{"id":10007,"date":"2020-09-15T22:01:45","date_gmt":"2020-09-15T22:01:45","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/?p=10007"},"modified":"2026-04-24T01:49:31","modified_gmt":"2026-04-24T04:49:31","slug":"bir-ordered-to-return-income-tax-to-pogo","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/bir-ordered-to-return-income-tax-to-pogo","title":{"rendered":"BIR ordered to return income tax to POGO"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Bureau will have to return over US$2.37 million to a gaming company located in City of Dreams Manila.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<!--more-->\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Philippines.- The Court of Tax Appeals (CTA) in the Philippines has ordered the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) to return incorrectly charged tax to a Philippine offshore gaming operator (POGO).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The court\u2019s First Division determined that Premium Leisure and Amusement (PLAI) was erroneously charged Php115 million (US$2.37 million) for the 5 per cent franchise tax in 2015.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The <strong><em>BIR<\/em><\/strong> has been ordered to return the payment or issue a tax credit certificate after the court found that PLAI was not obliged to pay income tax to the Philippine Amusement and Gaming Corporation (PAGCOR) on its gross income.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">PLAI is a co-licensee in City of Dreams Manila, the integrated resort and casino project in Entertainment City.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Manila Bulletin reported that the court&#8217;s ruling states that the company&#8217;s licence fee was already \u201cinclusive of the five percent franchise tax in lieu of all other taxes.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">It also cited precedent from the Supreme Court in a similar case in which PAGCOR licensees and contractors were found exempt from the payment of corporate and other taxes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The ruling came just a day after the Philippines <strong><em><a rel=\"noreferrer noopener\" href=\"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/philippines-seeks-to-double-tax-income-from-pogos\" target=\"_blank\">approved a new law<\/a><\/em><\/strong> that will change the way POGOs are taxed in a bid to double tax income from the companies.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The Bureau will have to return over US$2.37 million to a gaming company located in City of Dreams Manila.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"is_press_release":false,"is_interview":false,"is_opinion":false,"focusai_summary":"The Philippine Court of Tax Appeals (CTA) has ordered the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) to refund Premium Leisure and Amusement (PLAI) US$2.37 million in erroneously charged franchise tax from 2015. The court ruled that PLAI, a co-licensee in City of Dreams Manila, was exempt from additional income tax as its license fee already included the 5% franchise tax, citing Supreme Court precedent. This decision precedes a new law aimed at increasing POGO tax income.","focusai_entities":"Bureau of Internal Revenue, Court of Tax Appeals, Premium Leisure and Amusement, Philippine Amusement and Gaming Corporation, Supreme Court, Manila Bulletin","focusai_location":"Philippines, Manila","focusai_target_profile":"ceo_executive (0.9), regulator (0.9), compliance_legal (0.95), operator_casino (0.95), investor_analyst (0.9), supplier_vendor (0.7), journalist_researcher (0.9)","focusai_suggestions":[{"label":"POGO Tax Implications","query":"How will the CTA's interpretation of the 5% franchise tax exemption impact the financial statements and future tax liabilities of other PAGCOR licensees and contractors in the Philippines?"},{"label":"Regulatory Framework Evolution","query":"What are the potential implications of this judicial precedent on the implementation and enforcement of the recently approved POGO taxation law, particularly concerning existing license agreements?"}],"footnotes":""},"categories":[439,16333],"tags":[128,15789,1206],"class_list":["post-10007","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-legal-news","category-south-east-asia-news","tag-philippines","tag-pogos","tag-tax"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10007","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=10007"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10007\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":777008656,"href":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10007\/revisions\/777008656"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=10007"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=10007"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=10007"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}