Practice question
A large taxpayer has an uncovered type of tax violation and asserts that EOPT reduces every compromise penalty by half for every taxpayer. A separate eligible micro taxpayer has a covered nonfraud Section 113 violation but has not agreed to compromise. Which combined statement is correct?
- Both automatically owe half of every scheduled amount without consent
- Neither can ever obtain any lawful settlement
- The large taxpayer's claimed blanket concession is unsupported; the micro taxpayer's applicable reduced schedule does not eliminate the need for a valid agreement
- The micro taxpayer's classification abolishes all underlying taxes
- The large taxpayer becomes micro merely by requesting relief
Legal references
- RA11976, Section45: https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2024/ra_11976_2024.html
- BIR RR6-2024, reduced penalties for micro and small taxpayers: https://bir-cdn.bir.gov.ph/BIR/pdf/RR%206-2024%20(final).pdf
- BIR RMO7-2015, compromise penalty schedule and voluntary settlement rule: https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/10/69577
- La Flor Dela Isabela v. CIR, GR202105, April28 2021, main decision: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2021/apr2021/gr_202105_2021.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.