THERE IS A striking irony in the public discussion about the Bureau of Internal Revenue. A politician recently called the BIR the “second most corrupt agency” in government—a sweeping claim condemning more than 11,000 workers in a snap, as if every examiner and revenue officer has already been tried and found guilty.
Sweeping allegations are easy, even cathartic, for a frustrated public. But they also ignore the need for evidence and skip over the complicated realities of tax administration in a developing democracy.
The allegations, the legislators claim, stem from abuses in the issuance and execution of Letters of Authority (LOAs). Many taxpayers share this view, feeling that the audit process has become equated with harassment.
The story is appealing because it is straightforward. Corruption occurs; therefore, blame the agency. But public policy—like the tax code—rarely relies on simplicity.
STORY BEHIND STORY
For one, corruption is real. But it is equally naïve to imagine that all wrongdoing flows in one direction. In fact, some of the most sophisticated and entrenched misconduct in the system originates not from government offices but from the private sector.
Tax evasion isn’t just a term; it’s a national pastime. Underreporting income, disguising deductions, creative accounting, ghost companies, fake receipts—these have created entire cottage industries. Tax avoidance schemes are openly marketed as “tax planning strategies.” Behind sleek offices and expensive suits, there are complex mechanisms designed to hide liabilities or at least render them invisible.
When the BIR pursues these cases, many taxpayers do not just defend themselves; they retaliate. They file harassment lawsuits against BIR personnel, threaten litigation, or mobilize political connections to intimidate revenue officers into backing down. Some even rally the media and public opinion to portray themselves as victims of government abuse.
Thus, a paradox arises: the agency responsible for enforcing the law is often the one criticized for doing exactly that.
A FLAWED SYSTEM
It is easy to demand that BIR officials enforce the law “without fear or favor.” It’s much harder to do so when the people evading taxes are the same ones who can destroy careers, weaponize the media, or exert political pressure.
Revenue officers know this. Their families know this. Everyone within the agency has a story of how an audit suddenly became a political fight.
This does not justify corruption, but it clarifies the landscape—the tough pressure points where integrity is challenged and where institutional safeguards need to grow.
PARALLEL HONESTY
The Philippine taxation system largely relies on voluntary compliance: self-assessed returns, self-declared income, and self-reported expenses. For this approach to succeed, integrity must be upheld by both the tax collector and the taxpayer.
However, experience shows a different reality. If left unmonitored, many taxpayers will underreport, misreport, or hide income. The BIR is justified in questioning self-assessments; it would be negligent if it didn’t.
LOAs, when used correctly, are tools of accountability — not harassment. The issue is not with the tool itself, but with the system that permits discretion, inconsistency, and makes it vulnerable to corruption and manipulation.
ROOM TO DEVELOP
The most unfortunate part of today’s discourse is how quickly condemnation is directed at those who have barely taken charge.
The new leadership stepped in during a time of turmoil—exactly when a fresh approach could offer hope. Instead of giving space for reforms to take hold, the public prematurely labels the Bureau as a lost cause. Some even demand its abolition, as if erasing an institution could wipe out the nation’s tax obligations.
But transformation does not come from cynicism. It develops through deliberate, structured reform—and by giving new leaders the chance to demonstrate what they stand for.
INTEGRITY, TRANSPARENCY
What if we say, the BIR’s audit transformation agenda aims for exactly that: a system where LOAs are digital, risk-based, justified, verified, monitored, and protected from both abuse and external interference; a system where transparency shields honest officers and accountability keeps those who stray in check; and a system where taxpayers see the audit not as harassment but as a necessary instrument of fairness.
Reforms of this scale require time, political capital, and institutional courage. But above all, they require trust—not blind trust, but responsible trust grounded in transparency and oversight.
It’s easy to criticize a system but it’s harder to understand it. The most difficult part of it is to change. But this is exactly where the country is today. The BIR is not a saint or a villain; it is an organization facing the same challenges that every tax authority around the world encounters.
CHANGE IS COMING
If we seek fairness, we must hold both taxpayers and tax collectors to the same standard. If we want integrity, we must demand it from both sides of the audit table. If we want a better future, we must give reform a fighting chance.
Change is occurring—not just on the surface of public noise, but through the challenging, disciplined work of institutional transformation.
The better approach is not to judge too quickly, but to engage in building a tax system worthy of public trust.