THE Philippine Chamber of Commerce and Industry (PCCI) wants a more liberal regime for importing sugar modeled on the rice tariffication bill, with tariffs to benefit domestic sugarcane farmers.
“When it comes to sugar, I don’t think we are being competitive. This will be similar to the rice tariffication. Currently, it is being proposed… There will be a tax but the quantity is more liberal,” PCCI chairman George T. Barcelon told BusinessWorld in an interview on Dec. 27, adding that the chamber expects the proposal to become law this year.
“More drinks that contain sugar are being imported to the detriment of our producers,” Mr. Barcelon said, adding that “for the industry to grow, the limit (on imports) should be removed.”
Mr. Barcelon said that the liberalization of the sugar industry may include the modification of the authority of the Sugar Regulatory Administration (SRA), or even abolish the agency.
The rice tariffication reforms removed the National Food Authority’s (NFA) role in importing rice, leaving it to focus on maintaining a buffer stock with rice procured from domestic farmers.
“Toward the latter part (of the reform) is the abolition of the SRA. It may not exactly be abolished but its role will be clarified. The SRA is not helping the sugar industry. Our sugar is expensive, and the high cost is being passed on to consumers),” Mr. Barcelon said.
The proposal is not yet available to legislators, but Mr. Barcelon said that this has been proposed to the SRA itself. He added that he is hoping President Rodrigo R. Duterte can direct lawmakers to pass such a law, which benefits consumers.
“I’m just reading it from the point of view of the President, not from the Congress. The House has indicated that it will follow what the President wants,” Mr. Barcelon said.
“The move to rice tariffication started with consumer complaints about high rice prices,” Mr. Barcelon added.
The SRA, meanwhile, said that abolishing the SRA will be detrimental to sugarcane farmers.
“There is substantial difference between the sugar industry and the rice industry. The reason given to justify the rice tariffication finds no application to the sugar industry and to do otherwise will only bring intolerable injustice to the small sugarcane farmers in particular and the sugar industry in general,” Roland B. Beltran, SRA Board Member, responded in a text message when asked for comment.
Asked if the SRA rejects the proposal, he said, “SRA and the sugar industry stakeholders view it with disfavor.”
University of Asia and the Pacific (UA&P) Center for Food and Agribusiness executive director and professor Rolando T. Dy noted that the ASEAN tariff for rice is 35% while that for sugar is 5%, and high tariffs can only be imposed to protect domestic agriculture and industry.
“With rare exceptions, high tariffs and non-tariff barriers protect local agriculture and industrial producers be it rice, corn, sugar, meat, etc. Sugar from ASEAN has 5% tariffs but imports need okay from SRA. Only coconut producers have low or no tariffs among the major crops,” Mr. Dy said in a mobile message.
“The question is how long will high tariffs transit into low level of 10% or less. The policy is balancing producer and consumer welfare,” Mr. Dy added. — Reicelene Joy N. Ignacio
