MISLEADING: Atty. Kristine Ferrer has a “stronger record” than Atty. Lorna Kapunan based on corporate tax cases

Neil Clarence Lagat

A circulating Facebook graphic pits defense counsel Atty. Kristine Ferrer against private prosecutor Atty. Lorna Kapunan, declaring that Ferrer can “fill Kapunan’s shoes, and maybe even better”. The post relies on corporate tax victories to argue that while age and reputation matter, Ferrer holds a superior legal track record.

CLAIM

The publication material argues that Atty. Ferrer has “proven, tested results” that give her a “stronger record” than Atty. Kapunan. 

To support this, it highlights Ferrer’s role in the Mighty Corporation case, claiming she reduced a ₱39-billion exposure to ₱25 billion in fines and facilitated a ₱45-billion sale. The post explicitly notes this saved the company ₱13 billion, kept its owners out of jail, and left them with ₱20 billion in cash.

It further cites her victory in securing a ₱152.5-million tax refund before the Court of Appeals, which is “extremely rare,” “extremely difficult,” and “extremely impressive.”

Conversely, it claims Atty. Kapunan has “no major track record in corporate tax cases,” limiting her high-profile practice to criminal defense, civil, family, and celebrity matters rather than complex tax litigation.

RATING: MISLEADING

FACTS

• Atty. Kristine Ferrer is a CPA-lawyer, Partner, and Head of Tax at Fortun, Narvasa & Salazar (FNS). She has roughly 15 years of legal practice specializing in taxation, corporate restructuring, and mergers and acquisitions.

• Official law firm records confirm that Atty. Ferrer led the FNS legal team that facilitated the ₱25 billion tax compromise settlement between Mighty Corporation and the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) and processed requirements for its ₱45 billion asset sale to JT International. However, framing an entire government-level, multi-agency tax settlement as a sole personal victory overstates the individual’s role in a broad corporate legal effort involving top-ranking state officials and executive leadership.

• Atty. Ferrer’s team secured a ₱152.5 million refund for erroneously paid taxes on royalties. However, the post contains a factual error: the ruling was granted by the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA), not the Court of Appeals (CA).

• Atty. Lorna Kapunan is a senior trial lawyer with over 45 years of experience in family law, corporate governance, IP, civil litigation, and criminal defense. She also has a corporate and tax-related practice through her firm, which handles corporate and commercial law, M&A, joint ventures, taxation, banking, trusts, estate planning, and litigation.

• In Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Estate of Benigno P. Toda, Jr. (G.R. No. 147188), she was named by the Supreme Court as a special co-administrator of the estate in a case involving a ₱79.1 million deficiency income tax assessment. However, the decision lists Atty. Jose Mario C. Buñag as counsel, so it should not be characterized as a tax litigation victory.

• The post therefore creates a false equivalence. It measures two attorneys with substantially different professional profiles solely through the narrow lens of corporate tax litigation, a field in which Atty. Ferrer has a particularly clear specialization as a CPA-lawyer but which does not encompass the full scope of Atty. Kapunan’s decades-long practice. Declaring one lawyer to have a “stronger record” overall based solely on niche metrics tailored to one side misleads readers on their actual professional standings.

BOTTOMLINE

While the financial figures and legal victories attributed to Atty. Ferrer’s tax practice are real, verified achievements, using specialized corporate tax cases to claim she has a “stronger record” than Atty. Kapunan relies on cherry-picked criteria, cross-specialization false equivalence, and minor jurisdictional errors.