COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS

Objective:
 To have an overview of the expenses spend by the
Government vis-à-vis the settlement penalty imposed
BFAR vs. F/B Mison 8
 Violations:
1. Section 86 (Unauthorized Fishing)
2. Section 95 ( Use of Active Gear in Municipal Waters)
3. Section 113 (Commercial Fishing Vessel Operators
Employing Unlicensed Fishworkers)

 Gross tonnage : 29.22 GT (medium scale)

Settlement Penalty
VIOLATION RULE 131.3 FORMULA TOTAL

29.22/150 X 30% X 8, 766

SECTION 86 150,000

29.22/150 X 30 % X 5,844
SECTION 95 100,000

4,000 X 18 X 30 % 21, 600

SECTION 113
 TOTAL SETTLEMENT PENALTY

 PHP 36, 210 covered by O.R No.

4122127
 Vs the Direct 30% Imposition
VIOLATION MINIMUM IMPOSABLE 30%
PENALTY
Section 86 150,000 45,000

Section 95 100,000 30,000

Section 113 (18 Workers) 72,000 21, 600

TOTAL 96,600
DIFFERENCE

PHP 60, 390

Seaborn Operation
 Travel Order No. 2017-0335
 Period : May 29, 2017 – June 2, 2017
 Destination: Davao Gulf/ East Coast
 Patrol Boat Used: 3 ( 3040, 3057 and 2825)
 Number of Seaborne personnel: 12
 Fuel: 500 Liters per Patrol Boat
 Per Diem: 400/day
 EXPENSES
GASOLINE - 1,000 X 38 = 38,000
DIESEL - 500 X 31 = 15,500
TEV - 1,920 X 12 = 23, 040
SALARIES - = 27,000
_____________________________________________

TOTAL PHP 103, 540

PHP 36, 210 ( SETTLEMENT PENALTY) -
PHP 103, 540 (EXPENSES)

= PHP - 67, 330

RECOMMENDATION:
 Amend the IRR of R.A 10654 specifically on the
computation of penalty:

“The settlement penalty arrived at using the formula provided

under Rule 131.3 is no longer in harrmony with the spirit of
R.A 10654 which is to PREVENT, DETER AND ELIMINATE
ILLEGAL, UNREPORTED AND UNREGULATED FISHING”