What It Means
- iSON Group has restated overlapping investment figures across three separate meetings with President Marcos since August 2025, arriving at a cumulative $375 million pledge.
- Roughly ₱21 billion at current exchange rates clears the ₱15 billion threshold that lets Investment Promotion Agencies grant incentives directly, without Fiscal Incentives Review Board review.
- Only about 22 percent of the original $300 million tower pledge from 2025 has been verifiably deployed so far.
- The gap between announced capital and delivered capital sits with the state entities administering the access, not with iSON alone.
- Domestic infrastructure and BPO operators without equivalent head-of-state access face a widening competitive gap as this pattern repeats.
The Meeting Produced a Number, Not New Information
On September 12, iSON Group met President Marcos and presented a $75 million package covering an agro-solar project in New Clark City, expanded teleconsultation services, and a BPO buildout. Government releases described this as new investment. It is not entirely new. The $75 million sits inside a larger $375 million figure that has been assembled piece by piece since August 2025, when iSON first announced a $300 million telecom tower program during a meeting in Bengaluru.
Between then and now, the company has held at least two additional government meetings, in August 2025 and August 2026, each restating prior commitments alongside fresh ones. The September meeting is the third data point in a pattern, not an isolated announcement. That pattern is what determines whether this pledge clears the threshold for CREATE MORE incentive eligibility, and what it means if it does.
Common Tower Policy Access Sets iSON Apart From Smaller Builders
iSON’s telecom arm, iSON Tower Ltd. Inc., operates under the Department of Information and Communications Technology’s Common Tower Policy, which authorizes shared infrastructure buildout across regions. The company has built 450 towers so far, backed by TPG Peppertree Capital, the Asian Development Bank, and Security Bank. That backing and that authorization put iSON in a small group of players with standing access to a state-coordinated tower rollout.
Domestic tower builders without comparable capital partners or a documented multi-year relationship with DICT compete for the same regulatory slots without the same track record to point to. Access here does not run through open procurement. It runs through sustained presence at the table, and iSON has been at that table for over a year.
BCDA’s Land Joint Venture Gives iSON a Channel Others Do Not Have
The $50 million agro-solar component of iSON’s package runs through a joint venture with the Bases Conversion and Development Authority, using state land in New Clark City for a 50-hectare protected agriculture project paired with a 40-megawatt solar facility. This is not a commercial land purchase. It is a negotiated arrangement with a state entity that controls one of the most actively marketed development zones in the country.
Other agri-tech investors bidding for comparable state land face a structurally different process. They have to build the relationship iSON already has, through the same cycle of meetings and restated commitments that produced this deal. The joint venture format itself is the mechanism. It converts government relationship capital into land access that a standard investment application does not offer.
CREATE MORE Incentive Eligibility Rewards the Pledge Total, Not the Delivery Record
This is where the pattern becomes structurally significant instead of just repetitive. Republic Act 12066, the CREATE MORE Act, raised the investment threshold for direct Investment Promotion Agency approval to ₱15 billion, up from ₱1 billion. Projects below that threshold still route through the Fiscal Incentives Review Board. Projects at or above it can be approved directly by the relevant IPA.
iSON’s cumulative pledge, now at $375 million, converts to roughly ₱21 billion at prevailing exchange rates. If treated as a single qualifying investment package rather than four separate smaller announcements, that figure clears the ₱15 billion line by a wide margin. Whether the government treats the cumulative $375 million as one project for CREATE MORE incentive eligibility purposes, or evaluates each tranche separately, has real consequences. Bundled, the package gets faster, more direct incentive processing. Separated, each piece faces the review layer meant for smaller commitments.
Nothing in the public record confirms which approach applies here. That ambiguity is itself worth naming. CREATE MORE incentive eligibility was designed to fast-track large single investments, not a sequence of announcements that accumulate toward a large number over multiple press cycles. A company that restates and combines smaller pledges into one running total gets closer to the fast lane than one that submits a single verified project from the start.
Twenty-Two Percent Deployment Defines the Real Exposure
The number that grounds this entire pattern is delivery, not pledges. Of the original $300 million tower commitment from 2025, iSON has deployed about $65 million, building 450 of a planned 3,000 to 4,000 towers. That is roughly 22 percent delivered against a commitment now more than a year old, with no publicly disclosed completion schedule for the remainder.
This is where the exposure actually sits. Not with iSON, which has delivered something and continues to operate in the country. The exposure sits with BCDA and DICT as the state counterparties who negotiated joint ventures and tower authorizations against a track record that is one-fifth complete. If CREATE MORE incentive eligibility gets extended on the strength of the full $375 million figure, the incentive framework is pricing in capital that has not yet arrived, using a delivery rate from the same company’s prior pledge as the only available evidence of what “committed” actually means in practice.
The Pattern Becomes a Template for Other Conglomerates
A foreign conglomerate has now demonstrated, across three government meetings and thirteen months, that restating and stacking investment figures produces sustained media coverage, state land access, and a cumulative total that approaches the CREATE MORE incentive eligibility threshold, without requiring a single comprehensive delivery audit at any point in the process.
Other investors watching this sequence now have a working model. Announce in stages. Let each stage generate its own news cycle. Let the totals compound before anyone asks how much of the earlier pledge actually got built. Mid-size investors without the capital partners or relationship depth to sustain a multi-meeting cadence do not get this option. They face a single-application process where the full commitment has to be shown upfront, competing against companies whose cumulative totals were built through repetition rather than a one-time disclosure.
| Meeting Date | Setting | Amount Announced | Cumulative Total | Verified Deployment to Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| August 2025 | Bengaluru, India | $300 million (telecom towers) | $300 million | Not yet disclosed |
| August 2026 | DOF meeting, Manila | Expansion into healthcare and BPO discussed | $300 million (unchanged) | ~$65 million (22%) |
| September 2026 | Malacañang | $75 million (agri-solar, health, BPO) | $375 million | ~$65 million (22%) |
FAQs
What is CREATE MORE incentive eligibility?
It refers to qualifying for direct, streamlined incentive approval under Republic Act 12066, which allows Investment Promotion Agencies to grant incentives without Fiscal Incentives Review Board review for projects at or above ₱15 billion in investment capital.
Does iSON Group’s pledge qualify for CREATE MORE incentive eligibility right now?
That depends on whether the government evaluates the cumulative $375 million as one package or as separate smaller commitments. Public statements have not clarified this, which is itself the structural gap this piece examines.
Why does the 22 percent deployment figure matter for CREATE MORE incentive eligibility?
Because incentive frameworks built for large single investments assume the pledged capital reflects committed capital. A one-fifth delivery rate on a prior pledge suggests the two are not the same thing here, and that gap is what future incentive decisions have to account for.
Who actually carries the risk if the full pledge is not delivered?
BCDA and DICT, as the state counterparties who structured the joint venture and tower authorizations, along with the broader incentive framework if CREATE MORE incentive eligibility gets extended against unverified totals.
The Record Shows What the Announcements Do Not
Three meetings, thirteen months, and one recurring number tell a different story than the press releases describing them. iSON Group has delivered roughly a fifth of its original pledge while its cumulative commitment has grown to a figure that now sits within reach of direct incentive approval. The state entities that negotiated the land access and the tower authorizations hold the exposure the announcements do not mention. What moves next is whether CREATE MORE incentive eligibility gets extended against the full $375 million total or against what has actually been built, and that decision will tell other investors exactly how far a pledge can outrun its delivery before it matters.
Stay ahead of the cost structures, capital flows, and market recalibrations that shape Philippine business in Business & Money section of Hemos PH.
