The acquisition of right-of-way (ROW) for transmission towers and lines by the National Grid Corporation of the Philippines (NGCP) is one of the most contentious issues in Philippine energy infrastructure development. Landowners frequently ask: “How much will I actually be paid?” The short answer is that there is no single fixed amount prescribed by law. Compensation depends on whether the acquisition is by negotiated agreement or by judicial expropriation, the classification of the land, the voltage level of the line, the degree of restriction imposed on the property, and the current fair market value in the locality.

Nevertheless, both NGCP practice and Supreme Court jurisprudence have established clear patterns that allow landowners and lawyers to predict, with reasonable accuracy, the likely compensation.

Legal Framework Governing NGCP ROW Acquisition

Republic Act No. 9511 (NGCP Franchise Act, 2008)
Grants NGCP the power of eminent domain and the right to acquire a perpetual easement of right-of-way for transmission lines.
Electric Power Industry Reform Act (EPIRA, RA 9136) and its IRR
Recognizes transmission as a public utility service and authorizes the exercise of eminent domain.
Rule 67 of the Rules of Court (Expropriation)
Governs judicial proceedings when negotiation fails.
Republic Act No. 10752 (The Right-of-Way Act of 2016) and its IRR
Applies to NGCP projects because they are national government infrastructure projects under DOE oversight (DOE Department Circular DC2017-11-0014 explicitly adopts RA 10752 procedures for power transmission projects).
Article 649 of the Civil Code
Basis for the legal easement of right-of-way for transmission lines.

Components of Compensation

Compensation is divided into three main categories:

1. Tower Footprint / Tower Base (Full Occupation Area)

The concrete foundations and the small area immediately surrounding each tower leg (typically 400–1,600 sqm per tower depending on voltage) are considered permanently and totally occupied.

Standard compensation: 100% of the current fair market value (FMV) of the land.

In negotiated settlements, NGCP almost always pays 100% for this portion. In expropriation cases, courts uniformly award 100% because the landowner loses all beneficial use of that specific area.

2. Right-of-Way Easement Strip (Danger Zone / Servitude Area)

This is the rectangular corridor beneath and on both sides of the transmission conductors where buildings, tall trees, and certain activities are prohibited.

Typical ROW widths:

69 kV lines → 15–20 meters
138 kV lines → 30 meters
230 kV lines → 40–50 meters
500 kV lines → 60 meters

The landowner retains title and may continue agricultural use (rice, corn, coconut with height restriction, fishponds, pasture, etc.), but is permanently prohibited from constructing houses or structures taller than 3–4 meters.

Compensation for this easement portion is expressed as a percentage of the FMV of the affected land.

Evolution of the Percentage in Supreme Court Jurisprudence

Period / Leading Cases	Percentage Awarded	Rationale
1991–2005 (NPC v. Gutierrez, NPC v. Campos)	10%	Traditional rule; landowner can still farm the land
2007–2015 (NPC v. Ibrahim, NPC v. Heirs of Sangkay)	10–30%	Courts began recognizing greater restriction on future use
2016–present (TransCo v. Oroville Development Corp., G.R. 223366, 2021; NPC v. Spouses Bernardo, G.R. 189127, 2022; NPC v. Heirs of Macabangkit, G.R. 237277, 2023)	30%–50% most common; occasionally 70%	Current prevailing doctrine: percentage depends on the degree of deprivation of ordinary use and future potential use

The 10% rule is now largely obsolete. The Supreme Court has explicitly abandoned a fixed percentage in favor of a case-by-case determination based on the report of court-appointed commissioners.

In practice, however, in most recent RTC decisions involving NGCP/TransCo expropriation cases nationwide (2019–2025), the awarded easement fee ranges from 30% to 50% of the FMV, with 30% being the most frequent when the land is agricultural and 50% when the land is classified residential or commercial or when the ROW severely limits future development.

3. Improvements, Crops, Trees, and Consequential Damages

Perennial fruit-bearing trees (coconut, mango, etc.) – full replacement value based on current DOA/DAR formulas or appraisers’ valuation
Annual crops – actual damage plus disturbance compensation
Structures – 100% replacement cost (even if illegal, if built before the ROW was imposed)
Consequential damages – loss in value of the remaining land (severance damage) if the property is bisected by the ROW

These are paid separately and in full, in addition to the land/easement compensation.

Typical Compensation in NGCP Negotiated Settlements (2020–2025 Practice)

NGCP’s standard initial offer (based on hundreds of executed ROW agreements nationwide):

Tower footprint → 100% of FMV
ROW easement strip → 20–30% of FMV (most common offer)
Crops/trees/structures → 100% replacement value

Many landowners negotiate upward to 40–50% for the easement portion, especially in Luzon and urbanizing areas of Visayas and Mindanao. NGCP frequently agrees to 40–50% to avoid protracted litigation.

In high-land-value provinces (Cavite, Laguna, Batangas, Cebu, Davao), final negotiated easement compensation often reaches 50–70% of FMV because landowners are more sophisticated and litigation costs for NGCP are high.

Tax Treatment of ROW Compensation

Under Section 9 of RA 10752 and BIR Revenue Regulations No. 13-2017:

Compensation for land and easement – exempt from capital gains tax, donor’s tax, DST, and VAT
The owner receives the full amount net of any withholding tax (NGCP withholds only if the payment is considered income, which it usually is not)

Summary Table: Realistic Compensation Expectations (2025)

Land Classification	Tower Footprint	ROW Easement Strip (Negotiated)	ROW Easement Strip (Expropriation, most likely)	Total Effective Compensation per sqm of affected land
Agricultural (rice/corn)	100%	30–40%	30–40%	₱150–₱400/sqm (if FMV is ₱1,000/sqm)
Coconut land	100%	40–50%	40–50%	₱500–₱1,000/sqm
Residential/commercial	100%	50–70%	50–60%	₱5,000–₱15,000/sqm (in peri-urban areas)

Conclusion

While Philippine law does not fix a single percentage, the realistic range of compensation for NGCP transmission line right-of-way in 2025 is:

100% of fair market value for the actual tower footprint
30%–50% of fair market value for the ROW easement strip (higher in negotiated settlements in high-value areas)
100% replacement cost for all improvements, crops, and trees
Additional consequential damages when applicable

Landowners who refuse NGCP’s initial offer and go to court will, in almost all recent cases, receive at least 30% and frequently 50% for the easement portion — significantly higher than the old 10% rule that many NGCP ROW personnel still mistakenly quote.

For landowners, therefore, the practical strategy is clear: reject offers below 40–50% in most cases, demand an independent appraisal, and be prepared to litigate if necessary. The current Supreme Court doctrine strongly favors higher compensation reflecting the real economic restriction imposed by a perpetual high-voltage transmission line easement.