When Senator Bam Aquino filed Senate Bill No. 1330, dubbed the “Budget the Blockchain Bill,” it reignited buzz around blockchain’s potential to address the Philippines’ most deeply rooted problem: corruption in government. Soon after, similar measures emerged in Congress—including House Bill 4489 from Rep. Brian Poe Llamanzares, and earlier, bills from Rep. Angelo Barba and Rep. Javi Benitez. All pitch the same idea: putting the national budget on-chain for public traceability.

At first glance, it sounds like a progressive step. Blockchain, after all, promises transparency, immutability, and decentralized auditability. In theory, this tech-backed governance could empower citizens to finally “follow the money” in real time.

But the problem isn’t just what, but also how and more urgently, at what cost?

The ₱500M Question

In a Facebook post, Christopher Star on, a well-known key opinion leader in the Philippine crypto and tech policy space, flagged Section 8 of Rep. Poe Llamanzares’s bill, which proposes an initial ₱500 million allocation for integration and capacity-building.

“₱500 MILLION PESOS while the country is in the middle of a corruption scandal,” Star posted publicly. “The lack of transparency of how they reached this conclusion and the vagueness of the proposed bill raises a lot of questions.” Reiterating how he finds the number seemingly pulled out of thin air, hence lacking not only feasibility but justifiability. As someone deeply engaged in blockchain education and policy discourse, Christopher Star is no stranger to both the promises and pitfalls of this space. His concerns make sound arguments not out of cynicism, but call for accountability.

He then proceeds to point out a major red flag concerning the apparent—in his words—‘copy-paste’ nature of the House Bills. According to him, Rep. Poe Llamanzares’s HB 4489 shares nearly identical language with Rep. Javi Benitez’s HB 4380, which itself closely mirrors Sen. Aquino’s Senate version. If true, then it suggests a lack of rigorous authorship and undermines the credibility of each version’s legislative foundation.

Don’t Corrupt the Anti-Corruption Pitch

This is enough to incite an uncomfortable feeling of irony and doubt. These bills aim to use blockchain to fight corruption, yet critics argue that they were introduced hastily, with little public consultation or technical depth, and paired with hefty budgets lacking itemized justification. This raises the sobering reality of how genuinely good technology when poorly implemented, can be weaponized or wasted. 

Blockchain is not a magic wand that purifies bureaucracy on contact. It is a tool, and like all tools, it’s only as good as the hands that wield it.

It’s not enough to ride the blockchain trend just because it sounds good. If the government really wants to use blockchain to fight corruption, then it better make sure not to corrupt the very process of establishing a system to combat it; the crux of the public’s growing skepticism.

Currently, none of the bills offer a detailed systems design, pilot test results, or assessments from independent cybersecurity experts. While the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) has piloted BayaniChain—reportedly Asia’s first on-chain budget system—the details remain mostly internal. The public has yet to see how this platform works, what it costs, and what lessons have been learned from its early stages.

Without these critical disclosures, ₱500 million—no matter how noble the pitch—is a difficult number to swallow.

Transparency Requires More Than a Blockchain

There is a fine line between innovation and distraction. Blockchain can help with transparency, but it cannot replace institutional reform, robust oversight, and genuine civic participation. For the public to embrace this shift, the process must be consultative, not top-down; detailed, not vague; open-source, not opaque.

Nonetheless, the public is still optimistically and eagerly waiting on the release of Sen. Bam Aquino’s official bill blueprint. Hopefully, it will soon position itself to provide assurance to the important questions surrounding the “Blockchain the Budget” legislation. 

Will it reflect careful planning or just another tech-forward PR move? Will it account for actual costs of on-chain implementation across departments? Will it involve the community of blockchain experts, cybersecurity auditors, and transparency advocates who’ve long warned about crypto being used for lip service?

The answers to these questions will determine whether this legislative push is remembered as a milestone, or yet another missed opportunity.

Filipinos deserve better systems that work for them, not around them. Blockchain might help get us there, but only if its champions are held to the same standard of transparency they claim to promote. Until then, maintaining vigilant and healthy skepticism remains even more increasingly necessary. 

‍