Home Blog Page 10281

Jerwin Ancajas moving on from shelved title fight

By Michael Angelo S. Murillo
Senior Reporter

WHILE admitted to have been greatly disappointed over the last-minute cancellation of his title defense in California at the weekend, International Boxing Federation (IBF) world super flyweight champion Jerwin “Pretty Boy” Ancajas said he is now moving on from it, believing that greater things could well be in store for him in lieu of the botched fight.

Was set to face Mexican Jonathan Rodriguez on Sunday (Manila time) for what was supposed to be his eighth defense of the title he won back in 2016, Mr. Ancajas (31-1-2) and his team were floored when it was announced that the fight would no longer push through.

Because of the failure of Mr. Rodriguez (21-1) to secure his US visa on time, leaving him unable to complete his medical requirements, Top Rank Promotions said it had no choice but to cancel the 12-round fight which was scheduled to take place at the Dignity Health Sports Park in Carson, California.

Mr. Ancajas will still get the chance to defend his title but against a still-to-be-determined opponent in a bout tentatively set for Dec. 7 in Mexico.

“[On Friday] just before our afternoon training ended we were hurriedly called for a team meeting. There we were told by coach (Joven Jimenez) that the fight was cancelled as told by our matchmaker Sean Gibbons,” said Mr. Ancajas, in Filipino, in an online correspondence with BusinessWorld on Saturday.

The Filipino champion shared the he really felt bad with the sudden turn events as he and his team had already put in much-needed work and was ready to go to battle, making weight days before fight night.

But eventually he came to terms that maybe the cancellation had a bigger purpose for him down the line.

“At first I was really disappointed. But I just thought that maybe God has bigger plans for me. So I’ll just continue training here in the United States, focus on what I need to do and maybe in the next week couple of weeks my opponent will be known and then I’ll step up training some more,” said Mr. Ancajas, also touching on their immediate plans in the aftermath of the cancellation.

Mr. Ancajas and Coach Joven are expected to stay in the United States for the time being, with most of Team Ancajas, including nutritionist Jeaneth Aro and media consultant and photographer ALVIN S. GO, due back in the country later this week.

Mr. Ancajas won the IBF world super flyweight title in September 2016, defeating McJoe Arroyo of Puerto Rico by unanimous decision here in Manila.

He has defended his title seven times previously, the last time against Japanese Ryuichi Funai in May this year by knockout in California.

Filipino Pacatiw to make Brave CF history in Bahrain

By Michael Angelo S. Murillo
Senior Reporter

ALREADY holding the distinction as the Filipino with the most fights in Brave Combat Federation, Team Lakay’s Jeremy “The Juggernaut” Pacatiw looks to create further footing in the promotion when he returns to action on Nov. 15 in Bahrain.

To take on Jordan’s Ali Qaisi at Brave CF 29 at Khalifa Sports City Arena in Isa Town, it will be the ninth fight in Brave by Mr. Pacatiw, who has a 5-3 record in the company, surpassing Brave welterweight world champion Jarrah Al-Selawe, who has eight fights, for most in the promotion.

Mr. Pacatiw is currently riding a three-fight winning streak, the last one over compatriot Marc Alcoba, a submission victory (arm bar) in the third round of their clash in Brave’s Philippine debut in March this year.

While with Brave, Mr. Pacatiw, now fighting in bantamweight after spending time in flyweight, has fought in different parts of the world, including Brazil, Indonesia, Morocco and Pakistan.

He has fought twice in the home of Brave in Bahrain but was unsuccessful each time, something he hopes to change when he makes his return to the place.

Founded in 2016, Brave, under the patronage of His Highness Sheikh Khalid bin Hamad Al Khalifa, has made significant headways in bringing top-class MMA action in different parts of the globe.

Since September of 2016, the company has visited more than a dozen countries.

Brave said that by taking MMA to a wider range, it was able to give a truly global platform to athletes for their in-cage abilities and fighting qualities.

Philippines 3×3 team vows to work hard after earning qualifying spot in Olympics

CHOOKS-to-Go will pull out all the stops in the country’s preparation for the 2020 FIBA 3×3 Olympic Qualifying Tournament next March in Delhi, India.

A day after the world governing body’s announcement of the Philippines’ inclusion to the tournament that has three tickets to the 2020 Tokyo Olympics at stake, Chooks-to-Go Pilipinas 3×3 commissioner Eric Altamirano already has a concrete plan for the national team’s program.

Besides the 2020 season starting this January, Mr. Altamirano unveiled that the pool will also have training abroad, specifically Eastern Europe or China.

“We already have a plan and we just have to finalize it with Boss Ronald [Mascariñas]. Offhand, we are giving these guys a break because they have been working hard the last nine months,” said Mr. Altamirano, Saturday night during a press conference held at Bar One in Crowne Plaza, Ortigas.

“After that, we have to start preparing. We will have training camps abroad to prepare. And then of course, individual strength and conditioning programs we have bigger opponents in the OQT (Olympic Qualifying Tournament).”

Mr. Altamirano also said he believes that advancing to the knockout round of the OQT is doable.

The Philippines in bracketed in Pool C along with world no. 6 Slovenia, no. 10 France, no. 17 Qatar, and no. 33 The Dominican Republic.

“Now that we are in the Qualifiers and I saw the groupings, I think it is not as hard as the other groups. Although France and Slovenia are there, it’s doable. With the proper preparation, we can shock the world,” said Mr. Altamirano.

“I believe in our players. The one year of experience we had is enough for the Olympic Qualifier.”

The composition of the national team will be two players from the top 10 and two from the top 50 or players that have the minimum number of ranking points.

McGregor convicted of assault, fined €1,000

DUBLIN — Irish mixed martial arts fighter Conor McGregor was convicted on Friday of assault for punching a man who refused a shot of whiskey from him in a Dublin pub in April and was fined €1,000 ($1,117).

The 31-year-old twice Ultimate Fighting Championship title-holder, offered a guilty plea and apologized to his victim in Dublin’s District Court.

“What I did was very wrong. I would like to apologize again to the injured party… and assure you that nothing of this nature will happen again,” said McGregor, dressed in a navy suit and tie.

McGregor’s solicitor Michael Staines asked the court to give McGregor “one last chance” and said a criminal conviction could lead to a refusal of a visa to the United States and create “very severe difficulties” for McGregor’s career.

McGregor, who declined to comment to the media after the hearing, last week announced plans to return to the UFC octagon in Las Vegas on Jan. 18 against an opponent he declined to name.

He said he wants three fights in 2020, including rematches with Nate Diaz and Khabib Nurmagomedov, who defeated the Irishman in a lightweight title bout last year, the Irishman’s most recent MMA fight. — Reuters

Gerrit Cole setback

Gerrit Cole was not happy with the obligation. He had just witnessed the Astros — favored to claim the World Series from the very first game of the regular season to the last, winner-take-all outing of their campaign — bow to the supposedly overmatched Nationals, and the disappointment he felt trumped the need for him to face the media for a post-mortem. It certainly didn’t help that he knew he would be asked about his status as a free agent, the formality of his declaration available to him as early as the next day. He wanted to hightail it out of Minute Maid Park, not stay in a clubhouse wallowing in, well, emptiness.

That it didn’t take long for oddsmakers to install the Astros as overwhelming favorites anew for 2020 served only to rub salt on Cole’s gaping wound. He was ready to be part of Game Seven as a reliever, manager A.J. Hinch’s insurance policy in the event that they were close enough to hug the hardware. And, for a while there, it looked to be his destiny. Until, that is, the seventh and eighth innings came and went, and with it the lead he had been projected to protect. Against the prospect of burning his usage for nothing, he wound up riding the pine to the bitter end — a fate that surely made him ruminate on the What Ifs and Whys were he instead called in earlier.

And so Cole faced scribes with a yearning intent to move on. Even as he acknowledged the deep ties he established with the Astros, there was really no incentive for him to linger on an experience that resulted in failure. In fact, he saw fit to look ahead. He understands how much interest — and money — he will command in the open market, and while he would like to stay in familiar digs, the commitments already made to fellow pitchers Justin Verlander and Zack Greinke tie the hands of his immediate past employer. Which was why his statements had an unmistakable air of goodbye, and why, for good measure, he thought to utter them while wearing a cap bearing the insignia of Boras Corp., the company of his agent.

To be sure, Cole was more at ease with himself a day removed from the Game Seven setback. Looking back, he said, he may have sent the wrong message. “I was upset, and my tone did not come off quite the way I wanted it to.” Indeed. And, once again, he spoke of the “lifelong” relationships he forged during his time with the Astros. Still, there can be no downplaying his desire to claim what is due him. There will be a bidding war for his services, with Scott Boras, as always, making sure to drive up the price. The process will almost assuredly see him wearing new colors next year. In a league where even the supposed best of the best can come up short, the addition of zeros to his bank account is just about the surest thing he can count, and count on.

 

Anthony L. Cuaycong has been writing Courtside since BusinessWorld introduced a Sports section in 1994. He is a consultant on strategic planning, oprerations and Human Resources management, corporate communications, and business development.

Inchoate displays of anger

“Inchoate” means imperfectly formed or formulated: formless, incoherent, the Merriam-Webster dictionary says, to which the Cambridge dictionary adds, “not completely developed or clear.” When Sanjoy Chakravorty, professor of global studies at Temple University, Pennsylvania, called the fever of street protests around the world in 2019 “inchoate displays of anger,” “inchoate” can only mean futile and desperate.

The Guardian, in its Oct. 25 issue, cites experts in academe on political science, speaking on the long-playing “protests in Hong Kong, Lebanon, Chile, Catalonia and Iraq as well as in Russia, Serbia, Ukraine and Albania… the UK (against Brexit), France (yellow vest movement), and Spain, in the restive region of Catalonia. The Middle East has convulsed with so much dissent that some are calling it a second wave of the Arab Spring. In South America, Brazil, Peru, Ecuador, Colombia and Venezuela have experienced popular unrest.” The article asks, “Protests rage around the world — but what comes next?”

The question can only be rhetorical. The academics in The Guardian agree that the protests are paradoxical in many ways. The protestors are in the millions. In Lebanon, around 1.3 million people, or 20% of the population, were estimated to have attended the largest demonstrations so far, the weekend before last. In Hong Kong, the protestors normally number 500,000 to 1,500,000 at its peak; and in Barcelona, an estimated 525,000 people gathered on Oct. 18. The protests are long-running — not like the weekend protests of a decade ago, but lasting for months, like in the unbelievable but true, five-month massive youth protest that has paralyzed communist-owned but “autonomous” Hong Kong, a financial and trade hub of the capitalist world.

In all these, the core protestors are young people. In Hong Kong, they are mostly university or secondary school students who were initially concerned about extradition laws that would bring transgressors of the law to trial and judgment in Mainland China — an intimidation perhaps not earlier considered, in their young minds. In Lebanon, the protests started with young people angry about a 20-cent tax on WhatsApp calls, a seemingly small issue for civil society, but a grave concern for the tech-savvy younger generation. In Santiago, Chile, the youth-led demos protested a rise in metro ticket prices, which the authorities said was a reaction to fare-dodging and vandalism of the youth themselves. In the month-long protests, the fights mutated into civil society anger for civil and human liberties transgressed by the autocratic governments.

For Catalona, the half-million protesters on the streets of Barcelona were mostly young, mainly in their teens and 20s. Their anger was triggered by Spain’s Supreme Court judging nine Catalan separatists leaders guilty of sedition and misuse of public funds over their roles in a failed push for Catalan independence two years ago. Even in Iraq, protests were mostly driven by young and unemployed people, later joined by the older citizenry angry about the lack of jobs and poverty suffered by nearly a quarter of the population. Curiously significant is that in almost all of the long-running, angry protests to date, the youth lit the fires that raged into the conflagration of demonstrations by the greater society who saw the bigger picture of democracy and human rights being threatened by autocratic governance.

The protests by the youth are against autocracy. Thierry de Montbrial of the French Institute of International Relations says in The Guardian: “The traditional system of enforcing power from top to bottom is increasingly being challenged. There is a social revolution with a growing demand for participatory democracy.” Jacquelien van Stekelenburg, Social Change and Conflict professor at Vrije University in Amsterdam adds, “It is also easier, in a digital, globalized world, to know how the other half (or the 1%) live… There are not just new streams of information, but streams of people. Those youngsters in the Arab spring in all likelihood knew at least one person living overseas, and it creates a kind of relative deprivation — ‘I want to have that too’.”

Relative deprivation now demanding participatory democracy: that is the trigger for the youth-led surge in “inchoate displays of anger.” Still inchoate, the social analysts say, because these mass protests are worrisomely leaderless. “The leaderless nature of many of the protests makes them harder for authoritarian governments to quash, but it may also make the movements more difficult to sustain,” says Chakravorty in The Guardian. What will determine success and closure to an issue protested?

“(Yet) the data shows that the amount of protests is increasing and is as high as the roaring ’60s, and has been since about 2009,” says Stekelenburg. The Guardian says, “The protests raging today and in the past months on the streets of cities around the world have varying triggers. But the fuel is familiar: stagnating middle classes, stifled democracy and the bone-deep conviction that things can be different — even if the alternative is not always clear.”

Are we Filipinos even touched by the humongous effort and the conflagration of passion in the protests around the world, shrugging — what will become of these protests — when “the alternative is not even clear”? We Filipinos are pathetically “seguristas” — we want to be sure we will “win.”

And so shall we just take it, that the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos has been formally accused in our justice system and in other concerned jurisdictions around the world of human rights violations, killings, and plunder, but many of these high crimes have been cleared by our own Sandigan Bayan and Supreme Court, often for lack of evidence beyond reasonable doubt — down to the suspicious excuses of “missing documentary proof” or “lost” originals. The “taking it” crept into Filipino mores in the years after the big protest of the 1986 EDSA Revolution, when Marcos was finally ousted by the Filipino people who had been intimidated in the 14 years of martial law. Then we allowed another dictator to intimidate us — the chilling gigantism of “the numbers game” that has chopped to its suppliant knees, our system of checks and balance in ethical and moral governance.

The “numbers game” grew from the polarization of those who benefitted from the ouster of Marcos, and those whose collateral benefits from Marcos were lost or decimated. Perhaps in the fight for maintenance of status and influence, lines were crossed in politics, and in economic and social status, until a generally more pure “pro-democracy and rights faction” (not necessarily aligned to the EDSA/Aquino/yellow group) seems now to be barely surviving over the more numerous “non-aligned to the other group” (probably more self-centered, and attached to current powers-that-be). Then the groupings are canted more to the majority aligned with present influence and power by the forgetfulness of history and some active revisionism of historical facts by some with self-serving objectives.

In our pathetic ecosystem, there looms and lords the ubiquitous “numbers game” in the Judiciary, the Legislative, and, above all, in the Executive branches of government. That is what has manipulatively killed whatever noble incentives we Filipinos might have to protest, in our own fight for the “stifled democracy.”

Creeping autocracy is the same obstacle for those protesting peoples in the rest of our troubled world.

 

Amelia H. C. Ylagan is a Doctor of Business Administration from the University of the Philippines.

ahcylagan@yahoo.com

Democracy is on the march, not in retreat

By Pankaj Mishra

ACROSS THE WORLD, from Hong Kong to Ecuador, Sudan to Iraq, angry protesters are filling urban streets and squares, clashing with police, smashing shops and burning tires. They do not have a clear leadership. Yet, even in hopelessly sectarian Lebanon, demonstrators seem defiantly united against their rulers. And they have claimed three major scalps already: the leaders of Sudan, Algeria, and Lebanon.

Their immediate motivations differ. Public rage was stirred in Lebanon by a proposed tax on WhatsApp calls and, in Chile, by an increase in subway fares. More broadly, persistent inequality has grown more intolerable in all these countries, especially among the unemployed and underemployed young, against the backdrop of a global economic slowdown.

If it’s hard to pinpoint a unifying cause behind the simultaneous protests, it is possible to dispel one myth. The unrest hasn’t erupted, as the New York Times suggested last week, because “the expansion of democracy has stalled globally.”

Such assessments owe too much to a conservative notion of democracy. Upheld by Cold War institutions such as Freedom House, this idea confuses democracy with elections and other procedural matters. It fails to grasp that democracy is, above all, a social sentiment, a potentially revolutionary demand for equality and dignity — what by the 20th century in the West had ended millennia of rule by kings and the feudal landowning class.

Alexis de Tocqueville, the sharpest analyst of democracy, prophesied that it was the inescapable fate of all societies, no matter how deeply hierarchical. He was clear that having “destroyed monarchy and aristocracy,” democracy would not “stop short before the bourgeoisie and the rich.”

Indeed, the European bourgeoisie and the rich of the 19th century spent much energy trying to contain democracy, and to keep ordinary people, especially the industrial working classes and women, in their place. Walter Bagehot, celebrated editor of the Economist, wrote obsessively on “what securities against democracy we can create.” A broader suffrage beyond the propertied classes was mooted, and some social security offered to the struggling poor.

But one political shock after another revealed that, as Tocqueville wrote, people in the democratic age “have an ardent, insatiable, eternal, invincible passion” for equality, and that “they will tolerate poverty, enslavement, barbarism, but they will not tolerate aristocracy.” This intolerance is again evident in the furious anti-elite revolts in the West today.

It is even more strikingly manifest in the postcolonial world, which since the Arab Spring has hosted the world’s biggest mass upsurges.

Those above the age of 40 can recall a time in Asia and Africa when extreme deference, if not fear, marked the relationship between rulers and the ruled, rich and poor, and upper and lower classes and castes. Assured of immunity, the wealthy and powerful got away with murder — sometimes literally. A small, incestuous elite stole from the state’s coffers and splurged in London, New York, and Paris, boosting the profits of real estate agents, Harrods and Bloomingdale’s, not to mention party planners and glamorous escort services.

A reminder of those good times for the Suhartos, Bhuttos, and Mubaraks of the Third World is provided today by Lebanon’s recently departed Prime Minister Saad Hariri, who allegedly showered a $16-million gift on a bikini model he met at a luxury resort in the Seychelles.

Even in India, supposedly the world’s largest democracy, a single family dominated politics for decades, including a loyal few in its network of patronage but excluding countless others. Visitors marveled at the infinite forbearance of the degraded and suffering millions, wondering why they did not mutiny against their cruel masters.

Social hierarchies finally began to crack faster from the 1990s, with broader politicization and the growth of literacy, satellite television channels and digital media. Massive street protests against a corrupt ruling elite in India in 2011 were the first sign that Indian society and politics were about to be radically transformed.

Indeed, the protests set the stage for Narendra Modi, who rose to power denouncing venal and inept dynasts and claiming to represent their victims. Likewise, massive social unrest over bus fare hikes in Brazil paved the way for Jair Bolsonaro.

There is no guarantee that the current upsurge against ruling elites won’t empower demagogues. In late 19th century Europe, far-right and anti-Semitic movements also hijacked the demand for democracy, marginalizing left-leaning and liberal parties.

The practical challenge, now as much as then, is how to make mass democracy compatible with individual liberty — how to find political and economic institutions capable of deploying the tremendous energy of social mobilization for the larger good.

In the meantime, we should resist concluding that democracy is in decline. For, if democracy means rule of the people, and a demand for social equality, then we are witnessing its flowering in the most populous parts of the world.

 

BLOOMBERG OPINION

Taking a longer look back on rice imports, palay and rice prices

Most of the analysis done on the impact of the rice tariffication law make use of fairly recent data, as in what happened to rice imports, palay and rice prices in 2019. It may be useful to look slightly farther back, say in the last 10 to 15 years. Had the changes observed this year been unprecedented? If they had occurred before, the chances of our rice farmers, millers, and traders surviving what would seem now to be extremely adverse situation for the industry are high.

As of August 2019, about 2.4 million tons of rice had been imported. With still few more months to go, the expected import volume this year would break the 10-year record high of 2.439 million tons (see Table).

The National Food Authority (NFA) imported the country’s largest volume in 2008, when world rice prices were at their peak. Vietnam and India, two of the world’s top exporters, restricted their rice exports. Fearing then that it might not be able to buy rice abroad, the NFA accelerated its rice purchases in the first five months of the year, which only aggravated the increase of prices in the world market.

The influence of imports on the retail price depends upon the amount of rice injected into the market. Rice prices in 2008 went up instead, and that may be attributed to the NFA keeping instead of releasing the rice in its warehouses. It imported more in 2008 to build up its stocks in anticipation of much thinner world rice market.

The increase of rice prices in that year had nothing to do with high world prices or local rice scarcity. The NFA increased its buying prices of palay in order to attract farmers to sell rice to it. Farmgate prices of palay did go up from P11.21 a kilogram to about P14.13. With the increase, the NFA’s release price rice went up as well by factor of two. Retail prices then moved up from P24.72 pesos per kilo in 2007 to P32.71 pesos

In contrast, the average price of well-milled rice in the first nine months of the year declined by 4% from its level in 2018. The rate is lower than expected considering the volume of imported rice. Still, rice prices did go down unlike in 2008.

The comparison between 2019 and 2008 involves two different policy regimes. In 2008, the NFA was the only gate of rice imports into the country. Some rice imports came in undocumented, but still the bulk of foreign rice in the local market was controlled by the NFA.

In 2019, private sector traders, not the NFA, are the dominant players in the rice market. Rice prices go up or down with the decisions of the private sector in keeping or injecting rice into the market.

Why have traders not injected more to further lower rice prices? What may be keeping traders from releasing more is policy uncertainty. Through their lengthy discussions, policy advocates and makers hold the key to lower rice prices. There is uncertainty in the rice market spawned by widespread discussion on the appropriateness of the rice tariffication law, or on what the government can do to mitigate the adverse effect of it on rice farmers.

Some say that Congress should reverse the reform, or at least to temporarily halt or slow down rice imports, if the law cannot be undone for now. Advocates talk about invoking the ordinary safeguards measure, which if adopted would increase the import tariff to over 100% from 35% for at least 200 days. Others would vote for controlling the flow of imported rice with sanitary and photo-sanitary (SPS) permits, which would violate our treaty obligation under the Sanitary and Photo-Sanitary agreement.

Such talk is keeping rice prices up. Traders may be speculating even as I write, that if any of these proposals materialise, i.e. a reversal, safeguard, or some other measure that can effectively reduce imports, the value of the stocks in their warehouses can go up.

The uncertainty was lifted partially, with Congress settling, before they went to recess, for a joint resolution urging the government to enact effective measures to help rice farmers, instead of reversing the rice tariffication law. The short-term measures include increasing the procurement budget of the NFA to buy more rice from farmers, and accelerating the programs intended to increase rice yields, and/or providing cash assistance to rice farmers. Moreover, the Secretary of Agriculture decided it is not time and appropriate to invoke the ordinary safeguards.

These developments may be contributing partly to these latest results. Rice prices continue their slide down, says the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA). In yesterday’s issue of the Philippine Star (see Louise Maureen Simeon’s article in the business section), the PSA reported that the average wholesale price of well-milled rice was P37.85 per kilogram in the second week of October, or a year-on-year drop of 16%. Retail prices went down by 14.3% to P41.89 per kilogram.

The rice policy reform, so far as the rice market, is concerned seems to be working for rice consumers. But the observed decline may also reflect the seasonal fall of rice prices in the last four months of the year.

The PSA further reported that farmgate prices continued their decline. Year to year, farm prices went down by 26.9%, from P21.23 per kilogram to P15.33.

This is unprecedented! We still have two months to go before the end of the year so the worst for farmers may not be over yet. The second deepest dive of prices happened in 2015, at 14.6%. Since the 1970s, farmers saw their incomes fall year-on-year in only eight years. They had seen farm prices go up by nearly 48%, and that was in 1984. It is understandable that policy advocates and makers raise concern about the plight of rice farmers.

There are short term measures that the government has been urged to pursue such as:

• Targeted procurement of palay by the NFA to the major rice producing areas. The NFA has limited funds, although it has been rightly argued by many that for now it be given a bigger budget for procurement while private traders and millers are figuring how to adjust their business models in light of the new rules.

• Cash assistance to rice farmers.

If these measures help farmers through the main harvest, farmgate prices are expected to improve in the first two to three months of the following year. Hopefully by then, traders resume their purchases of local rice.

The more important measures for helping rice farmers are those which would make the rice reform of 2019 succeed for farmers. These are the programs that would deliver the result, which is that even a family with a one-hectare rice farm increases its income because of the reform. Ironic, considering the farmers are suffering now because of lower prices. But lower prices would mean something different to farmers with a higher rice yield.

The rice tariffication law generates money that the government can use to increase rice yields. But the government should deliver the assistance differently than what other administrations in the past had done, to raise rice farm productivity.

 

Ramon L. Clarete is a professor at the University of the Philippines School of Economics.

Grand slam for tax reforms

In baseball, a grand slam is a home run hit with all the bases loaded. That means that each base has a runner and that the single home run, the grand slam, scores four runs (points), in one fell swoop.

In tennis, basketball, football, and other sports, a grand slam means winning all the major competitions or tournaments in a season.

From here, we can expand the coverage of a grand slam, and it can be applied as well in legislation. Concretely, winning all the major tax reforms in succession and within one political administration, is a most difficult feat and hence should be treated as a grand slam.

At present, we are seeing a grand slam on tax reforms about to happen.

In the previous Congress or in the first half of the Rodrigo Duterte administration, the legislature passed the contentious first package of the Tax Reform for Acceleration and Inclusion (TRAIN). The package in itself is big and overwhelming. Among other reforms, the first package includes the reduction of the individual income tax; the increase in the excise tax on fuels, automobiles, coal, and mining; the introduction of a tax on sugar-sweetened beverages; and the reduction of items that are exempted from the value-added tax (VAT).

Another significant tax reform that happened in the first half of the administration is a series of legislation increasing tobacco excise taxes to finance the universal health care (UHC) law. The UHC is likewise a landmark piece of legislation.

Moreover, one can claim that the removal of the quantitative restrictions on rice imports and its replacement by a 35% tariff is a tax reform. A tariff, after all, is a tax on imports. This new law will result in lowering the price of rice, and rice being the main component of the inflation basket, will significantly lower over-all inflation. At the sane time, the shift from quantitative restrictions to tariffication will create the conditions for Filipino rice farmers to enhance efficiency and productivity,

Despite these pivotal solid gains, overhauling the tax system to achieve equity, simplicity, efficiency, and certainty of revenues is not over. Four crucial reforms remain: corporate tax and fiscal incentives reform; increase in the excise taxes of alcohol products, e-cigarettes, and heated tobacco products (collectively known as sin taxes); property valuation tax reform; and passive income tax reform.

Accomplishing the legislation of the remaining reforms is on track. The House of Representatives, with Congressman Joey Salceda leading the charge, passed the most difficult and most controversial of the remaining reforms — specifically, the rationalization of fiscal incentives and the increase in the sin taxes — in one month. Observers and career officers at the House of Representatives say that that the passage of the bills in quick succession in a span of one month is a record.

The Senate, too, has stepped up. The Senate Ways and Means Chair, Pia Cayetano, has completed the Committee Report on increasing the tax rates on alcohol, e-cigarettes, and heated tobacco products. The Report has been submitted for second reading.

She will be wrapping up the deliberations on the Corporate Income Tax and Incentive Rationalization Act (CITIRA), buoyed up by the strong support from the local business chambers and the acceptance after much opposition by the Philippine Economic Zone Authority of the bill, with some modifications to allow for a reasonable transition.

To return to the baseball metaphor, Senator Cayetano will be batting on the plate for the grand slam. (Credit must be given to Congressman Salceda for loading the bases.) She can do so.

The Senator graduated with degrees in economics and law, both with honors, at the University of the Philippines. She understands not only the economic principles and concepts behind tax policy, but also the pragmatic legal framework that underpin it.

Furthermore, in the conduct of the hearings on CITIRA and the sin taxes, Senator Cayetano has shown her preparedness and diligence. She, too, has been participatory, inviting all stakeholders to articulate their positions. At the sane time, she has shown political deftness and critical discernment in advancing the bills. At one point, she rebuked PEZA’s (Philippine Economic Zone Authority) Director General Charito Plaza, for being redundant, unreasonable, and even outrageous. Senator Cayetano asked Director General Plaza: “Are you resistant to all reforms? Because at least some reform is going to happen.”

We are now nearing the end game. With respect to CITIRA, the tide has turned in its favor. The major stakeholders — government, agencies, civil society, business, and academe — have all lent their support to the measure. Even PEZA, which was most resistant to it initially, is now more than open to finding common ground that will be consistent with the goals of the reform.

The business stakeholders have raised their biggest concern over the measure: uncertainty. Further delays in its passage would mean uncertainty over the rules of the game and the fiscal and macroeconomics prospects. It has been noted that foreign direct investments suffered a recent dip. The passage of the CITIRA will lead to a recovery of foreign direct investments as it modernizes the incentive structure and makes corporations more competitive with the gradual lowering of corporate income tax. The CITIRA will secure a favorable environment for foreign and domestic investment, employment, and ultimately economic growth. Hence, CITIRA must be passed soonest — in 2019.

Similarly, it is most crucial for the sin taxes to be passed within the year in order that additional revenues can be immediately generated for the underfunded UHC.

The role of the Executive at this juncture is to nudge Congress, particularly the Senate, to pass CITIRA and the sin taxes. Concretely, the Executive must issue a certification of urgency for the two bills.

With the momentum that has been gained, we can expect the rest of the reforms to advance upon the passage of CITIRA and the sin taxes.

To Senator Pia Cayetano, Congressman Joey Salceda, the Department of Finance, and the other reform advocates; Go for the grand slam!

 

AJ Montesa and Filomeno S. Sta. Ana III are part of the tax reform team of the Action for Economic Reforms (www.aer.ph).

What is really being said

By Tony Samson

COMMUNICATION CAN be indirect. Words uttered especially by leaders need not be taken literally. They may be coded with body language emphasizing (pounding on the table) or contradicting (wink of an eye) what is being ordered with a loud voice for eavesdroppers to hear.

“Signaling” is a management watchword. It means consistency with a brand image or a value system by being ever mindful of unintended messages. A quickly deleted tweet over a small island can torpedo the marketing efforts (and revenues) of a professional sports league in another country.

Leaders can signal preferred directions, even by expressing contrary declarations of policy. The gift for “reading between the lines” is prized in a subordinate. The public pronouncements of transparency and integrity need to be outwardly practiced. And yet, certain decisions need to be made which require some bending of the rules. A leader would rather delegate this downwards, but not too explicitly.

Is a job offer to head a major initiative against drug abuse to be taken seriously?

Reading between the lines and deciphering the meaning of blank spaces separating words require a subtle reading of signals. The trick of seeming to contradict the boss in an independent move but furthering his hidden agenda is a delicate balancing act.

When a CEO receives an unsolicited service contract involving a known acquaintance of his in a transaction, he will publicly instruct the subordinate in charge of the bid process to avoid the accusation of nepotism and independently decide on the strict merits of the case. This overly emphasized policy pronouncement provides a clue for the faithful vassal to connect the dots. The decision is packaged as an independent judgment against the boss’s explicit (but disregarded) orders not to favor a relative. (She is not really related by blood, but merely a town mate.) And although she does not offer the lowest cost, she dresses well, and is very persuasive.

Isn’t a subordinate who truly understands what the boss wants someone to be prized?

CEOs who loudly they profess welcoming criticism, independent thinking, and vigorous dissent in meetings, can make known to a close circle of intimates (including the one serving coffee) that the personality fitting this description really pisses him off. (I get a headache when he opens his mouth.)

Such a signal reaches the corporate hit man who takes his cue and proceeds to implement the un-ordered but devoutly wished outcome. Soon, the fall of the loudmouth is greeted a little sadly by the boss — it’s too bad that we are now deprived of such an independent point of view. But it’s surely a lot quieter in the office — can you turn down the volume of my playlist?

Still, history records the possibility of mixed signals. The 12th Century tale of Thomas Beckett and his king, Henry II is the classic case of vassals trying too hard to please their master. Henry publicly despaired of the independence of his friend and appointee. Offhandedly, he declared, “Will no one rid me of this troublesome priest?” Seeming to have been given the signal, certain nobles conspired to kill Beckett in his own cathedral. Henry was remorseful at this turn of events which he seemed to precipitate, and made a pilgrimage to Rome for the Pope’s forgiveness.

It is the fate of overeager subordinates who on their own implement an unexpressed order (maybe even a contrary one) to deal with the consequences. In case their action turns sour, the chief washes his hands of the responsibility. And the subordinates take the fall.

What refuge is there for the underling who seems to go against the publicly expressed wishes of his boss? The defense that one has unfortunately misread the signals is the fate of a bumbler who must justify actions that seem to have been independently taken on behalf of the boss.

Getting the message across should be straightforward. Shouldn’t a man be taken at his word? Sadly, what public figures say in speeches and interviews are not always what they mean. But telling the difference between pronouncements and real wishes can be a hazardous undertaking for those currying favor with the boss.

Maybe, it’s better to just take the chief at his word and reconfirm what he meant… or if he meant it. Denials can come later.

 

Tony Samson is Chairman and CEO, TOUCH xda.

ar.samson@yahoo.com

BSP: Oct. inflation could still be below 1%

OCTOBER could have seen the second straight month of below-one percent inflation, the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) said on Thursday, citing lower fuel and rice prices that could have offset increases in electricity and water rates as well as prices of select food.

“The BSP Department of Economic Research (DER) projects October 2019 inflation to settle within the 0.5-1.3% range,” the monetary authority said in an e-mail to reporters.

The Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA) is scheduled to report October inflation data on Nov. 5.

The BSP-DER estimate range compares to September’s 0.9% which was the slowest in nearly three-and-a-half years, as well as the nine-year-high 6.7% of October 2018 that was sustained from September.

The lower end of the BSP estimate matches the pace clocked in February 2016 and would be the slowest clip in nearly four years, or since November 2015’s 0.3%.

With actual headline inflation clocking in at 2.8% in the nine months to September, against the central bank’s downward-adjusted 2.5% full-year 2019 forecast, the BSP-DER October estimate would yield a 2.6-2.7% year-to-date average range.

“Increases in electricity and water rates as well as higher prices of LPG and selected food items are seen as the primary sources of upward price pressures for the month,” the BSP-DER explained in its e-mail. “Meanwhile, inflation could be tempered by lower domestic oil and rice prices.”

Customers of Metro Manila’s water concessionaires saw their basic tariffs rise by P0.02 per cubic meter for Maynilad Water Services, Inc. and by P0.17/cu.m. for Manila Water Company, Inc. starting October.

October also saw the basic rate of Manila Electric Co. — the country’s biggest electricity distributor — rise by P0.0448 per kilowatt-hour after five straight months of reduction.

At the same time, latest available PSA data show retail price of regular-milled rice falling by 18.25% to P37.53 per kilogram in the first week of October from a year ago, while that of well-milled rice similarly eased by 14.48% to P41.94/kg.

Most fuel pump prices also dropped for much of October, going down P0.25-P0.40/liter for gasoline, P0.10-P0.15/liter for diesel and P0.25/liter for kerosene effective Oct. 20-22.

Rice accounts for 9.59% of the theoretical basket of goods used by a typical household that is the basis for computing year-on-year overall price changes, while liquid fuel, solid fuel, gasoline and electricity contribute 0.13%, 1.22%, 1.28% and 4.8%, respectively.

Receding inflation since last year’s multi-year peaks has enabled the central bank to partially dial back 2018’s 175 cumulative basis point increase in benchmark interest rates by a total of 75 bps in three moves to 3.5% for overnight deposit, four percent for the reverse repurchase facility and 4.5% for overnight lending. BSP Governor Benjamin E. Diokno has said that the central bank was comfortable with that pace of easing for now.

The BSP has also cut banks reserve requirement ratio four times this year by a total of 400 basis points (bps) to 14% for universal and commercial lenders and four percent for thrift banks starting December. In the latest RRR easing last month, the reserve ratio of rural banks that will go down to three percent in November was left untouched.

“Looking ahead, the BSP will remain watchful of evolving inflationary conditions to ensure that the monetary policy stance remains consistent with the BSP’s price stability mandate,” the monetary authority said on Thursday. — with LWTN

Fed leaves door half-shut for Asia’s central banks

HONG KONG — Jerome Powell has just complicated the outlook for Asia’s central banks.

By signaling that the US easing cycle is on pause, the Federal Reserve chairman has narrowed the options for emerging economy central banks to ease too.

Monetary authorities across Asia have followed the Fed’s dovish tilt this year in aggressively lowering borrowing costs as growth slows.

India, Indonesia, Philippines, Malaysia, South Korea and Thailand are among those that have cut benchmark rates.

Those cuts have helped support demand in what remains the world’s fastest-growing region.

A Fed easing cycle typically creates room for emerging economy central banks to cut rates, without triggering a run on their currencies or capital markets.

While Asian central banks still could ease, their room for maneuver will depend on how markets play out and how long the Fed stays on hold.

“A Fed pause will not completely close the door on Asia rate cuts, which will more likely be driven by individual country conditions,” said Chua Hak Bin, an economist at Maybank Kim Eng Research Pte Ltd. in Singapore.

At the same time, the Fed’s hawkish cut signals confidence that the world’s biggest economy is headed for a smooth landing.

That will buoy sentiment for emerging economies and lessen the need for policy support.

“This positive mood should support risk assets as we approach the end of 2019, including Asian equities with high export exposure,” according to Tai Hui, Asia chief market strategist at JP Morgan Asset Management Inc. — Bloomberg

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT