Inevitably, and by all indications, fuel prices will rise again. If it has not already, since today is Tuesday.

Let’s take liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), for example, which is more of a fuel of necessity for most Filipino households. As of this writing (Easter Sunday) and depending on where you are and what brand of cooking gas you order for your kitchen, the real pain is already here.

Where I am from in Quezon City, the 11-kilogram LPG tank I regularly get is now brushing the P1,800 range, from the P1,160 price just a little over a month ago. And this is for a commodity government insists is not in short supply.

If that claim is true, the price is punishing for a fuel not short in supply. When LPG climbs, the stomach surely grumbles: ulam at the karinderya is either more expensive or spread out on the plate like half an order; rice servings are shaved; and the pandesal shrinks quietly without much complaint from customers.

We Pinoys are headed for dieting, abstinence, or fasting well beyond the Lenten Season. A less-fed Juan and Juana, though, may be music to the ears of the congresswoman who announced several weeks ago that our nation should be alarmed, as over 40+ percent of our adult population is obese or overweight. Well, perhaps here’s an opportunity to force a national diet.

Sadly, we can’t kid ourselves. This is certainly not a solution for better health, but about inflation tightening its grip.

Diesel is projected to spike by as much as ₱20 per liter. Gasoline and kerosene follow. Public transport, logistics, food chains — all will adjust, and never seem downward as the real pressures of wars in the Middle East and even between Russia and Ukraine bear down on the throats of nations like ours that are dependent on oil imports.

Which is precisely why the fake “energy lockdown” advisory that spread like wildfire over Holy Week is not just irresponsible — it is dangerous.

Malacañang, through Usec. Claire Castro has repeatedly shut it down: there is no energy lockdown on April 20. President Marcos Jr. himself has assured supply stability through June 30. And yet, rumor merchants persist — complete with forged logos and doomsday checklists urging people to hoard.

This is not harmless chatter. It is economic sabotage.

False claims distort behavior. They trigger panic-buying, strain supply chains, and artificially drive up prices. They erode trust in institutions at the very moment clarity is needed. In a fragile energy environment, misinformation doesn’t just mislead — it manipulates markets.

Firing Line is full-on behind Acting Communications Secretary Dave Gomez when he said there must be zero tolerance for purveyors of fake news on energy issues. The law is clear and should be applied to them — because those who deliberately spread lies in a time of economic strain are enemies from within.

They are market saboteurs, preying on public anxiety, distorting prices, and pushing ordinary Filipinos closer to panic, scarcity, and unnecessary hardship.

At this time, Filipinos must learn to consume information the way they should consume fuel in a crisis — carefully, deliberately, and from reliable sources. Not every forwarded message deserves belief. Not every viral post deserves a share.

We are already dealing with enough real problems. We do not need invented ones.

*         *         *

SHORT BURSTS. For comments or reactions, email firingline@ymail.com or tweet @Side_View via X app (formerly Twitter). Read current and past issues of this column at https://www.thephilbiznews.com

It’s tax payment season again — and what troubles me now, that did not before, is how a simple assessment can quietly turn into a long-term threat to one’s home.

The numbers on paper look routine enough. But remember, there’s the Republic Act No. 12001 (Real Property Valuation and Assessment Reform Act) — the law that now pegs property taxes to updated market values through a uniform Schedule of Market Values (SMV). It promises transparency, standardization, and a more “equitable” system. On paper, it looks clean, even fair.

But in practice, it begins to feel like something else entirely.

Let’s be clear about the premise: this is a revenue measure. It raises funds by aligning taxes with current market prices. But markets rise regardless of whether the homeowner’s income does. And so, the burden shifts — quietly but decisively — onto the very people who bought their land decades ago not as an investment play, but as a place to live out their final years.

Take the case of a Filipino who, in 2004, at the prime of life, bought a modest 100-square-meter lot at ₱5,000 per sqm. It was a fair price then, earned through years of work and taxes paid to the same State now reassessing that property. Today, with development all around, that land may be valued at ₱50,000 per sqm.

On paper, the owner is “wealthier.” In reality, nothing about their daily life has changed — except the tax bill that follows.

Yes, the law offers a 6% cap on increases in the first year. A grace period, of sorts. But that is only a delay. The full valuation catches up. A tax once at ₱3,000 annually can climb toward ₱30,000 over time — for the same home, the same walls, the same life lived inside it.

And when that bill becomes too heavy to bear, the consequence is stark: the State, through the LGU, may move to take possession.

That is where the law’s inhuman edge begins to show.

There are safeguards, we are told. Senior citizens may apply for limited exemptions. There is a two-year amnesty for back taxes. LGUs are given discretion to stagger increases. But these are conditional, uneven, and often inaccessible — especially in a system where both national agencies and local governments are, by public perception and experience, notoriously vulnerable to corruption and selective enforcement.

And that discretion is precisely the problem.

Because what the law standardizes in theory, it decentralizes in practice. LGUs now hold immense power to interpret, apply, and, at times, exploit these valuations. For some, it may mean moderation. For others, it can mean aggressive collection — at the expense of residents who have neither the liquidity nor the leverage to push back.

This is how a “fair” law becomes anti-resident and literally unfair.

Modernization should not mean pricing people out of homes they have already paid for in a lifetime of work. It should not force the elderly to depend on children who are themselves struggling. And it should never reduce a home into a taxable asset first, and a human refuge second.

If the government truly intends this reform for the public good, then it must do more than defend the law. It must strictly rein in its implementation, especially at the local level.

Because if left unchecked, this will not just be about taxes. It will be about displacement, distrust, and a slow, sanctioned erosion of dignity.

The irony is glaring. These are the same ideological strains that once criticized government control of industries and pushed for privatization, arguing that professional firms could better serve the public and keep resources away from corrupt hands. So, what do they really want?

*         *         *

SHORT BURSTS. For comments or reactions, email firingline@ymail.com or tweet @Side_View via X app (formerly Twitter). Read current and past issues of this column at https://www.thephilbiznews.com

There are moments when government officials reveal exactly how out of touch they are — and this past week, Trade Secretary Cristina Roque gave the Filipino public a shining example as an advanced Christmas gift. Her now-infamous remark that ₱500 is enough for a Noche Buena meal didn’t just miss the mark, but insulted a nation that already knows too well how far ₱500 doesn’t go.

Most Filipinos didn’t know whether to take her seriously or laugh in jest. So they did both. TikTok, Facebook — name any platform from Batanes to Jolo — exploded with a flood of content mocking the idea. Some netizens offered the most bizarre, nutrition-deprived, gutter-tier combinations imaginable, proving that yes, you can technically buy food worth ₱500… if your idea of Noche Buena includes instant pancit canton and Sky Flakes.

On the other side were the few kitchen-savvy Filipinos who tried to assemble a dignified meal for 2–4 people. They succeeded, barely — but with one huge caveat: their ₱500 computation silently assumed the family already had oil, salt, sugar, pepper, and gas or electricity for cooking. In short, the public had to make Roque’s numbers work by excluding half the realities of actual living.

And here’s the real kicker: after receiving a tidal wave of criticism, she could have stopped. She could have read the room, stepped back, and admitted that the remark didn’t land well in the Christmassy spirit that had just set in.

But hey, Secretary Roque just had to double down at a time the nation is angered by left-and-right corruption in government infrastructure projects that put the life of the presidency under a sharpened ax.

So, yeah… she faces the press again, “clarifying” that ₱500 — no more, no less — can truly satisfy the noche buena cravings of papa, mama, and two children. As if repetition could turn fantasy into fact.

This is where the insult sharpens. Because what Filipinos heard was not guidance — it was condescension. It was the familiar tune of officials who speak about the poor without ever living a day in their reality.

So here is a simple, fair challenge, Madam Secretary: On Christmas Eve, show us your family’s ₱500 Noche Buena table. Lay it out proudly. Feed your family of four with it. Then ask yourself, sincerely and without cameras, whether you would still have the temerity to recommend the same to millions of Filipino households.

Until then, spare us the Yuletide suggestions on thrifty feasting.

Filipinos already stretch every peso until it screams. What they don’t need is a government asking them to celebrate Christmas on a budget it wouldn’t dare endure itself.

According to the survey conducted from September 24 to 30, 2025, 56% of respondents said reducing the prices of rice and other food products should be the government’s top priority. Coming in second, 31% urged the administration to address corruption — underscoring the public’s demand for both economic relief and good governance.

The poll, which covered 1,500 respondents nationwide with a ±3% margin of error, found that concern over rising food prices cuts across regions, particularly in the Visayas (61%) and Mindanao (61%). More Filipinos in rural areas (57%) than in urban centers (54%) expressed concern over food affordability, reflecting how inflation continues to hurt lower-income households the most.

Meanwhile, corruption ranked second among Filipinos’ top concerns, with the highest share of responses from Metro Manila (45%), followed by Balance Luzon (32%) and the Visayas (31%)—indicating a widespread clamor for transparency and accountability in government spending.

“This survey highlights the urgent reality that Filipinos are still struggling to afford basic food,” said Prof. Victor Andres ‘Dindo’ Manhit, President of the Stratbase Group. “The more they cannot afford essentials like rice, the more they demand concrete reforms against corruption—issues that the President himself has repeatedly raised before the public.”

Manhit stressed that Filipinos are sending a clear message: address inflation and food insecurity while ensuring transparency and accountability in government spending.

“Filipinos demand that their hard-earned taxes be put to good use—allocated to the right projects, funding essential services, and making a real difference in their lives and those of their families,” he added.

Other issues cited by respondents include education (7%) and healthcare (4%), while 3% said they were undecided.

Manhit emphasized that the findings reflect a growing public demand for responsive and ethical leadership.

“This is an opportunity for the administration to recalibrate its priorities,” he said. “Filipinos want policies that directly ease the burden of high living costs while implementing reforms to eliminate corruption.”