Under Article XIII, Section 9 of the 1987 Constitution, the State is mandated to make decent housing and basic services” available to underprivileged and homeless citizens at an affordable cost. However, the wanton increase in Real Property Taxes (RPT)—which have surged by as much as 2,300 percent due to the revision of land property values—is not only unconscionable but confiscatory. Because these zonal values cover residential properties used as primary homes for owners and their extended families, the tax hike offers no liquid benefit. The increased value is never realized unless the property is sold; until then, it is merely a burden to be absorbed.

While a higher property valuation might seem like a windfall, it is only a paper profit" that generates no cash flow. In reality, this upward valuation can lead to tragedy: an owner may find themselves unable to pay the exorbitant RPT, eventually leading to the government auctioning the property to cover the arrears. This results in the loss of residence for the owner and their family. I, therefore, propose the removal of RPT on the primary residence of taxpayers for the following reasons:

First, it aligns with the Constitutional mandate. RPT runs counter to the state’s duty to provide affordable housing for both aspiring and existing homeowners. If the government cannot provide housing due to a lack of funds or the diversion of resources, it should at least make it affordable for citizens to keep the homes they already have. Instead of allowing RPT funds to be dissipated by government inefficiencies and corruption, we should give that value directly back to the people by removing the tax burden of homeownership.

Second, RPT constitutes double taxation. It is unfair to honest, tax-paying citizens. The funds used to purchase these properties come from salaries, business income, professional fees, dividends, and capital gains—all of which have already been subjected to income tax, inheritance tax, VAT, and withholding tax.

Third, it empowers families to solve the housing crisis. With approximately 4.5 million homeless people in the Philippines, the government lacks the resources to provide homes for everyone. If homeowners were relieved of the RPT burden, they could better assist their own children with down payments for their own homes. Parents will always do a better job of helping their children secure a future than the government ever will.

The proposal is specific: the removal of RPT should apply only to the primary residential property of the owner. As of 2020, there were about 28.5 million housing units, indicating that many owners hold multiple properties. Removing the tax on primary residences would broaden the homeowner base as more people seek to take advantage of this relief.

U.S. President Donald Trump has discussed removing property taxes in the United States, and it is time someone here takes the lead. To those who argue that removing RPT would cause a massive disruption in tax revenue, I say this: Give the people a break. Stop the corruption, streamline the government, and reduce the bureaucracy to cut costs. Most Filipino families must live within their means because they have no other choice. Why should the government be any different?