rice tariffication law tagalog essay

Ang Katotohanan sa Rice Tariffication Law

Sa pagbagsak kamakailan ng presyo ng palay, hindi nakagugulat na uminit ang usapan tungkol sa bagong Rice Tariffication Law .

Umani ng batikos ang batas, at maraming mga kritiko nito ang nagsabing ito daw ay hindi pabor sa ating mga magsasaka. Ito daw ang dahilan kung bakit bumaba ang presyo ng pagbili ng palay. Ito daw ang dahilan kung bakit lalong maghihirap ang ating mga magsasaka.

“Mas mabuti pa ang dating sistema, kasi kawawa naman ang ating mga magsasaka,” sabi nila. “Dapat hindi na naipasa ang batas na yan!”

Sa kasamaang palad, ang publiko ay nabigyan ng maling impormasyon tungkol dito. Nagpadala ang karamihan sa atin sa mga litratong nagpapakita ng mga magsasakang naghihirap. Pero ito nga ba ang bigger picture ?

Ano ba ang katotohanan sa Rice Tariffication Law (RTL) ? Nakabubuti o nakasasama ba talaga ito sa ating mga magsasaka?

Isang maikling sagot – malaking kabalintunaan ang mga ibinabatong batikos sa bagong batas na ito, dahil lahat ng sinasabi nila ay pawang kasinungalingan . Ang RTL ay pabor sa ating mga magsasaka . Ito ang sagot para mapabuti ang industriya ng bigas at agrikultura ng Pilipinas. Ang RTL ang tunay na pagbabago sa sistemang ilang dekada nang sumisiil sa ating mga magsasaka at kanilang mga pamilya.

Bakit? Dahil ang RTL ay lunas para sa ugat ng problema – isang bulok na sistemang walang magandang naidudulot para sa ating mga magsasaka.

Ang mas malaking pakinabang ng mga taripa

Una sa lahat, inaayos ng Rice Tariffication Law ang polisiya ng Pilipinas, mula sa pagpapatupad ng quotas papuntang pagtatalaga ng mga tariffs . Ano ba ang pinagkaiba nito?

Ang isang bansa na gustong maghigpit sa  importation  ng mga bilihin ay pwedeng magpatupad ng  tariffs  (o taripa sa mga  imported goods ) o kaya’y  quota na naghihigpit sa dami ng inaangkat na produkto.

Malinaw na mas malaki ang benepisyo ng taripa kaysa sa quota. Hindi lang ito pagkukunan ng pondo para sa pamahalaan na maibabalik sa taumbayan, kung hindi bubuo din ng sistema na hindi madaling pasukin ng katiwalian.

The Duterte effect

Sa kabila nito, pinili ng Pilipinas ang pag deklara ng  quotas at mga kaparehong mga patakaran upang mapangalagaan ang mga magsasaka. At noong pinagkasunduan ang 1994 Uruguay Round Final Act (ang pagpupulong na nagsimula sa World Trade Organization), nangako ang Pilipinas na palitan ito ng mga taripa sa loob ng sampung taon.

Ang problema? Hindi ito naipatupad – nangyari lamang ito sa administrasyong Duterte. 15 taon na ang lumipas mula ang naitakdang oras ng pagpapatupad.

At siyempre, lahat ng mga ekonomista ay sumasang-ayon na ang mga taripa ay mas mabuti kaysa sa quota . Bakit?

Ang  tariffs  ay nakalilikom ng pondo para sa pamahalaan; ang mga  quotas ay nakalilikom ng pondo para sa mga indibidual (marahil mga opisyal ng gobyerno) na nag-aapruba ng mga patakarang ito.

Sino ba sa tingin niyo ang mga may ayaw sa RTL? Ang mga tutol dito ay ang mga distributor  at iba pang mga organisasyon na gustong manatili sa quota system para kontrolado nila ang presyo ng merkado.

Bakit ba natin pinagpipilitan na taasan ang presyo ng palay? Hindi ba kapag nangyari to, itataas din ang presyo ng bigas? Ibig-sabihin, dehado naman tayong mga mamimili.

Hindi pataasan ng pagbili ng palay ang sagot para sa ating mga magsasaka – ang sagot ay ang mga lunas na isinusulong ng RTL, at alam ito ng Pangulo.

Ang Katotohonan? Ang RTL ay pabor sa ating mga magsasaka

Salungat sa mga pinipilit ng mga kritiko ng batas na ito, ang RTL ay pabor sa ating mga magsasaka. Ano nga ba ang laman ng RTL, at bakit malaki ang benepisyong makukuha ng mga magsasaka natin dito?

Una sa lahat, and RTL ay magtatalaga ng mga tariffs sa mga ini-aangkat na bigas na maaaring pagkunan ng pondo ng pamahalaan. Inaalis ng batas na ito ang mga import restrictions sa mga ini-aangkat na bigas, kapalit ng (a) 35 – 48% na taripa para sa mga bansang kasama sa ASEAN, at (b) 50% na taripa para sa mga non-ASEAN na mga bansa.

Ano ang benepisyo nito? Ang malilikom na taripa ay mapupunta sa pag buo sa tinatawag nilang Rice Competitiveness Enhancement Fund (RCEF) , na siyang magbabalik ng pera sa ating mga magsasaka.

Ang RTL ang pagmumulan ng pondo para sa ating mga magsasaka

Mahigit na ₱10-billion ang inaasahang malilikom na pondo mula sa RTL. Ito ay mapupunta sa RCEF na popondohan ang sumusunod:

• 50% para sa mga magsasaka at mga kooperatibo, at sa modernisasyon ng kagamitang pansaka
• 30% para sa pag- develop , pagpapalawig, at pagsulong sa lokal na palay
• 10% para sa Landbank, upang maging pondo para sa pautang sa mga masasaka
• 10% para sa mga organisasyon tulad ng TESDA, PhilMech, PhilRice, at Agricultural Training Institute (ATI), na magbibigay ng kaukulang pagsasanay para sa ating mga magsasaka upang maging mas epektibo ang kanilang mga pamamaraang ginagamit sa pagsasaka

Malinaw ang benepisyo ng pondong malilikom mula sa batas na ito. Ngunit hindi dito tumitigil ang mga benepisyo ng RTL.

Pagpapababa ng production costs

Ang suma total ng lahat ng mga pagbabagong ito ay ang pagpapababa sa production cost ng lokal na palay.

Tayo ang isa sa mga may pinakamahal na production cost ng palay sa buong Southeast Asia.

Para makagawa ng kilo ng bigas sa Pilipinas, kailangan gumastos ang mga magsasaka ng ₱12. Mataas ito kung ikukumpara mo sa Thailand (₱6) at sa Vietnam (₱6). At minsan, mas maganda pa ang kalidad ng kanilang bigas, at mas mura ang bilihan sa merkado. Idagdag mo pa ang delubyong dala ng bagyo, na mas madalas sa Pilipinas, paano tayo lalaban?

Sinusubukan ng RTL na ayusin ito, para maging mas competitive ang ating lokal na palay. Pagbaba ng production cost ng palay, lalaki din ang kita ng ating mga magasasaka. ‘Yan ang totoo. Walang sagot ang mga kritiko diyan.

Proteksyon para sa magsasakang Pilipino

Isang kabalintunaan na ang lahat ng mga kritiko ng Rice Tariffication Law ay nagpupumilit na masama ang batas para sa ating mga magsasaka. Sa katunayan, wala nang mas lalayo pa sa katotohonan.

Ang RTL ay para sa ika-uunlad ng industriya ng pagsasaka ng Pilipinas, mula Luzon hanggang Mindanao . Gawin natin ang parte natin para magkatotoo ang pagbabago. Magsimula tayo sa pagpigil sa pagpapalaganap ng maling impormasyon. Pag-usapan at intindihin ang isyu bago magpasiya. Tigilan na ang pagpapadala sa fake news .

Kailangan nating maintindihan na ang RTL ay makabubuti para sa lahat. Hindi lang ito para sa ating mga magsasaka, kung hindi para sa buong Pilipinas, at kinabukasan ng lahat ng Pilipino.

Related Articles

Agricultural Smuggling: A Threat to our Economic Stability

Lakambini Rice: PH Made High Quality Rice

Big-Time Onion Smuggler Arrested: Villar Calls for Tougher Laws

High Times: Are more PH farmers planting marijuana?

Leave a reply cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

• Subscribe Now

[OPINYON] Bilang isang babaeng magsasaka, ano ba para sa akin ang Rice Tariffication Law?

Already have Rappler+? Sign in to listen to groundbreaking journalism.

This is AI generated summarization, which may have errors. For context, always refer to the full article.

Illustration by Guia Abogado

Para sa marami, ang ika-labing apat ng Pebrero ay Araw ng mga Puso, araw ng mga magsing-irog, ng mga nagmamahalan. Pero para sa akin, ito ang araw ng pagtalikod ng pamahalaan sa aming mga magsasaka na nagpapakain sa bawat pamilyang Pilipino. Sa araw ring ito, lahat ay nagmamahal; ang palay lang ang hindi. 

Nangako ang mga nagtulak ng Rice Tariffication Law (RTL) ng pagtaas ng ani, pagbaba ng mga gastos sa produksyon, at pagbaba din ng presyo ng bigas para sa mga konsyumer. Pero walang nasunod sa mga pangakong ito, at mapapako pa kung walang gagawing hakbang ang pamahalaan. 

Sa isang opinyon na sinulat kamakailan lang ni Ginoong Fermin Adriano , sinabi nya na hindi masama para sa ekonomiya ang mababang presyo ng palay. Pero paano kaming mga magsasaka? Hindi ba kami kasama sa ekonomiyang sinasabi niya? Paano ang ekonomiya naming mga magsasaka na wala halos kinikita sa pagtatanim ng palay? Ang pagsasaka ng palay ay ang aming pangunahing ikinabubuhay. Dahil lugi kami lagi, nagsasakripisyo ang aming mga pamilya. Saan namin kukunin ang pang-tustos sa pag-aaral ng aming mga anak? Paano ang aming gagawin kung sakaling may magkasakit sa amin?

Maaaring di ako nakapagtapos ng degree sa kolehiyo. Pero ang aking deka-dekadang karanasan sa bukid at bilang isang lider ng mga kababaihan at ng mga magsasaka ang nagbibigay kaalaman at kaunawaan sa akin sa mga isyu at problema naming mga magsasaka.        

Ang mga patakaran sa agrikultura, gaya ng RTL, ay sinusulat at ipinapasa ng mga ekonomista at mga mambabatas sa loob na kanilang mga opisinang de aircon. Hindi nila naririnig ang boses naming magsasaka. 

Simula ng mapasa ang RTL, sinabi ng Department of Agriculture (DA) na ang presyo ng palay ay naglalaro sa P18/kilo. Pero sa Nueva Ecija, kung san matatagpuan ang aking dalawang ektaryang palayan, walang nakakabenta ng mas mataas pa sa P14 pesos/kilo. Nagtanim ako noong Hulyo ng nakaraang taon at nag-ani ako ng Oktubre. Naibenta ko sa mga traders ang aking mga inaning palay sa halagang P14.00/kilo lamang at hindi P18, gaya ng sinasabi ng DA. 

Mula sa presyong ito, wala ako halos kinita dahil mahigit sa P12 pesos bawat kilo ang gastos ko sa pagtatanim hanggang makapag-ani. Ang sinasabing P18 pesos per kilo na sinasabi ng DA ay nangyayari lamang kapag nasa kamay na ng mga traders ang palay. Yan ay mga Nobyembre hanggang Disyembre na kung kelan nakabenta na ang mga kagaya naming magsasaka. Hindi namin pwedeng antayin na tumaas ang presyo ng palay dahil kailangan namin ng pera. Kung minsan nga, hindi pa namin naaani, naibenta na ito sa mga traders dahil kapos sa pera ang mga magsasaka; nautang na sa traders ang pagbebentahan pa lang ng palay. 

Nasaan ngayon ang pinangakong pagpapababa sa gastusin ng produksyon? Hindi naman sumasapat ang pinag-uusapang ayudang binhi at pataba, na nakapaloob sa RTL. Unang-una, ang binibigyan ng ayuda ay yung mga nakalista sa Registry System for Basic Sectors in Agriculture (RSBSA). Kulang na kulang ang database na ito dahil ang kadalasang nakalista lamang ay mga kalalakihan o yung mga may-ari ng lupa. Paano ang mga nakikisaka lamang at hindi nakalista dito? Sila ang totoong nakakailangan ng ayuda.

Bataan bishop scraps fees for funeral Masses

Problema rin ang pag-access sa database na ito dahil magastos papuntang Municipal Agriculture Office (MAO) o DA. Paano ang mga kababaihang magsasaka na kadalasang hindi makapagpalista dahil hindi maiwan ang mga gawaing bahay at pagaalaga ng pamilya? Sila ay totoong magsasaka rin. Ang iba ay wala ring maipresentang ID.

Ikalawa, ang mga ayuda ay para lang sa mga palayan na may isang ektarya pababa. Paano ang mga mahigit isang ektarya pero hirap pa rin sa kanilang pamumuhay?      

Para sa katulad kong may dalawang ektarya, nakakuha ako ng ayuda – dalawang sako ng binhi (40 kilos) at dalawang sako ng pataba (40 kilos). Ngunit hindi ito sumasapat sa aking palayan dahil kailangan ko ng limang kaban na binhi. At dahil kulang, mapipilitan akong bumili lalo na kung bumagyo dahil hindi nagagamit na binhi ang mga palay na nalunod sa baha. Lalong hindi rin ito pwedeng ipalit sa kapwa ko magsasaka dahil nakakahiya.

Kung dati ay P40,000 ang gastos sa produksyon kada ektarya, ngayon ay malinis na P60,000 kada ektarya ang kailangan kong ilabas para makapag-ani lang ng palay. Sa dalawang ektarya, P120,000 ang aking puhunan. Sa land preparation pa lamang ay umuubos na ako ng P28,000-30,000. Apat na buwan kong hihintayin bago umani at mabenta, bago makuha ang aking kita.   

Habang naghihintay, lalo na nung nagpapaaral pa ako ng mga kapatid, kailangan kong mag-alaga ng baboy para matustusan ang pangangailangan nila sa edukasyon. Buti na lang at nagtatanim din kami ng mga gulay sa palibot ng palayan at nag-aalaga ng mga bibi, pato, at mga manok. Ito ang pinagkukunan namin ng pagkain para di na kami bumili sa panahon na wala pang ani. Meron din kaming maliit na sari-sari store na pinag-kukunan ng konting pang-gastos. Nakatulong ang kaalaman ko sa pagba-budget dahil natitipid ko at napapaikot ang aming pera para sa aming mga pangangailangan sa bahay at sa bukid. Bawal sa amin ang gumasta ng wala sa budget at di pwedeng galawin ang pera pampaaral. Kung kinakailangang magtipid sa kakainin, tinitipid namin ang kakaunting pera.    

Sa matagal na panahon, alam ko na di sasapat ang pagsasaka lang para mabuhay kami. Ngayong may RTL, batay sa mga karanasan ko at nakikita ko rin sa mga kapwa ko magsasaka, napatunayan kong mas mahirap pa ang pagsasaka ng palay dahil nabawasan ng malaki ang aming mga kinikita ng halos palugi na. Mas malaki ang gastos namin sa produksyon kesa kita. Dati rati, nakakabenta ako sa aking palay ng P100,000. Ngayon, di pa ako maka-abot ng P60,000.

Hindi rin naman bumaba ang presyo ng bigas sa pamilihan gaya ng pinangako ng RTL. Kaming mga magsasaka, konsyumer din kami. Wala namang bababa pa sa P30/kilo na tindang bigas sa palengke. Umaabot pa nga ito sa P60/kilo. Buti na lang at may natitira akong bigas kahit paano para sa aming kakainin. Paano ang mga magsasakang nangutang para sa produksyon? Wala silang kakayahang magtabi para sa pamilya nila dahil di pa man sila umaani, nakaabang na ang pinagkaka-utangang trader sa kanilang palay. Ang nangyayari ay bibili din sila sa pamilihan ng mahal na bigas mula sa maliit na nga nilang kinita sa pagbebenta ng palay.

Sa pagsusuri ng isang magsasakang tulad ko, wala pa akong nararanasang kaginhawahan o pagbabago sa estado ng buhay naming mga magsasaka noon at lalo na ngayong may RTL, dagdag pa nga ang patong-patong na krisis at mga bagyong dumaan. Kung gusto talaga ng pamahalaan maayos ang buhay naming mga magsasaka, makinig sila sa aming mga hinaing at maglagay ng tunay na kinatawan ng magsasaka sa paggawa ng mga panibagong patakaran sa agrikultura. Ibigay nila ang ayuda ng naaayon sa kung ano ang kailangan namin sa pagsasaka, kahit wala ng pautang. Baguhin nila ang mga patakaran na nagpapahirap pang lalo sa aming mga magsasaka.

Bilang babaeng magsasaka, masasabi ko na ang RTL ay hindi para sa akin o sa kahit sino pa mang magsasaka. – Rappler.com

Si Trinidad “Ka Trining” Domingo, 68, ay walang asawa, at pang-anim sa labing-isang magkakapatid. Siya’y isang magsasaka at lider ng Pambansang Kongreso ng Kababaihan sa Kanayunan (PKKK).  

Add a comment

Please abide by Rappler's commenting guidelines .

There are no comments yet. Add your comment to start the conversation.

How does this make you feel?

Related Topics

Recommended stories, {{ item.sitename }}, {{ item.title }}, farmers in the philippines, negros occidental farmers urge presidential action over land promised them 12 years ago.

Farmers in Ilocos Norte struggle after Super Typhoon Julian’s onslaught 

DA to give P19.9B excess rice tariffs as cash aid to farmers by November

4,000 farmers struggle as fall armyworms continue to ravage Negros Occidental farms

Negros Occidental town moves to thwart legal battle over palm oil project

rice supply in the Philippines

23,000 mt of imported rice kept by consignees in manila port.

Congested ports hinder rice prices from going down – DA chief

Agri groups seek dismissal of tariff officials over EO 62

Farmers’ groups want TRO vs EO 62, reduction in rice tariffs

Marcos gov’t cuts tariffs on imported rice from 35% to 15%

Checking your Rappler+ subscription...

Upgrade to Rappler+ for exclusive content and unlimited access.

Why is it important to subscribe? Learn more

You are subscribed to Rappler+

• Privacy Policy
• Login/Register

Search form

FFTC Agricultural Policy Platform (FFTC-AP)

• Policy Articles
• Policy-Related News
• Accepted Manuscripts
• About E-Journal
• External Links

You are here

The philippine rice tariffication law: implications and issues.

The Philippine rice sector has always been the center of government agricultural policies. The focal points of the policies revolve around promoting food self-sufficiency, providing high income to rice farmers while making prices affordable to the consuming public. The accession to WTO provided for the revision of the quantitative restrictions (QRs) and reduce tariff protection. Rice was exempted from tariffication. The Philippines opened up imports on rice under a minimum access volume (MAV) which is in operation equivalent to QRs. The QR regime mandated for conversion into tariff protection from 2005- 2012 and a waiver to maintain QR up to June 30, 2017. The Philippines’ membership to the WTO for 24 years aimed to counter the impact of the expected influx of cheap rice imports. The Rice Tariffication Law signed into law by President Rodrigo Duterte on February 14, 2019 amends the Agricultural Tariffication Act of 1996 that imposed tariff to agricultural imports except for rice.  The law was prompted because of the surging inflation of rice price during the last quarter of 2018 after the rice stocks of NFA ran out. As Filipinos continue to struggle with inflation, the government found ways to temper rising inflation.

Overview of Philippine rice industry

The Philippines became self-sufficient in rice in the 1970s and was a rice exporter to neighboring countries such as Indonesia, China, and Myanmar. However, with the rapid increase in population and limited land resources to produce the total rice requirement, the country slowly turned into a net rice importer. The Philippines is the second largest rice importer in the world next to China (Simeon, 2019). In 2017, the country imports rice mainly from Vietnam (52%) and Thailand (29%) (Santiago, 2019).

Rice is a highly political commodity because it is the country’s main staple. It has always been the center of government agricultural policies. The focal points of the policies revolve around promoting food self-sufficiency, providing high income to rice farmers while making prices affordable to the consuming public (Tobias et al. , 2011)

The Philippines in the WTO

In 1995, the Philippines acceded to the WTO with the premise of revising QRs and reduce tariff protection. Rice, however, was exempted from tariffication. The Philippines opened up imports on rice under a minimum access volume (MAV) which is in operation equivalent to Quantitative Restrictions (QRs). The QR regime of the Philippines was mandated for conversion into tariff protection. The country obtained a special treatment for rice up to 2005, which was later on extended until 2012. The Philippines has been applying for extensions of QR on rice since 1995. Eventually, the Philippines acquired a waiver to maintain QR up to June 30, 2017.

The Philippines’ membership to WTO for 24 years aimed to counter the impact of the expected influx of cheap rice imports. The country apparently has been extending protection primarily to safeguard the local rice farmers from increased competition of imported rice. Another reason the Philippines had been pushing for a two-year extension of the restriction is to achieve rice self-sufficiency by 2020.  However, given that QR on rice shall be retained, consumers shall continue to bear the burden of overpriced rice, with the poorest households bearing the burden. Based on the 2012 Family Income and Expenditure Survey, the richest 20% of households only devote 3% of their spending on rice while poorer income groups tend to allocate greater share for rice (PIDS, 2012).

THE RICE TARIFFICATION LAW

The Rice Tariffication Law titled “An Act liberalizing the importation, exportation, and trading of rice, lifting for the purpose the quantitative import restriction on rice, and for other purposes” was signed into law by President Rodrigo Roa Duterte on February 14, 2019. This is also known as the Rice Liberalization Act or Republic Act No. 11203, which amends the Agricultural Tariffication Act of 1996 that imposed tariff to agricultural imports except for rice. Primarily, the law aims to lift the quantitative restriction (QR) on rice imports and replace it with a general tariff.  The Agricultural Tariffication Act of 1996 served as the Philippine government’s compliance to our obligation to WTO, lifting QRs and imposing tariff to agricultural products. The law aims to protect local farmers from the entry of more imported rice into the country through the imposition of 35% tariff on rice coming from member-countries of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) like Thailand and Vietnam. For non-ASEAN countries, 40% tariff is imposed. The collected tariffs will be used to fund mass irrigation, warehousing, and rice research.

Objectives of the tariffication law

• Fulfill our international commitment when we joined the World Trade Organization in 1995. Replace the QR on rice with another form of protection that is more transparent and generate revenues to support the sector – or a tariff.
• Ensure the availability of rice in the domestic market for the accessibility of greater majority of the population by allowing more private traders (big or small) to participate in importing rice.
• Lower domestic rice prices to levels that would be affordable to greater majority of the population.         
• Make domestic market function effectively and efficiently with much reduced/no government intervention.
• Provide farmers equivalent protection with the imposition of 35 % or higher tariff rates on rice imports and preferential assistance to rice farmers, adversely affected by tariffication.
• Provide opportunity for farmers to earn more in the world market. The law also lifted the restriction on rice exports to encourage farmers to produce much better quality heirloom/ traditional rice geared to exports.

Key provisions of the rice tariffication act

• Tariffication . Tariffs are set at 35% tariff rate on all rice imports from ASEAN countries, and a 50% tariff on all imports from non-ASEAN countries.
• Lifting of quantitative restriction on imports and exports. Removal of the QR will also increase imports and depress “palay” prices.
• Powers of the President. Upon the recommendation of NEDA and as advised by the National Food Authority Council (NFAC), the President “may increase, reduce, revise or adjust existing rates of import duty up to the bound rate” of rice tariffs. In case of “imminent or forecasted shortage,” the draft IRR provides that the President may allow the importation of rice at a lower applied tariff “for a limited period and/or specified volume” to address the situation.
• 50% will go to the Philippine Center for Postharvest Development and Modernization (PhilMech) to provide farmers with rice farm machineries and equipment;
• 30% will be released to the Philippine Rice Research Institute (PhilRice) to be used for the development, propagation and promotion of inbred rice seeds to rice farmers and the organization of rice farmers into seed growers’ associations engaged in seed production and trade;
• 10% will be made available in the form of credit facility with minimal interest rates and with minimum collateral requirements to rice farmers and cooperatives to be managed by the Land Bank of the Philippines and the Development Bank of the Philippines; and
• 10% will be set aside to fund extension services by PhilMech, Agricultural Training Institute (ATI), and the Technical Education and Skills Development Authority (TESDA) for teaching skills on rice crop production, modern rice farming techniques, seed production, farm mechanization, and knowledge/ technology transfer through farm schools nationwide.
• Rice industry road map. The Department of Agriculture (DA), together with relevant agencies, will have to formulate a Rice Industry Roadmap to spell out the critical interventions that need to be put in place to assist the small rice farmers, especially those that will be most affected by the tariffication. DA Secretary Emmanuel Piñol issued Special Order No. 358 which created a National Rice Roadmap Team.
• Issuance of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Import Clearance for Rice for the Sole Purpose. The law allows unlimited importation of rice as long as private sector traders secure a phytosanitary permit from the Bureau of Plant Industry and pay the 35% tariff for shipments from neighbors in Southeast Asia. This covers even rice importation for the purposes of donation during calamities and emergency situations. In these instances, the agency/office/organization or private entities, if they are based in the Philippines, will be required to secure phytosanitary import clearances (SPSIC).
• National Single Window Program . A proposed measure the setting up of a single window system for rice by the Bureau of Customs to address rice smuggling.
• Exclusion and transfer of the regulatory function of the National Food Authority (NFA) to the Bureau of Plant Industry (BPI). NFA will retain its power to maintain a rice buffer stock which will be used in emergency situations and to sustain the government's disaster relief programs. Rice for this purpose will be sourced solely from local farmers.
• Special Rice Safeguard. The Implementing Rules and Guidelines (IRR) provides for a Special Rice Safeguard to help protect local rice farmers from sudden or extreme price volatilities. These will be imposed in accordance with RA 8800 or the Safeguard Measures Act and its IRR.
• Priority beneficiaries of mechanization. There are 1,100 producing towns that have been identified as priority beneficiaries of mechanization in the form of tractors, transplanters, harvesters, dryers, and rice milling equipment.
• Rice Farmer Financial Assistance program . Focuses on rice farmers, cooperatives, and associations adversely affected by rice tariffication. Also allocates tariff revenues in excess of Php10 billion to the Rice Farmer Financial Assistance program to compensate rice farmers who will lose income as a result of the measure. A portion of the excess tariff will be allocated to titling rice lands, expanded crop insurance, and crop diversification program.

Rice tariffication and inflation

The newly approved Rice Tariffication Law, approved by Congress on November 2018, will remove the National Food Authority’s (NFA) power to import and distribute cheaper rice. With Senator Cynthia Villar as the principal author, the measure was prepared jointly by the Committees on Agriculture and Food, on Ways and Means, and on Finance. It is in substitution of Senate Bill Nos. 1476, 1689, 1839, taking into consideration Proposed Senate Resolution Nos. 143, 146 and House Bill No. 7735, with Senators Ralph Recto, Leila De Lima, Joel Villanueva, Risa Hontiveros, Grace Poe, Sherwin Gatchalian and Cynthia Villar as authors.              

Pres. Rodrigo Duterte signed into law the Rice Tariffication Bill which was imposed recently on March 5, 2019. The law was prompted because of the surging inflation of rice price during the last quarter of 2018 after the rice stocks of NFA ran out. Further, according to Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA) data, rice was the number one contributor to inflation in September 2018, while food items in the consumption basket accounted for more than half of the inflation rate in the same month.  Consumers bought regular-milled rice at an average price of Php 37.89/kg (US$ 0.72/kg) and well-milled rice at Php 41.93/kg (US$ 0.80/kg). Prices of rice have continued to go up since then. Farmers enjoyed the highest buying price for “palay” which was recorded at Php 22.00/kg. The rise in rice prices, both at the farm-gate and retail levels, contributed significantly to inflation. As Filipinos continue to struggle with inflation, the government found ways to temper rising inflation. One way of doing it is by passing the Rice Tariffication Bill.

On the other hand, according to the National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA), rice tariffication will directly benefit farmers and the poor through lower rice prices and increased government assistance to the agricultural sector. The newly-signed law provides for the establishment of the Rice Competitiveness Enhancement Fund (RCEF), which will pipe in Php10 billion (US$ 190.84) annually to the rice sector for the next six years. The RCEF is allocated for the procurement of farm machinery and equipment, rice development, propagation and promotion, as well as expanded rice credit and extension services.

Meanwhile, the NEDA is taking the lead in crafting the Implementing Rules and Guidelines (IRR) of the Rice Tariffication Law along with the Department of Budget and Management, Department of Agriculture, and other concerned government agencies to ensure the country’s smooth transition to a new rice regime. This draft IRR takes into account the feedback and concerns brought up by various stakeholders during the drafting of the bill and after it was signed into law.

The following sections present the objectives, key provisions and possible implications and issues associated with the enactment of the Rice Tariffication Law.

Effects of rice tariffication

• Lower retail prices for consumers. Possible savings for the consumers as it allows no limit in terms of the volume of imports which will eventually stabilize prices. However, in the long run, the economy could benefit more from the adoption of import tariffs than implementation of QRS which limit the entry of commodities and may lead to unstable prices.
• Address the rice shortage. Would address the urgent need to improve availability of rice in the country, prevent artificial rice shortages, reduce the prices of rice in the market, and curtail corruption and cartel domination in the rice industry.
• Lower inflation rates. The law will also reduce government's role in rice importation and lead to more rice imports by the private sector, thus, lowering rice prices and help tame inflation.
• Interventions to support rice farmers. RCEF will provide key interventions to support farmers and enhance their competitiveness and profitability, including farm machinery and equipment to improve farm operations, rice seed development, propagation, and promotion, expanded rice credit, and extension services. Likewise, it will open up a window for farmers to export and contribute to the world market.

Negative                      

• New law lacks safety nets for Filipino farmers . Farmer groups clamor that the new law will make them compete with cheap rice imports, making them more penniless. Measures should be in place to ensure that Filipino farmers will not suffer with the rice tariffication law and that "safety nets" are available for farmers.  While it has its good points, the lack of government regulation worries stakeholders.
• Millers. There are around 6,600 registered rice millers all over the country, employing 55,000 workers. Industry stakeholders, in a position paper, said that a complete milling facility costs from Php 30 million (US$572,519.08) to Php 50 million (US$954,198.47) 1  . This would place the value of the whole industry itself at Php200 billion (US$ 3.82 billion) to Php300 billion (US$ 5.73) ( (Orly Manuntag, Confideartion of Grains Retailers Association of the Philippines).
• Animal feeds and beer industry. A by-product of the rice milling process, the rice bran is used for making animal and aquaculture feeds. A shortage in local unhusked rice production would also mean there would be a drop in its by-product.  If feed mills produce less, it would cause a possible increase in the prices of pork and chicken which use rice bran as major ingredient for its feeds. Another by-product which comes from the milling process is the brewer's rice or “binlid” which is used in manufacturing alcoholic drinks, particularly beer.
• Biomass, construction industry. A drop in local rice output will also mean a decrease in rice hull, which is used as fuel for biomass furnaces used in the provinces to provide electricity. Rice hulls are also used as a binder for cement and land fillers (Orly Manuntag, Confideartion of Grains Retailers Association of the Philippines).
• Enable cartels of the rice trade and will throw poor sectors into a worsened state of hunge r. There is no guarantee that retail rice prices will be lower in the long run with unhampered importation. Relying on rice imports makes the country vulnerable to higher world market prices as well as to rice production and export decisions of other countries. In 2008, for instance, Vietnam, India and Pakistan restricted their rice exports amid rising global rice prices. Thailand also raised the idea of creating a global rice cartel similar to that for oil exporting countries.

Some salient issues on rice tariffication

• Rice imports are cheaper than domestically produced rice. Under a free market, the market price of rice will decline with the influx of cheaper rice imports.
• Liberalizing rice imports will help, but will not solve the Philippines' inflation problem.
• Tariff are set at 35% tariff rate on all rice imports from ASEAN countries, and a 40% tariff on all imports from non-ASEAN countries. However, some experts claim these tariff rates are still too high, and lower rates (10% to 20%) might be more feasible in keeping with the central goal of making rice more affordable for Filipinos. While this will result in imported rice becoming more expensive, the flood of imported grains will still threaten local produce and worse, affects the farmers.
• To ensure that the rice to be imported will not be infested by pathogens or pests like bukbok (weevils), the new law requires that all private players secure “sanitary and phytosanitary import clearances” from BPI before they can import. Past experience tells us that this could be prone to abuse (Dr. Ramon Clarete, University of the Philippines School of Economics).
• The Rice Fund will be put to better use if it were focused instead on improving rice farmers’ access to credit and crop insurance (Dr. Emil Q.  Javier, National Academy of Science and Technology).

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

Much has been said on the ratification of the Rice Tariffication Act. However, the main concern is the negative impact of the rice tariffication law on local farmers, saying that the “over supply” of cheap rice could adversely affect them following its implementation. On the other hand, the law is seen to help expand the access of Filipinos to cheap rice that in return will prevent inflation pitch brought in large part by the supply. Nevertheless, the core concern of the government should be on how to prevent 2.4 million rice farmers and farm workers from getting poorer because of the implementation of the new law. Although special key provisions are already laid out to protect the farmers and the consumers, the focus is on the proper implementation so that everyone should benefit from the law. 

The newly-signed law provides for the establishment of the Rice Competitiveness Enhancement Fund (RCEF), which will pipe in Php10 billion (US$ 190.84 million) annually to the rice sector for the next six years. The RCEF is allocated for the procurement of farm machinery and equipment, rice development, propagation and promotion, as well as expanded rice credit and extension services. RCEF is a package of support programs to help the farmers and serve as safeguard to cushion the sudden effects of inflation. However, it is imperative that DA to strongly support the local rice industry and diligently perform its mandated functions in identifying eligible beneficiaries which include farmers, other farm workers, rice cooperatives and associations. Most importantly, in crafting the IRR, research and development should be highlighted since it has been proven to help develop improved technologies and increase farmers’ income.

House of Representatives. An Act liberalizing the importation, exportation, and trading of rice, lifting for the purpose the quantitative import restriction on rice, and for other purposes. Retrieved from   http://www.congress.gov.ph/legisdocs/ra_17/RA11203.pdf

National Economic Development Authority. Implementing Rules and Regulations of the Rice Liberalization Act - AmBisyon Natin 2040. Retrieved from http://2040.neda.gov.ph/public-consultation-for-the-drafting-of-the-impl...

Punongbayan, JC. “[ANALYSIS] Will Rice Tariffication Live up to Its Promise?” Rappler. Retrieved from www.rappler.com/thought-leaders/218393-analysis-will-rice-tariffication-live-up-to-promise .

Santiago, D. Philippines Rice Imports by Country. Retrieved from http://www.philippinesaroundtheworld.com/philippines-rice-imports-by-cou...

Tobias A, Molina I, Valera HG, Mottaleb KA, Mohanty S. 2012. Handbook on rice policy for Asia. Los Baños (Philippines): International Rice Research Institute. 47 p.

• Please login to bookmark this post
• 214118 read

The Sectoral Impact of the Rice Tariffication Law on Filipino Rice Supply: A Time-Series Analysis

• Aaron Benjmin Alcuitas University of San Jose-Recoletos, Cebu City, Philippines https://orcid.org/0009-0008-6413-1700
• Josephine Petralba University of San Jose-Recoletos, Cebu City, Philippines https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3943-8793

The Rice Tariffication Law was implemented in March 2019 to address rice shortage by replacing quantitative restrictions with import tariffs. Prior studies have evaluated its various impacts, but no study has analyzed post-RTL seasonal rice supply data by sector. This study is a quasi-experimental, interrupted time-series analysis using ARIMA models applied to 2011-2020 data. The control group consists of observed values and the experimental group consists of ARIMA-forecasted values post-RTL. Research findings indicate that RTL does not affect rice supply trends in the overall rice supply and household sector. Conversely, in the commercial and NFA sectors, RTL has been observed to significantly influence rice supply trends. This reveals the ways in which RTL altered the dynamics within these sectors, thereby impacting their respective supply trends by influencing local production, buffer stock, and importation. The actualization of RCEF, buffer stock increase, and the development of plans to enhance agricultural sustainability are recommended.

Balié, J., Minot, N., & Valera, H. G. A. (2021). Distributional impacts of the rice tariffication policy in the Philippines. Economic Analysis and Policy, 69, 289-306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eap.2020.12.005

Balié, J., & Valera, H. G. (2020a). Domestic and international impacts of the rice trade policy reform in the Philippines. Food Policy, 92, 101876. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2020.101876

Balié, J., & Valera, H. G. (2020b). Is covid-19 a threat to the stability of rice price and supply? International Rice Research Institute. https://www.irri.org/news-and-events/news/covid19-threat-stability-rice-price-and-supply

Briones, R. M. (2021). Does rice tariffication in the Philippines worsen income poverty and inequality? Philippine Institute for Development Studies. https://www.pids.gov.ph/publication/policy-notes/does-rice-tariffication-in-the-philippines-worsen-income-poverty-and-inequality

Calicdan, J. P. J., Gavino, C. J., Estrada, H. F., Cortez, J. M., & Balaria, F. E. (2020). Effects of rice liberalization law on rice production, farmers’ wages and government budgets. International Journal of Advanced Engineering, Management and Science, 6(6), 275-281. https://dx.doi.org/10.22161/ijaems.66.8

Carpio, A. T. (2020). Our rice buffer stock. Philippine Daily Inquirer. https://opinion.inquirer.net/128545/our-rice-buffer-stock

Casinillo, L. F. (2020). Econometric modelling on satisfaction in rice farming under Philippine rice tariffication law. Journal of Research and Multidisciplinary, 3(2), 326-336. https://journal.alhikam.net/index.php/jrm/article/view/38

Casinillo, L. F. (2022). Happiness and profitability under Philippine rice tariffication law: Regression and k-means clustering approach. Scientific Papers Series Management, Economic Engineering in Agriculture and Rural Development, 22(4), 141-148. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/366577224_HAPPINESS_AND_PROFITABILITY_UNDER_PHILIPPINE_RICE_TARIFFICATION_LAW_REGRESSION_AND_K-MEANS_CLUSTERING_APPROACH

Clarete, R.L. (2018). Red flags in rice tariffication. Per SE. https://econ.upd.edu.ph/perse/?p=7134

Cororaton, C. B. (2004). Rice reforms and poverty in the Philippines: a CGE analysis (No. 57). ADBI Research Paper Series. https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/publication/156759/adbi-dp8.pdf

Department of Agriculture. (2019). DA bulletin no. 1 on rice: Understanding the rice tariffication law (RTL) or RA 11203. https://www.da.gov.ph/understanding-the-rice-tariffication-law-rtl-or-ra-11203-and-its-ramifications/

De Vera, B. O. (2022). Diokno to Bongbong Marcos: Don’t scrap rice tariffication law. Philippine Daily Inquirer. https://business.inquirer.net/352556/diokno-to-bongbong-marcos-dont-scrap-rice-tariffication-law

Estadilla, R. J. C. (2022). Economic impacts of rice tariffication law on the Philippine rice domestic market. Journal of International Society for Southeast Asian Agricultural Sciences, 28(1), 76-92. http://issaasphil.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/7.-Estadilla-2022.-Rice-Tarification-Law-FINAL.pdf

Evangelista, A. (2018). A staple problem: History of rice crisis in the Philippines. Rappler. https://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/iq/212410-history-rice-crisis-philippines-yearend-2018/

Geniston, N. A. M., Cabahug, M. Q., Zanoria, M. L. E., & Uy, K. J. D. (2015). Impact of perceptions apropos economic growth. Recoletos Multidisciplinary Research Journal, 3(2), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.32871/rmrj1503.02.01

Gudmalin, C., Perante-Calina, L., Balbosa, J., Mangahas, J., & Samoza, M. A. (2021). Protecting the poor and vulnerable against the pandemic. ADBI Research Paper Series. https://www.adb.org/publications/protecting-poor-and-vulnerable-against-pandemic

Gutierrez, M. A., Paguirigan, N. M., Raviz, J., Mabalay, M. R., Alosnos, E., Villano, L., Asilo, S., Arocena, A., Jr., Maloom, J. & Laborte, A. (2019). The rice planting window in the Philippines: An analysis using multi-temporal SAR imagery. The International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, 42, 241-248. https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLII-4-W19-241-2019

Neo, P. (2018). Philippine rice crisis escalates as shortages push prices to a three-year high. Food Navigator Asia. https://www.foodnavigator-asia.com/Article/2018/08/30/Philippine-rice-crisis-escalates-as-shortages-push-prices-to-a-three-year-high

Philippine Rice Research Institute. (2019). Rice tariffication law. https://www.philrice.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/RCEF_FAQ02-RiceTariff.pdf

Philippine Statistics Authority. (2016). Rice and corn stocks inventory June 2016. https://psa.gov.ph/sites/default/files/csd/2022-12/memo_june2016.pdf

Schaffer, A. L., Dobbins, T. A., & Pearson, S. A. (2021). Interrupted time series analysis using autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) models: A guide for evaluating large-scale health interventions. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 21(1), 1-12.

Tobias, A. M. (2019). The Philippine rice tariffication law: Implications and issues. Food and Fertilizer Technology Center for the Asian and Pacific Region. https://ap.fftc.org.tw/article/1372

Vertudes, M. F., Musa, C. D., Cosilet, M. A., Salagubang, R., & Balaria, F. (2020). Impact of rice tariffication law in selected rice farmers in Nueva Ecija, Philippines. International Journal of Advanced Engineering, Management and Science, 6(3), 147-153. https://dx.doi.org/10.22161/ijaems.63.7

How to Cite

• Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)

Copyright (c) 2023 University of San Jose-Recoletos

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License .

Copyright of the Journal belongs to the University of San Jose-Recoletos

Most read articles by the same author(s)

• Josephine Petralba, Wordnet Semantic Relations in a Chatbot , Recoletos Multidisciplinary Research Journal: Vol. 8 No. 2 (2020)

Information

• For Readers
• For Authors
• For Librarians

Make a Submission

Recoletos Multidisciplinary Research Journal Copyright @2017                            

Center for Policy, Research, and Development Studies

Contact Number: 032-2537900 loc. 244                                                                       

Email: [email protected]

• COVID-19 Full Coverage
• Cover Stories
• Ulat Filipino
• Special Reports
• Personal Finance
• Other sports
• Pinoy Achievers
• Immigration Guide
• Science and Research
• Technology, Gadgets and Gaming
• Chika Minute
• Showbiz Abroad
• Family and Relationships
• Art and Culture
• Health and Wellness
• Shopping and Fashion
• Hobbies and Activities
• News Hardcore
• Walang Pasok
• Transportation
• Missing Persons
• Community Bulletin Board
• GMA Public Affairs
• State of the Nation
• Unang Balita
• Balitanghali
• News TV Live

The Rice Tariffication Law and how it affects you

While the Philippines has around 4.80 million hectares of rice farmland, the country’s rice industry isn’t as stable and globally competitive as one would hope. In September 2018 for instance, Filipinos paid around P45.57/kg of rice, while Thailand and Vietnam paid P25.00 less per kilo for their rice due to lower cost of production and more efficient markets. Local rice farmers still can’t compete with our neighboring countries, even with the international trade protection and multibillion-peso programs by the government for the sector.

The bottom line: Filipinos are paying too much for rice and local farmers aren’t doing so well either.

This is where the Rice Tariffication Law (RTL) or Republic Act 11203 comes into the picture. This law opens the Philippine rice market and places a minimum 35% tariff on imported rice. This means that while rice from other countries is cheaper, the tariff imposed on them would level the playing field for less efficient local producers. This stable supply of rice also helps lower rice prices for Filipino consumers.

Meanwhile, tariff revenues go to the Rice Competitiveness Enhancement Fund (RCEF), which is being utilized for programs dedicated to increasing yield and boosting the income of our farmers.

Under the RCEF and other programs, total tariff revenues or 10 billion pesos, whichever is higher, are allocated annually for the provision of modern farm equipment, high-yielding seeds, expanded credit assistance, training for local rice farmers, etc. These programs are expected to help bring down the cost of palay production, boosting the disposable income of our farmers.

The government is also implementing other measures to help farmers adjust to the new rice trade regime, such as the distribution of Rice Farmer Financial Assistance and provision of zero-interest loans, among other existing programs being implemented for the sector.

For the average rice-eating Filipino, here’s how the RTL can affect you:

1. Rice will be made affordable for everyone.

Since the RTL, retail prices of rice have dropped by an average of P9/kg compared to September last year, making it more affordable for everyone. This is good news for over 100 million Filipinos, including farmers who buy rice during non-harvest season and the poor households who spend 20 percent of their budget on the staple.

2. Workers can have more disposable income.

Workers will feel their real income increase as the price of rice decreases. Money saved can be put into their savings, education of their children, emergency funds, or other investments.

3. Taxes can now be allocated to other sectors.

Filipinos’ tax payments will no longer heavily subsidize the National Food Authority (NFA) under the RTL. Taxpayers’ money can now be allocated to other programs that improve education, healthcare, public works, and more.

4. People can improve their nutrition and well-being.

As more Filipinos gain access to affordable and high-quality rice, the country will have about 2.1 million less hungry people and malnourished children by 2025.

5. You will be helping farmers become globally competitive.

The RTL also protects farmers and modernizes their livelihood. About P10 billion from RCEF are allocated to upgrading farmers’ equipment and the distribution of high-quality rice seeds. Farmers are also given programs for skills enhancement, financial and rice credit assistance, and crop insurance. As farmers’ agricultural methods improve, so do their productivity and income.

The Rice Tariffication Law addresses major problems from the current agricultural system to make the country’s rice sector more efficient, progressive, and competitive. It safeguards the welfare of local rice farmers and ensures that every Filipino will always have food on their plates.

Stay informed about the Rice Tariffication Law. Visit https://www.dof.gov.ph/ for more news.

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Download Free PDF

The Philippine Rice Tariffication Law: Implications and Issues

Related papers

The PIDS Discussion Paper Series constitutes studies that are preliminary and subject to further revisions. They are be-ing circulated in a limited number of cop-ies only for purposes of soliciting com-ments and suggestions for further refine-ments. The studies under the Series are ...

Enhancing Capacities on Sustainable Agriculture for Poverty Reduction, 2005

Food security remains a major concern among the APEC member economies. A simple and crude exercise shows that the region collectively could supply each member economy’s demands for rice, maize and wheat. Thus, there is a potential role for enhanced intra-APEC agricultural trade to address food security issues. However, economies may be reluctant to abandon a policy of pursuing self-sufficiency because of “political sensitivities” and because of the uncertainties that trade is sometimes associated with. While tariffs and subsidies have been addressed, nontrade barriers such as sanitary and phyto-sanitary conditions are imposed on agricultural commodities. Hence, regional cooperation must also be pursued along other grounds such as institutional support and the dissemination of technological advancements. In addition, a collective definition of food security must be answered by the 21 member economies.

… : Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM)–World Bank, 2005

Chronology & Catastrophism Review, 2024

AIZANOI IV. ÖZEL SAYI. ANADOLU’DA HELLENİSTİK VE ROMA DÖNEMLERİNDE ÖLÜ GÖMME ADETLERİ ULUSLARARASI SEMPOZYUMU, BİLDİRİ KİTABI (23 – 26 Temmuz 2018), ed. by Elif ÖZER, 2019

Restauración de ecosistemas de montaña : cultura y ecología desde el páramo y el piedemonte llanero., 2018

DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals), 2013

American Journal of Water Resources, 2014

SENTRI: Jurnal Riset Ilmiah

Karina Azka Tridewi, 2024

Acta Materialia, 2018

Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 2011

Materials, 2019

2011 IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC), 2011

Journal of Sports Sciences, 2014

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

• You are on Realigro website
• Russian Federation
• Novosibirsk Oblast

Map and property price trends for Novosibirsk Oblast

• List your properties
• Estate agents
• Private seller
• Property portals

Preferences

• Publish your free listing
• Rent-holidays

Property ads for Novosibirsk Oblast, Map and property price trends

Page views divided according to country of origin

Change date interval 1 month 2 months 6 months

Price trend (USD/m²)

Search by area.

• Borovoe (1)
• novosibirsk city (1)

Property ads for Novosibirsk Oblast

For a better use of Realigro website, set your preferences for language, currency, square meters or sq ft.