Do you think one's constitution is a big hindrance to economic growth?

[Zlantann]

Do you think these provisions in a constitution are a big deterrent to economic growth, and do you have similar provisions in your country's constitution?

The Philippine land and business ownership law is outdated. It will force investors to consider neighboring countries instead of investing in the Philippines. The idea of protecting the land and businesses from external dominance is not wrong. However, it is too harsh and doesn't conform to current business realities.

Countries that want to protect their lands are now establishing economic free zones and special economic zones for foreigners. These zones have different land and business policies when compared to other areas of the host country. 

[Cryptomultiplier]

Do you think these provisions in a constitution are a big deterrent to economic growth, and do you have similar provisions in your country's constitution?

The Philippine land and business ownership law is outdated. It will force investors to consider neighboring countries instead of investing in the Philippines. The idea of protecting the land and businesses from external dominance is not wrong. However, it is too harsh and doesn't conform to current business realities.

Countries that want to protect their lands are now establishing economic free zones and special economic zones for foreigners. These zones have different land and business policies when compared to other areas of the host country. 

The biggest hurdles I see when it comes to deterring foreigners from  owning a major part of companies or businesses or even land isn't just from the constitution alone because poor infrastructure, high cost of energy, regulations all contribute to what hinders foreign investors and in some ways can limit economic growth when there's no sharing or exchange of technological ideas or innovative ideas that could create a competitive market and force the economy to boost its GDP.

When foreigners are chased away with huge taxes and revenues, and other complex demands, including insecurity, it becomes hard for investors to accept the terms and stay and this leaves the country to depend on its own citizens to thrive and develop the economic sector with what they have acquired.

[CryptoBuds]

Do you think these provisions in a constitution are a big deterrent to economic growth, and do you have similar provisions in your country's constitution?

Philippines economic problem have absolutely nothing to do with constitution.
it is possible to resolve these issues without amending constitution.

Regulation for foreign investor certainly need to be relaxed somewhat to attract foreign investment.
They must be given opportunity to operate freely. And in special case even granted permission to purchase land.
However Philippine govt does not appear to be interested in this, imo.
They had previously passed law to reduce foreign investment in renewable energy and public service sector as well.
You know, at that time there was no need to amend constitution.

So, simple fact is that economic growth will not stall if constitution is not drafted. Actually Politician mislead public to serve their own interest. Government can boost economic growth by passing various law without needing to amend their constitution.

[Berry2d]

Actually this kind of constitution can retard economic growth, and there are some constitution that need to be properly reviewed from time to time. Sometimes, some people don't know the effect of or negative impact of their actions except when they are told, developing an economy alone can be difficult without the help of foreigners, and any country that doesn't give room or welcome foreign investors will remain underdeveloped for so long. I don't really know how long this constitution restricting foreigners from owning landed properties have been, and no matter how long it has been, there has to be some changes. Am also convinced that there must be some Philippines in other countries who owns landed properties there, and are absolutely welcomed, why would theirs be different.

There is nothing wrong with that constitutional restriction given to foreign investors,  any investment that permits over 40 percent share by an investor is okay if I may say. Identifying this as a wrong practice that will retard a country's economic development is a complete false because the china we all know today in never friendly to foreign investors  and they are doing perfectly well.
 Before drawing conclusion on this constitutional restriction of foreign investors,  I will say we need to look at the economic importance of such decisions,  if this investment option is properly practiced you will come to understand that  it is made to generate more profit for the country. 
Many investors,  especially the greedy once loves operating in a situation where they will have all benefits why the land owners feed from the dust but this constitution never allow them practice it and this is the only reason many disagree 

[Churchillvv]

…

You said this is not a hindrance to economic growth, but still admitted that it limits the number of foreign investment in the country. Your statement is highly contradictory,  except you are failing to recognise the level of impact foreign investments have on the economy of the country. These impacts range from revenue generated through tax from these foreign companies, to employments created, including the availability of foreign products or services in the country which would have been imported if these foreign investors didn't bring those products down to the country. The list just goes on

Countries through their constitutions are trying to do things in the  best interest of their people, but laws ain't supposed to be too rigid, they should understand when there is need for some adjustments if the old laws ain't favourable. Any law that discourages investors, whether foreign or local investors should be looked into seriously. The result of such outdated laws will be felt in the present day economy.

You seem to also overly equate the effect of foreign investment than normal hence it seem to be the hindrance to economic growth and additional, there are countries with similar level of foreign investments limitations but are not economically poor or less economically stable like the Philippines. I sometimes think that people do not understand the power of indigenous interest or investment, like communal investment like the Chinese does. That is a good example, so for my previous comment I mean economic growth is not just hindered because there is less foreign investment, but other factors are mostly the cause of lack of economic growth. I guess foreign investments is what they could shift the blame’s to.

[boyptc]

That kind of rule is limiting the growth economically and how the investors look to do business in the country. By having the 40% of ownership and it's even lower than the half could mean a lot for foreign investors and requires them to partner to the corporations based in the country.

Hong Kong and Singapore has a better policy of allowing 100% foreign ownership.

And I think that's the same in UAE why they have been one of the most sought places to do business. When foreign investors are being limited to what they own for their own company, they won't make an effort and spend money on that kind of policy.

They will look elsewhere where the policies are friendly and in favor of doing business.

[Crypto_Timothy]

Definitely the rules and regulations of a country will affect it's Economic growth, I don't really think there's two ways about it. How Investors will look at the market in a foreign country depends heavily on how the country's law and how it accommodates foreign policies. In my country, the constitution is there but it is enforced only when it benefits and that's why everywhere just feels the same so yea for sure the constitution of a country can be a big hindrance to it's economic growth

[Tamaperdana]

Snip

Do you think these provisions in a constitution are a big deterrent to economic growth, and do you have similar provisions in your country's constitution?

Yes, of course, this has a significant impact on your country's progress. Your country has too many restrictions on foreign business owners opening businesses. Foreign business owners are naturally reluctant to enter your country because there's no flexibility. This is clearly not beneficial for your country, as there won't be many foreign companies operating there, and ultimately, there won't be many job opportunities, making it difficult for people to find work.

But there's probably a reason why your country restricts foreigners from owning 100 percent of their businesses. In my country, foreigners can open companies here and own 100 percent of their own shares. So, my country is quite lenient when it comes to regulations like this. It's also very beneficial for both the country and the people.

So, your country clearly needs to make significant changes in this regard.

[Queentoshi]

Do you think these provisions in a constitution are a big deterrent to economic growth, and do you have similar provisions in your country's constitution?

The Philippine land and business ownership law is outdated. It will force investors to consider neighboring countries instead of investing in the Philippines.

We may blame the constitution in these countries for limiting their economic growth, but it is not just that to blame as you will notice that they are even doing better economically than some other countries with no such constitutions. The economic growth of a country largely depends on the government and how they handle the runnings of the country in a corrupt system even without such constitutions that hinder foreign investors the country would still wallow in economic penury while countries having better leaders who are citizens oriented can flourish even with such constitutions.

[Dareo]

I was a little surprised to hear about this law in the Philippines, because our picture in Nigeria is quite different. Here foreigners can own 100 percent of businesses in almost all areas except for a few sectors and there is an easy opportunity to take long term leases instead of direct ownership in the case of land. But despite all these legal concessions, our country's economy has not progressed much. Because even though foreigners are given opportunities on paper, but in reality when they see extreme corruption and a terrible lack of electricity here, they naturally hesitate to invest. If a foreign company builds a factory and finds that they have to run generators at their own expense to produce, then why would they come here.

[Cointxz]

Do you think these provisions in a constitution are a big deterrent to economic growth, and do you have similar provisions in your country's constitution?

Not really,  Corruption specifically red tagging on foreign business when they are getting permits, taxes and many under the table fees is the main reason why foreign businesses are hesitant to invest in PH market.

Besides, Dummy owner is a common practice now for foreign businesses to still operate here despite that provision. Many foreigners dodge that law through the dummy loophole.

Those corrupt officials are the root cause of the poverty. Imagine their SALN grow exponentially while their salary doesn’t add up. No audit or whatsoever investigation on this unexplained wealth since every politician is involved.

[Aanuoluwatofunmi]

Constitutions that only meant to serve as guidelines for people to what they are expected to do an not to do, while economic growth is being Factor towards the achievement a country have and it rate of productivity, and this is where we consider for GDP of a country and how the government have been planning effectively to ensure that there is a massive growth in this sector of the economy performance over the time, it also has to do with international relation and how a country is being capable of producing enough to export to other countries that would depend on their economic activities.

[AVE5]

One of the provisions in the 1987 Constitution that the business sectors want to change is foreign and land ownership; if you are a foreigner who wants to set up a business here, you need a local business partner, and you can only own 40% of the business, and no foreigner is allowed to own land.

Maybe the era when this policies was constituted used to be the days when foreigners tries to dominate and oppressess the indigenous citizens in your place.
The rules of such constitution is usually aimed to secure their heritage against colonial master's and foreigners who may have upper hand's in terms of administrative alliance where the local bodies meets with externals who are more influential.
There's now regulatory perspective that identities indigenous people with exclusive advantage over foreigners and same time,its a timidity and results to economic setbacks in a country that restricts foreigners from owning landed properties which in times the interrelationship causes under developments in the local communities.
In the terms of limiting foreigners not to fully have the right to control their businesses would hinder foreigners not to invest in that region.
Why not the jurisdiction only hold the foreigners responsible on taxes? Maybe that'd seemed more friendly to attract foreigners investors and same time, encourages economic development in diversities with foreign affairs.

[EarnOnVictor]

-snip-
Do you think these provisions in a constitution are a big deterrent to economic growth, and do you have similar provisions in your country's constitution?

First, I think you meant to write "1973 Constitution" instead of "1945 Constitution."

Second, I dug deep into this and found out that your country's economy wasn't any better during the former constitution.

You see, in cases like this, instead of looking for the main source of the problem and tackling it, people often chase shadows and look for what to blame.

For me, the solution here is not the constitution but the government's policies. You might have had a series of bad/corrupt leaders, just as many of us suffer from it in our countries.

[davis196]

Not allowing foreigners to own land and real estate in a country helps for keeping the land and real estate prices affordable in that particular country. What if suddenly lots of foreigners started buying land in the Philippines? The land prices would go through the roof and many poor filipinos won't be able to afford buying land or a house. Foreign investors prefer countries with functioning democracy and effective court system. A constitution is just a wall of text written on a piece of paper, if there aren't any strong democratic institutions, that are capable of imposing the laws and the constitution of a certain country.

[Jubilee58]

When a constitution is made to deprive people from owning properties in a particular place, the development in such a place becomes extremely very slow, and if you ask me the people who wrote such constitution are in position to acquire more properties, and feel maybe foreigners could deprive them of acquiring many properties as they want. But the truth remains, no country has ever grown, and develop with allowing investors from other countries to come in. In many cases, when you give foreigners permanent resident or right to own properties, they could bring in good ideas to the place, also bring investment that could help the economic system. In my own country, their are many foreigners who have acquired landed properties, and have esterblished companies, and other investment that has helped in creating employment, and bringing development. I think the Philippines government should have a review in that aspect of their constitution, and make amendment regarding such decision.

[Frankolala]

It means that no foreign investors will come and invest in Philippine because it's like they're investing for the citizens in Philippine and not for themselves. This is why Philippine is still the way it is because that law seems to be from the greedy side of the country. Look at the US and other second world countries, they allowed foreigners to invest and own landed properties all to themselves. These foreign investors only pay the government their tax and respect their laws. Foreign investors boost up the economy of a country.

[Odusko]

Just like every other countries that have suffered long periods of dictatorship leadership and colonialism have always hard this constitution issues, like in my country Nigeria since the 1st Republic constitution that was annualed by a military interference all the other 4 different constitution we have never leave up to the expectation the rest of the constitution is drafted just to fulfil the interests of a few, which have failed our development stride and our economic growth have been affected by this, so this case you expressed is not only happening in the Philippines alone but other countries too are facing this, the question now is when are we going to have the right constitutions that drive the development of both domestic economy a d interest of the whole nation os carried along.