Just How Reasonable are the Rates of Return of the Water Concessionaires: Manila Water Company and Maynilad?

President Duterte has gone to war with two of the biggest oligarchs in the country, namely the Ayalas and Manny Pangilinan, who operate the water concessionaires Manila Water and Maynilad. He has threatened to arrest them and have them thrown in jail for plunder and syndicated estafa. Specifically, they have been accused of the following:

1. Renegotiating and extending their 1997 contracts thirteen years prior to their expiration in 2022 without the benefit of public bidding.
2. Attaching onerous provisions in the revised contracts that include transferring their income tax burden to the consumers and prohibiting government regulators, the MWSS (Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System), from discharging its mandate to regulate the rate of charges that the companies will collect from the consumers.
3. Collecting environmental fees intended to build water treatment facilities without actually building such facilities, resulting in the pollution of Manila Bay.

As a result, the MWSS has cancelled the extension of the water contracts to 2037 and the government is drafting revised water concession contracts that exclude the terms the President considers onerous.

Plunging Share Prices

Unsurprisingly, with their futures in limbo, the stocks of the water concessionaires have taken deep dives since the President launched his war late last year but have recovered some ground with the prospect of impending contract renegotiations.

Here is the chart for Manila Water:

And here's the chart for Metro Pacific Investments Corporation, Maynilad Water Services' holding company. Maynilad itself was publicly listed in the Philippine Stock Exchange (PSE) until its voluntary delisting in 2017.

Impressive Financials

Both companies have been among the biggest and most profitable companies listed in the PSE, pulling roughly Php 20.0 billion (US$ 392 million) in revenues and Php 6.0 billion (US$ 118 million) in net income each.

Naturally, both companies have stacked up very decent rates of return for their respective shareholders in the last five years. For instance, Manila Water's Return on Equity (ROE) for the last five years (2014 to 2018 plus the last 12 months) have averaged 14.34%. Maynilad's ROE (2015 to 2017) was an even more impressive 21.41%.

Global Comparisons

Now how do these returns stack up, globally?

After scanning Capital IQ for publicly-listed companies comparable to the Water Concessionaires, I arrived at a list of 74 companies that are primarily in the business of Water Supply. Here's the list:

Company Name	Exchange:Ticker	Country of Operations	Revenue (US$ M)	Market Cap (US$ M)
Aguas Andinas S.A. (SNSE:AGUAS-A)	SNSE:AGUAS-A	Chile	703.00	2,622.70
American States Water Company (NYSE:AWR)	NYSE:AWR	California	471.90	3,107.00
American Water Works Company, Inc. (NYSE:AWK)	NYSE:AWK	USA	3,558.00	22,519.30
Aqua Spólka Akcyjna (WSE:AQU)	WSE:AQU	Poland	40.71	54.47
AquaVenture Holdings Limited (NYSE:WAAS)	NYSE:WAAS	Americas	192.70	856.00
Artesian Resources Corporation (NasdaqGS:ARTN.A)	NasdaqGS:ARTN.A	USA	81.90	344.40
AS Tallinna Vesi (TLSE:TVEAT)	TLSE:TVEAT	Estonia	70.90	259.90
Athens Water Supply and Sewerage Company S.A. (ATSE:EYDAP)	ATSE:EYDAP	Greece	357.70	895.80
Beijing Capital Co.,Ltd (SHSE:600008)	SHSE:600008	China	7,873.40
Beijing Enterprises Water Group Limited (SEHK:371)	SEHK:371	Global	3,528.10	5,235.50
Beijing Water Business Doctor Co., Ltd. (SZSE:300055)	SZSE:300055	China	130.30	905.30
Ben Thanh Water Supply Joint Stock Company (HNX:BTW)	HNX:BTW	Vietnam	20.10	9.43
Binh Duong Water - Environment Joint Stock Company (HOSE:BWE)	HOSE:BWE	Vietnam	109.60	142.10
Bohai Water Industry Co.,Ltd (SZSE:000605)	SZSE:000605	China	232.90	368.00
California Water Service Group (NYSE:CWT)	NYSE:CWT	USA	705.10	2,383.20
Chengdu Xingrong Environment Co., Ltd. (SZSE:000598)	SZSE:000598	China	643.90	2,033.50
China Everbright Water Limited (SGX:U9E)	SGX:U9E	China	673.10	690.70
China International Holdings Limited (SGX:BEH)	SGX:BEH	China	10.26	16.90
China Water Affairs Group Limited (SEHK:855)	SEHK:855	China	1,095.70	1,250.80
China Water Industry Group Limited (SEHK:1129)	SEHK:1129	China	124.30	97.60
Chongqing Water Group Co.,Ltd. (SHSE:601158)	SHSE:601158	China	818.70	3,956.80
Compagnie des Eaux de Royan (ENXTPA:MLEDR)	ENXTPA:MLEDR	France	41.93	26.61
Companhia Catarinense de Águas e Saneamento - CASAN (BOVESPA:CASN3)	BOVESPA:CASN3	Brazil	264.90
Companhia de Saneamento Básico do Estado de São Paulo - SABESP (BOVESPA:SBSP3)	BOVESPA:SBSP3	Brazil	4,351.00	10,007.80
Companhia de Saneamento de Minas Gerais (BOVESPA:CSMG3)	BOVESPA:CSMG3	Brazil	1,196.80	2,049.30
Companhia de Saneamento do Paraná - SANEPAR (BOVESPA:SAPR4)	BOVESPA:SAPR4	Brazil	1,071.90	2,406.70
Consolidated Water Co. Ltd. (NasdaqGS:CWCO)	NasdaqGS:CWCO	Global	69.20	251.30
Eastern Water Resources Development and Management Public Company Limited (SET:EASTW)	SET:EASTW	Thailand	150.80	636.80
Essbio S.A. (SNSE:ESSBIO-C)	SNSE:ESSBIO-C	Chile	217.30	409.10
Esval S.A. (SNSE:ESVAL-C)	SNSE:ESVAL-C	Chile	253.70	328.10
Global Water Resources, Inc. (NasdaqGM:GWRS)	NasdaqGM:GWRS	USA	35.04	276.53
Grandblue Environment Co., Ltd. (SHSE:600323)	SHSE:600323	China	802.80	2,219.70
Guangdong Investment Limited (SEHK:270)	SEHK:270	China	1,899.70	14,122.20
Guangxi Nanning Waterworks Co., Ltd. (SHSE:601368)	SHSE:601368	China	210.20	757.30
Heilongjiang Interchina Water Treatment Co.,Ltd. (SHSE:600187)	SHSE:600187	China	66.70	615.70
Hyflux Ltd (OTCPK:HYFX.F)	OTCPK:HYFX.F	Global	111.60	7.90
Iguá Saneamento S.A. (BOVESPA:IGSN3)	BOVESPA:IGSN3	Brazil	214.30
Inversiones Aguas Metropolitanas S.A. (SNSE:IAM)	SNSE:IAM	Chile	703.00	1,071.90
Jiangsu Jiangnan Water Co., Ltd. (SHSE:601199)	SHSE:601199	China	138.30	528.00
Jiangxi Hongcheng Waterworks Co., Ltd. (SHSE:600461)	SHSE:600461	China	689.60	835.40
Kunming Dianchi Water Treatment Co., Ltd. (SEHK:3768)	SEHK:3768	China	230.00	309.70
Luzhou Xinglu Water (Group) Co., Ltd. (SEHK:2281)	SEHK:2281	China	207.80	147.00
Lydec S.A. (CBSE:LYD)	CBSE:LYD	Morocco	786.20	401.30
Manila Water Company, Inc. (PSE:MWC)		Philippines	417.10	462.80
Middlesex Water Company (NasdaqGS:MSEX)	NasdaqGS:MSEX	USA	135.10	1,084.40
Muscat City Desalination Company S.A.O.C. (MSM:MCDE)	MSM:MCDE	Oman	43.67	43.64
New England Service Company, Inc. (OTCPK:NESW)	OTCPK:NESW	USA	7.52	21.49
Nha Be Water Supply Joint Stock Company (HNX:NBW)	HNX:NBW	Vietnam	28.29	20.14
PBA Holdings Bhd (KLSE:PBA)	KLSE:PBA	Malaysia	83.30	88.00
Pennon Group Plc (LSE:PNN)	LSE:PNN	United Kingdom	1,869.20	5,822.40
Puncak Niaga Holdings Berhad (KLSE:PUNCAK)	KLSE:PUNCAK	Malaysia	106.00	33.00
Pure Cycle Corporation (NasdaqCM:PCYO)	NasdaqCM:PCYO	USA	27.75	296.05
Qian Jiang Water Resources Development Co;Ltd (SHSE:600283)	SHSE:600283	China	165.30	522.00
Ranhill Holdings Berhad (KLSE:RANHILL)	KLSE:RANHILL	Global	406.80	280.10
Saigon Water Infrastructure Corporation (HOSE:SII)	HOSE:SII	Vietnam	7.82	49.73
Salcon Berhad (KLSE:SALCON)	KLSE:SALCON	Malaysia	43.26	43.05
Severn Trent Plc (LSE:SVT)	LSE:SVT	United Kingdom	2,344.40	7,997.20
SIIC Environment Holdings Ltd. (SGX:BHK)	SGX:BHK	China	853.60	512.00
SJW Group (NYSE:SJW)	NYSE:SJW	USA	393.40	1,976.00
Société de Distribution d'Eau de la Côte d'Ivoire, S.A. (BRVM:SDCC)	BRVM:SDCC	Ivory Coast	176.60	42.70
Taliworks Corporation Berhad (KLSE:TALIWRK)	KLSE:TALIWRK	Malaysia	90.70	431.50
The Torrington Water Company (OTCPK:TORW)	OTCPK:TORW	USA	7.34	35.42
The York Water Company (NasdaqGS:YORW)	NasdaqGS:YORW		50.60	622.00
Thessaloniki Water Supply & Sewerage Co S.A. (ATSE:EYAPS)	ATSE:EYAPS	Greece	76.80	192.70
Thu Duc Water Supply Joint Stock Company (HOSE:TDW)	HOSE:TDW	Vietnam	21.13	8.80
TTW Public Company Limited (SET:TTW)	SET:TTW	Thailand	201.40	1,830.10
United Utilities Group PLC (LSE:UU.)	LSE:UU.	United Kingdom	2,393.80	8,867.70
Universal Technologies Holdings Limited (SEHK:1026)	SEHK:1026	China	34.54	148.32
Watlington Waterworks Limited (BER:WWW.BH)	BER:WWW.BH	Bermuda	11.99	26.66
WHA Utilities and Power Public Company Limited (SET:WHAUP)	SET:WHAUP	Thailand	59.60	731.60
Wodkan Przedsiebiorstwo Wodociagów i Kanalizacji S.A. (WSE:WOD)	WSE:WOD	Poland	9.82	8.36
Wuhan Sanzhen Industry Holding Co.,Ltd (SHSE:600168)	SHSE:600168	China	225.70	710.50
Yunnan Water Investment Co., Limited (SEHK:6839)	SEHK:6839	China	912.90	255.10
Zhongshan Public Utilities Group Co.,Ltd. (SZSE:000685)	SZSE:000685	China	300.10	1,821.80

Some are big, some are small. Many are in China or the ASEAN. But in every case, both Manila Water and Maynilad's Rates of Return tended to gravitate to the upper end of the spectrum, be it globally, Asia-wide, or in Southeast Asia and in every category of return. Manila Water's returns are highlighted in orange while Maynilad's are highlighted in yellow.

Global Returns:

Asian Returns:

Southeast Asian Returns:

Statistical Rankings

Both Manila Water's and Maynilad's Rates of Return are far above average on a global, Asian-wide, and Southeast Asian-wide basis.

Manila Water's Rates of Return are above the 75th percentile (meaning only 25% of the companies have higher returns) globally and in Southeast Asia in terms of ROA and ROC. Asia-wide, its returns are at least in the 83rd percentile in all categories of returns.

Maynilad's Rates of Return rank above the 90th percentile in all geographic categories and in all categories of return except one: global Return on Common Equity (ROCE) - where it ranks in the 65th percentile.

Conclusion:

The impending contract renegotiations and removal of the provisions deemed "onerous" by the Duterte administration will inevitably result in a much slower growth in water tariffs and higher costs for the water concessionaires. They will no longer be able to pass on their income tax burdens to the consumers, they will have to build expensive water treatment plants, and they will no longer enjoy uncontested and automatic rate increases.

All this will serve to lower their rates of return  and align them with international averages. The returns of Manila Water and Maynilad will closely resemble that of a regular water utility stock: safe but boring.

Source: Capital IQ, www.edge.pse.com.ph

Just How Rich Are The Marcoses Today?

Marcos is widely believed to have plundered US$ 5 billion to US$ 10 billion from the Philippines during his regime from late 1965 to early 1986.  Although some studies have estimated the plunder to be as high as US$ 17 billion, these are not widely cited.  The Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG), the government agency tasked with the recovery of the Marcos Wealth, has recovered around US$ 4 billion in the past 28 years.

Does this mean the Marcoses only have US$1 billion to US$ 6 billion left?

Definitely not!

First of all, the US$ 4 billion that the PCGG has recovered was recovered over a stretch of 28 years, giving the Marcoses enough time to squirrel away and hide most of those assets beyond the reach of the PCGG.  Moreover, the Marcoses have had more than enough time to grow those assets to even more unimaginable sums.

People of Great Wealth tend to have one primary investment strategy: Capital Preservation.  This capital preservation investment strategy generally has two goals:

• Preserve the Absolute Amount of the Wealth:

In other words, if the Marcoses had US$ 5 to US$ 10 billion in assets, they would like to have at least the same amount (US$ 5 to 10 billion) so many years later. In this case, at least 28 years later.

• Preserve the Amount of Wealth Relative to Inflation:

Most people intuitively understand inflation: that the buying power of one peso today is much less than the buying power of one peso ten years ago.  Similarly, having US$ 5 billion today is not the same as having US$ 5 billion in 1986.  You could buy more stuff with US$ 5 billion back in 1986.  Therefore, the Marcoses would have liked to preserve their wealth on an inflation-adjusted basis.

Just how much would the Marcos Plunder be on an inflation adjusted basis?  What was US$ 5 billion to US$ 10 billion in 1986 dollars would be worth US$ 10.7 billion to US$ 21.3 billion in 2014 dollars.

People of Great Wealth and Ambition also have another, often overriding goal: to grow their capital even further over and above what it would be on an inflation adjusted basis.  In other words, the Marcoses would most certainly want to grow their wealth beyond US$ 10.7 billion to US$ 21.3 billion.

There are many, many ways to do this.  The possibilities are infinite.  There are a multitude of ways for a wealthy but law-abiding citizen to grow his wealth in a most tax-efficient manner.  Just ask Mitt Romney. Given the magnitude of the Marcos wealth, its stateless status, its illegal origin, and the Marcoses' determination to evade the law, there are even more ways to hide and grow this wealth way beyond what they have lost to PCGG's recovery efforts.

This blog post will merely explore the investment possibilities that are available to anyone with much much more modest financial assets: the affluent but ordinary investor.

Given the size of the Marcos wealth, it would be inconceivable for the Marcoses not to have a significant portion of it invested in what the world deems the biggest, the safest, and most liquid investment market: US financial securities. Also, given the size of the Marcos wealth, it is entirely possible for them to invest in these securities and reinvest 90% of the interest payments received.  The income from the remaining 10% of interest payments would be more than sufficient to provide the Marcoses with a decent amount of cash flow to pay living expenses and whatever taxes they cannot avoid.  The calculations below assume that the investment instruments were held to maturity.  They account only for returns due to the stated interest rate and not total return (yield plus gain/loss in price of security)

Risk Free Investments

The safest US financial instruments are US Government Securities such as US Treasury Bills and US Treasury Bonds.

3-Month US Treasury Bills

If the Marcoses had invested all their assets in 3-Month US Treasury Bills from 1986 to 2013 and reinvested 90% of the interest payments they received, they would still have an estimated net worth of US$ 12.71 billion to US$ 25.42 billion as of year-end 2013. Moreover, they would have received a cumulative income distribution of US$ 0.86 billion to US$ 1.71 billion during this time.

10-Year US Treasury Bonds

If the Marcoses had invested all their assets in 10-Year US Treasury Bonds from 1986 to 2013 and reinvested 90% of the coupon payments they received, they would still have an estimated net worth of US$ 18.46 billion to US$ 36.92 billion as of year-end 2013.  Moreover, they would have received a cumulative income distribution of US$ 1.50 billion to US$ 2.99 billion over that time period.

Safe But Not Risk Free Investments

1-Month Eurodollar Deposits

If the Marcoses had invested all their assets in 1-Month Eurodollar Deposits from 1986 to 2013 and reinvested 90% of the interest payments they received, they would still have an estimated net worth of US$ 13.81 billion to US$ 27.61 billion as of year-end 2013.  Moreover, they would have received a cumulative income distribution of US$ 0.98 billion to US$ 1.96 billion over that time period.

AAA Rated US Corporate Bonds

Triple A Rated US Corporate Bonds are safe and have higher yields than US government securities.  They are not entirely without risk because even blue chip corporations can and do default from time to time but the risk is minimal.  If the Marcoses had invested all their assets in AAA Rated US Corporate Bonds from 1986 to 2013 and reinvested 90% of the interest payments they received, they would still have an estimated net worth of US$ 26.64 billion to US$ 53.28 billion as of year-end 2013.  Moreover, they would have received a cumulative income distribution of US$ 2.40 billion to US$ 4.81 billion over that time period.

Tax-Free Investment

20-Bond Municipal Bond Index

The Marcoses could also have invested in tax-free US Municipal Bonds.  If the Marcoses had invested all their assets in 20-Bond Municipal Bond Index from 1986 to 2013 and reinvested 90% of the interest payments they received, they would still have an estimated net worth of US$ 19.53 billion to US$ 39.05 billion as of year-end 2013.  Moreover, they would have received a cumulative income distribution of US$ 1.61 billion to US$ 3.23 billion over that time period.

US Equities

US Equities, by definition, have higher risks than debt instruments such as AAA Rated Corporate Bonds, Municipal Bonds, Eurodollar Deposits, and US Government Securities.  The easiest way to invest in US Equities is by buying into an Index Fund, preferably one that tracks the S&P 500 Index, which is often cited as a measure of the broad equity market.  Such a strategy would have certainly been available to the Marcoses in 1986 because Vanguard, which pioneered this investment strategy, has been offering this since the 1970s.

Why invest in an index fund? Because most fund managers cannot beat the broader market on a consistently long-term basis and at a lower cost

S&P 500 Index Fund

If the Marcoses had invested all their assets in the S&P 500 Index from 1986 to 2013 and withdrawn all the dividends they received, they would still have an estimated net worth of US$ 45.18 billion to US$ 90.35 billion as of year-end 2013.  Moreover, they would have received a cumulative dividend income distribution of US$ 11.75 billion to US$ 23.50 billion over that time period.

If the Marcoses had invested all their assets in an S&P 500 Index Fund from 1986 to 2013 and reinvested 90% of the dividend payments they received, their net worth would be significantly higher: US$ 77.61 billion to US$ 155.22 billion as of year-end 2013.  Moreover, they would have received a cumulative dividend distribution of US$ 1.67 billion to US$ 3.33 billion over that time period.

If the Marcoses had invested all their assets in an S&P 500 Index Fund from 1986 to 2013 and reinvested all dividend payments they received, their net worth would be significantly higher: US$ 82.35 billion to US$ 164.71 billion as of year-end 2013. 

Conclusion

Most likely the Marcoses would have employed a mix of all these investment instruments (stocks, bonds, deposits, government securities) plus many many more investment vehicles only available to the extremely wealthy.  In 1986, their wealth was already diversified with investments in art, jewelry, real estate, etc.  to reduce the risk of loss of capital.

How much are the Marcoses really worth? No one really knows.  Not even the PCGG.  Some of it turns up here and there.  But when Imelda Marcos says that she can pay off the Philippines foreign debt, she wasn't kidding.

Data Sources: New York University Stern School of Business.  St. Louis Federal Reserve.  Worldbank.org

A Stealing Analysis of the Marcos Regime

Marcos is often listed as one of the world's most corrupt leaders.  In fact, based on this list, which was ultimately sourced from Transparency International's Global Corruption Report, the Philippines has the dubious distinction of having two Philippine Presidents in the top ten most corrupt leaders: #2 Marcos and #10 Erap.

			Plunder (In US$ Billions)
Leader	Country	In Office	Low	High
Suharto	Indonesia	1967 to 1998	$15.000	$35.000
Marcos	Philippines	1965 to 1986	$5.000	$10.000
Mobutu Sese Seko	Zaire	1965 to 1997	$5.000
Sani Abacha	Nigeria	1993 to 1998	$2.000	$5.000
Slobodan Milosevic	Serbia/Yugoslavia	1989 to 2000	$1.000
Alberto Fujimori	Peru	1990 to 2000	$0.600
Jean-Claude Duvalier	Haiti	1971 to 1986	$0.300	$0.800
Pavlo Lazarenko	Ukraine	1996 to 1997	$0.114	$0.200
Arnoldo Aleman	Nicaragua	1997 to 2002	$0.100
Joseph Estrada	Philippines	1998 to 2001	$0.078	$0.080

Some of this wealth was acquired in a few short years.  Some of it was acquired over decades.  Some of it was stolen from relatively small economies.

Given all these factors, which leader stole the most as a percentage share of their respective economies?

The answers might surprise you.  For instance, Suharto of Indonesia, who is estimated to have plundered as much as US$35 billion, is fourth on this list, stealing just 0.56% to 1.32% of his nation's economy.  Mobutu Sese Seko of Zaire (now the Democratic Republic of Congo), who stole US$ 5 billion over 32 years, stole the most from his country's economy: an astounding 10.49%, more than three times the second most corrupt leader: Sani Abacha of Nigeria, who stole as much as 3.35% of his nation's GDP.

And Marcos?  Marcos, who ranked number two in terms of absolute amount plundered, was demoted to number three, stealing anywhere from 1.20% to 2.39% of the Philippine economy during his time as President.  Our beloved Erap still ranks as #10, stealing 0.03% of the Philippine economy from mid 1998 to early 2001.

Marcos Plunder as a Share of the Philippine Economy

From the time Marcos became President of the Philippines on December 30, 1965 till the time he fled the country on February 25, 1986, the Philippine economy had a cumulative nominal GDP of US$ 418.311 billion.

If Marcos stole US$ 5 billion, then Marcos stole 1.20% from the country's total output.

If Marcos stole US$ 10 billion, then Marcos stole roughly 2.4% from everything that was produced by the Philippine economy during his years in office.

There are also strong indications that Marcos did much of his stealing after the declaration of Martial Law because, as everyone knows, "absolute power corrupts absolutely."

If this is so, then Marcos stole a bigger share from a slightly smaller pie: US$ 361.530 billion in cumulative GDP from 1973 to 1985.

If he stole US$ 5 billion, then Marcos stole 1.38% of the nation's economy after 1972.

If he stole $10 billion, then he stole as much as 2.77% of the entire Philippine economy during the 13 to 14 years after the declaration of Martial Law.

Marcos Plunder as a Share of Philippine Government Spending

During the Marcos years, the Philippine government racked up at least US$ 40.648 billion in general government consumption expenditures.  In other words, it spent at least US$ 40.648 billion from 1966 to 1985.

If Marcos plundered US$ 5 billion, then this represents 12.30% of all government consumption expenditures during this period.

If Marcos plundered US$10 billion, then he stole almost 25% of total Philippine government spending.

If much of the stealing was done after the declaration of Martial Law, then if he stole US$ 5 billion, he stole 14.39% of all Philippine government consumption expenditures of US$ 34.736 billion.

If he stole US$ 10 billion, then he stole almost a gargantuan 29% of Philippine government spending!

So Marcos' well-deserved reputation as Mr. Ten Percent should really be Mr. Thirty Percent!


How much would Marcos be stealing if he were in power today?

When Marcos left in 1986, the Philippines was a US$ 33.09 billion economy.  As of 2013, the Philippines is so much bigger - a US$ 272.07 billion economy.  In 1986, Philippine government consumption expenditures amounted to just US$ 2.88 billion.  Today, it amounts to US$ 30.37 billion.

In 1986, Nominal GDP per capita in the Philippines was US$ 535.  Today, it's multiples of that: US$ 2,765.

So if Marcos were alive today or if his family were in power today, the Marcoses would be stealing anywhere from 1.20% to 2.77% of the Philippine economy or 12.30% to 28.79% of total Philippine government spending.

If Marcos were to continue stealing from the Philippine economy on the same rapacious scale during his regime, he would be stealing anywhere from a low of US$ 3.3 billion to as high as US $7.5 billion from the Filipino people every year!

If the Marcoses were to incorporate, their annual plunder would easily put them in the top six Philippine corporations in terms of 2013 revenues.  At the high end of US$ 7.5 billion, the Marcoses would rank a distant third to San Miguel Corporation's Top Frontier Investment Holdings (with revenues of US$ 16.7 billion) and ahead of Meralco (with revenues of US$ 7.0 billion).  At the low end of US$ 3.3 billion, they would rank below PLDT (with revenues of US$ 4.0 billion) and slightly above Ayala Corporation (with revenues of US$ 3.2 billion).

In 2013, the Philippine government had general government consumption expenditures of Php 1.282 trillion or US$ 30.368 billion.  In other words, government spending amounted to 11.16% of the entire Philippine economy.  Government spending's share of the economy has climbed significantly since Marcos fled the Philippines in 1986.  During the Marcos years, government spending comprised 9.72% of the economy.  In the post Marcos years (1986 to 2013), government spending has averaged 10.46%.

If Marcos plunders the government treasury at the same rapacious scale during his regime,  his "take" from government spending would be significantly higher than his "take" from plundering the Philippine economy, simply because government spending occupies a larger proportion of the economy now than during his time.

In Peso terms, their annual plunder would amount to Php 157.74 billion (US$ 3.74 billion) to Php 369.21 billion (US $ 8.74 billion).  In contrast, total annual expenditures from the scandalous Disbursement Acceleration Program (DAP) amounts to only Php 136.75 billion.  The equally scandalous Priority Development Assistance Program (PDAF) amounts to only Php 10.21 billion.  The amounts for DAP and PDAF assume that everything from these current government programs are stolen, which does not seem to be the case, so the actual amount plundered through these programs could be much lower.

How much would the Marcoses be stealing from every Filipino today?  Anywhere from Php 1,403.51 (US$ 33.24) to Php 3,239.78  (US$ 76.72) for every Filipino man, woman, and child every year.  DAP annual disbursements only amount to Php 1,389.83 (US$ 32.91) per person per year.  PDAF annual disbursements are much, much lower than that: only Php 103.76 (US$ 2.46) per person per year.

Data Sources: www.worldbank.org, www.bsp.gov.ph