Tax revolts: an international perspective
- Authors: Tinotenda, Tariro Chizanga
- Date: 2020
- Subjects: Taxation -- Public opinion , Taxation -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Income tax -- South Africa , South Africa -- Economic conditions , Fiscal policy -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: text , Thesis , Masters , MComm
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/166116 , vital:41330
- Description: The main goal of this study is to investigate whether tax revolts currently taking place and apparently threatening to take place in South Africa follow patterns shown in past international tax revolts or follow a unique pattern of their own. Tax revolts or tax rebellions are not a new phenomenon; they can be traced back to the beginning of time. Renowned tax revolts of the past include the Magna Carta and the Peasants’ Revolt in England, the Boston Tea Party, the Whiskey Rebellion, the Zimbabwean poll tax revolt, the Bambatha rebellion, the Tigre Rebellion, Proposition 13 and Margaret Thatcher’s poll tax revolt. These tax revolts were usually caused by the high burden of taxation, excessive government expenditure, corruption of government officials, declining tax morale of taxpayers and taxpayers’ perceptions of unfairness. In South Africa, elements of tax revolts have been on the rise. There has been a tax revolt against the e-tolling system in Gauteng since 2013. Non-payment of municipal rates is another form of tax revolt that has been and is happening in South Africa. Trade unions have also threatened strikes and mass action against various tax changes, including the value-added tax increase. Taxpayers, through media reporting, have been witnessing an increase in the use of taxpayers’ money for non-governmental agendas or overstated budgets. An increasing number of South Africans have been emigrating financially from South Africa to avoid a high taxation burden. The study falls within a post-positivist paradigm and an interpretive methodology is applied in the present research. The methodology is based on the fact that the social reality of tax revolts is not singular or objective, instead it is influenced by human experiences and social contexts. The study finds that tax revolts are currently occurring and threatening to occur in South Africa. The patterns of South African tax revolts are to a great extent similar to the patterns of international tax revolts, indicating the universalism of tax revolts. The study also confirms that South African tax revolts are, to a certain extent, unique.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2020
- Authors: Tinotenda, Tariro Chizanga
- Date: 2020
- Subjects: Taxation -- Public opinion , Taxation -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Income tax -- South Africa , South Africa -- Economic conditions , Fiscal policy -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: text , Thesis , Masters , MComm
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/166116 , vital:41330
- Description: The main goal of this study is to investigate whether tax revolts currently taking place and apparently threatening to take place in South Africa follow patterns shown in past international tax revolts or follow a unique pattern of their own. Tax revolts or tax rebellions are not a new phenomenon; they can be traced back to the beginning of time. Renowned tax revolts of the past include the Magna Carta and the Peasants’ Revolt in England, the Boston Tea Party, the Whiskey Rebellion, the Zimbabwean poll tax revolt, the Bambatha rebellion, the Tigre Rebellion, Proposition 13 and Margaret Thatcher’s poll tax revolt. These tax revolts were usually caused by the high burden of taxation, excessive government expenditure, corruption of government officials, declining tax morale of taxpayers and taxpayers’ perceptions of unfairness. In South Africa, elements of tax revolts have been on the rise. There has been a tax revolt against the e-tolling system in Gauteng since 2013. Non-payment of municipal rates is another form of tax revolt that has been and is happening in South Africa. Trade unions have also threatened strikes and mass action against various tax changes, including the value-added tax increase. Taxpayers, through media reporting, have been witnessing an increase in the use of taxpayers’ money for non-governmental agendas or overstated budgets. An increasing number of South Africans have been emigrating financially from South Africa to avoid a high taxation burden. The study falls within a post-positivist paradigm and an interpretive methodology is applied in the present research. The methodology is based on the fact that the social reality of tax revolts is not singular or objective, instead it is influenced by human experiences and social contexts. The study finds that tax revolts are currently occurring and threatening to occur in South Africa. The patterns of South African tax revolts are to a great extent similar to the patterns of international tax revolts, indicating the universalism of tax revolts. The study also confirms that South African tax revolts are, to a certain extent, unique.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2020
The distiction between debt and equity from an income tax perspective
- Authors: Duna, Nomfundo
- Date: 2020
- Subjects: Income tax -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MCOM
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10948/47791 , vital:40375
- Description: The debt bias gives rise to real and disadvantageous consequences for many jurisdictions. South Africa is by no means any safer from its dilutive and evasive effect. This bias in favour of debt arises as a result of the difference in the tax treatment of debt and equity which is found in the South African tax legislation. At the centre of the difference in tax treatment is that under the domestic tax legislation, interest incurred on debt is deductible to the extent that the debt was used to fund income generating assets which dividends payable to equity investors is not. From a South African perspective, the classification of a funding as debt or equity funding for tax purposes is not exhaustively dealt with within the tax legislation as it is not always that these terms are defined in the tax legislation. In some instances, common law is relied upon to classify funding as debt or equity funding. Furthermore, this classification and the resultant tax treatment of funding as either debt or equity becomes even more complicated when you consider the various tax avoidance mechanisms that taxpayer corporations use to take advantage of the debt bias. Tax avoidance mechanisms such as the uptake of excessive debt to increase interest deductions and the use of hybrid debt instruments has necessitated the inclusion of targeted anti-avoidance provisions that operate to either reclassify the nature of the funding or the return on such funding, or in some instances deny interest deductions. These targeted anti-avoidance provisions contain definitions of the type of funding that they apply to. In the South African context, the South African tax legislation contains provisions in respect of anti-excessive debt rules contained in section 23M and 23N as well as hybrid instruments contained in sections 8E,8EA, 8F and 8FA that aim to counter the extent to which taxpayers exploit the debt bias to avoid tax.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2020
- Authors: Duna, Nomfundo
- Date: 2020
- Subjects: Income tax -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MCOM
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10948/47791 , vital:40375
- Description: The debt bias gives rise to real and disadvantageous consequences for many jurisdictions. South Africa is by no means any safer from its dilutive and evasive effect. This bias in favour of debt arises as a result of the difference in the tax treatment of debt and equity which is found in the South African tax legislation. At the centre of the difference in tax treatment is that under the domestic tax legislation, interest incurred on debt is deductible to the extent that the debt was used to fund income generating assets which dividends payable to equity investors is not. From a South African perspective, the classification of a funding as debt or equity funding for tax purposes is not exhaustively dealt with within the tax legislation as it is not always that these terms are defined in the tax legislation. In some instances, common law is relied upon to classify funding as debt or equity funding. Furthermore, this classification and the resultant tax treatment of funding as either debt or equity becomes even more complicated when you consider the various tax avoidance mechanisms that taxpayer corporations use to take advantage of the debt bias. Tax avoidance mechanisms such as the uptake of excessive debt to increase interest deductions and the use of hybrid debt instruments has necessitated the inclusion of targeted anti-avoidance provisions that operate to either reclassify the nature of the funding or the return on such funding, or in some instances deny interest deductions. These targeted anti-avoidance provisions contain definitions of the type of funding that they apply to. In the South African context, the South African tax legislation contains provisions in respect of anti-excessive debt rules contained in section 23M and 23N as well as hybrid instruments contained in sections 8E,8EA, 8F and 8FA that aim to counter the extent to which taxpayers exploit the debt bias to avoid tax.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2020
- «
- ‹
- 1
- ›
- »