FUEL prices are once again rising, and as always, ordinary Filipinos are the first to feel the sting.
Every increase at the pump does not end with motorists. It travels. It reaches jeepney fares, bus fares, delivery charges, market prices, and eventually the household budget of every Filipino family.
The Tax We All End Up Paying
Excise tax is a government-imposed charge on specific goods such as petroleum products, alcohol, tobacco, and other commodities. In the case of fuel, this tax is built into the retail price of gasoline and diesel. In practical terms, it is the consumer who ultimately shoulders it.
The TRAIN Law significantly increased excise taxes on fuel. The policy was meant to raise revenues for the country.
On paper, that may sound reasonable. In reality, however, it also means that when global oil prices rise, Filipinos are hit twice: first by the increase in the base cost of fuel, and second by the fixed excise tax imposed on top of it.
That is where the frustration lies. The burden is not theoretical. It is immediate, visible, and painfully ordinary.
We Do Not Live in a Vacuum
The Philippines is heavily dependent on imported petroleum. We do not control global oil prices, and we certainly do not control the geopolitical events that drive them.
The US-Israel and Iran conflict have again exposed how vulnerable oil-importing countries are to international instability. When conflict disrupts supply or creates uncertainty in the market, prices climb. For countries like the Philippines, the effects are almost automatic.
We do not live in a vacuum. A missile launched halfway across the world can mean a more expensive tricycle ride in Quezon City, costlier vegetables in the wet market, and higher distribution costs for businesses already struggling to stay afloat. That is precisely why tax policy cannot be discussed in isolation.
The Case for Suspension
There is a straightforward argument for suspending or reducing fuel excise taxes during periods of unusually high global oil prices: it gives immediate relief.
When fuel prices go down, even marginally, the effect is felt across multiple sectors. Transportation costs ease. Inflationary pressure slows. Producers and distributors face less strain. Consumers get breathing room, however small.
If the government recognizes that global price shocks are beyond the control of Filipino consumers, then it must also recognize that keeping the full tax burden in place during those shocks may be unnecessarily punitive. The law should not operate with blind indifference to economic reality.
The Revenue Problem
Of course, the other side of the debate cannot simply be dismissed.
Excise taxes generate billions of pesos for the government. That money funds infrastructure projects, social programs, and public services. Suspending the tax, even temporarily, creates a revenue gap. The Department of Finance has long argued that removing fuel excise taxes would be inequitable and fiscally damaging. That argument is not without basis.
Government cannot run on sympathy alone. Roads, schools, hospitals, and subsidies all require money. Fiscal stability matters. Growth matters.
But this is exactly where good governance is tested: not in choosing one principle and ignoring the other, but in balancing both.
The choice should not be framed as relief versus responsibility. A government serious about both can design temporary, calibrated, and transparent interventions without abandoning fiscal discipline altogether.