Comparison between Revenue Memorandum Order 20-90 and 14-16

Due to the rampant practice by the taxpayers to contest the validity of their own waivers of the statute of limitations after having availed of its benefits, the BIR effectively revised its procedures with regard to the proper execution of waivers. 

RMO 20-90 AND RDAO 05-01	RMO 14-16
The provisions of the RMO and RDAO explicitly show their mandatory nature, requiring strict compliance. Hence, failure to comply with any of the requisites renders a waiver defective and ineffectual. (Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Standard Chartered Bank, G.R. No. 192173, July 29, 2015)	The waiver may be, but not necessarily, in the form prescribed by RMO No. 20-90 or RDAO No. 05-01.  The taxpayer's failure to follow the aforesaid forms does not invalidate the executed waiver, for as long as the following are complied with:  a)  The Waiver of the Statute of Limitations under Section 222 (b) and (d) shall be executed before the expiration of the period to assess or to collect taxes. The date of execution shall be specifically indicated in the waiver;  b)  The waiver shall be signed by the taxpayer himself or his duly authorized representative. In the case of a corporation, the waiver must be signed by any of its responsible officials;  c)  The expiry date of the period agreed upon to assess/collect the tax after the regular three- year period of prescription should be indicated.
Waivers of Statute of Limitations should specify the kind and amount of the tax due(Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Standard Chartered Bank, G.R. No. 192173, July 29, 2015) Logically, there can be no agreement if the kind and amount of the taxes to be assessed or collected were not indicated. Hence, specific information in the waiver is necessary for its validity. (Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Systems Technology Institute, Inc., G.R. No. 220835, July 26, 2017)	Except for waiver of collection of taxes which shall indicate the particular taxes assessed, the waiver need not specify the particular taxes to be assessed nor the amount thereof, and it may simply state "all internal revenue taxes" considering that during the assessment stage, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue or her duly authorized representative is still in the process of examining and determining the tax liability of the taxpayer.
The authorized revenue official shall ensure that the waiver is duly accomplished and signed by the taxpayer or his authorized representative before affixing his signature to signify acceptance of the same.	The taxpayer is charged with the burden of ensuring that the waivers of statute of limitation are validly executed by its authorized representative.
Under RDAO 05-01 it is the duty of the authorized revenue official to ensure that the waiver is duly accomplished and signed by the taxpayer or his authorized representative before affixing his signature to signify acceptance of the same.  (Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Next Mobile, Inc., G.R. No. 212825, December 7, 2015)	The authority of the taxpayer's representative who participated in the conduct of audit or investigation shall not be thereafter contested to invalidate the waiver.
The "WAIVER" should not be accepted by the concerned BIR office and official unless duly notarized.	The waiver may be notarized.
The waiver is a bilateral agreement, thus necessitating the very signatures of both the Commissioner and the taxpayer to give birth to a valid agreement.  If the waiver did not contain the date of acceptance by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, a requisite necessary to determine whether the waiver was validly accepted before the expiration of the original three-year period. (Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. FMF Development Corp., G.R. No. 167765, June 30, 2008 )	Considering that the waiver is a voluntary act of the taxpayer, the waiver shall take legal effect and be binding on the taxpayer upon its execution thereof.
The waiver must be executed in three (3) copies, the original copy to be attached to the docket of the case, the second copy for the taxpayer and the third copy for the Office accepting the waiver.  If it is not proven that the taxpayer was furnished a copy of the BIR-accepted waiver, the waiver in question is defective and will not validly extend the original three-year prescriptive period. (Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. FMF Development Corp., G.R. No. 167765, June 30, 2008)	It shall be the duty of the taxpayer to submit its duly executed waiver to the Commissioner of Internal Revenue or official/s previously designated in existing issuances or the concerned revenue district officer or group supervisor as designated in the Letter of Authority/Memorandum of Assignment who shall then indicate acceptance by signing the same.

PERIOD OF LIMITATION TO ASSESS (SEC 203 OF THE NIRC)

Internal revenue taxes shall be assessed within three (3) years after the last day prescribed by law for the filing of the return, and no proceeding in court without assessment for the collection of such taxes shall begun after the expiration of such period: Provided, that in a case where a return is filed beyond the period prescribed by law, the return is filed beyond the three (3)-year period shall be counted from the day the return was filed. A return filed before the last day prescribed by law for the filing thereof shall be considered as filed on such day.

In case an amended return is filed, the period of limitation of the right to issue an assessment should be counted from the filing of the amended return if it is substantially different from the original return. However, the prescriptive period to assess shall commence from the filing of the original return if it is sufficiently complete to enable the BIR to intelligently determine the proper amount to be assessed. 

EXCEPTIONS TO THE PERIOD OF LIMITATION TO ASSESS 

In the case of a false or fraudulent return with intent to evade tax or of failure to file a return, the tax may be assessed, or a proceeding in court for the collection of such tax may be filed without assessment, at any time within 10 years after the discovery of the falsity, fraud or omission: Provided, that in a fraud assessment which has become final and executory, the fact of fraud shall be judicially taken cognizance of in the civil or criminal action for the collection thereof. 

THE EXCEPTIONS TO THE LAW ON PRESCRIPTION SHOULD PERFORCE BE STRICTLY CONSTRUED 


For the purpose of safeguarding taxpayers from any unreasonable examination, investigation or assessment, our tax law provides a statute of limitations in the collection of taxes. Thus, the law on prescription, being a remedial measure, should be liberally construed in order to afford such protection. As a corollary, the exceptions to the law on prescription should perforce be strictly construed. (Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. B.F. Goodrich Phils., Inc., G.R. No. 104171, February 24, 1999)