CHAPTER 10

1. The heirs of Wilson are correct. The donation is perfected from the moment the donor knows of the acceptance by the donee. Considering that the donor was no longer of sound mind when the letter of acceptance reached him, the acceptance was equivalent to non-acceptance. ence, there was no valid donation to speak of. The heirs therefore of Wilson was correct in refusing to deliver the property to !anuel. ". #es. The property donated is a personal property. $ince the amount is more than %&,''' both the donation and the acceptance must be made is writing. Considering that neither the donation nor the acceptance were reduced in a private document, the donation is not valid. ence, the donor can validly recover the watch from the donee. (. )ondon is entitled to the car because the donation cannot produce any effect whatsoever. The information given by *amal in the phone that he is accepting the donation did not produce legal effect because in a donation of personal property with a value of more than %&,''', the acceptance must necessarily be in writing. This is not true in the instant case because )ondon did not receive the letter accepting the donation when he was still alive. +. The donation is not valid. To comply with the formal requisites for validity of a donation of real property, both the donation and the acceptance must be in writing. ,on-compliance with this requisite makes the donation void. &. #es because the donation has been validly made. -t is presumed that the donation has complied with all the requisites of a valid marriage. Thus, revocation of the donation after it has been perfected cannot be done unilaterally by the stockholders. The donation has been validly made because the foetus had already acquired /uridical personality. !oreover, it was duly accepted by a person who would legally represent him the moment he is born. Thus, the donation cannot be validly revoked. -f )erick is relieved of his liability after rendering services to 1udy, his creditor, the amount of %&',''' is considered compensation income. owever, if 1udy declared that he is relieved of his obligation even without rendering any service, the same is considered as a ta2able gift and not ta2able income.

..

0.

3. ,o. the rule is4 -f the renunciation of inheritance is given by one heir to another heir, there is no donation. Therefore, it is not sub/ect to donor5s ta2. owever, if the renunciation of inheritance is given by one heir to another person not his co-heir, then there is a donation which is sub/ect to donor5s ta2. Therefore, if the renunciation of inheritance is given to 6lladin, a person not a co-heir to the estate, there would be a donation which is sub/ect to donors ta2. 7. 8very payment of insurance premium by $haolo to the insurer constitutes donation made by him to 9rsino. This is so because $haolo did not retain any power to revest in himself or his estate the economic benefits of the insurance. The donation is ta2able. %olitical contributions are e2empt only from gift ta2 if duly reported to the Commissions on 8lections in the $tatement of Contributions and 82penditures of the candidate.

1'.

11.

The %(',''' given to :ayani is a remuneratory donation. -t does not constitute demandable debt. -t is not also based on liberality but only a debt arising out of gratitude. Thus, it is an income sub/ect to ta2. a. b. The Christmas gift of %"'',''' given by -melda to her parents is ta2able up to %1'',''' because under the law, net gifts not e2ceeding %1'',''' are e2empt. The donation of %13',''' to the parish church even assuming that it is e2clusively for religious purposes is not ta2-e2empt because the e2emption granted in the Constitution applies only to donations which are to be actually, directly, and e2clusively for educational purposes. The e2emption granted under the Constitution are e2emption from property ta2es. The donation to the ,C:6 ; <C 6lumni 6ssociation does not also qualify for e2emption because it is not an educational institution. =alid. -t does not matter whether the representative can or cannot read and write. What is important is that she is not disqualified to enter into a contract. =alid. )onation to an unborn child is valid if acceptance is made by persons who would legally represent them if they were already born. ,ot valid. )onation of personal properties e2ceeding %&,''' must be reduced in writing. 9therwise, it is not valid. The donation does not produce legal effects. -f the amount donated e2ceeds %&,''', it is important that the donation as well as its acceptance must be in writing. ,ot valid. )onation of real properties must be in a public instrument.

1".

c.

1(.

a. b. c. d. e.

1+.

,o. The value of the right to avail of the privileges attendant to the Calabar >olf Club, -nc. membership certificate on account of !r. *ohnson5s merits or services as a computer consultant is a fringe benefit ta2able to the employer. 9n the 9ctober (1 donation, only one donor5s ta2 return would be accomplished and filed because there is only one donor. This is despite the fact that there are several donees because all the donations given during that date will be combined in one ta2 return. Two donor5s ta2 returns will be filed. 9ne for the husband and another for >lo because there are two donors in this case.

1&.

1..

a.

,o. The forgiveness of indebtedness constitutes ta2able income to the debtor because the cancellation of the debt was due to the services rendered by the debtor to the creditor. ,o. $ince the renunciation is made in favor of a co-heir, its became retroactive from the moment of death of the decedent. Thus, the renounced share had accrued o the properties of his co-heirs. #es. The donation is not the amount of proceeds to be received by the beneficiary but the amount of premiums paid to the insurer. ,o. The donation is void. Therefore, it is not sub/ect to donor5s ta2. ,o. )onation of two-thirds of the entire property of the husband is not a moderate gift. Therefore, it is void. Consequently, it is not sub/ect to donor5s ta2.

b.

c. d. e.

f.

,o, because the donation was reported to the Commission on elections.

10. The donation of a two-hectare lot is valid because ?umander Todo *uego was still alive at the time of the donation notwithstanding the belief of the people that he was already dead. 6lthough he did not personally accept the donation, his wife had a special power of attorney, which was already a sufficient authority to validly accept the donation. -f it was true that the dead man was ?umander Todo *uego, the donation is not valid because donation to a dead person does not produce any effect whatsoever.

PROBLEM 10 2
Car *ewelry @and $hares of stocks ; 1amireA Corp B1.'& C 1.'(DE" 2 &,''' $hares of stocks ; Curameng Corp B+,''' 2 "."&D 1eceivables and interest B"&,''' C (,'''D ouse and lot B++',''' C1,&'','''D -nterest in partnership >ross gift % (&',''' 3&,''' ."&,''' &,"'' 7,''' "3,''' 1,7+',''' 07',''' (,3(","''