‘Gap’ between VP’s SALN, tax records shown in impeach trial

MANILA, Philippines — The net income after tax of Vice President Sara Duterte and her husband, lawyer Manases Carpio, from 2007 to 2025 amounting to more than P85 million does not add up to her declared net worth in 2025, according to a prosecution witness from the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) who testified on Thursday.

The testimony was made on Day 36 of Duterte’s impeachment trial, as prosecutors sought to establish the discrepancy between the couple’s reported income and declared net worth, and prove that the Vice President kept millions in cash and other assets off the record and violated the law.

“From 2007 to 2025, how much is the total income net of tax of Vice President Duterte and husband Carpio?” private prosecutor Erwin Matib asked BIR chief of staff, lawyer Anne Loraine Garcia Marquez.

Article continues after this advertisement

READ: Tax evasion case vs VP? Up for agencies to check, says Barbers

FEATURED STORIES

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

“Based here on the summary, the total is P85,343,803.23,” she responded.

Matib pointed out that there was a “gap” between this amount and that of the declared net worth in Duterte’s 2025 statement of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALN) amounting to P98,656,131.20.

According to Marquez, the income net of tax refers to all the income of an individual after taxes have been paid. She said the information in the BIR’s summary on Duterte and Carpio’s records came from the annual income tax returns.

The defense immediately objected to the prosecution’s comparison of the net income with the Vice President’s SALN, saying the witness has no personal knowledge of the entries on Duterte’s SALN.

Article continues after this advertisement

READ: BIR has no records Manases Carpio sold Cale88

Based on the audited financial statements (AFS) submitted to the BIR, the cash on hand and in banks for Duterte and Carpio dropped from 2022 through 2025:

Article continues after this advertisement

Marquez read the amounts as follows:

• Dec. 31, 2022: cash balance was P21,234,980

• Dec. 31, 2023: P28,971,725

• Dec. 31, 2024: P15,525,209; and

• Dec. 31, 2025: P13,804,540

The prosecution presented the information about the AFS—a joint submission by Duterte and Carpio—by reading out the numbers, after the defense objected to the flashing of Duterte and Carpio’s records on screen.

Law practice

Marquez explained that the AFS is different from the net income after tax, describing the former as a set of official corporate financial reports verified by an independent certified public accountant (CPA). The CPA checks that the financial statements were “presented fairly and in accordance with the Philippine financial reporting standard.”

According to the submitted 2025 AFS, Duterte reported “other income” separate from her compensation income.

For 2025, the reported other income was P1.1 million; and P1.58 million for 2024.

Marquez said the source of other income is not stated. But since the registered activity of Duterte is “legal activities,” she said the BIR understands that this refers to her law practice.

Matib asked Marquez if the Vice President can practice her profession and receive professional fees aside from her salary as the second highest official of the country.

The prosecution’s line of questioning raised the possibility that Duterte went against Section 13, Article 7 of the 1987 Constitution, which prohibits the president, vice president, Cabinet members, and their deputies from holding other offices, practicing other professions, or participating in businesses during their tenure.

The defense objected to the prosecution’s line of questioning.

Marquez further testified that a BIR Form 2316 attached to Duterte’s 2023 income tax return (ITR) shows she received compensation income from the City Government of Davao for the taxable year 2023.

Pattern of violation

She said that based on the Tax Code, all income derived from whatever source, legal or unlawful, is taxable. She added that the BIR issued a letter of authority (LOA) to conduct audit to determine whether proper taxes are paid or if income is legal or illegal.

Marquez confirmed that the BIR issued an LOA against either Duterte or Carpio, but she cannot disclose the details as these are confidential.

Marquez also testified that Duterte received the following for 2021: gross compensation income of P2,361,252; and noncompensation income or sales/receipts or fees of P4,650,000.

The prosecution tried to show that Duterte practiced her profession as a lawyer and earned income from it even as she held office as Davao mayor.

While it was not part of the scope of the impeachment charges, Matib argued this showed a pattern of repeatedly violating laws.

“There’s a pattern, there’s a habit of violating laws which prohibit her from practicing her profession. Throughout so many years she’s been doing it. And she carried it towards the vice presidency,” he said.

The defense objected to the remarks of the prosecution.

Evidence presented from 2017-2019 income tax returns showed Duterte reported sales, revenues, and fees in addition to her compensation income while serving as mayor of Davao City.

For taxable year 2017, Duterte reported net sales, revenues, receipts, and fees amounting to P3,188,776; P1,876,417 for 2018; and P4,051,000 for 2019.

“Aside from her compensation, she also received amounts in sales/revenues/receipts/fees?” Matib asked, to which Marquez answered in the affirmative.

True owner

Based on the BIR’s database, the prosecution said there are no records arising from or in connection with any transfer, sale, disposition, or other conveyance of the shares of stock owned by Carpio in Cale88.

“No documents or records were found evidencing the payment, assessment, or settlement of any applicable taxes fees or other charges arising from or in connection with such transfer or this position,” Marquez said.

She also confirmed there is no record of an issued electronic certificate authorizing registration (eCAR) nor are there any pending applications for one regarding the sale of these shares.

The prosecution claims that because of this, Carpio remains the true owner of Cale88 Foods Corp. and that the sale of shares to Pikimong Pikimong Inc. was “fake.”

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.

Your subscription has been successful.

The defense objected to this conclusion and asked that the characterization of such a sale as “fake” be stricken from the record. The court granted the defense’s motion. /cb