Tag: real-estate

Clarifying “Market Value” in the Supreme Court’s Pasay–Arellano Decision Post

The Supreme Court of the Philippines recently released a press statement. It is titled “SC: Just compensation in land expropriation must consider all relevant factors, not just market value.” This statement refers to its decision in G.R. No. 260038 (City Government of Pasay v. Arellano University).

The ruling reiterates a fundamental principle in expropriation law. Just compensation must be real, full, and fair. It is determined not by a single administrative figure, but through judicial evaluation of all circumstances surrounding the property.

However, the Court’s post also offers a chance to clarify a common terminological confusion. The use of “market value” as cited in the post does not refer to true open-market value. Instead, it refers to the Schedule of Market Values (SMV). Local assessors use this administrative instrument for taxation purposes.

Arellano University owned an 805-square-meter parcel of land in Barangay San Isidro, Pasay City. The City Government turned this property into a public road. It is now known as Menlo Street. This was done without expropriation proceedings or payment of just compensation.

The Pasay City Assessor’s Office had assigned the land a value of Php200 per square meter. This was based on its 1978 Schedule of Market Values. The trial court later used this figure to compute compensation.

The Supreme Court, however, clarified that such assessor-based valuations are not determinative of just compensation. They can guide fiscal assessments, but they are not substitutes for market evidence or judicial determination.

Market Value vs. Schedule of Market Values

This distinction lies at the heart of both valuation and constitutional law.

ConceptMeaningPurposeAuthority
Market ValueThe price a willing buyer would pay to a willing seller in an open market. Both parties act knowledgeably and without compulsion.Reflects real market behavior, used in appraisals, investments, and expropriation.Defined under PVS 102 and IVS 104; affirmed in Republic v. CA, G.R. No. 146587 (2002).
Schedule of Market Values (SMV)A uniform benchmark value prepared by the local assessor for tax assessment purposes.Ensures equity in real property taxation under the Local Government Code.Authorized under Sections 212–216, LGC of 1991.

The PVS (Philippine Valuation Standards) and IVS (International Valuation Standards) define market value as:

The estimated amount as the price for which an asset exchanges between a willing buyer and a willing seller. This occurs in an arm’s-length transaction after proper marketing. The parties act knowledgeably, prudently, and without compulsion.

In contrast, the Schedule of Market Values is an administrative tool. It is updated every few years. It is designed to standardize taxation but not to represent real-time market dynamics.

The Supreme Court has consistently drawn this line in cases such as NPC v. Manubay Agro-Industrial Corp. and Republic v. CA: the SMV may be indicative. However, it cannot replace the judicial process of valuation. This process ensures constitutionally mandated just compensation.

My Letter to the Supreme Court

To support accurate public understanding of this distinction, I have respectfully written to the Supreme Court Public Information Office.
My letter explains that the “Php 200 per square meter market value” is mentioned in the decision. It comes from the 1978 Schedule of Market Values. This should not be mistaken for actual market value as understood in valuation and jurisprudence.

You may read my full letter here.

In essence, my correspondence acknowledges the Court’s sound reasoning. It emphasizes the need to maintain terminological precision. This principle is crucial not only to valuation professionals but also to the legal system itself.

The phrase “market value” may appear technical. However, in matters of public taking, it defines the line between administrative convenience and constitutional fairness.
When government takes private property, just compensation must reflect the property’s true worth—its economic value, not its tax-assessed figure.

Ensuring this distinction honors both the rule of law and the integrity of valuation practice. It safeguards landowners’ rights and guides courts, assessors, and appraisers toward a shared language of fairness and precision.

The City of Pasay v. Arellano University decision reinforces a timeless principle:

Just compensation is not a matter of administrative convenience—it is a constitutional right grounded in fairness and factual valuation.

As valuation professionals, we have a responsibility to ensure that public discourse around “market value” remains technically accurate. It must also be legally sound. Clarity in language leads to clarity in justice.

How Econometric Analysis Solved a Client’s Valuation Challenge in BGC

In today’s volatile property market, even fully leased buildings can face uncertainty when interest rates rise and yields compress. One of our clients is a developer with a 30-storey, 76-unit office tower in Bonifacio Global City. They sought clarity on whether their investment was still performing as expected. Through econometric analysis, we transformed complex market data into actions. This gave them financial insight that helped them see beyond occupancy rates. They focus on true value, risk, and return.

The Client’s Challenge

A private developer approached our team with a critical question:

“Is our 30-storey, 76-unit office building in Bonifacio Global City still financially viable under current market conditions?”

The client had completed construction two years earlier. The building was fully leased. They were concerned about rising interest rates. Modest rental escalations are eroding investment returns.

The property’s leasing structure appeared competitive. It includes a mix of bare-shell and fitted office units. These units range from PhP1,500 to PhP1,800 per sqm per month. However, management wanted to know if the building’s cash flows truly reflected its economic value. They questioned whether adjustments in pricing, escalation, or capital structure were necessary.

In short, the challenge was not occupancy — it was understanding profitability in a tightening capital market.

Our Approach

Instead of relying on conventional yield assumptions, our team applied econometric modeling. This is an analytical framework that links property-level performance to measurable macroeconomic drivers.

We began by reconstructing the building’s income statement. We also reconstructed rental schedules across 76 office units and all 30 floors. We factored in current lease terms and 3% annual escalations. Additionally, we used observed market data from Pinnacle Real Estate Consulting and Arcadis Philippines.

From there, we derived two distinct discount rates using both finance-based and property-specific risk models:

MethodFormulaResult
Finance-Based (CAPM)R=Rf+β(ERP)+SRP17.40%
Real Estate Build-UpR=Rf+∑RiskPremiums13.16%

Each parameter was anchored to empirical data. This includes the risk-free rate, beta, and risk premiums. These were tied to data from the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas, PSA inflation series, and Damodaran’s country risk tables.

By integrating these variables, we aligned the building’s valuation with economic reality rather than static, one-size-fits-all assumptions.

Findings: Translating Data into Decision

Our projection model covered a 10-year period, reflecting the economic life of the building’s interior improvements.

Discount RatePresent Value of Cash Flows (PhP)Fit-out & Equipment Cost (PhP)NPV (PhP)Interpretation
13.16%11,801,35812,472,358–671,000Breakeven (stabilized scenario)
17.40%10,655,64612,472,358–1,816,000Slightly negative (equity scenario)

Despite the modest NPV results, the cash inflows were sufficient to recover the capital outlay within the project’s economic life. This indicated a financially balanced asset — not speculative, but self-sustaining and capital-preserving.

The key insight for the client was that profitability was not being lost. It was simply redefined by changing macroeconomic conditions. In other words, the property’s yield had adjusted to reflect a maturing market.

We extended the analysis to examine how the project would perform under various economic shocks:

  • A 1% increase in the discount rate (e.g., due to rising interest rates) would reduce the property’s value by approximately PhP700,000.
  • A 1% increase in rental escalation would improve valuation by about PhP500,000.

This confirmed that interest-rate and capital-market movements have a greater effect on value than marginal rental adjustments.

The adopted PhP1,800 per sqm rate for fitted offices is advantageous. It places the property squarely within the prime BGC rental range of PhP1,400–PhP1,900. The effective yield is 7–8% per annum. This is a level consistent with institutional benchmarks in Metro Manila’s investment-grade office sector.

The results of the econometric analysis allowed the client to make well-informed and financially sound decisions. Our findings confirmed the current rental rate structure of PHP 1,500 to PHP 1,800 per square meter per month. This rate was aligned with prevailing market conditions. These rates match the conditions in Bonifacio Global City. Attempting to increase the rates further would risk higher tenant turnover without producing a proportional increase in building value. Hence, the most strategic course was to maintain existing rents, ensuring consistent occupancy and stable revenue streams.

Second, the study validated the client’s 3% annual escalation policy. It demonstrated that this policy accurately reflected the average inflation rate. It also matched the standard lease renewal adjustments in the area. This approach ensured that income growth would remain sustainable and competitive, balancing tenant affordability with long-term asset performance.

Finally, we advised the client to reclassify the building’s investment profile—from a short-term growth-driven asset to a core income property. This repositioning recognized that the building had already reached stabilization, with 100% occupancy and predictable cash inflows. The property could now serve as a capital preservation anchor within the client’s portfolio. It would provide reliable income to offset higher-risk, higher-yield developments elsewhere.

What initially seemed like a modest or even negative Net Present Value (NPV) was reinterpreted. It became a measure of financial efficiency. The building’s inflows matched its cost of capital. This indicated that it was performing exactly as expected in a mature market like BGC. Through this shift in perspective, the client gained a clearer understanding of the property’s value. The client also gained a more strategic framework for portfolio management, anchored in data, discipline, and economic logic.

This case highlights how econometric reasoning transforms real estate valuation from a static appraisal into a dynamic decision-making tool. We treated rents, yields, and escalation rates as variables linked to broader economic conditions. This approach helped us uncover not just the property’s value but also the logic behind it. The client learned that a neutral or breakeven NPV is not necessarily a weakness. It can signify equilibrium and maturity in a market. In this market, stability is the new form of strength.

For investors, the key takeaway is that macro-driven valuation brings clarity in times of uncertainty. Understanding how discount rates move with monetary policy provides a sharper sense of timing. Recognizing how escalation aligns with inflation sharpens your understanding of risk and opportunity. For developers, the lesson is strategic. Once a building reaches full occupancy and stable returns, it should be viewed as a core income asset. This asset anchors the portfolio and preserves capital rather than being seen as a speculative venture.

Ultimately, the study demonstrates that data and discipline lead to confidence. In Bonifacio Global City, every percentage point of yield and risk can mean millions in value. Econometric analysis offers a distinct advantage. It gives clients the ability to move beyond intuition. Consultants can also ground their investment strategies on measurable, defensible evidence.

By: AB Agosto, JD, REA, REB, REC, MA Economics (University of San Carlos)
Paralegal – Real Estate, Environmental & Corporate Law

The Impact of the WorldRisk Report on Philippine Real Estate

The Philippines, a nation of islands situated in the typhoon belt, remains one of the world’s most disaster-prone countries. The WorldRisk Report 2025 is a publication of Bündnis Entwicklung Hilft. It is also published by the Institute for International Law of Peace and Armed Conflict (IFHV) of Ruhr-University Bochum. It places the country among those with the highest global risk exposure. This conclusion is once again highlighted. The report has a special focus on floods. Floods are the most frequent and destructive natural hazard worldwide. Between 2000 and 2009, floods accounted for 44 percent of all global catastrophes, affecting more than 1.6 billion people and causing losses exceeding USD 650 billion. In the Philippines, flood vulnerability continues to rise because of climate-related rainfall intensification. Unregulated urbanization contributes to the risk. The degradation of natural buffers such as wetlands and mangroves exacerbates the situation.

These recurring flood events are no longer isolated environmental phenomena. They are now central to understanding how real estate functions. They are also central to understanding how real estate is valued. Climate risk directly influences property demand, development feasibility, and investment decisions. What once defined value purely in economic terms—location, accessibility, and market trends—now includes resilience, adaptability, and sustainability. Floods not only damage structures and displace communities but also recalibrate the long-term performance and desirability of land.

The Real Property Valuation and Assessment Reform Act (RA 12001), enacted in 2024, reflects this changing reality. It establishes a uniform national valuation framework, standardizes market-based approaches, and introduces mechanisms for adaptive reassessment. Among its provisions, Section 18 explicitly recognizes that disasters and calamities can alter property market values. It authorizes local government units to revise their Schedules of Market Values. This occurs whenever “significant changes” happen due to calamities or disasters. These changes can be man-made or natural. This provision marks a significant legal milestone. It integrates disaster risk into valuation governance. It acknowledges that climate events are legitimate economic variables. These variables can affect land and building worth.

This legal recognition aligns with the 2025 WorldRisk Report findings. The report calls for an integrated response. It combines four key perspectives: political, technological, social, and ecological. Political measures emphasize decentralized governance and the inclusion of risk management in land-use planning. Technological innovation encourages the use of satellite data, LiDAR mapping, and AI-based flood forecasting to inform planning and decision-making. Social resilience underscores community preparedness and traditional knowledge systems that reduce vulnerability. Ecological solutions advocate for mangrove reforestation, wetland restoration, and nature-based flood control, which simultaneously protect biodiversity and buffer human settlements.

In real estate valuation, these four dimensions translate into practical implications. Under the cost approach, flood exposure accelerates physical deterioration. It shortens the remaining economic life of improvements. Appraisers must apply higher depreciation rates. They also need to use more conservative estimates of useful life. The income approach must consider flood-induced operating expenses. It should also factor in reduced rentability and risk-based capitalization rates. These considerations help to account for uncertainty in income streams. Meanwhile, the market approach must segregate comparable sales based on hazard exposure. This is important since properties within flood-prone zones typically transact at discounted prices. These properties also exhibit longer marketing periods.

Beyond appraisal technique, the relationship between flood risk and property value also reflects broader behavioral and institutional adjustments. Developers now prioritize elevation, drainage systems, and green design. Lenders are requiring flood-risk assessments before approving mortgages. Insurers have introduced differentiated premiums based on hazard classification. These market adjustments demonstrate that resilience has become a form of economic capital—one that safeguards value and attracts investment.

Yet the transformation brought by the WorldRisk Report and RA 12001 extends far beyond valuation methodology. It is reshaping the Philippine real estate sector as a whole. Urban planning now integrates flood risk into Comprehensive Land Use Plans (CLUPs). Developers incorporate retention ponds and elevated designs as standard practice. Financial institutions are embedding environmental risk into credit assessments. The convergence of scientific data, legal frameworks, and market adaptation signals a new era in property governance. In this era, resilience is not peripheral but central to defining and protecting value.

In this evolving landscape, real estate valuation has likewise been methodologically reshaped. It is no longer a static appraisal of economic worth but a dynamic assessment of risk, sustainability, and adaptive capacity. Properties are now judged by their performance under pressure. This includes how they resist, how they recover, and how they remain useful during climate events. The very meaning of “value” has expanded: it now includes the ability to endure.

Ultimately, the 2025 WorldRisk Report and RA 12001 together redefine the fundamentals of real estate in the Philippines. The former provides the global scientific context for understanding hazard exposure. The latter establishes the national legal mechanism to respond to this exposure. Together, they transform how property is developed, managed, financed, and valued. In the age of climate uncertainty, the true measure of real estate is no longer limited to its square meters. It is also not defined by its location. Instead, it lies in its resilience per square meter.

In this century of rising tides and shifting ground, resilience is not just protection—it is value itself.

References

Bündnis Entwicklung Hilft & IFHV Ruhr-University Bochum. WorldRiskReport 2025. Available at: https://weltrisikobericht.de/worldriskreport/
Republic Act No. 12001. Real Property Valuation and Assessment Reform Act of 2024. Official Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines.
Department of Finance – Bureau of Local Government Finance. Philippine Valuation Standards (PVS 2023).

The ARROW Act (RA 12289): A Promise of Reform or Another Risk of Corruption?

The ARROW Act (RA 12289) promises faster infrastructure and fairer compensation for landowners — but will it curb corruption or create new risks? Learn what appraisers and property owners must know.

Massive infrastructure projects in the Philippines often carry a double meaning. On one hand, they symbolize progress — roads that connect markets, airports that open trade, and power lines that electrify communities. On the other, they are dogged by delays, undervaluation of property, and allegations of corruption in right-of-way (ROW) spending. For property owners, expropriation has too often meant dispossession without fair payment. For taxpayers, billions intended for development sometimes disappear into inefficiency or worse, into private pockets.

The Accelerated and Reformed Right-of-Way (ARROW) Act (RA 12289) was passed to address these longstanding problems. It is framed as both accelerated — ensuring faster delivery of projects through calibrated deposits, ex parte writs of possession, and anti-delay rules — and reformed — standardizing valuations, expanding compensation, and mandating transparency. In theory, the law promises to close the loopholes that have long made ROW a breeding ground for corruption.

What Appraisers Must Know

For appraisers, the Accelerated and Reformed Right-of-Way (ARROW) Act (RA 12289) raises the bar of professional responsibility in ways that cannot be overstated. Under this law, the appraisal report is no longer just a supporting document — it is the linchpin of fairness in the determination of just compensation.

Valuation now begins with the Schedules of Market Values (SMVs) prepared by local government units under RA 12001, the Real Property Valuation and Assessment Reform Act. These SMVs are intended to provide an updated, standardized baseline to reduce arbitrary valuations. In the absence of updated SMVs, zonal values from the Bureau of Internal Revenue or assessed values may be used. However, these figures are only starting points. The law explicitly requires courts to weigh comparable sales data, sworn valuations by property owners, and independent appraisal reports. This keeps professional appraisers at the very center of the process: their expertise bridges the gap between mass appraisal (which may lag behind the market) and the constitutional requirement of “just compensation,” which demands property-specific fairness.

Beyond land valuation, the ARROW Act recognizes the full range of compensable interests that appraisers must document and value. Improvements, machinery, and structures must be valued at 100% of their replacement cost, subject to depreciation when determining deposits but fully recognized in final compensation. Crops and trees must be valued at market rates based on species, maturity, and productive potential. Partial takings — where only part of a parcel is acquired — require an assessment of the diminution in value of the remaining property, a task that often calls for a before-and-after analysis. The law also expressly allows for subsurface rights acquisition (for tunnels, pipelines, and conduits), which appraisers must value as easements or partial restrictions rather than outright takings.

This broadened scope makes appraisal practice more demanding but also more consequential. Appraisers must now master not only the sales comparison and cost approaches, but also agricultural valuation, easement analysis, and diminution-in-value methodologies. They must be familiar with engineering cost indices, Department of Agriculture commodity pricing, and even geotechnical impacts in subsurface cases. Every omission or weak assumption in a report may directly affect landowners’ rights and project budgets — or worse, provide room for undervaluation schemes.

What Landowners Must Know

For landowners, the Accelerated and Reformed Right-of-Way (ARROW) Act (RA 12289) is both a protection and a challenge. On the one hand, it expands what counts as compensable property. On the other, it requires vigilance to make sure rights are not overlooked or eroded.

The law broadens the scope of compensation significantly. Landowners are no longer limited to being paid for the bare land alone. They are entitled to just compensation that covers the value of the land, the 100% replacement cost of improvements and machinery, the fair market value of crops and trees, and even the diminution in value of partially affected parcels. This is critical because many families rely not only on their land but also on the homes, shops, or farms built upon it. Under RA 12289, these are recognized as integral to livelihood and must be paid for.

Importantly, the law also protects those who do not yet have formal titles. Long-time possessors of untitled land can still be compensated, provided they can present evidence such as tax declarations, DENR certifications declaring the land alienable and disposable, survey plans, and affidavits from disinterested persons or barangay officials. This closes a long-standing gap where informal but legitimate claimants were previously left without remedies.

However, landowners must also recognize the practical limits built into the law. Initial deposits made by the government when filing for expropriation are deliberately modest: only 15% of the land’s market value, but 100% of the replacement cost of improvements and 15% of crops. While this ensures that owners with houses, factories, or crops receive upfront money, those whose property is land-heavy but improvement-light may feel underpaid at the start. The balance is determined later by the courts as final just compensation, but this process takes time, and owners must be prepared for the cash flow gap.

The law also introduces a two-year freeze rule. Once a notice of taking is issued, any improvements added to the property may not be recognized for compensation. This rule is meant to discourage speculative or last-minute construction intended to inflate claims. For landowners, this is a warning: avoid sinking new investments into a property already tagged for acquisition, as they will not be reimbursed.

Promise or Risk?

Here lies the central tension of the Accelerated and Reformed Right-of-Way (ARROW) Act (RA 12289). The law is carefully crafted to accelerate infrastructure delivery while at the same time protecting landowners. By anchoring valuations to Schedules of Market Values (SMVs), it seeks to bring predictability to a process that used to be haphazard. By mandating public disclosure of right-of-way transactions, it holds agencies accountable in ways that past laws never did. By imposing sanctions on officials or private entities who delay or manipulate acquisition, it promises to bring discipline to a sector notorious for inefficiency and abuse. On paper, these reforms appear to strike the balance between speed and fairness.

But every promise also carries its shadow. SMVs, while standardized, remain products of mass appraisal. If they are outdated, they can undervalue land and deprive owners of just compensation. If manipulated at the local level, they can be skewed to benefit certain political or commercial interests. The ex parte writ of possession, designed to give the State quick access to property, is a powerful tool — but it can weaken a landowner’s leverage if the final fixing of just compensation drags on. Transparency requirements are strong in theory, but history has shown that agencies often find ways to delay, obscure, or underpublish the data the public needs to verify compliance.

The ARROW Act, then, stands at a crossroads. If implemented with integrity, it could finally provide a solution that curbs corruption, ensures fair compensation, and restores trust in public projects. But if captured by vested interests, it could just as easily become another source of corruption — with mass appraisal abused to justify lowball offers, safeguards ignored in practice, and speed used as a cover for unfairness.

The outcome depends not only on the text of the law but on the people who live under it. For appraisers, professionalism, independence, and defensibility are now essential, because their reports are the first line of defense against undervaluation and collusion. For landowners, preparation and vigilance are key — they must safeguard documents, assert their rights in negotiations, and demand the transparency that the law promises. For institutions, the challenge is consistent enforcement: ensuring that timelines are met, disclosures are made, sanctions are imposed, and that the balance between public need and private rights is respected.

In the end, the ARROW Act is not just a piece of legislation but a test of political will and civic vigilance. It challenges the Philippines to prove that it can build fast without breaking trust, that progress does not have to come at the expense of justice, and that corruption does not have to be the inevitable cost of development. Whether it fulfills its promise or slips into risk will depend on how well all actors play their part in the years ahead.

Why Title Annotations and Encumbrances Matter in Property Appraisal

“In valuation, the fine print on the title can be as valuable—or as dangerous—as the land itself.“

In real estate appraisal, numbers alone do not tell the whole story. A property’s legal status—particularly the annotations and encumbrances appearing on its title or tax declaration—can drastically alter its worth. While some may view these legal markings as mere notarial footnotes, a seasoned property appraiser understands that such entries are crucial to determining the property’s true value, marketability, and risk profile.  One of the most important but sometimes overlooked aspects of valuation is the presence of annotations and encumbrances on the property’s Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT), Original Certificate of Title (OCT), or Tax Declaration. These annotations—whether involving tax delinquency, pending litigation, or other restrictions—can drastically alter a property’s value, marketability, and highest and best use (HBU). For the professional appraiser, understanding and correctly interpreting these legal markings is essential, not optional.

Why Appraisers Must Pay Attention

There are several compelling reasons why a diligent appraiser must care about annotations and encumbrances.

First, these legal burdens directly affect market value—the core product of any appraisal. Buyers in the open market are generally unwilling to pay full price for a property encumbered by unresolved claims, legal disputes, or forfeiture risks. Appraisers must therefore consider how each annotation may cause potential buyers to either walk away or demand a discount.

Second, legal risk translates to value risk. Annotations such as a lis pendens, adverse claim, or a writ of attachment signal potential issues with ownership, possession, or future usability. Even if a property looks physically sound, a legal cloud on its title will make it less attractive and inherently riskier. Prudent appraisers account for this by adjusting their valuation assumptions, often applying a discount or issuing a qualified opinion.

Third, these annotations frequently affect the property’s highest and best use (HBU)—a foundational concept in valuation. If a property is subject to restrictive covenants, reversionary clauses, or foreshore lease limitations, its legal permissibility for development or other productive use may be severely constrained. The appraiser must therefore revise the HBU analysis and its associated value estimate accordingly.

Fourth, annotations impair a property’s marketability. For instance, a property that has been auctioned off for tax delinquency but is still within the redemption period cannot be sold with confidence. Similarly, if a property was inherited but the title transfer is not yet perfected, there may be co-heir disputes or administrative delays. In both cases, the property may be legally transferable only in theory, but not in practice—at least not without cost or time delays.

Fifth, annotations affect the property’s loanable value or equity value. Banks and other financial institutions are wary of lending against titles that carry risks. For example, a property mortgaged beyond its current market value or encumbered with a lien from unpaid taxes may only be eligible for partial financing, or worse, may be rejected altogether as loan collateral. This has direct implications for the appraiser’s task in estimating not just market value, but the net realizable or mortgageable value.

Finally, ignoring these factors may violate the appraiser’s professional and legal responsibilities. Under the Real Estate Service Act (RA 9646), the appraiser is required to exercise due diligence and report all material conditions that affect the value of the property. International Valuation Standards (IVS) and the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) similarly require full disclosure and the proper interpretation of legal burdens. Failing to do so may expose the appraiser to liability, loss of license, or reputational damage.

Understanding the Specific Impact of Common Annotations

To make these risks and responsibilities more concrete, let’s examine how common annotations and encumbrances impact valuation:

A Notice of Tax Delinquency or Forfeiture carries a negative impact on value and significantly impairs marketability due to the risk of government seizure. When a Certificate of Sale appears on the title—typically following a tax auction—the buyer only has conditional ownership until the redemption period lapses. This also warrants a discounted valuation and caution in reporting.

A Lis Pendens indicates that the property is subject to ongoing litigation. Its presence severely impairs marketability and imposes legal uncertainty, which in turn reduces value. An Adverse Claim similarly signals a third-party interest in the property that contradicts the titleholder’s claim. While not always litigated, it still creates hesitation for buyers and lenders, pulling values downward.

A Levy or Writ of Attachment represents a judicial restriction. Courts attach the property to secure a possible judgment, and while the property is not yet seized, its transferability is legally curtailed. This justifies a risk adjustment in the valuation.

If the title carries a Foreshore Lease or a Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) annotation, it usually means that the property is within the public domain (such as coastal or reclaimed land). Ownership is limited to leasehold rights, not fee simple. This not only reduces the appraised value to the leasehold interest but also conditions its use based on government regulation.

An Affidavit of Loss or Reconstitution of title temporarily affects the property’s marketability, especially if the reconstitution process is incomplete. Although this may only have a neutral to slightly negative impact on value, it still warrants disclosure and may be included as a limiting condition in the report.

A Real Estate Mortgage (REM), if current and performing, generally has a neutral impact on market value, assuming the appraisal is for market purposes and not equity extraction. However, the appraiser must still distinguish between total market value and the equity portion when applicable.

An Easement or Servitude, such as a right of way or drainage restriction, slightly reduces the value and may condition the property’s utility. If the easement affects buildable area or accessibility, this becomes a material consideration.

Reversion clauses or restrictive covenants are more serious. These limit future development, prohibit certain uses, or allow the property to revert to a former owner under certain conditions. As these significantly constrain HBU and market flexibility, they usually result in a negative value adjustment.

Lastly, annotations involving Deeds of Donation, Inheritance, or Partition may suggest that the property was recently transferred or is part of a co-ownership arrangement. If the legal transfer is incomplete or the estate is unsettled, the title remains in flux. This affects both value and marketability, particularly if there is a risk of future claims or if the sale requires consent from multiple parties.

In real estate valuation, legal clarity is just as important as physical condition. Title annotations and encumbrances represent real risks, limitations, and burdens that influence the value of a property. Whether through discounted sales, delayed transactions, restricted use, or diminished loanability, these legal notations affect how market participants perceive and engage with real estate assets.

The professional appraiser must go beyond mere physical inspection and apply legal awareness, risk sensitivity, and valuation expertise to provide credible, well-supported opinions of value. Every annotation tells a story—of ownership, encumbrance, or uncertainty—and the appraiser must read, interpret, and reflect that story in the appraisal report.

Property Identification: The Sacred Foundation of Real Estate Appraisal

In the meticulous world of real estate appraisal, one principle stands above all others: you cannot value what you cannot identify correctly. Whether working on a condominium in Makati, a farmland in Bukidnon, or a contested estate in Cebu, the first and most sacred duty of any appraiser is to accurately and defensibly identify the subject property. This is not just a technical requirement—it is the foundation of credibility, legality, and fairness in valuation. A mistake in property identification is not a small error. It invalidates every step that follows: the market comparison, highest and best use analysis, risk assessment, and final value estimate. Simply put, wrong property means wrong valuation.

Property identification involves several components. It means correctly determining the legal identity of the land—via Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT), technical description, and lot number. It also means identifying the actual physical location and ensuring it matches the documents, zoning classification, and any physical improvements or encumbrances. Every valuation method—whether it’s the market approach, cost approach, or income approach—relies on this first step. If you appraise the wrong lot, all your calculations, assumptions, and conclusions become legally and factually meaningless.

This is why misidentification carries not only technical consequences but also legal and ethical ones. A wrong appraisal can lead to court rejection of the report, denial of loans by banks, and even legal liability for misleading courts or clients. Under Article 19 of the Civil Code of the Philippines, professionals have a duty to act with justice, give everyone their due, and observe honesty and good faith. The Philippine Valuation Standards likewise emphasize that appraisers must exercise due diligence and care—beginning with accurate property identification.

Some of the most common pitfalls in this process include relying solely on the owner’s verbal claim without matching it against documentary evidence, misplotting technical descriptions, failing to check for easements or encroachments, and confusing adjacent lots with similar features. These errors are preventable with a disciplined and documented approach. A responsible appraiser will cross-check TCT data with the tax map and zoning ordinance, conduct field validation through site visits, use geotagged photos or drones, and even consult barangay officials or boundary markers when in doubt.

The risks of inaccuracy are very real. Imagine an appraiser tasked to value Lot 6 but instead inspects and reports on Lot 5. If Lot 5 is under threat of expropriation or prone to flooding, while Lot 6 is not, the valuation will be drastically wrong. In judicial proceedings, such a mistake may result in an unjust award of compensation or legal challenge. In lending, it may lead to defective collateralization. The appraiser’s name—and the integrity of the profession—are on the line.

I always emphasize that property identification is not just a preliminary step—it is the moral compass of professional practice. It sets the tone for the accuracy, fairness, and trustworthiness of the entire report. Real estate is a high-stakes industry. The margin for error is slim, and the cost of error is great. That is why we say: Property identification is sacred. Wrong property is wrong valuation. Always.

“Work to Learn, Then Earn”: An Appraiser’s Story

An excerpt from an interview with Appraiser Gus Agosto

In this special feature, a Bachelor of Science in Real Estate Management (BSREM) student sits down with Appraiser Gus Agosto to learn about his early journey into the world of real estate appraisal. From his first spark of interest to navigating the challenges of starting, Appraiser Agosto shares how his background in economics, passion for learning, and hands-on experience shaped his professional path. This insightful conversation offers valuable lessons and inspiration for students and aspiring appraisers alike.

Interviewer:

Welcome, Appraiser Gus Agosto. We’re excited to learn more about your journey into the world of real estate valuation. Let’s begin with your early inspiration.

1. What initially drew you to the field of real estate appraisal, and can you recall the moment you decided to pursue it as a career?

Appraiser Gus Agosto:

My journey into appraisal began during my time as a real estate salesperson and property investment specialist. More than a decade has passed since then. One vivid memory stands out: I was in a developer’s office when I met a gentleman who was reviewing for the appraiser’s licensure exam. I watched him work through a complex mathematical problem and admired the analytical skill involved. That moment sparked a deep curiosity in me, one that never left.

Later, during my broker’s review, I began to understand the nuances of the different professions within real estate. Our lecturers were very encouraging, and I gravitated toward appraisal because of its close ties to economics and mathematics—two subjects I’ve always been passionate about. Given my background as a researcher, writer, and a graduate in economics, the transition felt natural. That’s when I firmly decided to pursue a career in real estate appraisal.

2. How did your educational background or early professional experiences prepare you for the demands of property valuation work?

Appraiser Gus Agosto:

I hold a degree in economics and spent several years engaged in research before entering real estate. I conducted studies on local economies, enterprises, and development trends—work that laid the groundwork for the analytical mindset essential in valuation.

My stint as a real estate salesperson further broadened my understanding. I was exposed to different types of properties and transactions, attended seminars, and got to know the real-world workings of the industry. Steve Jobs once said, “You can only connect the dots looking backward.” In my case, those dots connected my work as a researcher, writer, lecturer, and a real estate practitioner, all of which converged toward a solid foundation in appraisal.

3. What challenges did you face when you were just starting out as an appraiser, and how did you overcome them?

Appraiser Gus Agosto:

Like many beginners in the field, I faced the usual questions: Where do I begin? How do I get clients? One piece of advice from a lecturer stuck with me—start with your “KKK”: Kamag-anak, Kliyente, at Kakilala—your natural network. That became my launching pad.

At one professional association event, I met a fellow appraiser who owned an appraisal firm. She invited me to join their Cebu branch, and I accepted without hesitation. It was a valuable opportunity. The company had a structured system, an established client base, and a culture of mentorship. We focused on the core operations—site inspections, analysis, and report writing. Each report we submitted was reviewed by seasoned appraisers, turning every assignment into a learning experience.

Later on, I had the opportunity to work with another appraisal firm in Metro Manila whose clients included major banks and large corporations. There, I learned the discipline of working in a highly coordinated team with tight turnaround times—often just three days per report. The volume of work was intense, but it sharpened my ability to deliver accurate reports under pressure, without compromising quality.

When I returned to Cebu, I reconnected with mentors who were among the pioneering appraisers in Visayas and Mindanao—back when there were only about five of them in the region. They welcomed me into their practice without formal discussions about fees. For me, the priority was learning. I was exposed to a different side of the profession: that of the individual practitioner. Besides Cebu and nearby provinces, I handled assignments even in remote areas such as Kapatagan in Lanao del Norte, Ozamis, and Clarin. I also had the opportunity to appraise properties of prominent Cebuano families and large-scale developments. That phase lasted for at least two years and deepened my understanding of valuation beyond the corporate environment.

Eventually, a batchmate invited me to serve as an appraiser for a nationwide cooperative, marking the start of my independent practice. I traveled to various locations, encountered a wide range of property types and development conditions, met people from all walks of life, and balanced time in the field with desk work in the office. Those routines became the rhythm of my early appraisal career.

In those formative years, I worked with at least three appraisal firms and three respected individual appraisers. My guiding principle was simple: “Work to learn, and earning will follow.” I was driven by a deep eagerness to grow in the profession, more than anything else.

Looking back, my journey—from economic researcher to real estate salesperson to hands-on valuation—was a kind of “gestation period.” Each phase played a vital role in sharpening my skills and shaping my professional identity as a full-fledged appraiser.

4. Looking back at your first appraisal assignment, what lessons did you learn that still guide your practice today?

Appraiser Gus Agosto:

I’ll never forget my first assignment—it was a warehouse in Pagsabungan, Mandaue. My buddy and I were eager and nervous. We did everything manually—measuring the structure, crawling into tight spaces, and sweating through the inspection. It was tough, but also rewarding.

The biggest lesson I learned was about trust. Clients allow us into their private spaces and rely on our judgment to assign value to their property. That responsibility has always stayed with me. I make sure to explain to my clients how I arrived at the valuation and why it’s fair. For me, valuation is not just about figures—it’s about credibility, integrity, and professionalism. Trust is the foundation of our practice, and I continue to uphold that principle in every report I sign.

Advice to Aspiring Appraisers:

Appraiser Gus Agosto:

To those just starting: “Work to learn first, not just to earn.” Be open to guidance, surround yourself with mentors, and never stop asking questions. This profession is built not just on numbers, but on experience, trust, and continuous growth. Stay curious, stay humble, and stay committed.

Interviewer Wrap-Up:
Thank you, Appraiser Gus Agosto, for that inspiring and grounded look into your journey. Your story is not only a blueprint for aspiring appraisers but also a testament to how passion, persistence, and purpose can shape a meaningful career.

Just Compensation Starts with Just Valuation

The right to just compensation is a cornerstone of constitutional property protection in the Philippines. But just compensation cannot exist without just valuation—an objective, market-based assessment of property value that respects both legal mandates and professional standards. This is the essential promise of Republic Act No. 12001, or the Real Property Valuation and Assessment Reform Act (RPVARA), enacted in 2024.

RPVARA introduces a uniform, professional standard for property valuation throughout the country. It mandates the use of the Philippine Valuation Standards (PVS), a comprehensive set of guidelines based on internationally recognized valuation principles. These standards are no longer optional. They are now the legal benchmark for determining real property values in the Philippines.

This legislative mandate gives flesh to Article III, Section 9 of the 1987 Constitution, which states: “Private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation.” In numerous decisions, the Supreme Court has clarified that “just compensation” means payment equivalent to the fair market value of the property at the time of taking. RPVARA enforces this principle by defining fair valuation through a standardized, transparent system.

For lawyers, this law is particularly relevant in cases involving land acquisition, expropriation, estate settlement, and taxation. It is no longer enough to rely on outdated zonal values or arbitrarily assessed figures. The Constitution guarantees the right to just compensation, and RPVARA operationalizes this by requiring property valuations to reflect prevailing market values. Lawyers who fail to understand and assert the application of the PVS risk failing in their fiduciary duty to clients, particularly in expropriation cases where compensation is the core issue.

Judges and court-appointed commissioners are equally bound. In the past, some courts and referees have resorted to averaging methods or used outdated assessments in determining compensation. RPVARA now provides a clear and binding legal standard—market value as defined and measured by the Philippine Valuation Standards. Ignoring these standards may not only result in injustice but may also constitute a legal error that undermines the integrity of court decisions.

Local assessors and government appraisers face a professional turning point. RPVARA tasks the Bureau of Local Government Finance (BLGF) to adopt, maintain, and enforce the PVS, ensuring that local government units implement the new standards consistently. All valuation professionals in the public sector are now required by law to comply with these standards. Section 13 mandates that “all appraisers and assessors in LGUs, and other entities conducting valuation, shall conform with international valuation standards.” Section 14 further states that “all real properties shall be valued or appraised based on prevailing market values… in conformity with the PVS.”

These provisions echo the broader mandate of Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution, which affirms the rule of law in all governmental actions. Likewise, Article XIII, Section 9, on urban land reform and housing, compels the State to respect the rights of small property owners—a promise that is only fulfilled when valuations are fair and legally grounded.

Non-compliance is not a mere technical oversight. RPVARA imposes administrative and even criminal liability on public officials or appraisers who deliberately disregard its mandates. This is reinforced by Sections 23 and 24 of the law, which provide for penalties in cases of violation. It also complements provisions in the Local Government Code of 1991 (RA 7160), such as Sections 201 and 212, which require local governments to prepare schedules of fair market values—now understood to mean values determined through PVS-compliant methods.

The significance of RPVARA extends beyond legal compliance. It helps create a transparent and reliable valuation system that supports fair taxation, equitable compensation, and investor confidence. For property owners, this means more credible valuations in expropriation, taxation, and real estate transactions. For local governments, it means a more reliable source of revenue, better planning, and improved public services.

This reform also aligns the Philippines with global best practices, supporting responsible urbanization and land use policy. A valuation system based on internationally aligned standards helps attract investment, reduce disputes, and enhance the efficiency of public infrastructure projects.

RPVARA is more than a technical law. It is a vital instrument for ensuring fairness in property-related processes, whether in taxation, compensation, or estate administration. Understanding this law—and putting it into practice—is not just the responsibility of appraisers or assessors. It is a shared duty of lawyers, judges, government officials, and landowners alike.

Now is the time to become familiar with the Philippine Valuation Standards. By doing so, we uphold constitutional rights, professional integrity, and the rule of law.

Why Effective Report Writing Adds Value

In the practice of real estate appraisal, much emphasis is often placed on the technical process of valuation—data collection, market analysis, and the application of valuation approaches. However, as Mr. Gus Agosto emphasized in a recent lecture on Appraisal Report Writing, one of the most overlooked yet indispensable components of the appraisal process is the ability to clearly and effectively communicate its outcome. Effective appraisal, as he asserts, means effective reporting.

Drawing from over a decade of experience in the field, Mr. Agosto highlighted that writing an appraisal report is not merely a clerical task or an afterthought to technical valuation. It is the final product—the formal articulation of an appraiser’s professional opinion of value. This report must not only present data but must also comply with standards, reflect sound judgment, and demonstrate adherence to the legal and ethical expectations of the profession.

Some appraisal reports currently in circulation—particularly those used as templates—were created prior to the passage of Republic Act No. 9646, known as the Real Estate Service Act of the Philippines (RESA Law). Others are adapted from international formats that may not fully conform to Philippine legal and regulatory requirements. While these templates may serve as useful starting points, Mr. Agosto stressed that they are insufficient if not updated to reflect local laws and contemporary standards. Over the past decade, numerous laws and administrative issuances have been enacted, including the Philippine Valuation Standards (PVS), Data Privacy Act, Electronic Commerce Act, Anti-Money Laundering Act, updates to BIR Revenue Regulations, and court procedural rules, which must now be reflected in appraisal report writing.

Under Section 3(g) of the RESA Law, a real estate appraiser is legally defined as a professional who “performs or renders, or offers to perform services in estimating and arriving at an opinion of or acts as an expert on real estate values,” and whose services “shall be finally rendered by the preparation of the report in acceptable written form.” This statutory requirement emphasizes that the report is not a mere formality; it is the legal expression of the appraiser’s findings and professional responsibility.

Further, Section 5(c) of the Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of R.A. 9646 mandates that licensed appraisers shall “prepare, sign, and issue a real estate appraisal report” in accordance with accepted principles and standards prescribed by the Board and the Professional Regulation Commission (PRC). The PVS, aligns with the International Valuation Standards (IVS) but is tailored to Philippine law and practice. Reports must demonstrate transparency in methodology, accuracy in assumptions, and consistency in legal compliance.

Mr. Agosto also pointed out that appraisal reports are not generic in nature. They must be purpose-specific, as each type of valuation engagement—litigation, insurance, sales, taxation, lease, or expropriation—carries distinct reporting requirements, legal standards, and evidentiary burdens. Moreover, Mr. Agosto emphasized that the appraiser’s ability to communicate effectively, through proper grammar, structure, and clarity, is just as important as analytical rigor. A report written in poor language or filled with jargon may undermine its credibility, even if technically correct. Thus, he encourages appraisers to continually upskill in both technical and language proficiency, utilize digital tools, apply peer review, and align with style guides that enhance report readability and presentation.

Appraisal reports serve as vital documents in court cases, bank financing, taxation, and public policy. Thus, Mr. Agosto explained, they must be credible, compliant, and defensible. This requires not only legal and technical knowledge, but also proficiency in professional communication. The appraiser must be able to clearly convey complex data, defend conclusions logically, and eliminate ambiguity through proper grammar, sentence structure, and vocabulary. In an era where reports are often read by legal, financial, and lay audiences alike, the precision and clarity of language can determine whether the report is useful—or even admissible.

Hence, appraisal report writing is not just a skill—it is a professional obligation grounded in law, ethics, and service to the public good. It transforms raw valuation data into a structured, credible, and actionable opinion of value. As Mr. Agosto aptly concluded: “Your report is your professional signature. It must speak with competence, integrity, and purpose long after you’ve signed it.”

Implication of Trump’s Immigration Policy on Philippine Real Estate

The recent announcement by newly inaugurated U.S. President Trump, suggesting a move to end birthright citizenship through an executive order, has sparked widespread debate. The proposal, targeting children born on U.S. soil to non-citizens or undocumented immigrants, challenges the long-standing application of the jus soli principle enshrined in the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. While the political and legal implications of this development have dominated headlines, the potential economic ripple effects are just as significant—not only in the United States but also for nations like the Philippines, where jus sanguinis governs citizenship by bloodline.

The jus soli principle grants citizenship to nearly anyone born within a country’s borders, while jus sanguinis, as applied in the Philippines, ties citizenship to one’s parents rather than birthplace. For Filipinos in the U.S., stricter birthright citizenship rules could mean diminished opportunities for their children to acquire U.S. citizenship automatically. This could deter future migration, affect job stability, and influence long-term investment behavior—including decisions to invest in Philippine real estate.

Filipino Migration and U.S. Immigration Data

As of 2022, about 4.1 million Filipino Americans lived in the United States, making up 17% of the nation’s total Asian American population, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. Philippine Ambassador to the United States, Jose Manuel Romualdez, recently highlighted that approximately 350,000 Filipinos are currently living illegally in the U.S. Since 2001, a total of 9,597,961 cases have been filed across all U.S. immigration courts, with only 25,301 of those involving Filipinos, including just 723 who entered without inspection (EWI). Of the 3,716,106 cases still pending in immigration court (most of which involve EWI), only 1,218 involve people born in the Philippines. This data reveals that despite Filipino Americans constituting roughly 1% of the U.S. population, they represent only 0.002% of deportation proceedings, which is a notably low percentage.

The majority of Filipinos in removal proceedings are facing deportation for overstaying their visas, with two-thirds (16,844) of these cases linked to visa overstay. An additional 3,342 are in proceedings due to committing aggravated felonies, and 3,955 have been convicted of other criminal charges. There are also 12 individuals charged with national security violations and one Filipino charged with terrorism.

The Housing Paradox and its Economic Impact

In the Philippines, the housing market is already dealing with the dual challenges of oversupply and a significant housing backlog—issues that have long plagued the country’s real estate sector. Despite efforts to address these concerns, access to affordable housing remains a critical issue. However, amid this ongoing struggle, the sector faces another blow. The potential changes in U.S. birthright citizenship policy will exacerbate the situation.

Overseas Filipino Workers (OFWs) and Filipino Americans are major drivers of real estate demand in the Philippines, sending billions of dollars in remittances annually to finance property purchases. OFWs based in the United States were the leading source of remittances received by the Philippines in 2023, amounting to around 13.71 billion U.S. dollars. However, if U.S. policy changes reduce the economic security tied to citizenship for these communities, their capacity and willingness to invest in Philippine properties could decline. This could further exacerbate the existing inventory challenges faced by real estate developers.

A reduction in U.S.-based remittances could also impact housing affordability and market segmentation. Developers, already grappling with oversupply, may need to pivot towards affordable housing to cater to the domestic market—a sector marked by intense competition. The increased supply targeting this sector could drive price corrections, creating both opportunities and risks for local buyers and investors.

Beyond the market dynamics, stricter U.S. citizenship policies could have sociopolitical implications for the Philippines. If long-term U.S. migration is discouraged for Filipinos, a potential increase in skilled professionals returning to the Philippines may reshape urban housing demand. The rental market and demand for mixed-use developments could see shifts, though it may take years for these changes to offset the current oversupply.

This issue is critical for Filipinos because migration, remittances, and real estate are deeply interconnected. The Philippine government, developers, and financial institutions must consider the potential consequences of global policy shifts, as these could have far-reaching effects on the local economy and housing market.