SC asked to stop transfer of idle PhilHealth funds

Q: How long will it take to read this news story?

The story "SC asked to stop transfer of idle PhilHealth funds" has 984 words across 31 sentences, which will take approximately 5 - 9 minutes for the average person to read.

Q: Which news outlet covered this story?

The story "SC asked to stop transfer of idle PhilHealth funds" was covered 10 hours ago by Business Mirror, a news publisher based in Philippines.

Q: How trustworthy is 'Business Mirror' news outlet?

Business Mirror is a fully independent (privately-owned) news outlet established in 2005 that covers mostly business and startups news. The outlet is headquartered in Philippines and publishes an average of 38 news stories per day. It's most recent story was published 10 hours ago.

Q: What do people currently think of this news story?

The sentiment for this story is currently Negative, indicating that people regard this as "bad news".

Q: How do I report this news for inaccuracy?

You can report an inaccurate news publication to us via our contact page. Please also include the news #ID number and the URL to this story.<ul><li>News ID: #21899410</li><li>URL: https://beamstart.com/news/sc-asked-to-stop-transfer-17226150584780</li></ul>

Business Mirror Logo Business Mirror 10h ago

SC asked to stop transfer of idle PhilHealth funds - Business Mirror

Quick Summary:

THE Supreme Court has been asked to stop the administration of President Ferdinand "Bongbong” Marcos Jr.from transferring to the national treasury and utilizing "excess funds” of the Philippine Health Insurance Corporation (PhilHealth) amounting to P89.9 billion for other purposes except for its members’ health care.

The transfer, said petitioners, also violates Republic Act 11346, which earmarks revenues from excise taxes on tobacco products and sugar-sweetened beverages for PhilHealth’s initiatives in line with UHA.“Reclaiming subsidies meant for the disadvantaged population places an unbearable burden on those already struggling,” the petitioners stressed.

The petitioners argued such inserted provision of the 2024 GAA is unconstitutional for being a rider, which violates Article VI, Section 25 (2) and Section 26 (1) of the Constitution.