SARS Preliminary Outcomes of Revenue Collection for the 2014-2015 Fiscal Year

We are today releasing SARS’ preliminary revenue collection outcome, twelve hours after the close of the 2014/15 fiscal year. Despite challenging economic conditions, SARS collected R986.4 billion which is a 9.6 % growth in total revenue from 2013/14. This is R7.4 billion above the revised estimate announced in the February 2015 Budget. This revenue performance was made possible by an extraordinary drive by SARS on compliance improvement, which in aggregate, added about R22bn. This closing of the compliance gap compensated for revenue collection shortfall caused by a slowing economy.

Sars accuses Malema of lying, hits him with R14m bill – report

Pretoria – The SA Revenue Service (Sars) has accused Economic Freedom Fighters leader Julius Malema of lying about his source of income and hit him with an additional R14m tax bill, the Sunday Times reported. This was according to court papers filed in the North Gauteng High Court by Sars which has launched an application for Malema’s final sequestration. According to the report, Sars, in the court papers explaining why it had dumped its deal with Malema, said he had lied about the source of the funds used to settle part of his tax bill.

UIF relief for taxpayers

On 25 February 2015, the Minister of Finance, Nhlanhla Nene, delivered the 2015 Budget Speech (Budget Speech) which contained a number of tax proposals. One such proposal relates to the temporary reduction in contributions to the Unemployment Insurance Fund (UIF) for the 2015/16 financial year. By way of background, the UIF gives short-term relief to workers when they become unemployed or are unable to work due to maternity, adoption leave or illness. The unemployment insurance

Understatement penalties: where is the prejudice to SARS?

Authors: Seelan Moonsamy and Nada Kakaza of ENSafrica The understatement penalty (“USP”) regime introduced by the South African Revenue Service (“SARS”) in terms of the Tax Administration Act, No 28 of 2011 (the “TAA”), which is still in its infancy stages, has led to some uncertainty as to when an USP should, veritably, be levied by SARS. An “understatement” is defined in section 221 of the TAA to mean “any prejudice to SARS or the fiscus as a result of – a default in rendering a return; an omission from a return; an incorrect statement in a return; or if no return is required, the failure to pay the correct amount of ‘tax’.”

SARS opened a new branch in MitChells Plain – Cape Town, Western Cape – South Africa

? Mitchells Plain is one of South Africa’s largest townships with a population of about 290,000 people. It is located about 32 km from the city of Cape Town, on the Cape Flats on the False Bay coast between Muizenberg and Khayelitsha. This is one of the reasons why SARS has decided to increase its reach in the area, by opening a new branch. Also making it easy for taxpayers to comply and assist in the facilitation of trade in the area.

Deferral of the implementation of the electronic Tax compliance status system

Tax clearance certificates (TCCs) are issued by the South African Revenue Service (SARS) to, inter alia, validate the status of a taxpayer and confirm that such taxpayer’s tax affairs are in order. TCCs are, almost without exception, required for tender or bid applications, to reflect good standing, foreign investment and for emigration purposes. A TCC is only valid for one year from the date of issue in respect of a tender and/or good standing, provided the taxpayer remains compliant with SARS requirements.

Professional tax advice vital in mitigation of penalties and interest

Author: Andrew Lewis – Tax Director (Cliffe Dekker Hofmeyr) Judgment was handed down in the Tax Court on 18 November 2014 in the case of Z v The Commissioner for for the South African Revenue Service (case number 13472), as yet unreported. The dispute concerned the calculation by the taxpayer of his capital gains tax liability arising pursuant to the disposal of shares. In 2007 the taxpayer disposed of his shares in a company for R841 million. In and around the time of the disposal of the shares, a company (A) instituted a damages claim against the taxpayer for an amount of R925 million which related to a transaction that took place in 2003. Shortly after the damages action was instituted, the taxpayer agreed to pay A an amount of almost R700 million in full and final settlement of its claim.