improving revenue generation capabilities of lgus pam
Post on 16-Jul-2015
278 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
»“Honest and effective governance—truly transparent, disciplined and serving the interest of the country and its people” is the vision of the Philippine government for the Philippine public financial management system (PFM).
(COA, DBM, and DOF, 2011)
»The public finance agencies of the Philippine government are ―collectively committed to promote fiscal responsibility and good governance through transparency and accountability in financial transactions in the Philippine government.
(COA, DBM. and DOF, 2011)
» LGU growth lagging behind population growth and inflation.
» For the past decade the growthof LGU revenues have failed to catch up with the combined growth of population as well as prices.
» LGU revenues grew annually by 5.85% compared to the combined growth of population and prices of 6.46%.
Annual Growth Rates of LGU Sources of Revenues (in %)
2001-2010 Province City Municipality Total
Local Sources 7.65% 5.97% 4.72% 5.92%
IRA and other grants and aids
5.12% 4.95% 6.49% 5.66%
All other sources
4.13% 10.19% 10.36% 8.45%
Total Revenues 5.50% 5.73% 6.23% 5.85%
Adequacy of LGU Revenues
Annual Population Growth Rate
2001-2010 1.88%
Annual Inflation rate 2001-2010 4.58%
Population Growth + Inflation
2001-2010 6.46%
»Continued high dependence on the Internal Revenue Allotment (IRA).
»Dependence on the Internal Revenue Allotment (IRA) and other grants at all levels of LGUs remained high – 75% for provinces, 79% for municipalities, and 42% for cities.
» Local revenue sources negatively affected by elections.
» LGU local revenue sources, especially local tax collections, are negatively affected by a 3-year election related cycle. For the different LGU levels, election-related cyclical behaviors in different local revenue sources have been observed (ADB, 2007):
˃ Provinces — real property tax (RPT), business tax, fees and charges andeconomic enterprises.
˃ Cities — economic enterprises, other receipts
˃ Municipalities — RPT, business tax, fees and charges and economic enterprises, other receipts.
» Delay in updating of the Schedule of Market Values (SMV).
» The inability of most LGUs to regularly enact updated schedules of market values is indicative of considerable delay problems (10 to 20 years) associated with the politicalization of the LGU SMV updating process.
Year
Gross Value Added in Real
Estate at Current Prices
Gross Value Added in Real
Estate at Constant 2000
Prices
Implicit Price Index for Real
Estate (2000 = 100)
2001356,982 333,272 107.11
20111,097,765 634,456 173.02
Annual Growth
Rate11.89% 6.65% 4.91%
YearTaxable
Assessed ValueNo. of Property
Units (PU) Taxable
Value/PU
20011,245,954,783,602
30,398,830 40,987
20112,515,274,287,897
33,217,384 75,722
Annual Growth
Rate7.28% 0.89% 6.33%
» Institutional deficiencies. Institutional bottlenecks like the issue of titling delays for properties covered by the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) and system deficiencies like lack of information sharing between LGU departments
Year
Gross Value Added
in Real Estate at Current Prices
Gross Value Added in Real
Estate at Constant 2000
Prices
Implicit Price Index for
Real Estate (2000 = 100)
2001356,982
333,272 107.11
20111,097,765
634,456 173.02
Annual Growth Rate
11.89% 6.65% 4.91%
Year RPT CollectionNo. of
Property Units (PU)
Collection/PU
200116,842,815,948
30,398,830 554
201127,399,920,255
33,217,384 825
Annual Growth Rate
4.99% 0.89% 4.06%
» Problematic real property accounts Collection efficiencies as of 2011 are still low primarily because of problematic real property accounts.
» Net of problematic accounts, the collection efficiency in 2010 would have been 93.2%, but because of the problematic accounts, RPT collection efficiency is a low of 56.10%.
Weighted average RPT rate
2.1%
Gross Taxable Value52,433,591,950
Collection efficiency based on
gross taxable value52.3%
Taxable value net of problematic account 29,413,036,523
Net taxable values as a % of gross taxable
value56.10%
Collection efficiency based on net taxable
value93.2%
» Difficulty in capturing business income levels for taxation.
The slow growth of business taxes is saddled by problems related to the identification of new businesses for taxation purposes and the undervaluation of declared gross sales.
The full capture of business taxes is estimated to have the potential to increase LGU business tax revenue by a factor ranging from 1.5 to 2.0. (ADB TA 7451, Aug. 2012).
»Track 1 - Proper Management of LGUs Taxing and Revenue Raising Power
»Track 2 – Stimulate Progress through Investments and Other Economic Activities
»Track 3 - Exercise of Corporate Powers and Partnership Arrangements
»Track 4 – LGC Review and Amendments
1994 & succeeding
years = 40%
1993 = 35%
INTERNAL REVENUE ALLOTMENT
Gross Internal Revenue Collections based
on third preceding Calendar Year
Provinces
23%
Cities
23%
Municipalities
34%
Barangays
20%
50% Population (NSO)
25% Land Area (LMB)
25% Equal Sharing
(1) Total BRGY.SHARE – BRGYs. with 100
inhabitants = NET Brgy.Share
(2) Net Brgy.Share
1992 1993 1994 forward
40% Pop. 50% Pop. 60% Pop.
60% E.S. 50% E.S 40% E.S.
A. Base
B. Level
C. LGU Allocation
D. Intra LGU Allocation
1992 = 30%
CY 2015Php 389.86B
• Means through which the national government support
the delivery official public services.
• Used to equalize or lessen disparities in fiscal capacities
among LGUs.
o More allotments can be given to LGUs with greater
needs and less resources.
• Allotments can influence the activities of LGUs.
oMore allotments can be given to help themselves by collecting taxes efficiently.
»Central Transfers creates ”fiscalillusion” in the form of a flypapereffect” that is associated with lumpsum grant-transfers from thenational government like the IRAand other shares from the nationalwealth.
»Updating Local Revenue Codes
»General Revision of Real Property Assessment
»Add new taxes, fees and charges using Section 186
»Revalidate/Reduce Exemptions
» Use of Presumptive Income Levels
» Updating the Unit Base Schedule of Market Values
» Developing models for determination of fee rates/ cost recovery
» Inspection of books of accounts
» Efficient delivery system (e.g. client satisfactions, simplification of procedures)
» Computerized Assisted System
» Effective Tax Information (Social Marketing)
» Issuance of Demand Letters
» Field Collections (e.g. house to house, mall based collection)
» One Stop Shops
» Participation of Barangays (billing, identification of tax subjects)
» Enforcement of Civil and Administrative Remedies
» Sale at Public Auction
1. Anchor provisions on legal basis
2. Expand Coverage (explore section 182)
3. Elimination of unproductive bases of revenues/bases which the LGU has no intentions of enforcing
4. Adjust/Update Rates (fixed rate, benchmarking, inflation, cost of delivery)
5. Simplify Provisions (minimize requirements to the most essential)
6. Increase transparency (those easily understood has greater chances for voluntary compliance)
7. Input Economic Sensitivity (amount passed on)
8. Encourage or discourage activities (rate variation)
Year Inflation Rate Consumer Price Index
2002 2.97% 103.0
2003 3.45% 106.5
2004 5.98% 112.9
2005 7.63% 121.5
2006 6.24% 129.1
2007 2.81% 132.7
2008 9.30% 145.0
2009 3.25% 149.8
2010 3.83% 155.5
2011 4.65% 162.7
2012 3.20% 167.9
2013 3.30% 173.4
2014 (est.) 4.50% 181.2
» RPT is the biggest and most potent source of revenues
» It is indexed on immovable (land, building, machineries and other structures)
» It benefits all levels of LGU
» It supports elementary and high school education through SEF
» Real property values floats with inflation and development
Valuation» Updating the schedule of values closer to market level» Identification of new structures (taxmapping , barangay –based support) » Capture the changes in the land use classification » Conduct of general revision of real property assessments» Computer assisted mass appraisal and assessment records system» Improving capacity of Assessment Offices
Collection» Information and education campaign (barangay/school based support)» Efficient distribution of notices of delinquencies» Policies to improve tax effort (incentives like discounts and relief, payment in kind etc)» Enforcement of civil and administrative remedies » Conduct of sale at public auction» Bundling of taxes
The LGU’s Role in Stimulating Progress:
• Provider of economic infrastructure
• Enabler – the creator of a business friendly
environment for sustainable development
• Planner and promoter of in-bound
investments - bringing in investments
creates more jobs, increase productivity,
generates resources for the government
and leads to improving the quality of life inthe communities.
Economic Dynamism
Size of economy, Growth of Economy and Investments, Employment, Prices,
Productivity, Business Groups, Financial Deepening
Government Efficiency
Transparency and Accountability, Public Finance, Recognition of Performance / Governance Responsiveness to Business and Basic Government Services
Infrastructure
Basic Infrastructure, Technology Infrastructure and Social Infrastructure.
Overall
Rank
Overall
Score
City/ Region
Rank
Economic
Dynamism
Government
Efficiency
Infrastructure
1 53.242 Makati, NCR 2 4 4
2 49.363 Cagayan de Oro, Region X 9 5 2
3 49.075 Naga City, Region V 4 1 18
4 47.717 Davao City, Region XI 11 13 1
5 45.465 Marikina City, NCR 19 16 3
6 45.003 Iloilo City, Region VI 23 2 7
7 43.686 Cebu City, Region VII 10 55 5
8 43.148 Manila, NCR 3 56 10
9 43.021 Valenzuela City, NCR 7 23 11
10 42.703 Paranaque City 1 93 13
1. Updated and approved LGU Plans
2. Structure leading local economic investment and incentive promotion
3. Local policies and ordinances consistent with national investment policies
4. Streamlined transactional services
5. LGU Roadmap to attract investments and generate employment
6. Active partnership with business sector
7. Infrastructure to basic local businesses
2/12/2015 For Discussion
»The significant borrowings of LGUs triggered the development of local economic infrastructure like public markets, slaughterhouses, transport terminals & post-harvest facilities
»The operation of most of these local economic enterprises is usually subsidized by the LGUs
»The challenge is to make local economic enterprises “revenue positive” or viable
˃ Public-Private Partnership
+ Power & Water Utilities Joint Venture Project of Bohol Province
+ Bulacan Toll & Packaging Center undertaken with the private sector to promote micro-small-medium enterprises
+ Mandaluyong Public Market
˃ Bond Flotation
+ Boracay-Aklan Provincial Bonds for
Tourism Development
˃ Inter-local Cooperation (LGU Initiative)
+ Inter-LGU cooperation of Metro Naga
Development Council
+ Gingoog Bay Development Council
(LGUs share a common resource
base)
+ Partido Development Authority in
Camarines Sur created by an act of
Congress providing legal
framework for inter-LGU
cooperation
˃ Corporatization of Basic Services
(Congressional Initiative)
+ La Union Medical Center - an act of
Congress corporatizing La Union
Provincial Hospital
˃ Corporatization of Public Utility (LGU
Initiative)
+ Corporatization of Misamis Oriental
Telephone System (MISORTEL) as
initiated by the Misamis Oriental
Province to ensure efficiency &
viability of MISORTEL. The
corporation has been registered
with SEC.
˃Strong political will with entrepreneurial
mind set
˃Stakeholders participation
+Transparency
+Accountability
+Empowerment
˃Capacity building/ technical assistance
˃Selection of appropriate financing option
˃Peace and order
˃Political harmony
» Vague policy/legal framework
˃Lack of roadmap for LGUs to establish and
disengage in the operation of LEEs
˃Vague legal basis of LGUs to establish LGU
corporations
˃Absence of clear-cut guidelines for LGUs to
enter into joint venture with private sector
THE REVIEW OF THE 1991 LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE
Improving Lives Through Local Governance Reform: Transparency, Accountability and Better Services
SYMPOSIUM ON THE REVIEW OF THE 1991 LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE
Improving Lives Through Local Governance Reform: Transparency, Accountability and Better Services
The LGC review will focus on fiscal provisions
1. Expenditure assignment
2. Revenue assignment & taxing powers
3. Intergovernmental fiscal transfers
4. LGU borrowing and credit finance
5. Creation of LGUs
6. Inter-LGU alliances/cooperation
7. Fiscal administration
They are critical to LGUs’ ability to deliver basic
services.
It is important to conduct a review of the
provisions using a holistic framework.
SYMPOSIUM ON THE REVIEW OF THE 1991 LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE
Improving Lives Through Local Governance Reform: Transparency, Accountability and Better Services
1. Expenditure
Assignment
Issues:
Overlapping and at times unclear assignment of
functions across various levels of government
(NG and different levels of LGUs)
Results in waste of resources
Unfunded mandates
Results in relevant services not being delivered at all or
not delivered in sufficient quantities
In either case, the welfare of local communities
is adversely affected.
Direction of reform (1) Clarifying expenditure responsibilities/functions by
distinguishing between fully devolved functions and delegated functions (i.e., functions which are related to the attainment of national objectives but implementation of which at the local level are assigned to LGUs)
Making the distinction has implications on how functions are financed o fully devolved functions best financed through block grants
and own-source revenues
o delegated functions best financed through conditional transfers if this happens there will be no need for Section 17 (f) except when said Section is interpreted in the context of conditional transfers
Consultation result – agreement in LVM
Other amendments suggested during the
consultations (1)
Reassign responsibility for solid waste
management, specifically operation of sanitary
landfill to province (LVM)
Delete Sections 147 (1) (xi), 458 (1) (xi) and 468 (1)
(xi) of the LGC authorizing the LGUs to provide
for additional allowances and other benefits to
judges, prosecutors, and other national
government agency officials operating in LGUs
(LVM)
Other amendments suggested during the
consultations (2)
Full disclosure of allocation for field offices of
NGAs operating in LGUs per budgets of said
NGAs (like DepEd, PNP, etc.) in GAA (VM)
SYMPOSIUM ON THE REVIEW OF THE 1991 LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE
Improving Lives Through Local Governance Reform: Transparency, Accountability and Better Services
2. Own-Source
Revenues
and Revenue
Assignment
Issues (1)
Lack of productive source of local revenues ► high LGU
dependence on transfers ► weak revenue autonomy ►
perverse incentives and weak accountability
Promotes less than efficient and fiscally responsible spending
Allows LGUs not to impose taxes on their constituents
commensurate with the services they deliver, resulting in weak
local demand and accountability
Issues (2)
Wide flexibility in taxes and fees that LGUs are
allowed to impose ► increased uncertainty on
part of local investors as local revenue codes
differ significantly from one location to another
May hurt inflow of investments and local economic
growth
Some LGUs impose nuisance taxes and fees that
increase the cost of doing business and/or cause
inefficient allocation of resources without a
commensurate increase in revenue take
Direction of reform (1) Identification of a closed positive list of local taxes,
fees, and charges over which LGUs have full autonomy in setting tax rates
Simplification of rate structure of local business taxes (LVM)
Indexation of tax rates, fees and charges that are fixed in peso terms to inflation (LVM)
Revisit of situs provision (i.e., derivation basis) with respect to local business tax (agreement in principle with LVM but M support for Escudero bill)
Direction of reform (2)
Assign the conduct and approval of the general revision of the schedule of market value of real property to the national government while retaining full autonomy on setting of assessment levels and real property tax rates to LGUs (LVM)
Provide mechanism for administrative recourse in case of disputes related to LGU taxing powers – Amend Section 195 (M)
Assign more revenue-productive taxes to LGUs Piggybacking on NG taxes like personal income tax
Green taxes
Other amendments suggested during the consultation
Repeal provisions of other legislation effectively amending Section 193 re tax exemptions of GOCCs, etc. (LVM)
Provide that LGUs may require establishments to submit/ open their book of accounts (VM)
SYMPOSIUM ON THE REVIEW OF THE 1991 LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE
Improving Lives Through Local Governance Reform: Transparency, Accountability and Better Services
3. Intergovernmental
Fiscal Transfers
Issues (1)
Intergovernmental transfers mainly take the form of the IRA
Does IRA provide sufficient resources needed for LGUs to deliver fully devolved services? (vertical balance issue)
Does the IRA assist fiscal equalization so that it provides more resources to LGUs with greater needs and less to LGUs with greater tax capacity?
Does IRA have disincentive effect on local revenue generation?
Lack of well-structured set of conditional transfers to leverage national government policy objectives
Issues (2)
Reforming the system of intergovernmental transfers …
Should be done in coordination with reform in revenue assignment and expenditure assignment
Should not threaten macroeconomic and fiscal stability
Reforms, even if substantive, can be designed and implemented in a marginal and sequential way so as notto harm any LGU in the process
HOW DO LGUs PAY FOR DEVOLVED SERVICES?
Intergovernmental Fiscal Transfers
Direction of reform (1)
Revisit vertical balance problem
Introduce transfer mechanism that will take into account disparities in revenue raising capacity of LGUs in line with their expenditure needs (equalization grant) (LVM)
Provided it is funded from additional transfers from the current 40% share of IRA in national internal revenue taxes
HOW DO LGUs PAY FOR DEVOLVED SERVICES?
Intergovernmental Fiscal Transfers
Direction of reform (2)
Establish system of conditional transfers with well-defined cost-sharing provisions and performance indicators (especially with regards to delegated functions) [LVM – conditional transfers to be performance based]
HOW DO LGUs PAY FOR DEVOLVED SERVICES?
Intergovernmental Fiscal Transfers
Direction of reform (3)
Review current provisions related to LGU share in national wealth and national taxes for the purpose of facilitating release, promoting more efficient utilization and, possibly, promoting greater equity
In VM, suggestion to provide for direct remittance/ payments to LGUs by GOCC/ private companies of their share in national wealth
HOW DO LGUs PAY FOR DEVOLVED SERVICES?
Intergovernmental Fiscal Transfers
Other amendments suggested in consultations Increase fixed share of LGUs in national taxes
Amend Section 284 by replacing “national internal revenue taxes” with “national taxes” (LVM)
Increase share of IRA in national internal revenue taxes from 40% to 50% (LVM)
Clarify that the term “national internal revenue taxes” in Section 284 include VAT/ excise tax collections of the BOC as in the case filed by Cong Mandanas in the SC (VM)
Provide conditional transfers to LGUs for the protection of municipal waters (VM)
Liberalize provision regarding utilization of share in NW (VM)
HOW DO LGUs PAY FOR DEVOLVED SERVICES?
Intergovernmental Fiscal Transfers
SYMPOSIUM ON THE REVIEW OF THE 1991 LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE
Improving Lives Through Local Governance Reform: Transparency, Accountability and Better Services
4. LGU
Borrowing
and Credit
Finance
Issues (1)
Subnational borrowing important if LGUs are to be enabled to finance lumpy investments on local infrastructure
At present, subnational borrowing is low relative to LGU financing for local infrastructure Need to streamline procedures governing LGU access to credit market
Issues (2)
Important to manage fiscal risks arising from LGU borrowing Review Section 296 of LGC which allows LGUs to borrow for the purpose
of stabilizing finances
Improve measurement of LGU borrowing capacity
Preference for gov’t financial institutions as LGU depository bank (Section 311 of LGC) ► discourages entry of private institutions in LGU credit market Greater competition has potential to reduce LGU borrowing cost
HOW DO LGUs PAY FOR DEVOLVED SERVICES?
LGU Borrowing and Credit Finance
Direction of reform (1) Require LGUs to repay loans not used to finance capital investments (i.e.,
loans incurred to stabilize finances) within the current fiscal year
Alternatively, limit use of LGU borrowing to the financing of capital investment only (Golden Rule) [L]
HOW DO LGUs PAY FOR DEVOLVED SERVICES?
LGU Borrowing and Credit Finance
Direction of reform (2)
Define the debt service ratio in terms of the net operating surplus before interest payments and capital expenditures instead of regular LGU income to make ratio more aligned with LGUs’ capacity to service their debt
Liberalize Section 311 of LGC to remove preferential treatment given to GFIs as LGU depository bank (LVM)
HOW DO LGUs PAY FOR DEVOLVED SERVICES?
LGU Borrowing and Credit Finance
Other suggestions made during consultations
Monetary Board approval should be removed/ facilitated (LVM)
Streamline regulatory processes related to approval of LGU borrowing (LVM)
HOW DO LGUs PAY FOR DEVOLVED SERVICES?
LGU Borrowing and Credit Finance
SYMPOSIUM ON THE REVIEW OF THE 1991 LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE
Improving Lives Through Local Governance Reform: Transparency, Accountability and Better Services
5. Inter-LGU Alliances and Cooperation
Issues
Inter-LGU cooperation deemed necessary and critical when delivery of devolved service involves:economies of scale (e.g., solid waste management, water supply)
externalities or spillover effects (e.g., coastal resource management, environmental management)
Attempts at inter-LGU cooperation to date have been hamstrung by questions related to how they will manage funds they have contributed to the alliance, how they can access financing from both credit and capital markets, etc.
Direction of reform
Clarify pre-requisite conditions related to the formation of inter-LGU alliances
Establish regulatory framework for said alliances including legal personality of the same and treatment in terms of fiscal administration, accounting and reporting
SYMPOSIUM ON THE REVIEW OF THE 1991 LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE
Improving Lives Through Local Governance Reform: Transparency, Accountability and Better Services
6. Creation of LGUs
Issues
For various reasons, growing trend in favor of…
conversion of municipalities to cities
Breaking up of existing provinces/ municipalities/ barangays into two or more new provinces/ municipalities/ barangays
Such a trend tends to result in inefficiently sized jurisdictions
Direction of reform Amend existing LGC provisions that have unwittingly incentivize such
behavior
Strengthen existing provisions that regulate creation of new LGUs
Adjust income requirements for the creation/ conversion of highly urbanized cities, provinces and municipalities to make consistent with RA 9009 which provided new income criteria for the creation of component cities (V)
Make stricter requirements for creation of LGUs (L)
Other suggestions raised during consultations Include other criteria (e.g., level of urbanization, competitiveness, potential
for growth, poverty incidence, etc.) in addition to income, land area and population (LVM)
Re “IRA-less” barangays,
Provide IRA even to barangays that are created by Sanggunian (V)
Only barangays created by Congress should be given IRA (M)
SYMPOSIUM ON THE REVIEW OF THE 1991 LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE
Improving Lives Through Local Governance Reform: Transparency, Accountability and Better Services
7. Local Fiscal
Administration
Issues Some of the existing provisions of the LGC on fiscal administration deemed
antiquated, not consistent with other laws enacted after the LGC, etc.
Direction of reform Review provisions related to, among others:
Cap on personal services expenditures
Full disclosure/ transparency (LVM)
Creation and operation of local economic enterprise
Authorize DOF to undertake income classification of LGUs and update income classification of LGUs (LVM)
1. LGUs’ exercise of corporate powers must be inspired by some guiding principles
˃ LGUs’ role in economic development is to be an enabler and creator of a conducive environment for sustainable development
˃ LGUs are more effective if they play the catalytic and regulatory roles and do not compete with the private sector
˃ LGUs should act primarily as planner, broker and promoter of inward investments. LGUs can play the role of investor in basic enterprises where private sector is absent.
2. LGUs operation of local economic enterprises could be viewed as two-pronged
─ As stand-alone investment by improving returns realized directly from the use/operation of such enterprise
─ As a catalyst for economic growth by utilizing the enterprise as a strategic & deliberate tool for local economic development
3. LGUs operating public economic enterprises must have a well-defined exit strategy
» The LGU FSS shall be used to set the criteria and system on the regular performance fiscal and financial performance assessment of local government units.
» LGUs were evaluated in the areas of revenue generation capacity, local collection growth, expenditure management, and reportorial compliance.
Summary per Region of LGUs Score in Fiscal Sustainability Scorecard
Region 2012Region XI 55.57Region III 55.51
CAR 53.58Region VII 51.58Region X 51.46CARAGA 50.98Region VI 49.64Region I 48.88
Region IX 45.90NCR 44.95
Region IV-A 43.07Region XII 39.56Region VIII 36.46Region V 31.00Region II 28.86
Region IV-B 25.53
Summary per Region of LGUs Score in Fiscal Sustainability Scorecard
Region2012
Excellent Very Good Good Average
CAR 3 (4%) 8 (10%) 12 (14%) 28 (34%)
NCR 1 (6%) 3 (18%) 2 (12%) 4 (24%)
Region I 3 (2%) 19 (15%) 25 (20%) 31 (25%)
Region II 1 (1%) 4 (4%) 8 (9%) 22 (24%)
Region III 7 (5%) 23 (17%) 23 (17%) 38 (28%)
Region IV-A 14 (10%) 12 (9%) 21 (15%) 27 (19%)
Region IV-B 1 (1%) 1 (1%) 6 (9%) 10 (14%)
Region V 0 (0%) 7 (6%) 9 (8%) 17 (14%)
Region VI 1 (1%) 12 (9%) 25 (18%) 28 (20%)
Region VII 7 (5%) 24 (18%) 29 (21%) 28 (21%)
Region VIII 1 (1%) 1 (1%) 15 (10%) 33 (22%)
Region IX 0 (0%) 6 (5%) 19 (16%) 30 (25%)
Region X 3 (3%) 10 (10%) 16 (16%) 27 (28%)
Region XI 2 (2%) 11 (21%) 9 (17%) 11 (21%)
Region XII 0 (0%) 2 (2%) 15 (12%) 27 (22%)
CARAGA 2 (3%) 5 (6%) 14 (18%) 23 (29%)
top related