Can tax declaration be proof of possession?

What are the requirements for land registration, and what other evidence can one present to comply with the required years of possession?

The new requirements for land registration are now governed by Section 6 of Republic Act (RA) 11573 or An Act Improving the Confirmation Process for Imperfect Land Titles, Amending for the Purpose Commonwealth Act 141, as amended, otherwise known as The Public Land Act, and Presidential Decree 1529, as amended, otherwise known as the Property Registration Decree:

"Section 6. Section 14 of Presidential Decree No. 1529 is hereby amended to read as follows:

"SECTION 14. Who may apply. The following persons may file at any time, in the proper Regional Trial Court in the province where the land is located, an application for registration of title to land, not exceeding twelve (12) hectares, whether personally or through their duly authorized representatives:

"(1) Those who by themselves or through their predecessors-in-interest have been in open, continuous, exclusive and notorious possession and occupation of alienable and disposable lands of the public domain not covered by existing certificates of title or patents under a bona fide claim of ownership for at least twenty (20) years immediately preceding the filing of the application for confirmation of title except when prevented by war or force majeure. They shall be conclusively presumed to have performed all the conditions essential to a Government grant and shall be entitled to a certificate of title under this section.

"(2) Those who have acquired ownership of private lands or abandoned riverbeds by right of accession or accretion under the provisions of existing laws.

"(3) Those who have acquired ownership of land in any other manner provided for by law. xxx"

Generally, tax declarations are proofs of payment of real property tax, but they are also indications of possession. This was reiterated in the case of Republic of the Philippines vs. Spouses Tan, GR 232778, Aug. 23, 2023, where Associate Justice Samuel Gaerlan said that:

"Although tax declarations and realty tax payment of property are not conclusive evidence of ownership, nevertheless, they are good indicia of the possession in the concept of owner for no one in his right mind would be paying taxes for a property that is not in his actual or at least constructive possession. They constitute al least proof that the holder has a claim of title over the property. The voluntary declaration of a piece of property for taxation purposes manifests not only one's sincere and honest desire to obtain title to the property and announces his adverse claim against the State and all other interested parties, but also the intention to contribute needed revenues to the government. Such an act strengthens one's bonafide claim of acquisition of ownership."

In Arlo Aluminum Co., Inc. vs. Republic of the Philippines, GR 254433, April 17, 2024, the Supreme Court, speaking through Associate Justice Ramon Paul Hernando, also stated that:

"In addition, Arlo may present other competent witnesses or documentary or object evidence to prove overt acts of possession and occupation by them and their predecessors-in-interest as held in the case of Spouses Tan:

"Accordingly, respondents may present anew other competent witnesses or other documentary or object evidence that show the overt acts of possession and occupation by their predecessors-in-interest, such as duly authenticated photographs of structures on the subject property built or erected by the said predecessors-in-interest predating March 11, 1989, but to speculate or suggest further would be to preempt the action of the CA in its reception and consideration of future evidence that may come before as a result of the remand of the instant petition."

Thus, the tax declarations may be used as additional proof of possession, but one must still present competent witnesses or other documentary or object evidence to show overt acts of possession through the predecessor-in-interest so as to comply with the 20-year occupation requirement as provided under Section 6 of RA 11573.

Source: Manila Times

Gen Zers and millennials are skipping the savings game

Gen Z’s self-sabotaging spending on ‘caviar bumps,’ luxury holidays, and designer bags is being driven by housing market rebellion and influencer lifestyle envy

What was once a marker of adulthood—owning a home, settling down, and reaping the rewards of hard work—seems a distant dream for today’s youth. Now many Gen Zers and millennials are skipping the savings game, opting for lavish getaways, $250-plus fragrances, and designer handbags instead.

Despite repeated warnings that they’ll end up stuck living with their parents forever if they don’t get their finances in order, 90% of 18-to-34-year-olds would consider buying from a luxury brand.

Even in a cost-of-living crisis, just 17% of young people today describe luxury as unaffordable, according to the Luxury Refocused report. Once-ultra expensive delicacies like caviar have seen a surge in sales thanks to TikTok-fueled trends inspiring Gen Z.

So why are the youth of today seemingly throwing in the towel on homeownership?

“Most of my expenses go [toward] holidays,” says Anette Suveges, a 27-year-old account executive at Harpswood PR. Out of her £35,000 ($44,000) annual income, she has already splurged over £6,000 ($7,600) on trips to the Maldives and Southeast Asia in the last year alone.

“I’m just not interested in even thinking about what’s going to happen in five to 10 years,” Suveges says. “I’m just going to live for the moment, spend the money I have, and enjoy the things that I want right now—even if I have to live paycheck to paycheck.”

“I don’t even know what I want,” echoes 26-year-old Jamie Rossouw, a data journalist at the advertising magazine Campaign. “I don’t know if I want to get married. I don’t know if I want children. I don’t even know if I want to own property. It’s just something that people tell you that you should do.”

One of those people is her stepmother, who does marketing for the mortgage department at Barclays. But instead of taking her advice and saving up for a house deposit, Rossouw has been prioritizing putting money aside each month to specifically spend on vacations and little luxury pick-me-ups.

“If I’m saving every single cent that I can to save toward a house, and you can’t tell me in the next 10 years if that’s even attainable, what am I saving for?” she asks. “Also, COVID put things into perspective in a sense that I want to explore, I want to see the world, and that is something that is attainable and something that I can do now.”

While her millennial stepmother may treat herself once or twice a year, Gen Zer Rossouw says she wouldn’t think twice about spending hundreds on the spot on something in a shop window that catches her fancy. 

“Literally, live life,” Suveges says.

Gen Z aspiring to an influencer luxury lifestyle

Private club Velloy promises its members access to luxury travel, experiences, and exclusive designer sales—and despite having only just started earning salaries, Gen Zers make up its fastest-growing group of members and are the company’s biggest spenders when it comes to luxury goods.

Hugo Cannon, the founder of the members-only concierge service, tells Fortune that Velloy is seeing a surge in young people using the platform to impress their social media followers and look more affluent. 

“Generally there’s this trend of people aspiring to this influencer luxury lifestyle a lot more,” Cannon says. “We’ve seen it with cars…people renting a Ferrari or a Lamborghini for a single day to drive around to get pictures and content.”

“Once you have already set the bar standard for how you look on Instagram or social media, you kind of want to keep that look,” echoes 26-year-old visual merchandising coordinator Aleah Wright. 

This mindset had gotten some members of her generation trapped in a cycle of trying to emulate their peers online and then keeping up with that “aesthetic.”

What’s more, “keeping up with the Joneses” is not only driving Gen Z to spend their money instead of saving it—it’s also contributing to some poor investment purchases.

“For instance, the people that use us to source Birkins, if they’re getting them at retail value they are making a two- or three-times return on investment—at a minimum,” Cannon adds. “But people are buying similar brands that they consider to be luxury, but they’re not investment pieces.”

Interestingly, many of the Gen Zers that Fortune spoke to saw their luxury purchases as an “investment” in their memories.

For example, when Wright finished her Prada internship she commemorated the moment by purchasing the recently discontinued Prada Gaufre bag, which can be found secondhand online for around $600.

“I wanted to treat myself and buy something to have a memory of it,” she says, adding that it was the first on her designer bag wish list—including Loewe’s Puzzle bag and Chanel’s Jumbo Flap—which she plans on ticking off over the next couple of years.

“I feel like my bags are investments,” she explains. “It’s an investment in my wardrobe that I’ll be wearing for years and years and years… I don’t plan on selling my Prada bag, I want to pass that down to my kids.”

Like many others in her generation, Wright also considers jet-setting an investment.

She’s prioritizing saving up for more trips around Europe over getting on the property ladder until she hits her thirties at least.

“Saving money is great, and being able to attain bigger goals like a car or house is great. But being able to spend money on the things that you’re going to enjoy, like a trip that you’ll never forget or bags that you love and wear for years, is also worth it,” she adds. “Like, those are memories I’m gonna have and never forget.”

“It’s like the classic quote, ‘Money comes and goes, but the memories last a lifetime,'” Cannon chuckles.

A lack of hope in the housing market

A sizable chunk of Gen Zers are running through their money—or rather, doom-spending—because they doubt they’ll ever be able to get on the property ladder.

Essentially, splurging feels better than stressing about potentially renting into retirement.

“I think it boils down to lack of hope,” says Rossouw. “With the current market, the cost-of-living crisis and just the way things are going, buying a house doesn’t seem attainable.” 

It’s why Suveges describes her generation’s self-sabotaging spending habits as an act of “rebelling against getting on the property ladder.”

“The whole property market is ridiculous and honestly, I refuse to be a slave for them,” she explains. “Me and the rest of my peers, we see through the flaws in the system and that it’s ultimately the salaries and the economy that make a difference, not our purchasing decisions.”

In her view, even if she put away £500 ($640) a month, it still wouldn’t guarantee that she would be able to buy a house as interest rates and property prices rise rapidly.

However, it would diminish her current quality of life “because saving that much would mean literally not leaving the house.”

To make matters worse, her generation isn’t even sure if there will be a future to enjoy anyway.

With geopolitical tensions and climate change on the verge of a catastrophic tipping point, some are spending like there’s no tomorrow.

“I’m just focusing on the present because the future is depressing,” Suveges concludes.

“I think there’s a lot to say about people wanting to distract themselves from what’s going on,” Rossouw echoes. “The future is uncertain at the moment—with the wars going on and the rising cost of living, it just doesn’t seem worth saving for.”

Source: Fortune

What Are The Exclusive Properties Of Spouses In A Conjugal Partnership?

In a Conjugal Partnership of Gains, the spouses place in a common fund the proceeds, products, and fruits and income of their separate properties and those acquired thereafter through their efforts or by chance.

Under the Family Code

The following shall remain exclusive property of the owner spouse:

1. That which is brought to the marriage as his or her own;

2. That which each acquires during the marriage by gratuitous title;

3. That which is acquired by right of redemption, by barter or by exchange with property belonging to only one of the spouses; and

4. That which is purchased with exclusive money of the wife or of the husband. (Art. 109, FC)

Property purchased before the marriage and fully paid during the marriage remains to be a separate property of either spouse. And, if a future spouse sold his property with right to repurchase before the marriage and reacquired it during the marriage, such property is still the exclusive property of said spouse. However, if the money he or she paid for the repurchase came from the conjugal assets, then, the said spouse must reimburse the conjugal partnership. Note, however, that the reimbursement shall be done at the liquidation of the conjugal partnership.

In case the property has been donated to or inherited by one of the spouses, the said property shall be an exclusive property of such spouse. Accordingly, if someone donates to a married couple a parcel of land, the said land will not be conjugal, but separate property of the spouse, each spouse owning one half of the property. And if a different proportion or designation of shares is made, such will be followed.

• Purchase of Property

In a Conjugal Partnership of Gains, when there is no showing as to when the property was acquired by a spouse, the fact that the title is in one of the spouse’s name, is an indication that the property belongs exclusively to the said spouse. Consequently, if a property is purchased partly with money of the wife and partly with conjugal money, the same is partly conjugal and partly exclusive.

• Presumption of Inclusion of Property In The Conjugal Partnership of Gains

In a Conjugal Partnership of Gains, all property acquired during the marriage, whether the acquisition appears to have been made, contracted or registered in the name of one or both spouses, is presumed to be conjugal unless the contrary is proved. The presumption of conjugality of properties acquired by onerous title during the marriage arises regardless of the source of the funds used to acquire the same.

• Property on Installment

Property bought on installments paid partly from exclusive funds of either or both spouses and partly from conjugal funds belongs to the buyer or buyers if full ownership was vested before the marriage. And the property belongs to the conjugal partnership if such ownership was vested during the marriage. In either case, any amount advanced by the partnership or by either or both spouses shall be reimbursed by the owner or owners upon liquidation of the partnership. (Art. 118, FC)