There is a very Filipino way of making an argument—start with one legitimate number, attach several questionable assumptions to it, then end with four frightening predictions. That is exactly what this post does.

It claims that Mindanao contributes only around ₱500 billion in taxes but receives ₱1.03 trillion in budget allocations. From there, it concludes that for every ₱5 Mindanao contributes, it supposedly takes more than ₱10 from Luzon and the NCR.

It sounds impressive. It is also a deeply misleading way to describe how the Philippine fiscal system works.

First: GDP is not tax collection

The post begins with the claim that Mindanao accounts for roughly 17% of Philippine GDP. That general order of magnitude is not unreasonable. But GDP share is not the same thing as tax share. GDP measures economic production. It is not a receipt from the Bureau of Internal Revenue. A region producing 17% of national output does not automatically mean that exactly 17% of all national taxes should be collected there.

And the reverse is equally true, a region receiving more than 17% of some government expenditures does not automatically mean it is “taking” money from other regions. That is Economics 101. The Philippine tax system is national. Government revenue is pooled. Government spending is then appropriated for national programs, agencies, infrastructure, social services, defense, education, health, debt obligations and transfers to local governments.

You cannot simply put a tax collection figure beside a budget figure and declare the difference a “subsidy from Luzon.”

Second: the ₱1.03 trillion figure is being used deceptively

This is probably the biggest problem with the graphic. The Philippine national budget is not a giant ATM divided into 18 regional envelopes according to how much each region paid in taxes. DBM itself explains that the national budget contains regionalized allocations as well as nationwide and central-office allocations.

In its budget documentation, regional allocations cover expenditures implemented in regions, while other appropriations remain nationwide or under central offices. And there is another important distinction—the National Tax Allotment (NTA) of local governments is not distributed according to which region collected the most taxes. DBM says the NTA distribution to provinces, cities, municipalities and barangays follows a statutory formula.

For provinces, cities and municipalities, population accounts for 50%, land area for 25%, and equal sharing for 25%. Barangay shares also follow a prescribed formula.

So when somebody says “Mindanao paid ₱500 billion but got ₱1.03 trillion”, the immediate question should be ₱1.03 trillion of what? Does it include national agencies operating in Mindanao? DPWH projects? AFP and police operations? National government salaries? Schools and hospitals? National Tax Allotments?BARMM’s block grant? Nationwide programs implemented in Mindanao? Capital expenditures for infrastructure? Debt-funded projects?

If the answer is yes, then comparing that entire number with BIR collections is not an apples-to-apples fiscal balance sheet. It is comparing tax receipts with government expenditures and pretending they are the same accounting category. They aren’t.

Third: taxes are not a regional membership fee

There is an even bigger conceptual problem. A Filipino corporation operating in Mindanao is part of the Philippine economy. Its customers may be in Luzon. Its shareholders may live in Manila. Its suppliers may be in Cebu. Its bank may be headquartered in Makati. Its imported machinery may enter through Manila. Its products may be shipped to Luzon, Visayas or overseas.

Where a corporation files a tax return is therefore not necessarily equivalent to where all of the economic activity generating that tax occurred. The post’s phrase “all corporations domiciled in Mindanao will pay in BIR Mindanao” also oversimplifies the tax system.

So the supposed “true tax” of Mindanao cannot simply be calculated by taking its GDP percentage and applying that percentage to total national tax collections. That is not how national taxation works.

Fourth: the Philippines is not a contest between Luzon and Mindanao

This is where the post becomes political rather than economic. It portrays Luzon as some giant exploiter and Mindanao as a dependent region. But look at the actual Philippine economy. NCR remains the country’s largest regional economy, accounting for about 31% of national GDP in 2024. But Mindanao is not an economic beggar either. Davao Region alone had a regional economy of about ₱1.08 trillion in 2024, while Northern Mindanao reached about ₱1.04 trillion.

Mindanao produces agricultural commodities, minerals, energy, manufactured goods and services that feed industries and consumers throughout the country. Luzon, meanwhile, provides manufacturing, finance, logistics, technology, ports, corporate headquarters and massive consumer markets that are also indispensable to Mindanao.

That is an economy, not a charity arrangement. The banana farmer in Davao, the manufacturer in Laguna, the logistics company in Cebu and the bank headquartered in Makati are part of the same national economic system.

Trying to calculate who “owes” whom by region misses the entire point of having a national economy.

And then come the four scare stories

The post claims that if Mindanao separates:

A. Muslim insurgents backed by Malaysia will take over. This is presented as a certainty. There is no basis for that certainty. In fact, Malaysia’s documented role in the southern Philippines has been as a facilitator of the Mindanao peace process, not simply an external sponsor of a coming invasion. The Moro Islamic Liberation Front’s transition away from armed struggle toward autonomy was itself part of a peace process brokered with Malaysian facilitation.

There are still security problems. There are still armed groups. There are still unresolved issues in the Bangsamoro peace process. But jumping from those realities to “Malaysia-backed Muslim insurgents will surely conquer Mindanao” is not analysis. It is speculation dressed up as certainty.

B. Mindanao would have no choice but to surrender its mining industry to China. Again: possible scenario, not inevitable outcome. An independent Mindanao would have to negotiate trade, investment, security and diplomatic relationships with many countries. China would certainly be an important economic player because of geography, markets and resources—but so would ASEAN neighbors, Japan, South Korea, Australia, the United States and others.

Whether a future government accepts predatory financing would depend on its institutions, leadership, negotiating capacity and economic policy. You cannot turn “China might seek influence” into “Mindanao will have no choice but to sell its mining industry to China.” That is not economics.That’s a geopolitical horror story.

C. Mindanao has no armed forces. Technically, an independent Mindanao would have to establish its own military because the AFP is the armed forces of the Republic of the Philippines. But saying Mindanao has “no armed forces” ignores the obvious—Mindanao is already home to substantial Philippine military formations and installations.

The AFP’s Eastern Mindanao Command, for example, is headquartered in Davao City and is responsible for military operations in eastern Mindanao. If secession were ever seriously pursued, the disposition of personnel, bases, equipment, command structures and assets would become a complicated constitutional and political negotiation. But that is very different from saying “wala silang armed forces, therefore they will be conquered.”

A future independent state could build armed forces just as every other state does. Whether it could afford them is another question. And that is precisely the kind of question that deserves serious economic and strategic analysis—not Facebook prophecy.

D. Mindanao will become a feudal land because its people elect warlords.

This is perhaps the most insulting part of the entire argument. Mindanao is not one political culture. It contains multiple regions, provinces, cities, ethnic communities, indigenous peoples, Muslims, Christians, business centers, agricultural communities, universities and highly urbanized economies.

Yes, political dynasties and local warlords exist. But they exist in Luzon and Visayas too. Political dynasties are not a uniquely Mindanaoan invention. If dynastic politics automatically produced feudal states, the entire Philippines would already be one.

The real lesson from the graphic

There is one legitimate question hidden underneath all this propaganda—is the Philippine fiscal system fair to Mindanao? Absolutely worth asking.

Does Mindanao deserve more infrastructure? Yes.

Does Mindanao deserve greater control over its resources? That is a legitimate policy debate.

Should national investments be more geographically balanced? Certainly.

Should regions have stronger fiscal autonomy and greater accountability for how public money is spent? Also worth debating.

But those arguments become weaker—not stronger—when advocates manipulate numbers to manufacture resentment. If you want to argue for Mindanao, argue for Mindanao. Don’t invent a tax ledger that treats the national government like a collection agency for Luzon. And if you want to argue against Mindanao independence, argue the constitutional, economic and security case. Don’t tell people that Malaysia will invade, China will seize the mines, the AFP will disappear and warlords will automatically turn the island into a medieval kingdom.

Those are four predictions. They are not four facts.

The Constitution itself defines the national territory as the Philippine archipelago and the territories over which the Philippines has sovereignty or jurisdiction. Any discussion of changing that constitutional arrangement is therefore a question of constitutional and political transformation—not something that can be settled by a Facebook graphic showing two columns of pesos.

The Philippines has one national economy because Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao are economically interconnected. The answer to regional inequality is not regional hatred. And the answer to a bad argument is not another bad argument from the opposite side.

The numbers should be used to understand the country—not to teach Filipinos to hate one another.Mindanao does not need to pretend it carries the Philippines. Luzon does not need to pretend it carries Mindanao. The Philippines carries all of us.