By Kenneth Christiane L. Basilio, Reporter

THE measure granting President Ferdinand R. Marcos, Jr. the authority to suspend the excise tax on fuel is headed to the Palace, after the House of Representatives on Wednesday adopted the Senate’s version as lawmakers race to give him powers to ease surging oil prices linked to the Iran war.

Lawmakers adopted Senate Bill (SB) No. 1982 via voice vote, fast-tracking its enactment into law by bypassing a joint congressional committee tasked with reconciling differences between the Senate and the House versions.

“It’s practically an exact copy of our bill,” Marikina Rep. Romero “Miro” S. Quimbo, who heads the House Ways and Means Committee, told BusinessWorld in a phone call. “We’re absolutely pressed for time, and going through a bicameral conference committee might unduly delay it.”

Senate President Vicente C. Sotto III told the Senate floor the proposal will be sent to Mr. Marcos for his signature.

Moves to ease duties on petroleum products come as lawmakers scramble to authorize the chief executive with powers to cut rising fuel costs, which risks fanning inflation and weighing on economic growth, as global crude prices remain elevated due to the US-Israel war on Iran.

The bill’s approval comes as the conflict stretches into its third week with no end in sight as the US and Iran show no desire to strike a deal, and as Tehran continues to retaliate with missiles and drone strikes following unprovoked US and Israeli air attacks on Feb. 28.

The war has raised global concerns that it could fuel inflation as vital oil and gas shipments from the energy‑rich region remain blocked at the Strait of Hormuz, a key waterway where a fifth of global supplies pass.

Under SB No. 1982, the President, at the recommendation of an inter-agency budget committee, may suspend or cut the collection of excise taxes on fuel if the average Dubai crude oil based on Mean of Platts Singapore benchmark reaches or exceeds $80 per barrel for a month.

The bill also requires the President to submit to Congress within 15 days of issuing such an order a “factual basis” for halting or cutting the excise tax of petrol, including estimates of foregone revenue and the impact on inflation, fuel prices and economic activity, with monthly reports to follow.

Oil companies will also submit monthly information on its cost components for the price of petroleum products to the Energy department.

The Senate and House proposals differ mainly in duration and automatic triggers. The Senate bill limits the President’s power to three months, while House Bill No. 8418 allows a six-month suspension. Extensions cannot last for more than a year.

“It’s the same thing,” Mr. Quimbo said. “It doesn’t really matter because in three months, it’s again extendable for another period.”

The Senate measure also includes a safeguard that automatically restores the excise tax reductions once the average Dubai crude price falls below $80 per barrel, a condition absent from the House version.

“The suspension of the excise tax on fuel will not stabilize oil prices, which are volatile due to the Middle East war, but will only partially alleviate the pain caused by escalating oil prices,” Foundation for Economic Freedom President Calixto V. Chikiamco said in a Viber message.

He added that the potential effects of any cuts or suspension in fuel excise tax may only range from P10 for gasoline and P6 for diesel.

“It would also reduce much needed government revenue, which could have funded additional schools or infrastructure,” Mr. Chikiamco said.

Finance department estimates showed suspending excise tax collections could result in P136 billion in foregone revenue, which may further widen the government’s budget deficit and raise the country’s debt.

Suspending the fuel excise tax could slightly temper pump prices, Philippine Chamber of Commerce and Industry Chairman Emeritus George T. Barcelon said.

“I think it will slightly mitigate the price of oil for consumers,” he said in a phone call, noting that oil prices dictate market costs across products.

He said the government should consider reallocating funds from “non‑priority” state programs in the 2026 budget.

“Maybe they can repurpose some of this to help people meet their needs amid the crisis,” said Mr. Barcelon. “But all of this assistance extended must be on conditionality of the situation.”

“It would be better if this was implemented early, if the President was given emergency power earlier,” Mario “Mar” S. Valbuena, chairman of transport group Manibela, said in a phone call in Filipino. “The war has been going on for three weeks.”

He said lawmakers should consider reviewing a 28-year-old law that liberalized the downstream oil industry, while also scrapping the value-added tax on fuel. “That would be a big help,” he said in Filipino.

The Philippines imposes an excise tax of P10 per liter on gasoline, P6 per liter on diesel and P5 per liter on kerosene under the 2017 Tax Reform for Acceleration and Inclusion law. It previously allowed the government to suspend the collection of excise tax on fuel when world oil prices reach $80 per barrel for three straight months, but that provision lapsed six years ago.

A HOUSE of Representatives committee on Wednesday found the impeachment complaints against Vice-President (VP) Sara Duterte-Carpio sufficient in “grounds,” setting the stage for hearings into the accusations that have politically weighed on her.

The House Justice Committee ruled the two complaints seeking Ms. Duterte’s removal from office were sufficiently grounded under impeachable offenses in the 1987 Constitution and should proceed to hearings to determine whether there is enough proof to support the charges, Batangas Rep. Gerville R. Luistro, who heads the congressional panel, said.

“This will be a ‘mini-trial,’” she told a media briefing, adding that both the impeachment complainants and Ms. Duterte will be given “ample opportunity” to present witnesses and evidence during the hearings.

Michael T. Poa, spokesman for Ms. Duterte’s legal team, maintained that “the complaints suffer from a fundamental defect.”   

“They are built on conclusions, speculation, and narratives that are not anchored on the ultimate facts required under the Constitution and the Rules,” he said in a Viber message to reporters.

Mr. Poa said there have been no talks yet regarding Ms. Duterte’s attendance to the hearings, but noted her appearance is not required.

“There is no requirement under the applicable rules for her personal attendance. Any decision in that regard will be made in accordance with her rights and upon the advice of counsel.”

The 39-member congressional panel’s ruling will advance the complaints to an inquiry that will determine their merits and whether they should be endorsed for a vote on the House floor. At least 106 lawmakers must support the charges for them to be sent to the Senate, which would act as an impeachment court.

Ms. Duterte faces a range of accusations, including claims she misused hundreds of millions of pesos in secret funds under the Office of the Vice-President and the Education department during her tenure as its secretary.

The complaints also alleged she amassed wealth greater than her income, moved to destabilize the government and plotted to assassinate President Ferdinand R. Marcos, Jr., his wife and former Speaker Ferdinand Martin G. Romualdez, charges which she has denied.

Together, the ouster bids accused Ms. Duterte of graft, bribery, constitutional violations, betraying the public’s trust and other high crimes — all grounds for impeachment under the Constitution.

Ms. Luistro said the Justice committee will hold hearings even while Congress is on a six-week break, with proceedings beginning on March 25 and continuing on April 14, 22 and 29.

She said the Vice-President will be given the opportunity to refute the charges and present her case, even as her initial reply to the impeachment complaints did not directly address the accusations.

“The accusations are not trivial. They are serious, and they are weighty,” Ms. Luistro told the Justice committee.

Only the complainants and Ms. Duterte will be allowed to speak directly at the congressional hearings, she added.

“It is incumbent upon the respondent to present her evidence,” said Ms. Luistro, referring to the Vice-President. “If the respondent is not interested to present her evidence… there will be a proper party to do that presentation.”

Party-list Rep. Terry L. Ridon, a member of the Justice committee, said lawmakers will continue with assessing the impeachment cases even if Ms. Duterte does not appear before the congressional panel.

“The proceedings will still continue on a ground-by-ground basis,” he told the same media briefing.

Mr. Ridon added that lawmakers are expected to take up several motions related to the charges on March 25, including moves to subpoena Ms. Duterte’s statements of assets, liabilities and net worth, as well as her bank, tax and corporate records.

Ederson DT. Tapia, a political science professor at the University of Makati, said the impeachment hearings are likely to be heated and politically charged, taking note of how Ms. Duterte initially replied to the charges.

“Given her combative stance, the hearings are likely to be highly politicized, adversarial and protracted,” he said in a Facebook Messenger chat.

On Monday, Ms. Duterte asked the Justice committee to dismiss the cases against her, saying the allegations lacked evidence and were based on speculation. The charges, she said, lacked statements of “ultimate facts” and “recycle the same accusations” thrown against her in last year’s impeachment push

“Her camp will likely question jurisdiction, evidence and process at every stage, which could slow proceedings,” Mr. Tapia said. “Expect more strategic maneuvering than a swift resolution.”

The renewed impeachment effort against Ms. Duterte comes as she declared her intention to run for President in 2028, a move that could put her political standing to the test. She is the daughter of former President Rodrigo R. Duterte, who retains a strong grassroot support amid a rift with the Marcoses.

Impeachment proceedings against the Vice-President were revived after the Supreme Court blocked attempts in 2025 for violating procedural rules. — Kenneth Christiane L. Basilio