We are all for transparency for all accountable public officials.

This is the best way to keep those in the public service honest.

But to demand the same rigorous disclosure of the personal finances of private citizens is not only improper act of the state but fiscal overkill.

In the first place, all gainfully employed citizens already filed their annual income tax returns which summarizes their income for the fiscal year and the taxes due and paid.

Second, as private citizens, they have no public accountability. If the reason to poke into private finances is to establish the legality or legitimacy of accumulated private wealth, as a congressional initiative seems to achieve, then the move could be potentially injurious to the rights and interests of   private persons.

Finally, such mandatory disclosure could endanger the safety and security of private individuals and their families who could be targeted by criminal elements.              

And so we heaved a sigh of relief upon learning that the House of Representatives wanted to look into the order of the Bureau of Internal Revenue requiring taxpayers, including fixed-income workers, to file the equivalent of a statement of assets, liabilities, and net worth. Under the law, only public officials and employees are required to file their SALN every year.

Batangas Rep. Hermilando Mandanas, House ways and means committee chairman, has called BIR Commissioner Kim Henares and her boss, Finance Secretary Cesar Purisima, to a hearing on November 15.

The BIR is requiring taxpayers to file, in addition to an annual income tax return, a detailed annual information return, which should include incomes subject to final tax such as interest on bank deposits and proceeds from the sale of stocks, and transfer or sale of properties and other assets.

Valenzuela City Rep. Magtanggol Gunigundo and other members of the ways and means committee have described Henares’ AIR as the version of the SALN for private citizens.

The detailed financial disclosure requirement is contained in Revenue Memorandum Circular 40-2011, which the BIR chief issued last September 5.

Mandanas said his committee decided to conduct an inquiry in the wake of numerous complaints from taxpayers that the requirement for “additional detailed information on their financial position and operations is unconstitutional and a violation of the right to privacy”.

He said business groups opposed to Henares’ issuance include the Federation of Filipino-Chinese Chambers of Commerce and Industry, Inc., Management Association of the Philippines, Philippine Chamber of Commerce and Industry, and the Bankers Association of the Philippines.

He said these organizations have expressed concern that the requirement would also violate the Bank Secrecy Law.

He reminded Henares that she had committed to his committee in a hearing last March 15 that she would withdraw the AIR requirement, which she had imposed earlier and was supposed to start last April’s tax filing period.

He added that he could not understand why the BIR chief is now resurrecting the detailed financial disclosure imposition.

Aside from Purisima and Henares, Mandanas has invited representatives of business groups opposed to the AIR circular to the House hearing on November 15.