Tax Digest

Jaime N. Soriano, et al. vs. Secretary of Finance and The Commissioner of Internal Revenue

G.R. No. 184450, January 24, 2017

Sereno, C.J.


On 17 June 2008, R.A. 9504 entitled “An Act Amending Sections 22, 24, 34, 35, 51, and 79 of Republic Act No. 8424, as Amended, Otherwise Known as the National Internal Revenue Code of 1997,” was approved and signed into law by President Arroyo. On 24 September 2008, the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) issued RR 10-2008, dated 08 July 2008, implementing the provisions of R.A. 9504.

Petitioners assail the subject RR as an unauthorized departure from the legislative intent of R.A. 9504. The regulation allegedly restricts the implementation of the minimum wage earners’ (MWE) income tax exemption only to the period starting from 6 July 2008, instead of applying the exemption to the entire year 2008. They further challenge the BIR’s adoption of the prorated application of the new set of personal and additional exemptions for taxable year 2008. They also contest the validity of the RR’s alleged imposition of a condition for the availment by MWEs of the exemption provided by R.A. 9504. Supposedly, in the event they receive other benefits in excess of P30,000, they can no longer avail themselves of that exemption. Petitioners contend that the law provides for the unconditional exemption of MWEs from income tax and, thus, pray that the RR be nullified.


1) Whether or not the increased personal and additional exemptions provided by R.A. 9504 should be applied to the entire taxable year 2008

2)Whether or not  Sections 1 and 3 of RR 10-2008 are consistent with the law in providing that an MWE who receives other benefits in excess of the statutory limit of P30,00019 is no longer entitled to the exemption provided by R.A. 9504


1) Yes. R.A. 9504 as a piece of social legislation clearly intended to afford immediate tax relief to individual taxpayers, particularly low-income compensation earners. Indeed, if R.A. 9504 was to take effect beginning taxable year 2009 or half of the year 2008 only, then the intent of Congress to address the increase in the cost of living in 2008 would have been negated. In one case, the test is whether the new set of personal and additional exemptions was available at the time of the filing of the income tax return. In other words, while the status of the individual taxpayers is determined at the close of the taxable year, their personal and additional exemptions – and consequently the computation of their taxable income – are reckoned when the tax becomes due, and not while the income is being earned or received.

In the present case, the increased exemptions were already available much earlier than the required time of filing of the return on 15 April 2009. R.A. 9504 came into law on 6 July 2008, more than nine months before the deadline for the filing of the income tax return for taxable year 2008. Hence, individual taxpayers were entitled to claim the increased amounts for the entire year 2008. This was true despite the fact that incomes were already earned or received prior to the law’s effectivity on 6 July 2008.

2) Yes. To be exempt, one must be an MWE, a term that is clearly defined. Section 22(HH) of Republic Act No. 8424 says he/she must be one who is paid the statutory minimum wage if he/she works in the private sector, or not more than the statutory minimum wage in the non-agricultural sector where he/she is assigned, if he/she is a government employee. R.A. 9504 is explicit as to the coverage of the exemption: the wages that are not in excess of the minimum wage as determined by the wage boards, including the corresponding holiday, overtime, night differential and hazard pays. In other words, the law exempts from income taxation the most basic compensation an employee receives – the amount afforded to the lowest paid employees by the mandate of law. In a way, the legislature grants to these lowest paid employees additional income by no longer demanding from them a contribution for the operations of government.

An administrative agency may not enlarge, alter or restrict a provision of law. The Court is not persuaded that RR 10-2008 merely clarifies the law. The treatment of bonuses and other benefits that an employee receives from the employer in excess of the P30,000 ceiling cannot but be the same as the prevailing treatment prior to R.A. 9504 – anything in excess of P30,000 is taxable; no more, no less.

The treatment of this excess cannot operate to disenfranchise the MWE from enjoying the exemption explicitly granted by R.A. 9504. Moreover, RR 10-2008 does not withdraw the MWE exemption from those who are earning other income outside of their employer­ employee relationship. Section 2.78.1 (B) of RR 10-2008 provides that: MWEs receiving other income, such as income from the conduct of trade, business, or practice of profession, except income subject to final tax, in addition to compensation income are not exempted from income tax on their entire income earned during the taxable year. This rule, notwithstanding, the SMW, Holiday pay, overtime pay, night shift differential pay and hazard pay shall still be exempt from withholding tax.

In sum, the proper interpretation of R.A. 9504 is that it imposes taxes only on the taxable income received in excess of the minimum wage, but the MWEs will not lose their exemption as such. Workers who receive the statutory minimum wage their basic pay remain MWEs. The receipt of any other income during the year does not disqualify them as MWEs. They remain MWEs, entitled to exemption as such, but the taxable income they receive other than as MWEs may be subjected to appropriate taxes.

Classes of Insurance Digest

Philamcare Health Systems, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals and Julita Trinos

G.R. No. 125678, March 18, 2002


Ernani Trinos, deceased husband of respondent Julita Trinos, applied for a health care coverage with petitioner Philamcare Health Systems, Inc.  In the standard application form, he answered no to the following question: “Have you or any of your family members ever consulted or been treated for high blood pressure, heart trouble, diabetes, cancer, liver disease, asthma or peptic ulcer?” Under the agreement, respondent’s husband was entitled to avail of hospitalization benefits, whether ordinary or emergency, listed therein.  He was also entitled to avail of “out-patient benefits” such as annual physical examinations, preventive health care and other out-patient services. Upon the termination of the agreement, the same was extended for another year from March 1, 1989 to March 1, 1990, then from March 1, 1990 to June 1, 1990.

During the period of his coverage, Ernani suffered a heart attack and was confined for one month beginning March 9, 1990.  While her husband was in the hospital, respondent tried to claim the benefits under the health care agreement.  However, petitioner denied her claim saying that the Health Care Agreement was void.  According to petitioner, there was a concealment regarding Ernani’s medical history.  Doctors at the MMC allegedly discovered at the time of Ernani’s confinement that he was hypertensive, diabetic and asthmatic, contrary to his answer in the application form.  Thus, respondent paid the hospitalization expenses herself, amounting to about P76,000.00. After her husband was discharged, he was attended by a physical therapist at home. He died afterwards. On July 24, 1990, respondent instituted an action for damages against petitioner and its president.


Was there an insurable interest in obtaining the health care agreement?


Section 3 of the Insurance Code states that any contingent or unknown event, whether past or future, which may damnify a person having an insurable interest against him, may be insured against.  Every person has an insurable interest in the life and health of himself.  Section 10 provides:

Every person has an insurable interest in the life and health:

(1)        of himself, of his spouse and of his children;

(2)        of any person on whom he depends wholly or in part for education or support, or in whom he has a pecuniary interest;

(3)        of any person under a legal obligation to him for the payment of money, respecting property or service, of which death or illness might delay or prevent the performance; and

(4)        of any person upon whose life any estate or interest vested in him depends.

In the case at bar, the insurable interest of respondent’s husband in obtaining the health care agreement was his own health.  The health care agreement was in the nature of non-life insurance, which is primarily a contract of indemnity. Once the member incurs hospital, medical or any other expense arising from sickness, injury or other stipulated contingent, the health care provider must pay for the same to the extent agreed upon under the contract.

Under Section 27 of the Insurance Code, “a concealment entitles the injured party to rescind a contract of insurance.”   The right to rescind should be exercised previous to the commencement of an action on the contract. In this case, no rescission was made.  Besides, the cancellation of health care agreements as in insurance policies require the concurrence of the following conditions:

  1. Prior notice of cancellation to insured;
  2. Notice must be based on the occurrence after effective date of the policy of one or more of the grounds mentioned;
  3. Must be in writing, mailed or delivered to the insured at the address shown in the policy;
  4. Must state the grounds relied upon provided in Section 64 of the Insurance Code and upon request of insured, to furnish facts on which cancellation is based.

None of the above pre-conditions was fulfilled in this case.  When the terms of insurance contract contain limitations on liability, courts should construe them in such a way as to preclude the insurer from non-compliance with his obligation. Being a contract of adhesion, the terms of an insurance contract are to be construed strictly against the party which prepared the contract – the insurer. By reason of the exclusive control of the insurance company over the terms and phraseology of the insurance contract, ambiguity must be strictly interpreted against the insurer and liberally in favor of the insured, especially to avoid forfeiture. This is equally applicable to Health Care Agreements. The phraseology used in medical or hospital service contracts, such as the one at bar, must be liberally construed in favor of the subscriber, and if doubtful or reasonably susceptible of two interpretations the construction conferring coverage is to be adopted, and exclusionary clauses of doubtful import should be strictly construed against the provider.


Blue Cross Health Care, Inc. vs. Neomi and Danilo Olivares

G.R. No. 169737, February 12, 2008


Respondent Neomi T. Olivares applied for a health care program with petitioner Blue Cross Health Care, Inc., a health maintenance firm. For the period October 16, 2002 to October 15, 2003, she paid the amount of P11,117. For the same period, she also availed of the additional service of limitless consultations. The application was approved on October 22, 2002. In the health care agreement, ailments due to “pre-existing conditions” were excluded from the coverage. On November 30, 2002, or barely 38 days from the effectivity of her health insurance, respondent Neomi suffered a stroke. During her confinement, she underwent several laboratory tests. She incurred hospital expenses amounting to P34,217.20. Consequently, she requested from the representative of petitioner at Medical City a letter of authorization in order to settle her medical bills. But petitioner refused to issue the letter and suspended payment pending the submission of a certification from her attending physician that the stroke she suffered was not caused by a pre-existing condition. She was discharged from the hospital on December 3, 2002. On December 5, 2002, she demanded that petitioner pay her medical bill. When petitioner still refused, she and her husband, respondent Danilo Olivares, were constrained to settle the bill. They thereafter filed a complaint for collection of sum of money against petitioner.


Was Neomi’s stroke caused by a pre-existing condition and therefore excluded from the coverage of the health care agreement?


The health care agreement defined a “pre-existing condition” as “a disability which existed before the commencement date of membership whose natural history can be clinically determined, whether or not the Member was aware of such illness or condition.” Under this provision, disabilities which existed before the commencement of the agreement are excluded from its coverage if they become manifest within one year from its effectivity. Stated otherwise, petitioner is not liable for pre-existing conditions if they occur within one year from the time the agreement takes effect. In this case, petitioner never presented any evidence to prove that respondent Neomi’s stroke was due to a pre-existing condition. It merely speculated that Dr. Saniel’s report would be adverse to Neomi, based on her invocation of the doctor-patient privilege. This was a disputable presumption at best.

Furthermore, as already stated, limitations of liability on the part of the insurer or health care provider must be construed in such a way as to preclude it from evading its obligations. Accordingly, they should be scrutinized by the courts with “extreme jealousy” and “care” and with a “jaundiced eye.” Since petitioner had the burden of proving exception to liability, it should have made its own assessment of whether respondent Neomi had a pre-existing condition when it failed to obtain the attending physician’s report. It could not just passively wait for Dr. Saniel’s report to bail it out. The mere reliance on a disputable presumption does not meet the strict standard required under our jurisprudence.


Philippine Health Care Providers, Inc. vs. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

G.R. No. 167330, June 12, 2008


Petitioner is a domestic corporation whose primary purpose is to establish, maintain, conduct and operate a prepaid group practice health care delivery system or a health maintenance organization to take care of the sick and disabled persons enrolled in the health care plan and to provide for the administrative, legal, and financial responsibilities of the organization. Individuals enrolled in its health care programs pay an annual membership fee and are entitled to various preventive, diagnostic and curative medical services provided by its duly licensed physicians, specialists and other professional technical staff participating in the group practice health delivery system at a hospital or clinic owned, operated or accredited by it.

On January 27, 2000, respondent Commissioner of Internal Revenue sent petitioner a formal demand letter and the corresponding assessment notices demanding the payment of deficiency taxes, including surcharges and interest, for the taxable years 1996 and 1997 in the total amount of P224,702,641.18. The deficiency DST assessment was imposed on petitioner’s health care agreement with the members of its health care program pursuant to Section 185 of the 1997 Tax Code.  Petitioner protested the assessment in a letter dated February 23, 2000. As respondent did not act on the protest, petitioner filed a petition for review in the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA) seeking the cancellation of the deficiency VAT and DST assessments. The CTA rendered a decision ordering petitioner to pay the deficiency VAT but cancelled the payment of DST assessments. On appeal, the CA held that petitioner’s health care agreement was in the nature of a non-life insurance contract subject to DST.


Is a health care agreement is subject to DST?


The DST is levied on the exercise by persons of certain privileges conferred by law for the creation, revision, or termination of specific legal relationships through the execution of specific instruments. It is an excise upon the privilege, opportunity, or facility offered at exchanges for the transaction of the business. In particular, the DST under Section 185 of the 1997 Tax Code is imposed on the privilege of making or renewing any policy of insurance (except life, marine, inland and fire insurance), bond or obligation in the nature of indemnity for loss, damage, or liability.

Petitioner’s health care agreement is primarily a contract of indemnity. And in the recent case of Blue Cross Healthcare, Inc. v. Olivares, this Court ruled that a health care agreement is in the nature of a non-life insurance policy.

Contrary to petitioner’s claim, its health care agreement is not a contract for the provision of medical services. Petitioner does not actually provide medical or hospital services but merely arranges for the same and pays for them up to the stipulated maximum amount of coverage. It is also incorrect to say that the health care agreement is not based on loss or damage because, under the said agreement, petitioner assumes the liability and indemnifies its member for hospital, medical and related expenses (such as professional fees of physicians). The term “loss or damage” is broad enough to cover the monetary expense or liability a member will incur in case of illness or injury. Furthermore, the fact that petitioner must relieve its member from liability by paying for expenses arising from the stipulated contingencies belies its claim that its services are prepaid. The expenses to be incurred by each member cannot be predicted beforehand, if they can be predicted at all. Petitioner assumes the risk of paying for the costs of the services even if they are significantly and substantially more than what the member has “prepaid.” Petitioner does not bear the costs alone but distributes or spreads them out among a large group of persons bearing a similar risk, that is, among all the other members of the health care program. This is insurance.

Moreover, DST is not a tax on the business transacted but an excise on the privilege, opportunity, or facility offered at exchanges for the transaction of the business. It is an excise on the facilities used in the transaction of the business, separate and apart from the business itself.

The Supreme Court affirmed the CA decision.


Philippine Health Care Providers, Inc. vs. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

G.R. No. 167330, September 18, 2009


For resolution are a motion for reconsideration and supplemental motion for reconsideration dated July 10, 2008 and July 14, 2008, respectively, filed by petitioner Philippine Health Care Providers, Inc. On January 27, 2000, respondent Commissioner of Internal Revenue (CIR) sent petitioner a formal demand letter and the corresponding assessment notices demanding the payment of deficiency taxes, including surcharges and interest, for the taxable years 1996 and 1997 in the total amount of P224,702,641.18. The deficiency documentary stamp tax (DST) assessment was imposed on petitioner’s health care agreement with the members of its health care program pursuant to Section 185 of the 1997 Tax Code.

In a decision dated June 12, 2008, the Court affirmed the CA’s decision. It held that petitioner’s health care agreement during the pertinent period was in the nature of non-life insurance which is a contract of indemnity. Moreover, the Supreme Court held that DST is not a tax on the business transacted but an excise on the privilege, opportunity or facility offered at exchanges for the transaction of the business. Unable to accept the verdict, petitioner filed the present motion for reconsideration and supplemental motion for reconsideration.


Was it the Legislative’s intent to exclude health care agreements from items subject to DST especially in the light of the amendments made in the DST law in 2002?


From the language of Section 185, it is evident that two requisites must concur before the DST can apply, namely: (1) the document must be a policy of insurance or an obligation in the nature of indemnity and (2) the maker should be transacting the business of accident, fidelity, employer’s liability, plate, glass, steam boiler, burglar, elevator, automatic sprinkler, or other branch of insurance (except life, marine, inland, and fire insurance).

Petitioner is admittedly an HMO. Under RA 7875 (or The National Health Insurance Act of 1995), an HMO is “an entity that provides, offers or arranges for coverage of designated health services needed by plan members for a fixed prepaid premium.” Thus petitioner, as an HMO, is not engaged in the business of insurance during the pertinent taxable years. As an HMO, it is its obligation to maintain the good health of its members. Accordingly, its health care programs are designed to prevent or to minimize the possibility of any assumption of risk on its part. Thus, its undertaking under its agreements is not to indemnify its members against any loss or damage arising from a medical condition but, on the contrary, to provide the health and medical services needed to prevent such loss or damage.

Furthermore, militating in convincing fashion against the imposition of DST on petitioner’s health care agreements under Section 185 of the NIRC of 1997 is the provision’s legislative history. When the law imposing the DST was first passed, HMOs were yet unknown in the Philippines. However, when the various amendments to the DST law were enacted, they were already in existence in the Philippines and the term had in fact already been defined by RA 7875. If it had been the intent of the legislature to impose DST on health care agreements, it could have done so in clear and categorical terms. It had many opportunities to do so. But it did not. The fact that the NIRC contained no specific provision on the DST liability of health care agreements of HMOs at a time they were already known as such, belies any legislative intent to impose it on them. As a matter of fact, petitioner was assessed its DST liability only on January 27, 2000, after more than a decade in the business as an HMO.

American Ghost Jack (Manhwa) Review

I’m trapped.

I finished reading 54 chapter of American Ghost Jack this early morning. I started reading nine chapter a month ago, but I stopped for a while because I had a lot of things to do. Then last night, I was feeling tired of everything so I decided to continue reading it. It is the best and a bit bad decision I made. The best because the manhwa was worth every single second spent. Bad because now I can’t seem to move on with my life and I’m dying for the next season.

While I was still in Chapter 2, I tried looking for an American Ghost Jack review or any helpful article that will shed light on what the manhwa is all about. However, there are very few reviews. And I’m not sure what is wrong with Google search because I discovered some reviews via links but they don’t appear when I search them through Google. It’s weird.

ALT Jack American Ghost Logo
Picture not mine. Belongs to Han Ji-hye and Ahn Jeong-eun as well as the publisher.

I have to say though that there are very few reviews of American Ghost Jack in the internet. The wikia is insufficient too. I am not sure if there are very few readers of American Ghost Jack or no one bothered to write about it. Haha. So I decided to write a review about the American Ghost Jack Manhwa.

This article is on what I loved about American Ghost Jack manhwa.

American Ghost Jack is written by Han Ji-hye and illustrated by Ahn Jeong-eun. It started way back in 2012 or 2013. I think the manhwa began as an animation, or vice-versa. I’m not very sure about this.

Love the plot. Let’s begin with the story. The summary of American Ghost Jack is:

ALT American Ghost Jack Dunn Rose Mansion
Picture not mine. Belongs to Han Ji-hye and Ahn Jeong-eun as well as the publisher.


Young Ma Go-eun and her father are about to be evicted from the haunted house they’ve run throughout the years. But Go-eun is not about to let the park owner demolish their haunted house and her memories of her childhood and her mother. She resolves to go to the United States to surpass trials and get a million dollar cash prize awarded to those who can survive a stay in Ghost Jack’s House.


ALT American Ghost Jack Young Go-eun
Picture not mine. Belongs to Han Ji-hye and Ahn Jeong-eun as well as the publisher.


So, Go-eun and her father owns a haunted house. It was Go-eun’s mother’s creation and legacy. However, while setting up the haunted house, Go-eun tripped on a wire which got pulled causing the wire to loop around her mother’s neck. Her mother was hanged causing her death. Go-eun witnessed her mother’s death in front of her, which caused her to be immobilized for five hours until his father came home. It is unclear from the story if her father really blamed her or not for her mother’s death. But from that day on, she was criticized by people around her. They whispered that she killed her mother, and that her mother committed suicide because of an unhappy marriage. Go-eun was sent in a mental hospital, where she would constantly sing a Korean lullaby that her mother loved to hear. In that asylum, Jack Blande was also confined. He stayed in the room next to her. Jack was sent to the mental hospital after revolting against her parents. Read American Ghost Jack if you want to find out why. Anyway, Jack was drawn towards to voice of Go-eun. Jack is a famous pianist, and he tried to compose the song or a song based on the voice of Go-eun. This song would be later be known as “Crush.”

ALT American Ghost Jack Crush
Picture not mine. Belongs to Han Ji-hye and Ahn Jeong-eun as well as the publisher.


Jack requested for a piano. However, the nurse was able to get a small toy piano. Jack would play the piano and Go-eun would sing along with it. One day, Jack told his story to Go-eun. They were, however, separated by a wall. Nonetheless, Jack offered Go-eun to escape the mental hospital. Go-eun told him that he would wait for him. However, when Jack’s father died, he left the hospital, and never fulfilled his promise to leave the mental hospital together with Go-eun. Unable to recover fully from the trauma, Go-eun became expressionless and lost her singing voice too.

ALT American Ghost Jack Piano
Picture not mine. Belongs to Han Ji-hye and Ahn Jeong-eun as well as the publisher.


After that, Jack stayed in Dunn Rose Mansion. Ryan and Misha, who would be his future bandmates, visited the Dunn Rose Mansion hoping to find Jack. At first sight, Jack fell for Misha. Even if Jack was not into rock genre, he agreed to join the band for Misha. They became lovers. Misha gave Jack a tryst card. In that tryst card, a command is written which Jack must fulfill if he truly loved Misha. However, after some time, Misha broke up with Jack because Jack fired Ryan from the band. The reason: because Jack knew Misha loved Ryan. Jack went to Dunn Rose Mansion, took drugs and alcohol, then committed suicide.

ALT American Ghost Jack Haunted Mansion
Picture not mine. Belongs to Han Ji-hye and Ahn Jeong-eun as well as the publisher.


A devil, Sebastian (reminds you of Black Butler?) offered a deal with Jack. Jack would be given 10 years to compose a song that would send shivers throughout the body of Sebastian, in exchange for Jack’s life. Initially, Jack agreed to the deal. He wanted his life back so that he could have another chance with Misha.

One twist of American Ghost Jack is that Sebastian is a soul collector. He has hundreds of souls collected, and wants Jack’s soul also.

Now, with the death of Jack, hundreds of fans mourned. Some of them would constantly visit the Dunn Rose Mansion. However, Jack would get irritated and disturbed by their presence. So, he would just order Sebastian to chase them away using his ghost collection. This would later cause more people to visit the mansion because of ghost sightings. Taking the opportunity, Jack and Sebastian started the ghost camp. Four people will stay in the mansion for fifteen (15) days, and if they survive, they will get one million dollars. A bonus will be if they see the very ghost of Jack. Hence, it became American Ghost Jack.

At first, the ghost camp participants were selected randomly. But later on, they were chosen carefully. Chosen participants were those with an experience of death. Death of a child, or a lover, or a parent. This is to make them leave the camp easier. Of course, Sebastian and Jack are delighted in watching the participants suffer too.

Unfortunately, Go-eun is not affected by the ghosts and tricks of the haunted mansion. Jack would later be interested in her. The same goes for Sebastian, who realized that Jack and Go-eun’s fate were intertwined. Jack needed Go-eun to make a good composition.

I would highly recommend that you read American Ghost Jack. The sequence of how I narrated is different from the manhwa.

The thing I loved about the plot is how the author connected all the details. The further you read, the more light is shed on the story. Every twist and turn is engaging and interesting. The hype does not end with each chapter. Rather, it goes on and on continuously.

The ending is a bit hanging. Jack died, finally. But the sinister Sebastian has other plans. That is, to have Go-eun’s soul a part of his collection. The question posed at the end of the season is whether or not Go-eun will make a deal with Sebastian and will Go-eun and Jack have that happy-ever-after? I really want them to. That they could find a way to deceive Sebastian and live on their own.

ALT American Ghost Jack Performance
Picture not mine. Belongs to Han Ji-hye and Ahn Jeong-eun as well as the publisher.


Love the drawings. American Ghost Jack is a horror cartoon. And to compliment the illustrator, the drawings are truly scary. Neat, well-drawn, and everything just fits. I don’t know how the illustrator gets the idea or the imagination to create those characters. This is what a horror cartoon really is.

ALT American Ghost Jack Love
Picture not mine. Belongs to Han Ji-hye and Ahn Jeong-eun as well as the publisher.

Love the romance. I don’t know if I’m the only one, but what I love about American Ghost Jack is that the story is direct and straightforward. No bullcrap or nonsense. Maybe the trait I like about Go-eun is her lack for facial expressions, which is advantageous for her because she is what a natural woman is. Most animes and mangas have a damsel-in-distress woman concept, which is irritating most of the time. In this case, she’s just normal and acts normally.


American Ghost Jack is still on-going. However the second season has not yet started. I do hope that a lot would support the creators of American Ghost Jack. Kudos, and hoping to have more manhwas like this.

Solidarity support challenge day 14


We enter day 14 of our challenge on a new plane as it has been approved and listed by WordPress. Immense thanks to all of you pioneers who made this giant step happen.

We are on our way to realizing our dream for this challenge. Let us spread the word; that others may join us and enjoy what we are enjoying.

Meanwhile, we continue to welcome the new participants who are joining us. May their stay with us bring them joy! May they find a sweet home here!


1. meloheart
3. vidishakaushik
4.Myan Tres
5. Kah Choon

If you are new here and wish to enroll or know more, find us at Solidarity Support Challenge.

To inform others about this share this link:

View original post

Noblesse: Rai’s Awakening Animation

My senses are tingling. Are we to expect an anime version of Noblesse?

A marvelous creation of Jeho Son and Kwangsu Lee, the Noblesse is a manhwa published by Naver Comics/Line Webtoon. As of February 2, 2016, the Noblesse manhwa has reached Chapter 391. Publication of chapters are once a week every Tuesday.

I have already made a review of Noblesse, since it’s my first manhwa. Anyway, to give a short background, manhwas are Korean comics. What I love about manhwas is that most of them are colored, that’s why reading them is more exciting.

I started reading Noblesse way back, I think, two years ago. That was when Manga Traders was still active and in operation. Then, the creators of Noblesse took a vacation due to health issues. It took them a long time before they continued the publication of Noblesse. Before they came back, the illustration were not a bit good and the story was fast paced. However, I think they had to employ another illustrator. The change was drastic, because the graphics were really amazing. However, the story is dragging. Waiting for one chapter every week makes time seem to tick slowly. And just now, I chanced upon a YouTube video published by Line Webtoon last February 4, 2016.

The video is entitled “Noblesse: Awakening animation.” On the description box, it says:

Production I.G, the legendary producers of “Ghost in the Shell” and “Psycho-Pass” are bringing you the epic LINE Webtoon series, Noblesse.

It covers the beginning of Noblesse manwha. The looks of the characters stay true to the manhwa. However, I think that M-21 looks more handsome in the animation. Haha. The video is roughly 31 minutes and worth watching. Will there be more Noblesse Animations that we should expect soon?