Pork scam accused Janet, hubby face P60-M tax case

Among the acquisitions made by the couple were their condominium units at City & Land Mega Plaza and The Discovery Center in Ortigas, worth P1.77 million and P9.19 million, respectively; land in Bayambang, Pangasinan province, worth P13.544 million; and life insurance plans from Philippine American Life & General Insurance Co., Insular Life Assurance Co. Ltd. and Philippine AXA Life Insurance Corp., with annual premiums ranging from P30,000 to P5 million.

The couple also made investments, either as incorporators or contributors, in a restaurant, two charity foundations, a construction firm, and four other corporations, as well as the family-owned JLN Corp., ranging from P100,000 to P2 million.

The Napoleses also bought shares in Manila Polo Club worth P4 million and bought three luxury cars, a Ford Lincoln Navigator, a Honda Civic worth P1.1 million and a Porsche Cayenne worth P2.3 million.

The BIR claimed that the funds used to acquire the properties and make the investments “represent unreported income” and could only mean that they failed to pay correct taxes and underdeclared their income.

Nuisance suit

In their joint counteraffidavit, the couple denied the allegations against them and argued that there was malicious intent in the BIR’s filing of the complaint. They said the cases were a mere “nuisance suit” meant to harass them and without legal or factual basis.

The DOJ prosecutors, however, said that from the evidence presented by the BIR, primarily the ITRs and the other documents, “there could be no iota of doubt that there exists probable cause” to indict the couple.

“The findings of the BIR resulted in conclusive, material and eloquent proof that the expenditures of respondent spouses were grossly disproportionate to their incomes, as reflected and declared in their ITRs,” they added.

“The commission of the crime is complete when the false or fraudulent tax return has been filed,” they said.  “What is most apparent is that, in essence, the filing of the ITRs, or the omission thereof, reflect the obvious and malicious criminal intent of respondent spouses to defraud the government by evading the payment of taxes due.” Jerome Aning