The funds collected through the motor vehicle users’ charge (MVUC) is underutilized, mismanaged and not transparent enough according to a study done by the Philippine Institute for Development Studies (PIDS).
The government has collected P112.5 billion of the road use tax from 2001 to 2014, but it is not clear where all the funds went, PIDS said.
The government think tank likewise said the use of the tax at the local government level is subject to politicking.
PIDS pointed out the lack of a definitive operating procedure system on how to identify and prioritize projects funded by the tax.
The discussion paper — Results of the Assessment of the Utilization and Impacts of MVUC in the Philippines — underscored that the processes of identification, approval, and implementation of proposed projects are problematic.
"Project identification does not follow the prescribed procedures. The approach is bottom up, rather than top down, (thereby) failing to incorporate a network perspective of accident blackspots, and leading to projects that are not of the highest priority being approved and implemented,” the report said.
The MVUC, which is imposed through the registration fees of vehicles and penalties for overloading, is envisioned as a source of funding to finance road maintenance and minimize air pollution.
According to Republic Act (RA) 8794, funds collected from the MVUC should be placed in four special accounts in the National Treasury: Special Road Support Fund (80 percent), Special Local Road Fund (5 percent), Special Vehicle Pollution Control Fund (7.5 percent), and Special Road Safety Fund (7.5 percent).
Specifically, the MVUC is intended for road maintenance and improvement of drainage of national, primary, and secondary roads; maintenance of local roads, traffic management, and road safety devices; installation of traffic signs, pavement markings, and safety devices; and for air pollution control.
The report said the total collections generated from the MVUC fund in 2001 to 2014 stood at P112.5 billion.
The PIDS study pointed out that project approval and fund release under the Special Local Road Fund requires the prerogative of the city mayor, leaving the process open to politicking.
"Project implementation is, ideally, a coordinated effort among several government agencies and the Road Board,” the paper said.
"However, in reality, there is evidently a real potential of overlaps of functions, especially between the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) and the Road Board Secretariat,” it added.
The report also cited the lack of transparency, given the absence of a clear schedule for proposal submission and approval of the projects.
It pointed out that this setup leaves the process open to political interference.
Aside from underutilization, the study also enumerated potential sources of discrepancy in fund collection due to incorrect agency and transaction codes and the lack of a list of deposited collections.
To solve these problems, the PIDS study recommended that MVUC collection be automated to efficiently track collections and deposits.
"Implementing agencies should make the effort to adhere to RA 8794’s Implementing Rules and Regulations, especially concerning the steps of proposing projects to the Central Office, and prioritizing selections using the Highway Development and management model, which makes sure that the projects are economically viable and ascertains that road users benefit the most,” the study said.
To improve monitoring, the report suggested that project proposals and current projects, as well as those undertaken for the past five years, be published online, thereby establishing a clear timeline following proposal to the final decision of the Road Board.
The study said institutionalizing impact evaluation and monitoring will help transparency issues and also improve the decision-making process.
Using performance indicators during monitoring and evaluation of projects is highly encouraged as well, it said.
The report further recommended setting up an oversight committee for the MVUC to ensure adherence to the RA 8794.
The authors also encouraged the Road Board Secretary to focus their time on monitoring and evaluation of project implementation and outcomes, and leave the procurement and project implementation to other agencies such as the DPWH.
Lastly, the report underscored capitalizing on the potential of a community-based labor approach on road maintenance.
The paper suggested strengthening community-based employment in road maintenance projects and encouraging the participation of civil society organizations in monitoring and increasing transparency in road projects.//
