Enrique Garcia vs Executive Secretary

211 SCRA 219 G.R. No. 101273 July 3, 1992

Facts: In November 1990, President Corazon Aquino issued Executive Order No. 438 which imposed, in
addition to any other duties, taxes and charges imposed by law on all articles imported into the
Philippines, an additional duty of 5% ad valorem tax. This additional duty was imposed across the board
on all imported articles, including crude oil and other oil products imported into the Philippines. In 1991,
EO 443 increased the additional duty to 9%. In the same year, EO 475 was passed reinstating the previous
5% duty except that crude oil and other oil products continued to be taxed at 9%. Later, EO 478 was
issued levied a special duty of P0.95/liter or P151.05/barrel of imported crude oil and P1/L of imported
oil products.
Enrique Garcia, a representative from Bataan, avers that EO 475 and 478 are unconstitutional for
they violate Section 24 of Article VI of the Constitution which provides:
All appropriation, revenue or tariff bills, bills authorizing increase of the public debt, bills of
local application, and private bills shall originate exclusively in the House of Representatives,
but the Senate may propose or concur with amendments.
He contends that since the Constitution vests the authority to enact revenue bills in Congress, the
President may not assume such power by issuing Executive Orders Nos. 475 and 478 which are in the
nature of revenue-generating measures. Further, Garcia argues that the Eos contravene Section 401 of
TCC which authorizes to increase, reduce or remove tariff duties or to impose additional duties only when
necessary to protect local industries or products but not for the purpose of raising additional revenue for
the government.

Issue: WON the President can validly increase tariff rates thereby rendering EO 475 and 478 are
constitutional.

Held: Yes
Under Section 24, Article VI of the Constitution, the enactment of appropriation, revenue and
tariff bills, like all other bills is, of course, within the province of the Legislative rather than the Executive
Department. It does not follow, however, that therefore Executive Orders Nos. 475 and 478, assuming
they may be characterized as revenue measures, are prohibited to be exercised by the President, that they
must be enacted instead by the Congress of the Philippines.
Section 28(2) of Article VI of the Constitution provides as follows:
(2) The Congress may, by law, authorize the President to fix within specified limits, and subject
to such limitations and restrictions as it may impose, tariff rates, import and export quotas,
tonnage and wharfage dues, and other duties or imposts within the framework of the national
development program of the Government.
There is thus explicit constitutional permission to Congress to authorize the President “subject to such
limitations and restrictions as [Congress] may impose” to fix “within specific limits” “tariff rates . . . and
other duties or imposts . . . .” In this case, it is the Tariff and Customs Code which authorized the
President ot issue the said EOs.