Philippine's 60/40 vs. China's New Change in Foreign Business Ownership

Some people say that Filipinos should feel blessed about the 60/40 mandatory rule which is a joint venture agreement but what most don't realize is that after the 1987 constitution, the damage left behind by the Macoy Administration had worsened.  In fact, Nobitacracy continues the damage (while conveniently blaming Gloria Abobo for everything) which is really bad.

The 60/40 rule states that every foreign corporation must have 60% to be owned by the Philippines and 40% to be owned by the foreign corporation. Though it sounds good in the name of "protectionism" but the huge problem is that, it's what basically was a problem in China before.  China tried to take control of every foreign corporation that way but later, Chinese business policies allowed a consideration of 100% ownership for certain firms within the Special Economic Zone.  China later dropped the mandatory China owns it more and has given options for more ownership of the foreign firm but what about the Philippines?  It's still so stuck with the Rule of Nobita which is a ridiculous economic restriction.  In short hasn't the Philippines learned from history?  I think not at all especially with leftists manipulating history books a smart history teacher may sooner or later lose the fervor to teach the subject!

So what's nice about China's new joint venture rule is that it allows adjustments between the foreign corporation and the Chinese government.  In fact, reading from the link just think what if most of the shares are in favor of the foreigner?  It's not being self-centered isn't it?  Also, there is the option in certain parts of China that either a foreign businessman can select for wholly owned subsidy under government vs. joint venture.  I personally would go for joint venture so I can easily familiarize with the country but I must have a good share, unlike the Philippines owning more.  If I were to invest, I would rather invest in Communist China which has more brains than Nobitacratic Philippines.  I mean, Communist China as of today has not only reversed many Maoist "close door policy" but also has dealt with violators regardless of nationality accordingly.  China can give me an option and imagine, if I can get a 50/50 ownership that's far more fair than the 60% for Nobitacratic Philippines, just 40% for me.  Talk about flexibility and sadly the trait is very rare in most of the Philippines!

The leftist misconception that they spread to the people of 100% ownership is this- it means indiscriminate allowance for foreigners to enter the Philippines, to sell lands to them until the Philippines is owned by foreigners.  Common sense and I mean you don't need to be a doctorate in commerce to understand this, even a first year commerce student can get this- 100% ownership means that they own the intangibles!  They may not purchase land but they are still 100% owning the firm's power.  The landlord does not and by any means has no ownership in terms of deciding power- only that he can only kick out a foreign firm IF they don't pay him rent or that 100% ownership doesn't exempt them from responsibility as well.  That misconception must be removed from the people.

And think about it- China has awakened from the miserable state it had from the Maoist view to the modern view.  On the other hand, post-Macoy Philippines just got worse after the Macoy years, I mean the late Nobita's mother's 1987 Constitution was just plain not reversing any damage done by the Macoy Dictatorship.  In fact, the Philippines is not a hopeless case.  Until a healthy amount of competition kicks into the country, I don't expect to see the country  get better services.  If Nobita's really an economics graduate, he should know better than to adhere to the stupidity of his late mom's economic policy.


  1. As what I've read in an article shared by AntiPinoy, the Philippines is more communist/socialist than China...

    "The landlord does not and by any means has no ownership in terms of deciding power- only that he can only kick out a foreign firm IF they don't pay him rent or that 100% ownership doesn't exempt them from responsibility as well." - It's a shame that our "beloved" president came from a family of landlords yet he (or perhaps even his whole family) doesn't know about this. Or, it's just that their greed just knows no bounds that they even want to own the businesses themselves... (I'm not being socialist here, though.)


Post a Comment