Wednesday, December 28, 2016

List of primary local government units of the Philippines

  1. Caloocan
  2. Las Piñas
  3. Makati
  4. Malabon
  5. Mandaluyong
  6. Manila
  7. Marikina
  8. Muntinlupa
  9. Navotas
  10. Novaliches
  11. Obando
  12. Parañaque
  13. Pasay
  14. Pasig
  15. Pateros
  16. Quezon City
  17. San Pedro
  18. San Juan
  19. Taguig
  20. Valenzuela
  21. Ilocos Norte
  22. Ilocos Sur
  23. La Union
  24. Alaminos
  25. Dagupan
  26. Urdaneta
  27. Pangasinan
  28. Abra
  29. Apayao
  30. Baguio
  31. Benguet
  32. Ifugao
  33. Kalinga
  34. Mountain Province
  35. Batanes
  36. Tuguegarao City
  37. Cagayan
  38. Cauayan City
  39. Ilagan City
  40. Santiago City
  41. Isabela
  42. Quirino
  43. Nueva Vizcaya
  44. Angeles City
  45. Mabalacat City
  46. City of San Fernando
  47. Pampanga
  48. Tarlac City
  49. Tarlac
  50. Olongapo City
  51. Zambales
  52. Balanga City
  53. Bataan
  54. Malolos City
  55. Meycauayan City
  56. City of San Jose Del Monte
  57. Bulacan
  58. Cabanatuan City
  59. Nueva Ecija
  60. Aurora
  61. Rizal
  62. Cavite City
  63. Imus City
  64. Dasmariñas City
  65. General Trias City
  66. Trece Martires City
  67. Cavite
  68. Biñan
  69. Santa Rosa
  70. Cabuyao
  71. Calamba
  72. San Pablo
  73. Laguna
  74. Batangas City
  75. Lipa City
  76. Tanauan City
  77. Batangas
  78. Lucena City
  79. Tayabas City
  80. Quezon
  81. Alabat Island
  82. Dumaran Island
  83. Polillo Island
  84. Puerto Princesa
  85. Busuanga Island
  86. Palawan
  87. Lubang Island
  88. Occidental Mindoro
  89. Calapan City
  90. Oriental Mindoro
  91. Marinduque
  92. Romblon
  93. Sibuyan Island
  94. Camarines Norte
  95. Naga City
  96. Camarines Sur
  97. Albay
  98. Catanduanes
  99. Sorsogon City
  100. Sorsogon
  101. Burias
  102. Masbate
  103. Ticao
  104. Aklan
  105. Antique
  106. Capiz
  107. Iloilo City
  108. Iloilo
  109. Guimaras
  110. Bacolod City
  111. Kabankalan City
  112. Negros Occidental
  113. Negros Oriental
  114. Cebu City
  115. Lapu-lapu City
  116. Mandaue City
  117. Camotes Islands
  118. Cebu
  119. Siquijor
  120. Bohol
  121. Panglao Island
  122. Biliran
  123. Tacloban City
  124. Ormoc City
  125. Leyte
  126. Western Leyte
  127. Southern Leyte
  128. Panaon Island
  129. Northern Samar
  130. Eastern Samar
  131. Calbayog City
  132. Catbalogan City
  133. Samar
  134. Zamboanga del Norte
  135. Zamboanga Occidental
  136. Zamboanga del Sur
  137. Zamboanga Sibugay
  138. Zamboanga City
  139. Isabela City
  140. Misamis Occidental
  141. Cagayan de Oro City
  142. Gingoog
  143. Misamis Oriental
  144. Camiguin
  145. Iligan City
  146. Lanao del Norte
  147. Malaybalay City
  148. Bukidnon
  149. Tagum City
  150. Davao del Norte
  151. Compostela Valley
  152. Davao City
  153. Davao del Sur
  154. Davao Occidental
  155. Davao Oriental
  156. General Santos City
  157. South Cotabato
  158. Sarangani
  159. Cotabato City
  160. Cotabato
  161. Sultan Kudarat
  162. Butuan City
  163. Agusan del Norte
  164. Agusan del Sur
  165. Dinagat Islands
  166. Siargao Islands
  167. Surigao del Norte
  168. Surigao del Sur
  169. Surigao Oriental
  170. Maranaw
  171. Lanao del Sur
  172. Shariff Kabunsuan
  173. Maguindanao
  174. Basilan
  175. Sulu
  176. Tawi-Tawi

Bay Area ‘iconic developments’ driving luxury residential demand – KMC Savills 0 BY CATHERINE TALAVERA, TMT ON DECEMBER 28, 2016

HIGH-END “iconic developments” in the Bay Area such as the Conrad Hotel, City of Dreams, and the new Okada Manila complex are driving demand for luxury residential property in the emerging district, real estate services firm KMC Savills Inc. said.
In a recent interview, KMC Savills Inc. head of research Antton Nordberg told The Manila Times that there is a demand for luxury residential properties in the Bay Area, particularly in the Entertainment City complex.
“…in the entertainment complex, they [developers]also have residential plans and those tend to be in the higher end,” Nordberg said.
In a media briefing earlier this month, KMC Savills managing director Michael McCullough suggested that developers are scaling up the quality of their projects in the Bay Area.
He emphasized that this is driven by the “iconic developments” in the area such as the Conrad Hotel, Okada Manila, and City of Dreams.
“Apart from the iconic projects being built there, one thing we will see is a lot more premium residential offerings,” McCullough said.
“So I think we’ll see more luxury properties being built in that area,” McCullough added.
Nordberg noted that the Bay Area’s luxury residential market would probably have the same targets as the luxury residential markets of Makati and Bonifacio Global City.
“So, local business owners as well as foreign investors. In Bay Area, you will probably see highrollers [looking for]permanent residences,” Nordberg said.
McCullough earlier expressed his optimism for the Bay Area, largely due to infrastructure development in the area.
“The whole reason we like the Bay Area so much is because of the infrastructure coming online,” McCullough said.
Among the big ticket infrastructure projects serving the Bay Area are road projects such as the Cavite Expressway, NAIA Expressway, NLEX-SLEX Connector Road, and Metro Manila Skyway Stage 3.
McCullough noted that the LRT-Line 1 Cavite Extension, the South Integrated Transport System and the Southwest Integrated Transport System will add additional connections for the Bay Area.
Nordberg also pointed out that another selling point of the Bay Area is the dynamic mix of property sector it offers.
“It’s a very nice mix. It’s very dynamic. It has an entertainment component, it has a retail component, a growing residential community, and a growing office sector. Everything is there,” Nordberg said.

BSP removes SBL relief extended to PPPs By Lawrence Agcaoili (The Philippine Star) | Updated December 28, 2016 - 12:00am

The Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) has lifted the additional 25 percent lending cap for single borrowers undertaking major infrastructure projects under the public private partnership (PPP) program.
The BSP is no longer extending the effectivity of the additional 25 percent single borrowers’ limit (SBL) specifically available to banks and quasi banks as temporary regulatory relief to jump-start financing for PPP projects.
The relief launched in 2010 for a period of three years and has been extended for another three years is set to expire today. With the lifting of the regulatory relief, the BSP would again restrict each bank’s exposure to a single borrower to only 25 percent of its capital.
“The decision of the Monetary Board to allow the additional SBL window to close takes into consideration the significant systemic risks from credit risk concentration if the regulatory relief is further prolonged. The decision is thus firmly in line with the financial stability objectives of the BSP,” it said.
The additional ceiling was provided to subsidiaries and affiliates of banks to support the financing of productive sectors and projects that form part of the priority programs under the Philippine Development Plan/Public Investment Plan of the previous administration.
The BSP refined its regulatory guidelines to allow companies the flexibility to engage in different PPP-related project finance activities structured as self-contained special purpose entities (SPE).
The BSP clarified SPE would be treated as independent entities subject to its own SBL if the project cash flows are properly ring-fenced despite the fact that it may fall under the definition of an affiliate.
As part of the refinements, the central bank now exempts the loans of banks and quasi banks to its related parties for the purpose of project finance from the 30 percent unsecured individual ceiling during the pre-operational phase of a PPP project.
Furthermore, monetary authorities also considered the entry of new foreign banks into the country providing additional potential funding sources in addition to syndicated loans that may be structured by existing banks.
Loan syndication spreads the credit risk exposure arising from big-ticket projects.
 “Furthermore, PPP projects that are already operational can be refinanced through the issuance of project bonds in the domestic capital market to open new long-term funding for infrastructure and other similar projects,” the BSP said.
The BSP has so far given nine foreign banks the green light to establish their presence in the country after the limit on the entry of foreign banks was lifted through Republic Act 10641.
Mulilateral lending agencies including the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank (ADB), the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), and the newly formed Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) could also help fund PPP projects.
The government has awarded 15 projects worth more than P371 billion since the scheme was launched in 2010. Completed projects include the P17.93 billion NAIA expressway phase 2 project, the P9.89 billion PPP for school infrastructure phase 1, the P2.23 billion Muntinlupa-Cavite expressway project and the P1.72 billion automated fare collection system.
PPP projects under construction are the P69.3 billion MRT-7 project, the P37.43 billion Metro Manila Skyway stage 3 project, the P17.52 billion Mactan-Cebu international airport passenger terminal building, and the P3.86 billion PPP for school infrastructure project phase 2.
Projects under pre-construction are the P64.9 billion LRT-1 Cavite extension, the P35.43 billion Cavite-Laguna expressway, the P24.41 billion Bulacan bulk water supply project, the P23.2 billion NLEX-SLEX connector road, the P5.2 billion South integrated transport system project, and the P1.59 billion civil registry system information technology project.
The Duterte administration has identified 17 PPP projects to catch up with the country’s infrastructure backlog. These include the P171 billion South line of the North-South railway project, the P108.2 billion regional airports project, among others.