BFP ‘preferred supplier’ racket draws corruption complaints

Post reignites outrage after business owners allege BFP inspectors illegally require them to buy fire safety gear from favored suppliers.

A complaint by Threads user @inkxthinkx is reigniting allegations of an old racket that Philippine law explicitly prohibits: Bureau of Fire Protection personnel steering business owners toward particular suppliers of fire extinguishers and other fire-safety equipment.

In his post, @inkxthinkx alleged that he had already purchased a fire extinguisher from a supplier supposedly “authorized” by the BFP. But after the personnel handling inspections changed this year, he claimed he was told to purchase another extinguisher from the new inspector’s supplier because his 20-square-meter establishment supposedly required two 10-pound units.

“Talagang korap tong BFP,” he wrote. “Hirap magnegosyo sa Pilipinas.”

The post had drawn 12,300 views at the time of the screenshots and opened the floodgates for other business owners to share similar allegations.

One commenter claimed a fire officer once asked how personnel would “kikita” after learning that a contractor had purchased fire extinguishers elsewhere. Another said a BFP representative referred his business to a particular supplier, only for him to later learn that personnel allegedly received commissions.

Other allegations went beyond fire extinguishers. One commenter claimed being asked to “sponsor” an event worth ₱35,000 before permits would be released, then another ₱5,000 to correct a clerical error. Another alleged being charged ₱2,000 for a fire-extinguisher seminar without receiving a receipt.

These are individual allegations and have not been independently verified. The posts also do not identify the specific BFP offices or personnel allegedly involved.

But when it comes to pushing particular fire-safety suppliers, the law is clear.

BFP cannot dictate where you buy

Section 12(f) of Republic Act No. 11032, or the Ease of Doing Business and Efficient Government Service Delivery Act, expressly prohibits BFP officials and employees from selling, offering to sell or recommending specific brands of fire extinguishers and other fire-safety equipment to applicants. Violations of the provision may carry imprisonment of one to six years and fines ranging from ₱500,000 to ₱2 million.

BFP Memorandum Circular No. 2016-016 likewise prohibits personnel from acting as agents or endorsers of manufacturers, dealers and suppliers of fire-safety equipment.

The bureau itself has repeatedly stressed that it does not accredit or recommend any particular brand, store or distributor of fire extinguishers.

When a ‘referral’ becomes a bigger problem

If an official receives commissions, kickbacks or other benefits for steering applicants toward a private supplier, other anti-corruption laws may apply.

Republic Act No. 3019, or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, prohibits public officials from requesting or receiving benefits in connection with certain government transactions and from giving private parties unwarranted benefits, advantages or preferences under circumstances covered by the law.

Republic Act No. 6713, meanwhile, imposes ethical standards on public officials and employees and restricts financial or material interests that conflict with their official functions.

The issue is not merely theoretical. In February 2026, Interior Secretary Jonvic Remulla publicly raised allegations involving fire extinguishers and fire-safety certification and ordered cases prepared against personnel of a BFP unit in Silang, Cavite.

The BFP has also reiterated its anti-corruption measures, including its “no body-worn camera, no inspection” policy.

Fire inspectors have every right—and responsibility—to require establishments to comply with legitimate fire-safety standards.

What they cannot do is turn that regulatory power into a captive market for a favored supplier.

READ: