineteen to "eptember thirty every year the printin$ and issue of semi-postalstamps of di%erent denominations with face value showin$ the re$ular posta$e char$e plus theadditional amount of &ve centavos for the said purpose, and durin$ the said period, no mailmatter shall be accepted in the mails unless it bears such semi-postal stamps Provided, That nosuch additional char$e of &ve centavos shall be imposed on newspapers' The additional proceedsreali(ed from the sale of the semi-postal stamps shall constitute a special fund and be depositedwith the )ational Treasury to be e*pended by the !hilippine Tuberculosis "ociety in carryin$ outits noble wor+ to prevent and eradicate tuberculosis'

- The respondent !ostmaster eneral nrico !alomar, in implementation of the law, issued four ./0administrative orders numbered 3 .une 2, 1540, .Au$ust , 1540, .Au$ust 24, 1540, and 1 .uly 15, 160'All these administrative orders were issued with the approval of the respondent "ecretary of !ublic or+s and7ommunications'

-8n "eptember l5, 163 the petitioner 9en:amin !' ome( mailed a letter at the post o;ce in "anore speci&cally the claim is madethat it constitutes mail users into a class for the purpose of the ta* while leavin$ unta*ed the rest of the populationand that even amon$ postal patrons the statute discriminatorily $rants e*emption to newspapers whileAdministrative 8rder of the respondent !ostmaster eneral $rants a similar e*emption to o;ces performin$$overnmental functions'

(EL)&The &ve centavo char$e levied by Republic Act 1635, as amended, is in the nature of an e*cise ta*, laid

upon the e*ercise of a privile$e, namely, the privile$e of usin$ the mails' As such the ob:ections levelled a$ainst itmust be viewed in the li$ht of applicable principles of ta*ation'

To be$in with, it is settled that the le$islature has the inherent power to select the sub:ects of ta*ation andto $rant e*emptions' This power has aptly been described as of wide ran$e and Be*ibility' ?ndeed, it is said that inthe &eld of ta*ation, more than in other areas, the le$islature possesses the $reatest freedom in classi&cation' Thereason for this is that traditionally, classi&cation has been a device for &ttin$ ta* pro$rams to local needs andusa$es in order to achieve an e=uitable distribution of the ta* burden'

?t is not accurate to say that the statute constituted mail users into a class' >ail users were already a classby themselves even before the enactment of the statue and all that the le$islature did was merely to select theirclass' Ce$islation is essentially empiric and Republic Act 1635, as amended, no more than reBects a distinction thate*ists in fact' As >r' ustice

7/26/2019 Gomez vs Palomar Digest

2/2