ITAD Ruling 14-01

ITAD RULING NO. 014-01

Art. 5 & 7, RP-Singapore BIR Rulings Nos. 279-88, 219-85 & DA-062-2-5-99 Puyat Jacinto & Santos 12/F Manilabank Building 672 Ayala Avenue Makati 1226

Attention: Regina P. Jacinto Job M . Ambrosio Rafael C . Garcia Gentlemen : This refers to your application on behalf of your client, Edsamail Asia Private Ltd. (EAPL), requesting confirmation of your opinion that the income derived by EAPL is income from sources outside the Philippines and therefore not subject to income tax, withholding tax and value-added tax in accordance with the Tax Code of 1997 and pursuant to the RP-Singapore Tax Treaty. It is represented that EAPL is a nonresident foreign corporation organized and existing under the laws of Singapore with office address at No. 50 Kallang Avenue, Noel Corporate Building, Singapore 339505; that EAPL does not have a branch, representative of fice fice or subsidiary in the Philippines; that EAPL intends to disseminate advertisements of its potential clients through the Internet using its facilities in Singapore; that the said advertisements, which are in the form of "banner-ads," will be prepared entirely in Singapore and the editing, programming, designing and dissemination of such advertisements will also be done using the EAPL facilities in Singapore; that EAPL also intends to enter into non-exclusive contracts with Philippine agents such as advertising agencies (local agents, i.e. Indio Communication Design and RS Concepts, Inc.); that these agents will act as independent contractors and will be responsible for soliciting potential advertising customers in the Philippines for EAPL; that these local agents do not have authority to enter into contracts for and on behalf of EAPL; that all advertising contracts will be accepted and executed by EAPL in Singapore; that the role of the local agents will Copyright 2017

CD Technologies Asia, Inc. and Accesslaw, Inc.

Philippine Taxation Encyclopedia (2017.1)

1

be limited to soliciting advertisements from advertisers and collecting the advertising fees and remitting the same to EAPL net of their commission; and that all cost for solicitation and collection will be for the account of the local agents. In reply, please be informed that Article 7 of the RP-Singapore Tax Treaty states: "Article 7 BUSINESS PROFITS

1. The profits of an enterprise of a Contracting State shall be taxable only in that State unless the enterprise carries on business in the other Contracting State through a permanent establishment situated therein. If the enterprise carries on or has carried on business as aforesaid, the profits of the enterprise may be taxed in the other State but only so much of them as is attributable to that permanent establishment. 2. Subject to the provisions of paragraph 3, where an enterprise of a Contracting State carries on business in the other Contracting State through a permanent establishment situated therein, there shall be attributed to that permanent establishment profits which it might be expected to make if it were a distinct and separate enterprise engaged in the same or similar activities under the same or similar conditions and dealing wholly independently with the enterprise of which it is a permanent establishment. aTEScI

However, insofar as it has been customary in a Contracting State to determine the profits to be attributed to a permanent establishment on the basis of an apportionment of the total profits of the enterprise to its various parts, nothing in this paragraph shall preclude that Contracting State from determining the profits to be taxed by such an apportionment as may be customary; the method of apportionment adopted shall, however, be such that the result shall be in accordance with the principles embodied in this Article."

The above-quoted provision of the RP-Singapore Tax Treaty must be read in relation with its Article 5, to wit: "Article 5 PERMANENT ESTABLISHMENT

1. For the purposes of this Convention, the term "permanent establishment" means a fixed place of business in which the business of the Copyright 2017



2

enterprise is wholly or partly carried on. 2. limited to:

The term "permanent establishment" includes specially but is not

a)

A seat of management;

b)

A branch;

c)

An office;

d)

A store or other sales outlet;

e)

A factory;

f)

A workshop;

g)

A warehouse, in relation to a person providing storage facilities for

h)

A mine, quarry, or other place of extraction of natural resources;

ISCTcH

others;

i) A building site or construction or assembly project or installation project or supervisory activities in connection therewith, provided such site, project or activity continues for a period more than 183 days; and j) The furnishing of services, including consultancy services, by a resident of one of the Contracting States through employees or other personnel, provided activities of that nature continue (for the same or a connected project) within the other Contracting State for a period or periods aggregating more than 183 days. 3.

...

4. A person acting in one of the Contracting States on behalf of an enterprise of the other Contracting State, other than an agent of an independent status to whom paragraph 5 applies, shall be deemed to be a permanent establishment in the first-mentioned Contracting State if — a) he has, and habitually exercises in the first-mentioned Contracting State, an authority to conclude contracts in the name of that enterprise unless the exercise of such authority is limited to the purchase of goods or merchandise for that enterprise; or b) Copyright 2017

he has no such authority, but habitually maintains in the



3

first-mentioned State a stock of goods or merchandise from which he regularly delivers goods or merchandise on behalf of the enterprise. 5. An enterprise of one of the Contracting States shall not be deemed to have a permanent establishment in the other Contracting State merely because that enterprise carries on business in that other Contracting State through a broker, general commission agent, or any other agent of an independent status, where such broker or agent is acting in the ordinary course of his business. However, when the activities of such an agent are devoted wholly or almost wholly on behalf of that enterprise, he shall not be considered an agent of independent status within the meaning of this paragraph if the transactions between the agent and the enterprise were not made under arm's length conditions."

Based on the foregoing provisions of the treaty, the Philippines is allowed to tax the business profits of an enterprise which is a resident of Singapore if it has a permanent establishment situated in the Philippines and only so much of such profit that is attributable to that permanent establishment. Considering that EAPL does not have permanent establishment located in the Philippines and its local agents did not qualify as to constitute permanent establishment situated in the Philippines, your opinion that the income of EAPL from advertising fees paid by local agents is not subject to Philippine income tax and consequently to the withholding tax pursuant to the RP-Singapore Tax Treaty is hereby confirmed. (BIR Rulings 279-88 & 219-85) Moreover, as the editing, programming, designing and dissemination of such advertisements will be done using the facilities in Singapore, the situs of income arising from such labor or personal services is Singapore. On this score, whatever fees derived therefrom are considered income outside the Philippines and therefore not taxable since a nonresident foreign corporation is taxable only on its income from sources within the Philippines. (BIR Rulings supra.) However, the commissions received and to be received by Indio Communication Design and RS Concepts, Inc. from EAPL pursuant to their agreement are subject to the corporate income tax imposed under Section 27(A) of the Tax Code of 1997 and to the 10% VAT under Section 108(A) of the same Code. (BIR Ruling DA-062-2-5-99) This ruling is issued on the basis of the foregoing facts as represented. However, if upon investigation it will be disclosed that the facts are different, then Copyright 2017



4

this ruling shall be null and void.

Very truly yours,

(SGD.) RENE G. BAÑEZ Commissioner Bureau of Internal Revenue

Copyright 2017



5

ITAD Ruling 14-01

Recommend Documents