G.R. No. L-23794
February 17, 1968.
Facts
Ormoc City issued Ordinance No. 4, Series of 1964, imposing “on any and all productions of centrifugal sugar milled at the Ormoc Sugar Company, Inc., in Ormoc City a municipal tax equivalent to one per centum (1%) per export sale to the United States of America and other foreign countries.” In other words, the ordinance was primarily enacted to specifically imposed a municipal tax to petitioner’s sugar company. Hence, the petitioner assailed the validity of such ordinance for violating the equal protection clause.
Issue
Whether or not an ordinance imposing a tax to a specific company violates the equal protection clause?
Held
Yes. In order not to violate the equal protection clause, an ordinance must not be only limited to existing conditions. It must also be applicable to future conditions.
In this case, the Ordince taxes only centrifugal sugar produced and exported by the Ormoc Sugar Company, Inc. and none other. Even if petitioner was the only sugar central in the city of Ormoc, the classification is still unreasonable. The taxing ordinance should not be singular and exclusive as to exclude any subsequently established sugar central, of the same class as plaintiff, from the coverage of the tax. As it is now, even if later a similar company is set up, it cannot be subject to the tax because the ordinance expressly points only to Ormoc Sugar Company, Inc. as the entity to be levied upon.
Hence, the ordinance in question is unconstitutional for violating the equal protection clause.