Sara Duterte net worth: Gatchalian takes notes of losses in firms

MANILA, Philippines — Senate President Sherwin Gatchalian on Tuesday raised the possibility that the increase in Vice President Sara Duterte’s net worth could not have come from the 18 companies linked to her and her husband, Manases Carpio, if they recorded losses.

Gatchalian made this observation after perusing the summaries of corporations that were prepared and submitted to the Senate impeachment court by prosecution witness Gerardo Del Rosario, director of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s company registration and monitoring department.

“Tama po ba na sa lahat ng mga corporations na may kaugnayan kay Vice President Sara at kay Manases Carpio, wala po ni isang nag declare ng  dividends?” Gatchalian asked.

Article continues after this advertisement

(Is it correct that none of the corporations linked to Vice President Sara Duterte and Manases Carpio declared any dividends?)

FEATURED STORIES

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

READ: Non-declaration of dividends not illegal, Sara Duterte’s camp points out

Del Rosario confirmed this, saying there was no information indicating that the firms declared any dividends.

“So ibig sabihin kung merong, kung ibabangga po namin ito sa SALN (statement of assets, liabilities and net worth), hindi ho pwedeng manggaling sa mga corporations nya yung paglaki  ng kanyang net worth. Tama po ba? Dahil kung by process  of elimination, titingnan natin yung mga corporations,  pwede na nating i-rule out yung corporations?” the Senate chief asked again.

(So, if we compare this with her SALN, does that mean the increase in her net worth could not have come from her corporations? Is that correct? Because, by a process of elimination, if we look at the corporations, can we rule out the corporations as a possible source?)

Article continues after this advertisement

READ: Impeachment trial: Jaime Tan Cruz was ex-Pres Duterte’s envoy to China

“Kung ayun po rito at wala po syang natanggap na benepisyo, yung dibidendo, hindi ko po alam kung meron po syang made-deklarang kinita out of these corporations,” the witness answered.

Article continues after this advertisement

(Based on that, if she did not receive any benefit, such as dividends, I don’t know if she would have any income from these corporations to declare.)

Gatchalian also asked the witness whether most of the companies, except for four—GenCorp Industries Inc,   Davao Emerging Taipans Corp., SGT Fortune Horse Corporation, and Mati City Ice Plant and Cold Storage— recorded  losses.

“Tama  po,” del Rosario answered. 

(That’s correct)

The Senate chief thought noted that  Duterte was  not a shareholder in GenCorp based on SEC records. 

“Yung may connection lang kay Atty.  Manases at  Vice President Sara yung Mati Ice Plant, Davao Emerging Taipans at SGT, ito lang yung kumita. The rest , tinitignan ko dito  summary, lugi  ho sya and therefore hindi hio makaka declare ng dividends  dahil  lugi nga e,’’  Gatchalian pointed out.

(The  ones connected to Atty. Manases Carpio and Vice President Sara Duterte—the Mati Ice Plant, Davao Emerging Taipans, and SGT—were the only ones that made a profit. The rest, based on the summary I’m looking at here, recorded losses and therefore could not declare dividends because they were operating at a loss.)

The witness agreed, explaining that those with deficit retained earnings could declare dividends.

Defense lawyer Justin Nicol Gular though pointed out earlier that  the non-declaration of dividends is not  prohibited under the Revised Corporation Code of the Philippines. 

“Under Section 42, hindi naman prohibited ang hindi pag-declare ng dibidendo, di ba?” Gular asked during his cross-examination of the witness.

(Under Section 42, the failure to declare dividends is not prohibited, correct?)

“Opo dahil sa word na ‘may,’” del Rosario said.

(Yes, because of the word ‘may.)

Section 42 of the Revised Corporation Code states that “The board of directors of a stock corporation may declare dividends out of the unrestricted retained earnings which shall be payable in cash, property, or in stock to all stockholders on the basis of outstanding stock held by them.”

“So pag walang dineklara, hindi naman po illegal yung ginagawa ng mga korporasyon. Tama po ba?” Gular asked again.

(So if no dividends are declared, what the corporations are doing is not illegal, correct?)