The Philippines has a law called the Ease of Doing Business and Efficient Government Service Delivery Act of 2018. The irony writes itself.
Eight years after Republic Act 11032 promised to streamline government services, the Department of Economy, Planning and Development has delivered a damning verdict: the policy exists, but the implementation does not. And in the gap between legislative ambition and bureaucratic reality, Philippine enterprises are still drowning in paperwork, redundant visits, and processing delays that would embarrass a nation with far fewer resourcesThe numbers tell a story of institutional failure. Seventy-two percent of businesses still register fully in person. Seventy percent renew their permits the same way. Nearly a quarter wait more than 20 days for registration-20 days in an era when a teenager can launch a global e-commerce store before lunch.
What went wrong? The usual suspects: fragmented systems, weak interoperability, and the persistent refusal of government agencies to talk to each other. The Bureau of Internal Revenue has its own online system. The Bureau of Fire Protection has another. LGUs run their own eBOSS platforms, each speaking a different digital dialect. The result? Businesses submit the same documents multiple times to different offices, validating the same information repeatedly because the left hand of government refuses to acknowledge what the right hand has already certified.
This is not a technology problem. It’s a coordination problem. It’s a political will problem. And it’s a problem that costs real money.
The DepDev report identifies business exit as the most egregious bottleneck-a process so convoluted that firms simply abandon formal closure rather than navigate the labyrinth of separate settlements with LGUs and the BIR. This creates a shadow economy of zombie businesses and informal operators who would prefer legitimacy but can’t afford the price of admission-or exit. High settlement requirements and unclear procedures don’t just inconvenience entrepreneurs; they actively discourage formalization, undermining tax bases and regulatory oversight alike.
DepDev’s proposed solutions are sensible enough: permanent Business Permit and Licensing Offices, a Unique Business Identification Number to finally unify fragmented records, mandatory interoperability under the E-Governance Act, and the rationalization of barangay-level fees that often serve more as local revenue extraction than legitimate regulatory costs. These are not revolutionary ideas. They are basic governance infrastructure that functioning economies implemented years ago.
But here’s the uncomfortable truth: the Philippines does not lack good policy. It lacks follow-through. Every administration discovers the same problems, proposes similar solutions, and watches implementation stall against the rocks of institutional inertia.
For a country positioning itself as a regional investment destination, this is embarrassing and economically self-defeating. Foreign investors have options. They can go to Singapore, where incorporation takes hours. They can go to Vietnam, where industrial zones operate with streamlined efficiency.
The DepDev report should be required reading for every legislator and local official who claims to support business growth. The message is clear: laws alone don’t build economies. Execution does. Interoperability does. The boring, unglamorous work of making systems talk to each other, of standardizing procedures across 1,724 LGUs, of actually implementing the reforms already on the books.
Until then, ‘Ease of Doing Business’ remains not a description of reality, but a cruel joke-and a warning to entrepreneurs that in this country, the government still makes everything harder than it needs to be.