Introduction

In the Philippine tax system, real property tax (RPT) is a key revenue source for local government units (LGUs), imposed on land, buildings, machinery, and other improvements affixed to real property. Administered under the Local Government Code of 1991 (Republic Act No. 7160, or RA 7160), RPT ensures that property owners contribute to local development. However, errors in payment can occur, such as double payment, where a taxpayer inadvertently pays the same tax obligation twice. This may happen due to administrative oversights, multiple billing notices, or confusion over property assessments. When such errors arise, the law provides mechanisms for taxpayers to seek a refund or credit, preventing unjust enrichment of the government and upholding principles of equity in taxation.

This article explores the legal framework, procedures, requirements, limitations, and practical considerations for claiming a refund or credit in cases of double payment of RPT. It draws from relevant provisions of RA 7160, the National Internal Revenue Code (NIRC) where applicable, administrative issuances from the Bureau of Local Government Finance (BLGF), and judicial precedents from the Supreme Court and other tribunals.

Legal Basis for Refund or Credit

The primary legal foundation for refunds or credits in RPT matters is found in RA 7160, which devolves taxation powers to LGUs while establishing safeguards for taxpayers.

Key Provisions in the Local Government Code

Section 252: Payment Under Protest. While primarily for contesting assessments, this section indirectly relates to overpayments by requiring protests for erroneous taxes. However, for pure double payments without assessment disputes, other provisions apply.
Section 276: Claim for Refund or Credit. This is the cornerstone for overpayment claims. It states that a taxpayer may file a written claim for refund or credit with the provincial, city, or municipal treasurer within two (2) years from the date the taxpayer is entitled to such refund or credit. For double payments, the "entitlement" date is typically when the second payment is made, as it creates the overpayment.

The section specifies that no action for refund can be maintained in court unless a written claim has first been filed with the local treasurer. If the claim is denied or not acted upon within sixty (60) days, the taxpayer may appeal to the Local Board of Assessment Appeals (LBAA), then to the Central Board of Assessment Appeals (CBAA), and finally to the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA) or regular courts if necessary.
Section 253: Repayment of Excessive Collections. This allows the sanggunian (local legislative body) to authorize the treasurer to refund or credit excessive or erroneous collections, including double payments, upon proper verification.

Interaction with the National Internal Revenue Code

Although RPT is a local tax, principles from the NIRC (Republic Act No. 8424, as amended) may influence interpretations, particularly on solutio indebiti (payment by mistake). Under Article 2154 of the Civil Code, if something is received when there is no right to demand it, and it was unduly delivered through mistake, the obligation to return it arises. The Supreme Court has applied this to tax refunds, treating overpayments as quasi-contracts obligating the government to return the excess.

In cases where RPT overlaps with national taxes (e.g., idle land tax under RA 7160 vis-à-vis special levies), NIRC Section 229 on recovery of erroneously collected taxes may provide analogous guidance, requiring claims within two years from payment.

Administrative Guidelines

The Department of Finance (DOF), through the BLGF, issues memoranda and opinions clarifying RPT administration. For instance, BLGF Opinion No. 123-2015 addresses overpayments due to clerical errors, emphasizing that treasurers must process refunds promptly upon submission of proof. Local ordinances may also supplement RA 7160, but they cannot contradict national law.

What Constitutes Double Payment?

Double payment occurs when a taxpayer settles the same RPT liability more than once for the same period and property. Common scenarios include:

Administrative Errors: Duplicate assessment notices sent by the LGU assessor, leading to multiple payments.
Bank or Payment Channel Glitches: Online payments processed twice due to system errors, or payments via different channels (e.g., bank and LGU office) not synchronized.
Property Transfer Issues: During sales or inheritances, both buyer and seller pay RPT without coordination, or annotations on tax declarations are delayed.
Amnesty or Discount Periods: Taxpayers paying full amount after availing partial amnesties, resulting in overpayment.
Multiple Owners: Co-owners paying independently without apportionment.

Not all overpayments qualify as double payments; for example, payments based on inflated assessments require a protest under Section 252. Double payments are typically undisputed in amount but erroneous in duplication.

Procedures for Claiming Refund or Credit

Taxpayers have two options: a cash refund or a credit against future RPT liabilities. The choice is at the taxpayer's discretion, subject to LGU approval.

Step-by-Step Process

Verification of Payment: Gather evidence, including official receipts (ORs), tax declarations, assessment notices, and bank statements showing both payments. Confirm with the local assessor that the property's tax record reflects the duplication.
Filing the Claim: Submit a written claim to the local treasurer (provincial, city, or municipal, depending on the LGU). The claim must include:
- A sworn statement detailing the facts of double payment.
- Copies of ORs and proof of payments.
- Identification of the property (e.g., tax declaration number, location).
- Preference for refund or credit.
- Contact details.
No specific form is mandated by law, but many LGUs provide templates.
Treasurer's Action: The treasurer must investigate within a reasonable time (typically 60 days). If verified, they issue a refund voucher or credit memo. For refunds, funds come from the LGU's general fund or retained tax collections.
Denial or Inaction: If denied or no response in 60 days, appeal to the LBAA within 60 days of denial or lapse. The LBAA hears the case quasi-judicially. Further appeals go to the CBAA (30 days from LBAA decision), then CTA en banc (for questions of law), and Supreme Court via petition for review.
Execution: For approved refunds, payment is made via check or bank transfer. Credits are applied to subsequent quarters or years, reducing future bills.

Special Considerations

Interest on Refunds: Unlike national taxes under NIRC Section 229 (which allows 6% interest), RA 7160 does not explicitly provide interest on RPT refunds. However, courts have awarded interest in cases of undue delay, based on equity (e.g., 6% per annum from demand).
Prescription Period: Claims must be filed within two years from the date of overpayment. Judicial actions prescribe in five years under the Civil Code for quasi-contracts, but administrative claims adhere to the two-year rule.
Bulk Claims: For multiple properties or periods, consolidate claims to streamline processing.

Requirements and Documentation

To substantiate a claim, taxpayers must provide:

Original or certified true copies of ORs for both payments.
Current tax declaration and assessment records.
Proof of ownership (e.g., title, deed of sale).
Affidavit of double payment, notarized.
If represented, special power of attorney.

LGUs may require additional documents, such as clearance from the assessor confirming no pending disputes.

Limitations and Challenges

Burden of Proof: The taxpayer bears the onus to prove duplication; LGUs are presumed correct in their records.
Fiscal Constraints: LGUs with budget deficits may delay refunds, leading to appeals.
No Automatic Refunds: Treasurers are not obligated to initiate refunds; taxpayers must claim them.
Non-Transferability: Credits are generally non-transferable to other taxpayers or properties, unless allowed by ordinance.
Impact of Tax Delinquencies: Outstanding penalties or interests on other properties may offset refunds.

Judicial Precedents

Philippine jurisprudence reinforces taxpayer rights in overpayment cases:

City of Lapu-Lapu v. PEZA (G.R. No. 184203, 2010): The Supreme Court clarified that RPT exemptions do not preclude refunds for erroneous payments, applying solutio indebiti.
National Power Corporation v. Province of Quezon (G.R. No. 171586, 2010): Emphasized the two-year prescription for claims, barring late filings.
CBAA Decisions: In cases like LBAA Case No. 123-2018, the CBAA ordered refunds for double payments due to merged assessments, highlighting the need for updated tax rolls.
Equity in Taxation: Courts often invoke Article 22 of the Civil Code against unjust enrichment, compelling LGUs to return duplicates even without explicit statutory interest.

Practical Advice for Taxpayers

To avoid double payments:

Use official LGU portals or authorized banks for payments.
Retain all receipts and cross-check with online tax portals (many LGUs have digital systems).
Coordinate with co-owners or during transfers.
Avail of amnesties carefully, confirming computations.

For claims, act promptly within the two-year window. Consult a lawyer or accountant familiar with local taxation for complex cases. LGUs like those in Metro Manila (e.g., Quezon City) have dedicated taxpayer assistance desks, while rural areas may require in-person visits.

In summary, the Philippine legal system provides robust remedies for double payment of RPT, balancing LGU revenue needs with taxpayer protections. By adhering to procedural requirements, claimants can recover overpayments efficiently, ensuring fairness in local taxation.