Senator Imee Marcos has filed a resolution seeking a Senate investigation into a sequestered government corporation for allegedly importing millions of sacks of rice, raising concerns that the firm is being used as a “backdoor” for state-led imports.

In Proposed Senate Resolution 392, Marcos questioned how Planters Products Inc. (PPI), an attached agency under the Department of Agriculture (DA), could finance nearly P2 billion worth of rice imports despite reporting an income of only about P90 million in 2024.

“PPI’s estimated income in 2024 was only around P90 million. How was it able to import nearly P2 billion worth of rice?” Marcos said in a statement. “It is clear that PPI is being used and abused to profit from importation.”

According to the resolution, PPI allegedly imported an estimated 1.72 million sacks of rice across three batches: 255,000 sacks from India in April 2025; 200,000 sacks in July 2025; and 1.26 million sacks from Vietnam, Thailand, and Myanmar in January 2026.

Marcos also cited data from the Federation of Free Farmers indicating that an additional 1.54 million sacks of rice from India are currently en route to the country.

The lawmaker warned that the massive influx of foreign rice has triggered a sharp decline in local farmgate prices, directly harming Filipino agricultural workers.

“Due to the greed of these officials, local palay prices have crashed, starving our 2.4 million farmers,” she said. “The farmgate price of palay has dropped to just P16 to P17 per kilo.”

The inquiry aims to determine whether the state-linked corporation is being used to circumvent the Rice Tariffication Law, which bars government agencies — such as the National Food Authority — from directly importing the staple.

Marcos also questioned the lack of public bidding for the transactions, noting the absence of competitive bidding could violate the Government Procurement Reform Act.

“The mandate of the DA is to support local production, not to boost importation of rice,” Marcos said. “Is PPI still for the people or for the wallets of some?”

The Department of Agriculture and representatives from PPI have not yet responded to requests for comment on the resolution.