Guide to BIR’s New Invoicing Requirements effective June 30, 2013

All business establishments should be aware on the new regulations on commercial invoices, official receipts, and other business documents being set by the tax authorities in the Philippines.

ATP

The BIR, in Revenue Regulations No. 18-2012, is requiring taxpayers to secure new ATP  and print new invoice/receipt and all commercial documents being issued to customers as the existing documents are valid only up to June 30, 2013.

Relative to said regulations prescribing the new rules in processing of Authority to Print (ATP) of Official Receipts, Sales Invoices and Other Commercial Invoices, the following must be noted:

  1. All applications must be done through on-line ATP systems.
  2. Not just principal receipts/invoices such as VAT SI/VAT OR/Non-VAT SI/Non-VAT OR are required to be registered before printing but also supplementary receipts/invoices such as delivery receipt, order slip, debit/credit memo, purchase order, provisional/temporary receipt, acknowledgement receipt, collection receipt, cash receipt, bill of lading, billing statement, statement of account, any other documents being used in the business and issued to customer.
  3. Approved ATP is valid upon full usage of the serial numbers or five (5) years from issuance, whichever comes first.
  4. All existing unused/unissued receipts/invoices shall be valid until June 30, 2013. The unused receipts/invoices shall be surrendered to BIR for destruction.
  5. Application for new ATP shall be 60 days prior to actual expiry.

The BIR, in issuing the above new regulations, aims to regulate further the printing of all invoices, set validity period, and generate reports relative to the ATP.

To give you a more detailed information, the following issuances of BIR regulations and memorandums has been provided for your references.

Issuance

Description

Date of Issue

Parties of interest

BIR RR 18-2012

Prescribes the policies and guidelines in the processing of Authority to Print (ATP) Official Receipts, Sales Invoices and other Commercial Invoices using the online ATP System and provides for the additional requirements in the printing thereof.
(Published in Manila Bulletin on January 3, 2013)

| Digest | Full Text

December 28, 2012

All business establishments, taxpayers, government, practitioners, printers, etc.

BIR OPM No.: 13-02-005

Prescribes the validity period of Receipts/Invoices to be printed by deemed accredited printers prior to the approval of the Revenue Memorandum Order on the Work-around Procedures on the processing of the Authority to Print Receipts/Invoices.

February 18, 2013

All business establishments, taxpayers, government, practitioners, printers, etc.

BIR RMO No. 12-2013

Prescribes the work-around guidelines and procedures in the processing of Authority to Print (ATP) Official Receipts, Sales Invoices and other Commercial Invoices in the interim period until the online ATP System is fully developed

| Full Text – Click to download the RMO 12-2013

| Annex A – Click to download the BIR form 1906 otherwise known as the Application for

| Annex B – Click to download the BIR Form 1921 otherwise known as the Authority to Print Receipts and Invoices

| Annex C – Click to download the sample invoices, official receipts, and other supplementary documents as prescribed by the Bureau.

| Annex D – Click to download the format of the list of unused/expired invoices or official receipts

|Annex E – Click to download the format of the Printers’ Quarterly Report

May 3, 2013

All business establishments, taxpayers, government, practitioners, printers, etc.

BIR RMO No. 13-2013

Prescribes the work-around procedures in the accreditation of printers as a prerequisite to the printing of Official Receipts, Sales Invoices and other Commercial Receipts and/or invoices

| Full Text | Annex A | Annex B, D, E, F, J | Annex C |Annex G | Annex H | Annex I

May 3, 2013

Printers

SAMPLE VAT/ NONVAT OFFICIAL RECEIPTS

VAT Official ReceiptVAT OR 2NONVAT OR

SAMPLE VAT/NONVAT INVOICES

VAT InvoiceNONVAT InvoiceNONVAT INVOICE Exempt

SAMPLE SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENTS

Collection ReceiptDelivery ReceiptNONVAT OR2

To download all sample invoices and official receipts as prescribed by BIR, please refer to the Annex C of RMO 12-2013.

Most taxpayers and practitioners are confused with the new ruling of the BIR regarding the invoices. Others are still unaware of the ruling and current developments of such imposition. This blog post was created to disseminate information to the public and to facilitate researches regarding this topic. Hoping that in this simple information, you will be able to comply with the new rulings of invoices and official receipts and avoid penalties in the future.

P.S.: Don’t get SICK! “Surcharges, Interests, Compromises, KICKBACK” Smile Please hit like and share. Thank you.

About these ads

326 thoughts on “Guide to BIR’s New Invoicing Requirements effective June 30, 2013”

  1. Can we, the cooperatives, consume first all existing Official Receipts before using the newly prescribed format, since most of the cooperatives had just printed their receipts in bulk, and it cost them big amount.

    We will definitely follow with the new regulation, we are just asking for consideration because of the above-mentioned reason.

    In behalf of my member-coops, and other coops as well, we are hoping for your kind consideration.

    Thank you.

    1. very well said ms tarroza. we share same sentiments. I have less than 2,000 booklets which were printed December 2012. if there is a pending regulation which took effect jan 2013, they should have informed us. this will be a big lost in us. be strict to those who doesn’t follow.

  2. So far, there are no provisions or regulations issued by BIR to reconsider the continuous used of the ORs or invoices. Status quo remains. The rulings shall prevail.

    1. please give due consideration. why did the RDO approved our request to print ORs when there are issued guidelines. this is a BIG LOST to us cooperatives. we always print ORS during months of December or peak seasons and we have stocks that will be affected by the ruling.

      1. agree with you, LEAHSAKDALngganda. Its really a big lost… problem is BIR doesnt care whatever damage it will cause us. They just want us to feel that they are the law and we should abide by their rule. There is not even a public consultancy done neither through our congress which is our representative, prior to implementing their rule or that single piece paper containing their own agenda via inter-office memo.

  3. Hello, I was just wondering if the Official Receipts needs the phrase “This Official Receipt is not a valid source of input tax” if we issue Sales Invoice already and the Official Receipts is only used for collection purposes? I see in the sample in Annex C, none of those Official Receipts have that phrase but I see that phrase being used often in Official Receipts. Thanks.

    1. Hi Jasom, according to the interpretation of BIR and the seminar we attended, there is a need to state the phrase ” This Official Receipt is not a valid source of input vat” if the OR is to be used as an evidence for subsequent collections. I do not know if such ruling is absolute. In my opinion, BIR should study every industry and issue a recommended format for each industry, such as those who are in the manufacturing, distributions, and services. BIR should be aware of the business practices where multiple copies of the invoices are used.

      There is also a supplementary document called “collection receipt” which I believe is redundant to the OR that is not valid for input vat claims. Please consult your nearest home RDO for a more reliable recommendation.

      1. Hello Jasom, The BIR segregates the Definition of OR and Invoice. OR’s or Official receipts shall only be used in service rendered industry while Invoices will be used for selling of goods and properties. All taxpayer must know about this cause we have a rule that issuing a wrong invoice/invoice shall rendered the transaction invalid. If ever you issue a Charge Invoice, a follow up transaction of collection that is the time you issue Collection Receipts. CR’s or Supplementary receipts/invoices does not have any tax implications which means only those primary receipts shall have those tax implications and that is Official Receipts and Invoices.

  4. When shall we use Official receipt rather than Sales INvoice for sale of a VAT Registered establishment? In the first samples fr OR and SI , both official receipt and sales invoice contains columns for Qty, unit, articles, unit price and amount.

    1. The samples indicated herewith was generated from BIR RMO 12-2013 Annex C. The official receipt that contains columns of qty and amount is an OR that is not valid for claim of input vat.

      Generally, Official Receipts should be used for a service business while an invoice should be used for distribution of goods.

  5. why is the computation of the total amount due in the vat official receipt that way?
    total sales (vat inclusive) less vat = amount net of vat less SC = TOTAL AMOUNT DUE.

    shouldn’t you add back the vat to arrive at the correct amount due (payable by the customer)?

    1. BIR designed it that way and perhaps also subject to human error. Anyway they are just samples prescribed by the Bureau. If our logic is more reliable, lets just make the necessary corrections before you have your receipts printed in volume. :)

      1. thanks for replying. when i pointed this out to the printer, the printer said that this is the format given by bir and if we change the formula, it will be subject to bir’s approval. meaning there is a possibility that bir will not approve of it.

  6. Ask ko lang.we have branches at vismin and yung pagpapagawa kasi nung invoices nila is dito pa samin sa manila,for the new ruling kailangan po bah dun na sila magpagawa sa vismin where their offices are located?

    1. Hi Mae, the new ruling states that all ATP should be processed at the Home RDO of the head office.

      RR 18-2012 SEC 3.4 states the following:

      “As a general rule, all applications for ATP of the Head Office (HO) and all its branches shall be done on-line. In case of systems downtime as officially posted in the BIR website, all applications for ATP shall be manually filed and the corresponding ATP shall be manually issued through an alternative off-line ATP system, by the RDO or concerned LT Office having jurisdiction over the taxpayer’s Head Office. All applications for ATP processed during systems downtime shall be immediately uploaded by the concerned RDO or LT Office, upon availability of the on-line ATP system.”

  7. so its mean that the head office should still processed the printing of the invoices for their branches,kasi we have invoices that are addressed at the vismin.

    1. I believe that BIR’s requirement is just to process the ATP at the Head Office, but the printing may not necessarily require a printer near the HO. A printer may be located at Vismin while the ATP was processed at the HO. :)

    2. Also, I guess that your concern could be the effect of the absence of the so called ONLINE ATP SYSTEM that BIR is bragging about. Until now, the ONLINE ATP SYSTEM is still down. BIR should have assured us that the ATP system is already working before they issued the rulings.

  8. April 11, 2013: We inquired how to have the ORs replaced because we heard in TB PATROL and AM Radio that BIR receipts must be replaced before June 30, 2013

    BIR OIC:” We have not gotten any info regarding it even the online website thing is not yet done, just come back”

    APril 26, 2013: We came back and asked the same question, and got the same no answer.

    May 20, 2013: We went to BIR to help us process 10 booklets of ORs. We got endorsed to a BIR personnel to help us process. THe BIR personnel assessed Php800 for 10SI booklets + Php800 for 10OR booklets + 200 pesos for the logo. TOtal 2k – 1k downpayment we made. OR given to us was an invalid OR but anyhow, you know how it works, its under the table so whatever for as long as the receipts gets processed ASAP

    May 21,2013: BIR personnel texted there is a 1k penalty because they receive a memo May 20 saying that they will start getting penalties May 21st for those who dont have ATPs May 21st

    So I we were like, ” what in the world????”
    1st argument: Where is the public notification that deadline is not June 30 and was moved to May 22nd
    2nd argument: We went to OIC last April and didn’t get any answer.
    3rd argument: We made downpayment May 20 so what’s the penalty for?
    4th argument: We are not the ones who process that ATP so its not our fault for not yet having the ATP.

    Summary: What the F**** is happening with this country!

    1. What’s new with the BIR unscrupulous employees? As much as possible, when it comes to fines and penalties, we should know the rules. Everything is in google. Or better yet, get a tax consultant, not a fixer. :)

    2. Gilian your not alone with that situaton. As we are informed of the new format. We contact our printing press immediately for this. Just this morning we have told that we have to pay 1K for penalty because we dont have ATP yet as of today. Hindi lng din kmi pti raw un na-process na pro hnd pa nrelease un ATP will also have penalty.. Grabe

      1. Better yet ask them for ruling that you really need to pay 1K. With regards to your concerns, we will try to verify if BIR is really charging the taxpayers for not having an ATP. As far as the latest update, there is no such ruling that a taxpayer needs to pay 1K. Unless you paid the 1K under BIR form 0605, I would say that that is a legitimate penalty. But if you just hand it over to the personnel without even getting an official receipt, then that is not a valid rule.

      2. Grabe talaga. I’ve submitted ATP last Feb of 2013 and di pa din ako lusot. My ORs and SIs were stamped last Feb and tumagal sa kanila for several revisions. Then I found out just this afternoon na I have to reprint ORs and SIs kasi, yung backing ng every booklet should have prints also of the ATP #s etc….very inconsiderate =(

  9. jtl

    People working at foreign embassies were informed that they are Tax-exempt in the past.

    Is it true that the new BIR ruling requires local employees of foreign embassies to pay income tax?

    If one who has been working at a foreign embassy for the past 10 years and wants to abide by the new rule, how can he possibly do so, considering the drastic financial burden he has to bear?

    Does the BIR give any special consideration to these “honest-to-goodness tax payers” who are in a dilemma due to the sudden change of rule? Are the embassies required to do their part alleviate the situation of their employees? If there is, kindly elaborate.

    1. Hi Joey, we will get back to you once we made our research regarding your concerns.

      However, I would like to give you an unsolicited opinion regarding your query. :)

      The rule to tax of the Philippine government is a borne power of the government. For a resident citizen, the rule is to tax the individual on ALL income derived from ALL sources within and outside the country. That is the basis of taxation in principles. So, whether or not your employer is a foreign government, as long as you are a resident citizen, the income you derived from employment of a foreign extension office is still taxable.

      There was a new issued ruling, RR 7-2013, regarding your concern. Please download it at ftp://ftp.bir.gov.ph/webadmin1/pdf/rr_7_2013.pdf for more details. :)

  10. May 23, 2013

    Kim Henares
    Commisioner
    Bureau of Internal Revenue
    Cc: RDO 18 – Olongapo

    Dear Ma’am/Sir:

    Good day!

    We would like to complain regarding the imposition of penalty for filing our Authority to Print. The RDO of Olongapo (RDO 18) required us to pay the penalty of P1,000 first before accepting our application for ATP.

    What we have been aware is that all unused receipts/invoices are still valid until June 30, 2013. That is why we are now applying for the new sets of Official Receipts and Invoices.

    But now to our surprise, we have been penalized with P1,000.00. The BIR employee indicates that the RR18-2012 states that we should apply 60 days before the expiry date of the invoices, which was last April 30.

    Indicated on Section 5 of RR18-2012: TRANSITORY PROVISION:

    “All unused/unissued principal and supplementary receipts/invoices printed prior to the effectivity of these Regulations, shall be valid until June 30, 2013.

    A taxpayer with expiring ATP for its invoices/receipts (principal and supplementary) shall apply for a new ATP not later than Sixty (60) days prior to actual expiry date. All unused/unissued principal/supplementary receipts/invoices shall be surrendered to the RDO…”

    As we understand, that said provision of “expiration/5-year validity” applies only to the NEW SET of invoices/receipts.

    There is in NO WAY indicated in there that securing of ATP for the new set on invoices/receipts should be on or before April 30, 2013.

    And to note, BIR Released another Revenue Memorandum Order No. 12-2013 only on May 3, 2013. “Prescribing Work Around Guidelines in the Processing of ATP in the Interim Period until online ATP System is Fully Developed”. Due to this, ATP applications submitted by Taxpayers/Printers were put on hold due to Revisions on lay-out of ORs, SIs, etc. This means that BIR is still in the work-in progress on implementing your rules.

    Please give due consideration to us TAXPAYERS, especially the majority of us who are small businesses/entrepreneurs. That amount of penalty is substantial to us, and can be used in the expenditures of printing the required new receipts/invoices.

    THIS RULE is still in its TRANSITORY PERIOD and the BIR should give us ample time. You may penalize us after JUNE 30, 2013. But not as early as APRIL 30, 2013. Because it WAS NEVER INDICATED on any of your RMO and RRs.

    Concerned Taxpayer,

    APRIL T. ARAGOZA
    TIN: 910-624-317-000

    1. Kudos to you April for submitting a petition letter to BIR. :)

      Yesterday, May 22, 2013, I have called over the phone one BIR personnel who is in-charged to the application of the manual ATP and I was asking if there is a ruling that was recently passed by BIR that requires the taxpayers to pay a penalty amounting to P1,000.00. Accordingly, there was an “interoffice memo” that was approved circulated among the district offices to charged taxpayers of P1,000.00 for the filing of ATP after April 30, 2013.

      The BIR personnel stated that there must be a typographical error on the interoffice memo because the date indicated therewith is to charged taxpayers if the application of ATP was done beyond April 30, 2013, rather than June 30, 2013 that was originally what was prescribed.

      Fortunately, in our district, they are not yet implementing the charging of P1,000.00. However, it is really sad to know that, regardless of the inconsistencies in the BIR provisions regarding the new invoicing requirements, some BIR Districts are already implementing such rule on fines and penalties.

      BIR makes us, taxpayers, all SICK by this (Surcharges, Interests, Compromise, and Kickbacks).

  11. Sana nga po makarating sa kinauukulan. I just sent this thru email: contact_us@cctr.bir.gov.ph and kim.jacinto-henares@bir.gov.ph. Sana bigyan naman nila ng aksyon asap o reply man lang.

    Ang sabi po kasi ng TAS Officer dito sa Olongapo, kay Henares kami mag-complain. Taga-implement lang sila at wala silang magagawa kundi sumunod. Either we pay the P1,000 penalty or suffer the P20,000 penalty come June 30, 2013. And if we already did pay for the said penalty, and BIR head have reverted, We CAN NOT anymore reimburse. So do we have a Choice then?

    1. I would say, if your district is already implementing such rule, we do not have a choice but comply. Unless the head of your district would not implement such rule. May mga nagsasabi rin na all taxpayers applied for the ATP after April 30, 2013, will still be required to pay the charges.

      Lets hope for the best. With all due respect, sana naman icoordinate rin ng mga district offices ang mga concerns ng taxpayers, dahil sila nmn ang may direct contact kay Kim Henares. In my opinion, yung response na dapat kay Kim Henares magreklamo is an immature advice. They should have, in the first place, communicated our concerns.

      Nakakainis lang talaga makipag-usap minsan sa kanila dahil ang ipipilit pa rin nila is the RULE TO TAX.

    2. perhaps in your e-mail cc: senate/supreme court/tulfo brothers/gma/abs-cbn/cause oriented or concerned groups. merely sending our sentiments to the author itself will not help, it should be eyed at least by somebody independent from the bureau, commentators and critics perhaps, for us to enable them to response and act to our complains.

  12. I got a copy of the Inter-Office Memorandum of the BIR which is the basis of collecting the P1,000 penalty. And this is my answer:

    Subject: Clarification on the Provisions of Section 5 of RR No. 18-2013

    2 BIR Memos were cited:

    BIR RR No. 18-2013, Section 5
    “All unused/unissued principal and supplementary receipts/invoices printed prior to the effectivity of these Regulations, shall be valid until June 30, 2013.

    A taxpayer with expiring ATP for its invoices/receipts (principal and supplementary) shall apply for a new ATP not later than Sixty (60) days prior to actual expiry date…”

    BIR OPM No.: 13-02-005
    Prescribes the validity period of Receipts/Invoices to be printed by deemed accredited printers prior to the approval of the Revenue Memorandum Order on the Work-around Procedures on the processing of the Authority to Print Receipts/Invoices.

    *****

    Both of these issuances of BIR regulations and memoranda clearly points to the NEW SET of invoices/receipts which will have an “expiration/five-year validity”. Only the newly released ATP will expire after five (5) years. And the provision of applying a NEW ATP “Sixty (60) days prior to actual expiry date” will apply to the succeeding ATP application. So there is in NO WAY an April 30, 2013 deadline was set to secure ATP. Even if we read between the lines, it will never mean that way.

    The MEMORANDUM dated April 30, 2013, is subject for questioning:
    First the memo is dated April 30, 2013. And the date set as “deadline” for securing ATP is the same day, April 30, 2013.

    Second, the memo is addressed to BIR Officers only and not the Public.

    Third, they interpret and clarify their own regulation by adding dates that were never clearly expressed on the original memo.

    No one knows this Memo and this ODD interpretation until all of the taxpayers were blown away with another penalty. The BIR and the Commisioner’s Office should NOT play GOD and make the Taxpayers follow blindly.

    Our PLEA: Please, let the TAXPAYERS proceed with ATP application without bearing the P1,000 penalty.

  13. In order not to repeat this carelessness, on or before June 10, 2013, the old sales invoices and official receipts should be surrendered to the BIR together with their inventory list.
    For relevant format of inventory list for sales invoices and official receipts ready for destruction by the BIR, we prepare it and those of you who wanted to have a copy of the same must send an email requesting a copy of which. Please send it to dianabaldoza@maestrotaxation.org

    To be a more empowered taxpayer please join our group.
    Joining a group called ‘TAXPAYER CLUB’ would give you a confidence and courage to challenge the centennial BIR questionable approach in dealing with you. TAXPAYER CLUB which would be spearheaded by Mr. Emelino T Maestro would provide and supply you vital and relevant tax advise on how to timely and correctly comply with the mandates of the laws of the State that is the Tax Code.

    To isolate yourself from people who really know and understand your concerns, sufferings and mental anguish is to offer your self to be devoured by a flesh-cutting beak and bone-crashing teeth of still unidentified aliens.

    Come one and come all. Be the strongest person on earth. Join the Taxpayer Club Now so that your can save a lot of money from the professional and matriculation fee being incurred yearly by an isolated and undereducated taxpayer.

    This is a personal conviction and belief.

    1. Hi. on or before June 10, 2013? Is this correct? I thought the old Official receipt can be used until June 30, 2013? How come we have to surrender already on June 10 when we can still use it until June 30? Please clarify

    2. RMO 12-2013 Title IV Sec. 1 – Transitory Provisions
      All unused/unissued principal and supplementary receipts/invoices printed prior to January 19, 2013 (effectivity of RR No. 18-2012) and those printed by printers which are not compliant with this Order shall be valid until June 30,2013. The taxpayer shall submit an inventory list (see Annex D) of principal and supplementary receipts/invoices and surrender the hardcopies of the receipts/invoices to the RDO/LT Office concerned where the taxpayer is registered on or before July 10, 2013. Branch Office/s shall submit and surrender the same to the RDO/LT Office concerned where the branch is registered.

  14. Last week of april i went to RDO 040 and 043A inquiring the online application of ATP and when is the deadline both RDO gave me the same answer na June 30 ang deadline. But to my surprise when i filed an application for a new atp yesterday they asked me to pay 1k penalty due to late filing!

    Darn how could the BIR issue a memo n hindi clear sa mga employees nla. so meaning hindi lang ako who got the wrong information… Then they are asking me to pay a penalty due to the wrong information given by their employees!

  15. Dito sa RDO 003 sa San Fernando La Union, wala man lang proper dissemination ng new rulings. Sabi ng taga BIR nagpadala daw sila ng sulat sa mga establishment para sa seminar at sa ruling pero wala kaming natatanggap. Nung May 22, narinig lang namin mga balibalita sa palengke na deadline nung araw na yun ang application ng ATP. So nung pumunta ako sabi nila dapat ay printing press ang pupunta. Di naman yun ganun kadali na kapag gusto naming magpapunta dun sa BIR e pupunta na agad ang printing press. Nagkakagulo ngayon sa BIR 003 dahil sa napakabulok na sistema ng BIR! Dapat me consideration man lang o pinalawig nila ang deadline ng ruling na to!. Napaka unjust and unreasonable na magbabayad ka ng penalty whereas it is their fault!

    1. I hear a lot of rumors about the systems and traditions of the personnels in RDO 3. Napakahirap pa raw nilang kausap.

      Kung ako cguro ayokong iregister ang head office ko sa RDO 3. Sayang naman ang paunlad na economy ng la union gawa ng pg-open ng economic zone at international airport. Paano mgkakaroon ng maraming investors kung di nila aayusing ang bulok na sistema nila sa loob ng district na yan

    1. Hi Anabel, hindi covered ang CAS sa new ruling. Ang application nito ay yung mga manual, bound and loose receipts. In cases na meron kayong pre-printed receipts, kailangan nyo rin mg-apply for new ATP. Kung computer generated naman ang invoices nyo, I believe, hindi pa covered ng new rule, pero para mas sigurado po kayo, paconsult na lng po yung district nyo. Pero so far, wala pa naman po kaming update regarding CAS generated invoices.

      In cases of POS, need pa rin mgapply ng ATP for manual issuance of OR and Invoices incases na down ang POS. :)

      1. hello sir thank you for ur response,,,we already made a letter addres to the RDO in our area,,, we will just follow up to them sir,,,,with regards to the ATP for manual issuance of OR sir incase of down ano po ba ang magiging basis namin sa numbering of OR na ipapagawa namin sir kc system generated po lahat sir eh tuloy tuloy po and OR number.thanks po!!

  16. sa RDO 34 nagpunta ako last april i asked when and deadline ng submission ang sabi until june 30. bumalik ako last may 10 for 1601 nagtanung ako ulit regarding dun same answer June 30. i went to BIR yesterday pero hindi tinanggap dahil late na daw. pinagbabayad ako ng 1k for penalty. nagreklamo ako ang sagot lang sakin kahit daw silang mga employees nasurprised sa bagong memo na april 30 ang last day. nareceived lng daw nila and memo lasy may 20, 2013 2pm. tapos ichacharge nila ang mga tax payers? wow! pinag fill- up ako ng o6o5 for late ATP. kasalanan b ng mga tax payers yun error na sinasabi nila? unfair!

  17. I suggest that we all submit an email of our complaints to kim.jacinto-henares@bir.gov.ph. She is the BIR commisioner na nag-issue ng mga utos na yan. Para lang malaman nya na all over the country, iisa ang himutok ng lahat ng Taxpayers.

    It’s somehow glad to know that we share the same sentiments and voicing out this unjust ruling of paying a P1,000 penalty before we can apply for ATP which we need to comply for the June 30 deadline, or else, all of us will be penalized with P20,000 for non-issuance of proper ORs,Invoices .

    We try to abide by their rules but they seem to play god and make us follow blindly all their rulings.

  18. The public must know this. I mean kng dito lng ntin i-complain wlang action nggawin un BIR.. Collect lng cla ng collect. Ipa-media pra they will explain it to the public or atleast they will heard the taxpayers plea.

  19. Question1: Are all Interoffice memo(assuming electronic documents, eg. PDFs) were signed by Kim Henares
    herself? If yes, what type of signature, (a text appearing originally signed or a Digital Certificate)?
    Question2: How fast the BIR will disseminate information such as critical as this one that will affect taxpayers, from the Head office to district offices and then to the public?

    Thank you for any attention…

  20. Bravo!!!!! Ms. April …. and dapat nilang singilin ay yung mga malalalaking buwaya na hindi nagbibigay ng resibo at puro kurakot ang ginagawa… hay naku hirap talaga gamutin ng sakit na yan… wala kayang magaling na tao makakagawa ng gamot laban sa kurakot????

  21. Hi, we have same situation here in batangas city, The taxpayers are looking for an answer… it’s worse because even the bir employees did not explain why or they don’t know..they just following the circular..grabe talaga. I hope that this issue will be resolved by Ms Henares ASAP

    1. Pero baka delaying tactics na lang at deadma ang BIR d2. Until we reach the June 30, 2013 and useless na ang mga complaints. They will now penalize the 20,000 charges for not complying the new ATP rules

  22. hi i have a new issue in connection for requirements. yung printer nmin kc naundoy so wala n silang maprovide ng ATP/PCD nabasa lahat ng files nila yr 2009. So I asked BIR how is it? sb mgbbyad dw kami mg 1k dhil kulang requirements nmin plus 1k na fine for late filing. How is that di nmn namin kasalanan na mwla ang files ng printer nmin. sabi sa law if the thing is lost due to fortuitous event the obligation is extinguish. Pro bakit we are oblige to pay pa din? Please clarify if we have to pay tlga.

  23. I just got fined 1k for late application of ATP and another 1k coz my old ATP wasnt returned by the printer so it’s considered lost ATP… 2k down the drain! :(

  24. the same goes here in laguna and cavite RDOs. the 1k penalty for allegedly late filing of ATPs is being imposed just immediately after the release of the BIR Memo, leaving all taxpayers surprised, confused, agitated.. leaving thwm with no choice.. HARRAssment to the highest level!!!

  25. Ayon sa aming staff na nag aayos ng ATP, hanggang bukas na lang daw ang submission ng ATP.IS THIS TRUE…. SOBRA NAMAN KUNG GANITO ANG GAGAWIN NG BIR, HINDI NA MAKATARUNGNA

    1. I also heard from a reliable source, those districts that did not implement the 1K penalty during the past weeks will start charging the taxpayers 1K for late filing starting on monday next week, June 3, 2013.. I do not know for other district offices of BIR

  26. gud day sir, bkit namn po ganun ang BIR pag naisip nila basta na lng, katulad ng ATP na yan, sir kapapagawa ko pa lng po ng BIR reciept nung jan 2013, 100 booklet, 25 books pa lang ang nagagamit ko eto at pinababago na, at pag d ngpagawa ng bago may penalty na 1k, parang d po yata makatarungan, d man lng po nla ininform na nung nagpapagawa ako na ipababago na ang recibo, nagastusan lng po ako, grabe pano naman po kming maliit na nagnenegosyo ng legal

  27. can someone clarify… I am an accountant who issues Official receipts only . However if the standard approved OR indicates” not valid for input tax,” how then could my clients avail of the input tax on their payments to me?

    1. If u are in service, u can see the input vat in the official receipt and invoice for trading. Im not an accountant. I just red itit :-)

    2. If your OR indicates” not valid for input tax, it means you’re a nonVAT registered taxpayer and is only paying monthly percentage tax and not VAT. You clients cannot claim Input VAT on their purchase of service from you. However, they can claim them as expenses which may be deductible against their income tax.

      1. @vic: how can she be non-vat when at the heading of the OR it says tin number-VAT (example: 123-885-513-000VAT). this is also my question regarding the statement in the OR that says: not valid for input tax. we have tenants and we issue them OR for their rental payments. under the tax code, when you render a service (like rent), you issue an OR. our rent is vatable. and on top of our OR, it reads: 154-412-221-000VAT.

      2. @anna I did not see any OR from beng that says she’s a VAT registered taxpayer. Also, beng is an accountant whom I just assume a percentage tax payer. Anyway, if you are a VAT registered taxpayer, then your OR/invoice should be used to claim input tax by your customers. There may be mistake in making your OR/invoice. You have to confirm and correct it with the BIR.

      3. @ beng and anna If you are an accountant who practice your profession as a self-employed individual, you are required to be registered to the BIR as a VAT-registered person if your gross sales/receipts for the year exceeds or is expected to exceed P1,919,500, otherwise you are required to register under percentage tax (3%). If you are a VAT-registered person, you are required to issue VAT-registered official receipts (OR) (i.e., TIN 123-456-789 VAT). Whereas, if you are registered under percentage tax, you shall issue non-vat official receipts (i.e., TIN 123-456-789 NVAT). If you are registered under percentage tax, your clients will not pay 12% VAT on their income payment for your services. Instead, part of their payment is the 3% percentage tax which forms part of their cost/expense that may be allowed as deduction from their gross income. Input tax arises only on VATable transactions. This may only be claimed from you if you are a VAT-registered person. If you are registered under percentage tax and you issue VAT OR, you may be penalized by the BIR for issuance of invalid ORs. Also, if you are a VAT-registered taxpayer, you shall not indicate “not valid for input tax” on your VAT ORs.

      4. @vic: you do not have to see beng’s OR. you can just deduce from her statement that she is vat-registered. “I am an accountant who issues Official receipts only.” from this statement, you can deduce that she has been issuing OR to her clients and she has had no problems with vat (input) prior to this new invoicing requirement.

        @elmokobe: im sure beng already knows what percentage tax is and the ruling / procedures for claiming input tax, etc. shes an accountant. her dilemma is (which is also mine) is the statement on the OR that says: not valid for input tax. this will NOT be a dilemma if in the first place we are NOT vat-registered. in our case, for example, we sell goods and services. for the goods, we issue an invoice. for the services (like rent), we issue an OR. (this is based on the tax code.) in our rdo, bir said that the OR should have the statement: not valid for input tax. their reasoning is this: there should only be one document (in this case, the invoice) that customers can get their input tax from. what??? what happens now to our tenants who pay rent? they cannot claim input taxes anymore because of that statement? the people from this rdo know that we are vat-registered. how? they approved our invoice format (it shows the 12% vat portion). we asked them not to include that statement in our OR but they themselves insisted that the statement should be there otherwise they will not approve our OR. its so hard to deal with people in authority who are not knowledgeable. we are at their mercy. sila pa yun nagagalit if you try to correct them.

      5. @Anna It is correct that Invoices are for goods and ORs are for services. If you are engaged in business which involves both selling of goods and rendering services, you have to follow the invoicing requirements. Please note also that rental payments per unit not exceeding P12,800 per month is not subject to percentage tax nor VAT regardless of the annual gross receipts or even though you are VAT-registered. If you are a VAT-registered person and is engaged in both VATable and Non-VATable transactions, you have to issue different ORs (VAT and NonVAT) or different invoices (VAT and NonVAT), as the case may be.

        As to the statement of “not valid for input tax”, this rarely happens. Since there is already non-VAT official receipts for non-VAT transactions, stamping of that statement in the ORs is not necessary. If your transactions are really subject to VAT, and you indicate in the ORs the VAT amount, and you issue VAT OR, your clients has the right to claim input tax based on Revenue Regulations 16-2005, as amended.

        For confirmation, What we normally do is to call different RDO’s and look for the Officer of the Day, thereby we are able to get opinions from different BIR officials. Whatever is their representation, ask for their legal bases. The BIR issuances are available in the BIR website so can confirm whether their advise is correct. You can also get their names and their position so that can go back to him/her.

        An professional advise from a tax practitioner cannot be disregarded especially if there is a huge risk involved. They are proficient in very dynamic Tax Rules in the PH and are experienced in dealing with BIR Officers.

        1. @elmokobe: let us emphasize that the P12,800 you are referring to refers to RESIDENTIAL units. And here is a more correct version of your explanation: “…lease of residential units where the monthly rental per unit exceeds P12,800 but the aggregate of such rentals of the lessor during the year do not exceed P1,919,500 shall be exempt from VAT but shall be subjected to the 3 percentage tax…” the full text can be found here: ftp://ftp.bir.gov.ph/webadmin1/pdf/60762RR%2016-2011.pdf

          we are vat-registered and we do not lease out residential units; therefore, all our lease transactions are vatable (whether the monthly rent is P4000 or P60000).

        2. Starting the year 2012, the new VAT threshold is 1,919,500.00 based on the CPI (Consumer Price Index)

          The rental income of RESIDENTIAL UNITS, regardless of volume shall be exempt from VAT IF the rental per RESIDENTIAL UNIT will NOT EXCEED P12,800.00.

          However for the COMMERCIAL units, if the lessor is VAT registered, all transactions shall be VATABLE, regardless of volume and price.

          In case that the company leases out some RESIDENTIAL UNITS, the threshold shall apply and those residential units that exceeds the 12800 threshold be subjected to VAT. An allocation of the input vat is necessary to proportionate exempt and vatable transactions.

          1. In addition thereto, for the residential units below the 12,800 threshold, aside from VAT exempt, is not also subject to Percentage tax. However subject to Income Tax.

            With regards to the invoicing requirements, just stick to the tax type of the taxpayer. If the tax payer is a VAT registered, then accomplish the VAT OR with a breakdown of vatable, exempt, zerorated transactions. On the other hand, if the taxpayer is NONVAT, then accomplish the NONVAT OR as long as the all requirements for VAT exemption are achieved. :)

    3. @beng, if you are an accountant that issues a VAT OR, then you must have opted to be a VAT registered practitioner or perhaps, your gross receipts incidentally exceeded the VAT threshold. Most tax practitioners are not subject to VAT, rather to Percentage Tax.

      As long as you are subject to VAT, then have your receipts be printed as VAT. There is one format of OR that is valid for VAT claims. Just try to browse the sample ORs. :)

  28. you are all correct. if there is someone who will initiate sueing BIR. I am willing to join. BIR is Hell to business. no consideration!

    1. I agree on you on this that BIR has no consideration. If only we could sue them… I could be a willing taxpayer without qualms if they could wipe out all corrupt employee in the government. Clean their own house first… Ghost employees and corruption do still exist. Many municipalities are still feeding ghost employees. If they insist that has been corrected, well maybe their investigation is as lousy as to how lousy they implemented their lousy BIR policy. CLEAN their house first. In that way we would be confident that the “peoples money” they collected will surely go back to all FILIPINO citizen through benefits, infrastracture, and a better life to live in their own country. But if we are going to look closely, there are still provinces that have no electricity, no easy access to water, supposed “roads” that have big craters like that of the moon. Students who have no chairs and tables and no blackboards and no books in the classroom. They are so hard on business people who are sweating out to meet all ends and while “corrupts” suck up their resources, for what?? To feed their own selfishness. Business man are the life blood of this country. If theres is no business, then there will be no employees and there will be NO TAXES to collect… BIR should treat business people as their partner and with respect, not as a dummy who is just there to be sucked up, with a lot of penalties and charges. And their sweat to feed higher official’s gluttony.

  29. we are a manufacturing company and we export our products to the warehouse abroad,we don’t sell anything here in the Philippines. aren’t we exempted?

  30. Never have I seen a receipt with so many details in it, only in the Philippines. Pity those small, struggling businesses who are burdened with printing new invoices and throw away the old ones. This new ruling is confusing, even BIR employees themselves are confused Tsk, tsk, tsk. What is the objective for this new ruling?

    1. I think BIR’s behind the scene objectives with this new ruling are:
      1. To do business with the taxpayers and printers
      2. To waste papers and be an advocate of deforestation and increasing carbon footprints
      3. To harass the business taxpayers and increase their revenue by charging fines and penalties

      This new ruling has also an advantage:
      1. To prevent voluminous printing of invoices
      2. To detect businesses that do not issue official receipts
      3. To clarify the claiming of VAT through source documents
      4. To run after evaders
      5. To eliminate the old receipts that do not have an ATP
      6. To systematize the ATP processing by their so-called online ATP system that is currently DOWN. :)

      1. “6. To systematize the ATP processing by their so-called online ATP system that is currently DOWN. ”

        To create a computerized system to cater millions of users/businesses is no easy task. They need to have stuffs of enterprise level and people with adequate technical skills. In short, they need time(QA/Testing), unless of course, there’s something unsual(project kickbacks), but anyway, this is normal for a government agency. I hope for the positive though.

  31. is it ok to pay “PAID Under Protest” worth 1k for late printing of invoices questioning the RR18-2012. Who will receive the protest letter BIR districts?

    1. why don’t all of you guys group together and ask for an audience with BiR chief Kim Henares to voice out your grievances… I heard thats she’s an intelligent and reasonable person and will,probably straighten things out… am sure this is a case of miscommunication… but kawawa naman talaga ang mga namumulta na di naman nila sinasadya… you guys are conscienscious tax payers who are willing to pay what is due… just a thought.

  32. Dito sa RDO-033 aside from 1k penalty sa late filing ng ATP, kapag nawala yun lumang resibo mo kahit may affidavit ka magbabayad ka raw ng 25k at lost of ATP & PCD 2k naman. Tapos yun mga resibo daw na 2008 below ay magbabayad naman ng 20k. akala ko ba nasa matuwid na daan na ang Pilipinas, o baka hindi alam ng ating Pangulong Aquino tungkol sa nasabing INTEROFFICE MEMO NG BIR.

    1. Ask for a copy of the old ATP from your printer. Kung wala ask from BIR. In our district, that is not an issue. Taxpayers were not asked for the old ATP, perhaps, the printers. Besides, if I am not mistaken, the BIR electronic database system can generate the scanned copy of the old ATP, but this is needed to be verified. Why do they have to ask for the old ATP when the taxpayers do not even keep a copy.

      Just crazy.

  33. kawawa naman ang mga taxpayer at mga printers late submission of tax clearance penalized of 1k? and submission of atp after June 30, again 10k penalty?too much! why not extend to 2 months for only few accredited printers, we could not accommodate all the taxpayers for their receipt printing . cant it be? konsencya naman..

    1. wala nang konsensya pagdating sa “penalty”…..malinaw na pera kasi yan para sa bir. kaya ang yayaman nila, maluwag pa ang oras sa trabaho. samantalang 24/7 na kumakayod at nag-iisip ng minumultahan nila. pero ang babait talaga nila pag haharap na sa tv.

  34. I have browsed and studied the sample ORs. We are a VAT registered lending company subject to 12% VAT. When we release a loan (payable in installments) we automatically deduct (from the principal amount borrowed) the interest computed based on the terms of the loan, plus the 12% on the interest as vat passed on to borrower. We account for them in our books as ‘Unearned Interests Income’ and VAT Payable, both liability accounts. We amortize the Unearned Interests Income account and recognize the interest income earned (vatable sales) on a monthly basis during the term of the loan. This is recorded in the books thru a journal entry only. Nowhere in our official receipt will you find the vatable sales and vat due thereon. Our official receipts issued by our collectors reflect only the partial payments made by the borrowers until the total loan principal is paid.

    Our problem is how to supply the data on the left side of the receipt e.g. vatable sales, vat amount, total sales, etc. when the amount shown on each official receipt issued is a partial return of the principal which is, in itself, not vatable. Your help will be much appreciated. Thank you.

  35. I HAVE A THEORY!!!!!

    The New regulation on receipts is nothing but a strategic and well thought-out cruel scheme that primarily aims to summarily force Taxpayers’ compliance out of fear and uncertainty that is, at the same time, enforced within the boundaries and protection of Law.

    BIR, AS A MATTER OF VESTED RIGHT, CAN MANIPULATE TAXPAYERS WITHIN THE PALM OF THEIR HANDS…

    1.) As an Implementing agency, the issuance of Regulations, in as far as taxes are concerned, is a regular and authorized function of the Bureau. RR 18-2012 that specially aims to enhance monitoring of receipts is no exception. Therefore, by simple reason, no one can question its authority nor its validity as it conforms with the basic and essential requirements of a valid Regulation. Simply stated, the BIR can issue valid regulations without having to worry about legal implications on its effect to us common people. Note that in order for one to raise a legal issue against the Bureau a cause of action must first be established. And what valid cause of action can anyone claim from an issued Regulation when the BIR may, at its discretion, issue another Regulation invalidating a previous one. The Bureau may also raise the defense that the taxpayer has the option whether to act in its compliance or not. Currently, there is no Law that specifically provides for the social responsibility and accountability of these implementing bodies in the exercise of their legal functions so as not to affect their supposed effectiveness even when it may result to the detriment of our rights. Thus, all of us taxpayers are forced to comply with the Revenue Regulation in order to avoid having to suffer implementation of its inclusive Penalty Clause that is highlighted in bold letters indicative of painful consequences.

    NO HARM NO FOUL…

    2.) The new Regulation basically contains legal flaws that application of its Penalty Clause may prove to be without legal basis and therefore unenforceable. The following are valid issues observed that may only be resolved through the application of existing Laws and Jurisprudence, thus;
    a.) The declaration of invalidity of the previous ATAP through the act of the discretionary powers of
    the Bureau is without Legal basis. It should be noted that there is no new law enacted to amend
    provisions contained in the original statute. The same law is being invoked by both regulations as its
    source of authenticity and validity. It should be observed that the “Old” ATAP was a direct result of the
    implementation of a specific Law that, for all legal matters concerned, is valid and enforceable. What
    makes it invalid therefore is its nonconformity to the additional requirements of the New regulation.
    Simply stated, on June 30, 2013 your issuance of receipts with “old” ATAP makes you a responsible
    and law abiding citizen, try issuing receipts of the same batch and you shall find yourself a committing a
    criminal offense.

    b.) A newly enacted Law, when its provisions shall give rise to the detriment of certain rights when applied,
    shall not be given RETROACTIVE application. A direct violation of the basics of Statutory law shall be
    made upon the retroactive application of the new additional requirements that shall render invalidity of a
    previously valid and legal ATAP. Simply stated, what is true today will not be anymore tomorrow…
    because the BIR says so…

    For the Bureau to declare strict compliance on the new regulation and, as planned, opt not to pursue with the implementation of its Penalty Clause, in particular the June 30, 2013 deadline for validity, will not only assure its objectives realized, since most of us taxpayers have already acted in compliance thereof, but will more than likely avoid the Bureau of the left, right front, back, above and below litigation. Simply stated, what a move!

    Oh before I forget, in case you noticed that the beauty of this scheme may more than appreciated by someone who has knowledge of Law. Well, your thoughts are just good as mine…Commissioner… bright lawyer… 20 or so advisers predominantly lawyers too… Still expect compassion, understanding and love? The Marines might…

  36. Ask ko lang po kung may ruling ba sa BIR pag ang resibo ay below 2008 pa may penalty kmi ng 20K agad bukod pa sa 1k na late atp. our client needs a copy of law or ruling regarding these before she pay a 20K penalty. thanks…

    1. Late filing is 1k pero walang penalty if ur OR is printed p noong 2008. I am handling a company n ung OR is printed p noong 2006 pero walang penalty n imposed. The 5 years expiration is only applicable s bagong print n OR ngaun. The 20k penalty is u failed to file atp after june 30 for the non-issuance of OR

  37. DEAR COMMISSIONER

    AKALA KO BA PAGBABAGO ANG GUSTO NYONG MANGYARI BAKIT PINAPAHIRAP NYO MGA TAXPAYER
    SA BAGONG MEMO, NAGKAKAGULO AT NAGKUKUMAHOG NA KAMING MGA TAXPAYER
    AT MAY BALITA AKO PAGDATING NG JULY 1 PANIBAGONG PENALTY NA NMN NA IPAPATUPAD,
    ANO BA TALAGA GUSTO NG BIR SA MGA TAXPAYER PAGLARUAN O GAWING BUBO SA RULING O MEMORANDUN NA PINAPATUPAD NILA PABIGLABIGLA AT WALNG PROPER ANNOUNCEMENT,
    BAKIT MGA SENADOR WALNG KUMIKIBO NGYN DAHIL BA SA MAS MARAMING TAO NI PINOY ANG NAKAUPO AT WALA SILANG MAGWA , SUSUNOD NAMN KAMING MGA TAXPAYER PERO SNA SA TAMANG PROSSESO
    PINAPATAY NYO KAMING MGA MALILIIT NA NEGOSYANTE ….

  38. I think one of the unanticipated problem because of the late dissemination of these guidelines is…will there be enough accredited printing presses to print all the printing requirements suddenly being brought to them by all the establishments needing the new invoices? If they could not and the deadline lapses…what happens then? 20K fine?

  39. madam kim henares malu uy ka man . taga e man extension, sa amun lugar damu gd tana wala kabalo. if multahan mo 50k . ka lulu uy man ang mga small busineses, ma nira dulang . ako ya dugay na ko nag hambal sa printing press diri sa passi city , sling ya ang approve sampol fr bir wala pa, hasta subung akun ATP wala pa . tapus damu pa bilin sang akun resebu , ay abaw dal un pa gd ini sa zaraga . Tani gin lawig lawig ya man ni madam KIm ang aviso. tam an ka subul. masak pa gd ang printing press kay election pa gd . ambut sini kung anhunsang printing press diri sa amon . ma agic sia para matapus printing

  40. paano po kapag kulang ang unused receipt namin na kailangang isauli sa BIR? For example 20 booklets po recepit namin then nasira po yung last 2 booklets dahil sa baha…di na po namin na retrieve… May fines po ba or ano po bang gagawin namin? Help…..

  41. I found out only about this ruling today when Inquirer published it. If Kim Henares says this was published six months ago, how come so many small business establishments , like me, are unaware of this. Be that as it may,
    I still have 100pads of unused receipts, and I am just suppose to throw away my hard earned income, because I can no longer use these receipts???? Do you in the BIR, have an idea how much a pad cost? Small business establishments like me, is spending so much for receipt printing, and now I can’t use the remaining pads after June 30! The least you, the BIR, could do, is be considerate to us, who already spent so much for these receipts, for us to finish them all, then have new receipts printed as per your new rule. Unless, you are willing to reimburse the cost of the unused receipts.

  42. We are a small exporter of Philippine handicrafts, lamps and shell crafts, we make our own commercial invoice on computer and issue it to foreign buyers via email. Is export commercial invoice also covered by the new BIR ruling?

  43. kala it would change the system for good, makakatulong ang bago gov. ni pinoy sa atin negosyante. yun pala ang daang matuwid niya ay papunta sa pagkalugi ng marami negosyo. paano tayo uunlad kong ang mismo gobyerno natin ang nagpapalubog sa atin.

    1. THE BIR Commissioner insisted during the TV interview yesterday that the new ruling was official as of January 2013, so all businesses must have no excuse saying “we have not enough time to prepare”, however what is really missing in that interview(if I did not miss something) is that how the BIR disseminate information to all type/size of businesses nationwide.

      My theory:
      Let the information of the new ruling be delayed. The effect of which is all the accredited printers will have a hard time finishing the required printed receipts for their customers, since there is a very small window for businesses to comply the requirements, only then that by that time, the majority will pay the penalty of 1k and some businesses will have to pay 20k. Imagine, billions of pesos they can collect for the penalties alone. This money will be used in 2016.

      1. So true.. ang pinaka kawawa is the businesses..
        imagine the damages done:
        those preprinted unused receipts covering for the whole year will not be used anymore…
        penalties of 1,000 PER ATP APPLICATION if applied after April 30, 2013…
        more penalties if not using the new receipts on July 1, 2013…
        cost of printing new receipts (RUSH pa yan)

        what difference did it actually make from the old receipts against the new ones?
        palagyan lang ng TIN ng customer, “validity period of 5 years”, details ng printing press…
        there’s no even security marks or paper or something.. i thought that would make the difference. but none.
        I DON’T THINK IT’S MATERIAL.

        what we need to change is the way our government system works..if it really is even working..

  44. I’m sorry, but no BIR employee informed me of this ruling. Every month, I go to their office to file taxes but none of them mentioned regarding this new ruling…

    1. AKO DIN, ANG DALAS KONG NAGBALIK BALIK DUN WALA MAN LANG NAGINFORM S AKIN AT WALA SILANG NAKAPASKIL NA ANUNSUYO O SA TV COMMERSIYAL MAN LANG.

      1. Even if u inquired they’ll give u a wrong info. Nag inquire ako noon last week of april the bir officer sa may registration say the deadline of filing is on june 30 nung nag inquire. To my surprise nung nag pasa n ako ng requirements nung may sabi penalty n raw ako

  45. TAMA KAYO, LAHAT NG SANGAY NG GOBYERNO AY MAY KANYA KANYANG STYLE NG PANGRARAKET DI LANG SILA PAHIRAP SA ATIN. SINO BA NAMAN GAGANAHAN NA MAKIPAGTRANSACT SA GOBYERNO, PAHIRAPAN KA AT PEPERAHAN K PA SA PAMAMAGITAN NG PANGGIGIPIT AT KUNG DI KA MAKASUNOD KAKASUHAN KA.

  46. Its a double jeopardy and a conivance at the same time considering that most BIR corrupt officers and staffs either have their own printing businesses or are commissioners of many printers. Its a fact that most of us knows. First the burden of paying such penalty has been passed to the taxpayers, and not to printers. 60 days period prior to June 30, is indeed a leeway for the printers to accomodate expected voluminous printing of such ORs and invoices, taking themselves out of the penalty issues, enough for both of them to raise huge amount of money from the taxpayers. Its a double jeopardy, thinking that BIR officer X has his/her own printing business, quoting you first how much it will cost you for the printing, and now applying for the atp for them to be able to start printing your ORs and Invoices, but prior to that, asking you if you have already paid the 1K penalty, now pressuring you that without paying such 1K printing might be delayed and the taxpayer will be facing a bigger penalty.

    1. I agree with you. Grabe talaga ang BIR employee’s. Sila mismo ang nagpapahirap sa mga tax payer. Paano uunlad ang bansa natin e sila mismo grabe maningil ng penalty na di kayang bayaran ng taxpayer. Kaya pumapayag ang taxpayer na magbigay na lang ng lagay e.

  47. considering we just had 200 OR booklets printed february this year, and despite claiming this new ruling was issued january then why did they approve the atp and printing of my new receipts only for this to be rendered invalid in a few months. I barely used the new ones because i was still finishing up the old ones and just ordered in advance so as not to run out of booklets in case bir has any delay in processing. Waste of time, money, paper and effort. Funny thing is the printing company we’ve always used is included in the list of accredited printers, BIR could have just allowed stamping of the additional printer information at the bottom to prevent waste of resources! and true, if not for opening the TV this week, i woouldnt have known of this new ruling then rushing to the bir ofc the following day i am required to pay late payment for application of atp, even if its still 3wks before the due date! another great news, now my printer would not accept orders because they’re swamped!

    1. The new rule of invoicing through RR 18-2012 was published on January 3, 2013. Even if a taxpayer complied as early as february, at that time, BIR has not yet released its prescribed new format of invoices and receipts, through RMO 12-2013 dated on May 3, 2013, thereby causing much more trouble and waste of paper and money.

      NO ONLINE ATP SYSTEM has been setup by BIR since the issuance of their new regulation on ONLINE ATP, yet taxpayers are burdened on their flaws due to the manual filing of ATP.

      What new anyway? tsk

      1. Diba pwede namang e modify yong invoice as long as nandoon yong pinakaimportante na kailangang ilagay? sa ngayon kasi nakapagprint na kami same size yong papel na ginamit namin kaso 3 lines nalang yong pwede sulatan like your sample yon daw kasi ang pwede nang printing press na aprobado nang BIR. pano ba yan kung maraming order yong dapat isulat sa recibo?

  48. paano nalang kung magsisimula ako ng negosyo? lalo na kng maliit lang ang kapital? nako’ patay tayo dyan. iniisip ko mas malaki pa ang license or business permit kaysa kapital ko sa negosyo.. maayo anah. silihan para mo tagam…

  49. NOT THE EXTENSION OF ATPs ang concern namin. we comply while following discussions. USE OF UNUSED ORs ang main concern naming. I still have ORs printed for one year consumption. THIS IS OUR MAIN CONCERN. we’re through with ATPs

    1. Ako nga may 15 booklet pa! Pahirap talaga tong ginawa nila malinaw na kurakot to wala namang safety features ang bagong receipt kayang gayahin ng malalaki at magagaling talo nanaman tayong maliliit nito haist gising binoy di ito makakatulong sa small scale at mid scale buisnessman grabe na yan.. We welcome improvement sana nag iisip naman tong mga taga bir

      1. oh my. you only have 15. I have less than 2000 unused booklets for one year consumption. ATPs or lost ATPs are not our main concern. pls. sec kim, don’t make us suffer. RDOs should have stop us and disapprove our request to print ORs for one year consumption. and then burn only these assets??

  50. Such ruling causes financial burden to business owners/taxpayers. As a consequence, costs of unused ORs and Invoices + damages done to the taxpayers as a result of such irrational ruling, should be reimbursed by BIR to every concerned business owner. Such is not a simple implementation of a ruling. It is very clear that there will be costs, signifying financial losts, that are involved here for the taxpayers. Hopefully this concern be brought to the attention of our BIR commissioner, and to the PRESIDENT as well.

  51. TAKE NOTE:
    1) APPLICATION OF ATP IS DUE ON APRIL 30, 2013 and ALL APPLICATION OF ATP UNTIL JUNE 30, SHALL BE PENALIZED AT P1,000.00.
    2.) ATP APPLICATION MADE BEYOND JUNE 30, 2013 SHALL BE PENALIZED ACCORDINGLY. BIR STATED IN ITS MEMO A MAXIMUM PENALTY
    3.) RMC 44-2013 ONLY EXTENDS THE MERE USAGE OF OLD INVOICES AND OFFICIAL RECEIPTS. READ THROUGH THE RMC. AVOID PENALTIES.

    FOR THOSE WHO DID NOT FILE YET, APPLY FOR YOUR ATP NOW BEFORE ITS TOO LATE…

    We’ve been trying to disseminate this information so taxpayers in the business sector could avoid BIR penalties. DO IT NOW.. :)

  52. greg you mean RMC 44-2013. You’re right, it only extends the validity of old invoices and ORs, not the ATP application.

      1. oh. only a few knew that senior citizens issue ORs for their mutual funds. I hope they will be free from all these hassles

  53. My business is trading of goods. How come i was not approved for Official Receipt? I was only approved to print COLLECTION RECEIPT. What’s the difference ba? Customer usually wants an OR, nothing else. If anyone can please enlighten me.

      1. Mr Greg Aquino, would you know why am i not allowed to print OR? How come department stores sell goods, they issue OR thru their POS?

        1. Hello po. Accordingly, BIR prescribes that:
          Invoices = Sale of goods
          Official Receipts = Sale of Services

          Although its true that in the POS, ORs and Invoices are used interchangeably. Anyway, POS or BIR accredited machines are not covered by the RR 18-2012 unless, when the point of sale system is down, and a manual issuance of receipts be made. You can read through the RR 18-2012 where it states the distinction of ORs and invoices. Hope it helps. :)

    1. If you issue a manual invoice or or, you are covered by the ruling, except when you are generating your ORs using a BIR accredited machine such as POS (Point OF Sale Systems)

  54. Do you think we are being heard by the government concerning this issue? The president for instance who is supposed to support and empower small local business entrepreneurs, the most being affected by this problem, or are they even being bothered to listen to us? Otherwise, we could simply say “It’s no more fun doing business in the Philippines, our own country.”

    1. The media already made its part to air this issue on the national TV. Its true those who are in authority should be the one to initiate the change or necessary adjustments. I don’t think they care much. What is it for them anyway?

  55. extended po ba till august 30 ang mga old receipt..
    bakit ganun kung kailn ng extend ung pag gamit ng mga old receipt pinapatagal nmn nila ang process ng ATP pra makapag paprint n kme

  56. Are PO/DR/DM/CM and other similar documents covered by this ruling? Normally we do have our own templates for these and they are just being printed on blank papers, with system generated numbers, others are also pre-printed but are not included in ATP. This is quite confusing, since in the past we only deal with ATP for our invoices and O.R.s.

  57. We were told by the accredited printer that if your existing OR is “too old” like if it was printed in 2003 you need to pay a separate penalty. The printer cited a company, Miascor, who had to shell out P10 k penalty since their receipt was printed in 2005. Is there a basis for this penalty? Was there a circular issued to this effect? As far as I know this is the first time BIR has required replacement of all receipts in the past 10 years.

    1. Hi Bert, I am not aware of any ruling that was passed way back 2003 that prescribes such penalties. And I have not read any provision to penalized receipts printed during the last decade. However, we will include your query in our researches about the BIR rulings. This time, we cannot give you a concrete response. Thanks.

  58. I filed for request to print receipt and i was penalized the amount of 1,000 pesos for late filing of request to print. the request was filed today June 14,2013. is there a penalty for late filing?

  59. tuwid na daan tungo sa kahirapan,, crap!! no wonder why the stock exchange suddenly burst down,,,i could guess that some businessman would choose to close their business then migrate., and no wonder why Philippines is on top of the list of most corrupted country!!

    1. submit to BIR FOR DESTRUCTION!! as in set on fire the COST OF PRINTING
      some media people don’t understand…. as if everybody’s cheating on taxes. WHO CAN HELP US PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  60. On June 28, 2013 Join the FREE Gathering of Taxpayers like you.
    Kame po ay nag-aanyaya sa lahat ng taxpayers na may problema sa BIR. Magkita-kita tayo sa June, 28, 2013, 1:30 PM at Training Room, QI Phils, 20th Floor, One Corporate Center, Julia Vargas, Ortigas, Pasig City.. Libre. Walang Bayad. Umpisahan natin na humanap ng miracle para mahinto na ang taun-taong lagayan..Ang patuloy na blackmailing at pandaraya sa sarili at lipunan.. Let us start to change to relieve ourselves from pains.
    This will lead by a veteran TAX CONSULTANT. For more details please visit our facebook page https://www.facebook.com/Katax.ETM
    Join our TAXPAYER COMMUNITY. We are on Taxpayer’s side.

  61. The RMO 12-2013 addressed to ALL Regional BIR Offices was DATED May 2, 2013 only, However the deadline for filing ATP is April 30! Parang DAANG PABALIK. Isip isip lang po Commision…ers. One more..Rev Reg 12-2012 was dated Oct. 2012, Jan. 2013 implementation, May 2013 RMO (5 months! Or 150 days), TV interview 2 days ago Lang! Shock

  62. Most of our clients are churches na exempt from taxes. VAT registered ako but then di ako naka pag add ng 12% sa sales of goods kasi nga exempted sila. What type of receipt or invoice will I use? Do I need to file another registration for this? (as in Non Vat)?

  63. Hi Greg, Great info!. Seems nobody knows this ruling before the news on tv.

    I will file my application today, sure i will need to pay the 1k penalty. Hayz! Kaka inggit ang mga biz partner ko from Malaysia and Nedherlands, sa kanila walang duties and tax pag electronics and semiconductors products ang import, then maraming privilage exemption pag nag start ka ng biznes. Fully supported talaga ng government. Dito sa atin, halos ayaw ka na pag startin ng biznes. Sa kanila in 1 day may bisnes ka na, dito sa atin bago ka maka umpisa napakaraming red tape at lagayan. Daang paurong indeed!

  64. sir, are churches supposed to issue official receipts too? ours is a born again church with SEC and BIR registration. appreciate your advise.

  65. Hi Sir Greg, RMO 12-2013 states that the deadline for submission of inventory of unused receipts together with its hardcopies is on July 10, 2013. With the issuance of RMC 44-2013, does this also extend the deadline to September 10? Nalito na ako sa second paragraph ng RMC 44-2013.

    1. I think that’s implied. But no provisions yet being passed to prescribed the deadline of submission of list and actual surrender of the unused invoices up to August 30, 2013. Its safer to surrender the unused invoices once you obtained your new invoices/receipts

  66. why is it it seems the penalty is ahead from the deadlines set in applying for the ATP.. the penalty must be imposed once you don’t hit the deadline.

  67. Sir Greg ask ko lang po valid po na tanggapin ang collection receipt instead of OR? Hinihingian po kasi namin ng Official Receipt yung mga supplier namen but then sinasabi nila na Collection Receipt lang daw ang iniissue nila.how can we claim input tax if that is the case.

    I hope you can enkighten us with this.Thank you.

    1. A collection receipt should be issued if there is a premise that an OR or invoice was previously issued. That’s one problem we have to raise to BIR. If thats the case, BIR will also loss money from taxpayers who will not declare an output vat.

    1. As long as companies issue a manual invoice/receipt, loose leaf or bound, covered po ng ruling. No particular industry, except when the school is using a POS or a computer generated OR from an accredited machine

  68. If I am VAT registered and selling goods on account, can I issue an an official receipt with the phrase “Not Valid for Claim of Input Tax” upon collection of payment instead of a “collection receipt” BIR is suggesting?

  69. Hi Sir Greg,

    Ask ko lang po may penalty po ba kapag nagamit na ko na sa last OR booklet ko prior to application of new atp?

  70. Wake up people of the Philippines…what is this? When was this ruling was issued and at once effective June 30, 2013? Don’t you give allowance to some who only have their ORs printed recently or ORs are to be fully utilized until next year/s? This is a very inconsiderate move. Do the President of the Philippines know about this especially for those small scale business owners making them hard for their investments?

    1. agree ako ms. luz jimenez. cuz we print our one year consumption before the year ends. and this is one of our biggest problem. THE LOST we will incur. why cant BIR let us consume the printed ORs first. I beg for the cooperatives who are service oriented and non-profit organizations. due consideration is all we ask while we comply at the same time on ATPs

      GODBLESS.

      1. Since this regulation exempted the big rich taxpayers, the idea is really to raise tax from the poor small taxpayers, who are forced to shell out P1000 each for penalty alone, aside form the receipts cost. Wala namang nabago sa tuwid na daan? Another anti-poor policy na naman ito. Pahirap sa mahirap!

  71. Lahat ng check vouchers, petty cash vouchers, delivery receipt, cash vouchers, order slip at any form ng kahit na anong parang mukhang resibo pina pull out ng BIR sa lahat ng branches ng National Bookstore as per statement ng sales staff. Time card lang natira sa shelves. Thousands and thousands of these forms will be wasted they said. Suppliers of these forms in National Bookstore were complaining HEAVILY.

  72. I abide by the new BIR SI, DR and OR standard format. But what I cannot understand is to go on the minimum 20 booklets qty to be printed. As per BIR RDO, price of printing are as follows:

    1. SI: PHP 400/booklet ( carbonized)
    2. DR: PHP 270/booklet (carbonized)
    3. OR: PHP 120/booklet ( uncarbonized)

    I would like to know if above pricing are the standard otherwise these changes will not serve the BIR purposes.

    1. It is not appropriate that the BIR give the price for the printing…it is the BIR Authorized Printers who should transact with the Taxpayer.

      Mapupulaan ang BIR na nine-negosyo ang pagre-resibo.

      Here is a reasonable price from one of our BIR Authorized printers in Olongapo City.

      specs: With printing of the ATP at the Back Board of each booklet (Required by BIR)

      DUPLICATE COPY (50 x 2)
      A. CARBONLESS PAPER ¼ Size of Letter Size 1/3 Size ½ Size
      20 bklts. P110.00/bklt P120.00/bklt P130.00/bklt
      50 bklts. P60.00/bklt P80.00/bklt P85.00/bklt
      100 bklts. P50.00/bklt P70.00/bklt P75.00/bklt

      B. BOND PAPER ¼ Size of Letter Size 1/3 Size ½ Size
      20 bklts. P85.00/bklt P90.00/bklt P100.00/bklt
      50 bklts. P45.00/bklt P50.00/bklt P55.00/bklt
      100 bklts. P43.00/ bklt P47.00/bklt P52.00/bklt

      TRIPLICATE COPY (50 x 3)
      C. CARBONLESS PAPER ¼ Size of Letter Size 1/3 Size ½ Size
      20 bklts. P120.00/bklt P130.00/bklt P140.00/bklt
      50 bklts. P80.00/bklt P100.00/bklt P105.00/bklt
      100 bklts. P70.00/bklt P90.00/bklt P95.00/bklt

      D. BOND PAPER ¼ Size of Letter Size 1/3 Size ½ Size
      20 bklts. P95.00/bklt P110.00/bklt P125.00/bklt
      50 bklts. P50.00/bklt P60.00/bklt P65.00/bklt
      100 bklts. P47.00/bklt P55.00/bklt P60.00/bklt

      According to the rules given by BIR to printers, printers should entertain any quantity of orders. Even 1 bklt, only that they may charge all the overhead cost of the whole printing process.
      Some printers just set a minimum that is reasonable in order to standardize printing to be able to accommodate different taxpayers’ orders

Post a comment. :)

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s