this is being shared around on facebook, first posted (as far as i can tell) on willie buyson villarama’s wall for public consumption. the author bienvenido c. gonzalez is a SALN advocate who closely monitored the corona impeachment trial.
SALN EXPERT GIVES HIS ANALYSIS
Benny C. Gonzalez
MBA, CPA, BSC, BA, UN Fellow
Thank you for asking for my take on the Bautista versus Bautista case. I want to limit the scope of my discussion to the SALN aspects of the issue where I think I can contribute the most. Good SALN analysis demands three paradigm shifts:
1. Good SALN analysis should at the end of the day either exonerate or convict the filer under scrutiny.
2. Good SALN analysis is focused on HOW the Networth was accumulated rather than WHAT it is at the end of every year.
3. Good SALN analysis defines and limits as legitimate and legal entries only TAXED EVIDENCED TRANSACTIONS.
De-politicking this case:
• The COMELEC Chairman is not a first time SALN filer with only his December 2016 SALN to show but has filed several others in his current capacity and from other past government appointment(s). As such, his declared Assets, Liabilities and Networth as of December 2016 should not be a given (assumed the truth) nor should it be the only figures against which the wife/whistleblower’s allegations be compared with. This is where most people especially the media will miss out on.
• Rather than being a given, his 2016 SALN should be X, what SALN analysis MUST solve for that either gives him a clean bill of health as an honest and transparent public servant or condemned him as someone who may have gotten away with ill-gotten wealth in his previous or current appointment(s).
• If red flags have already been raised at this stage, he should be asked to explain in accounting terms how the specific transactions causing these alarm bells are actually legitimate and legal movements of his Networth.
• When the explanations are questionable themselves, then appropriate charges should be filed against him for impeachment. Again, this is where most people especially the media will miss out on. Please note that this impeachment case can and will stand alone even without the USE of the whistleblower’s allegations.
• If red flags are detected during his earlier tenure(s), then it would be a strong case (in aid of legislation) for appointees to be asked to bare their past SALNs to public scrutiny before they can be eligible for reappointment in another capacity. In fact, I have a NO SALN, NO COC/APPOINTMENT advocacy.
• If he gets a clean bill of health after the analyses of ALL his past SALN filings, it will also be time to compare his December 2016 SALN with the whistleblower allegations.
• When his explanations are found unreasonable or unbelievable (because he consistently beats Gorge Soros in currency trading, for example), AMLAC should be asked to assist in the case build-up. A case for seizure and garnishment should then be filed with the Ombudsman.
• Knowing their husbands, NO wife should agree on any settlement with her husband based on his SALN. SALNs are based on historical costs while settlements should always be based on current fair market values.
• Forex gains, especially from offshore accounts are normally untaxed thus exposing the family involved to further BIR audits and assessments.
• The co-mingling of family funds in a filer’s SALN must be traceable to a PRIOR DISTINGUISHABLE investment fund carried as an asset with a contra-liability set up for that purpose. It is highly questionable if it had never been set up before the accusations. In fact, from an accounting stand point, this is what every SALN filer should do if s/he has a similar situation. Ab initio, the ownership of the capital and fruits are transparent and identifiable.
• The absence of these entries and accounts in his SALN would reveal at the very least the lack of good accounting and financial advice which may turn out to be very costly for him.