An investigation into the tax consequences for individuals performing work abroad
- Authors: De Ponte, Celeste Lidia
- Date: 2020
- Subjects: South Africa. Income Tax Act, 1962 , Income tax -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Double taxation -- South Africa , International business enterprises -- Taxation -- Law and legislation -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: text , Thesis , Masters , MCom
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/141235 , vital:37955
- Description: This thesis considered the income tax implications for South African tax resident individuals who render services abroad. The research included an analysis of the impact that the amendment to the section 10(1)(o)(ii) exemption has on individuals rendering services abroad and companies who send their employees abroad. In doing so, this thesis sought to highlight the key factors for consideration, for both employers and individuals. A doctrinal methodology was applied, and an analysis was carried out of relevant tax legislation, commentary of experts in the field of tax law and the relevant case law of South Africa, the United Kingdom (UK), Australia and the United States of America (US), where relevant. It was established that residency is key to determining the tax liability of a person and has an impact on the relief mechanisms that are available where double taxation arises. In addition, the amendment to section 10(1)(o)(ii) was considered. It was concluded that when rendering services abroad, both the employer and employee need to consider the tax consequences that may arise and highlights the factors which may be relevant. The thesis illustrates that, whilst the R1 million exemption alleviates the double tax consequences to a certain extent, further guidance is needed as to how the R1 million threshold will be calculated.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2020
Assessed losses: the trade and income from trade requirements as set out in section 20 of the Income Tax Act of 1962
- Authors: Pillay, Neermala Neelavathy
- Date: 2012
- Subjects: South Africa. Income Tax Act, 1962 , Income tax deductions for losses -- South Africa , Income tax deductions for losses -- Australia , Income tax -- Law and legislation -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MCom
- Identifier: vital:8949 , http://hdl.handle.net/10948/1670 , South Africa. Income Tax Act, 1962 , Income tax deductions for losses -- South Africa , Income tax deductions for losses -- Australia , Income tax -- Law and legislation -- South Africa
- Description: Section 20 of the Income Tax Act, No 58 of 1962 allows a taxpayer that incurs an assessed loss to carry forward the balance of assessed loss incurred, to be set off against taxable income earned in or added to losses incurred in future years. The issues regarding the carry forward of assessed losses in terms of section 20 is complex and in terms of the said section, a company is only entitled to set off its assessed loss from the previous year against its taxable income in the current year, if the taxpayer has carried on a trade during the current year and has derived income from that trade. Under the provisions of section 20(2A), a taxpayer other than a company can utilise an assessed loss even if no trading has been conducted. Assessed losses of natural persons, may however be ring-fenced. The aim of this treatise was twofold. Firstly it was to gain clarity on the „trade‟ and „income from trade‟ issues and secondly to compare South African legislation with that of Australia, with a view to recommending a change in our rules regarding the treatment of assessed losses in the context of companies. The critical lessons to be learned from the cases presented, is that liquidators, creditors and others must ensure that the company continues trading in order to x keep the assessed losses valid. Realisation of assets (including stock), and the collection of outstanding debts during liquidation does not constitute the carrying on of a trade in terms of s 20(1). The continuity of trade is an important element in regard to the carry forward of assessed losses to be utilised in the current and future years. Therefore it is important that a company carries on some activity that falls within the definition of trade. In the landmark case of SA Bazaars, it was held that a company did not have to trade continuously throughout the year to qualify for the set-off of the assessed loss or carry forward of the assessed loss, that is, to trade for say part of the year. The court however left open the issue of whether it was necessary to derive income from that trade. In order to clarify the issues regarding assessed losses, SARS issued Interpretation Note 33 granting taxpayers a concession in certain cases where a company has traded, but not derived income from that trade. But in ITC 1830, the court ruled that a company must trade and must derive income from that trade in order to carry forward its assessed loss, which effectively means that SARS cannot apply Interpretation Note 33. SARS does not have the authority to make concession which is contrary to the wording of the Act. xi In Australia, operating losses can be carried forward indefinitely to be set-off against future income, provided a company meets the more than 50% continuity of ownership test. Where the continuity test fails, losses can be deducted if the same business is carried on in the income year (the same business test). From the research conducted and in order to solve the issues surrounding the carry forward of assessed losses it was suggested that one of the following be adopted :- The method used in Australia for the carry forward of assessed losses., or A decision of the Supreme Court of Appeal is needed for a departure from the literal meaning of the words pertaining to the requirements regarding the carry forward of assessed losses. Furthermore, to clarify the definition of „income‟, as used in the context of s20, is it gross income less exempt income or taxable income?. If section 20 relates to taxable income, then an assessed loss will never be increased, which it is submitted, is not what the legislature intended. Section 20 ought to be revisited to eliminate any uncertainty about the income requirement and in the context in which the word „income‟ is used in that section.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2012
The deductibility of damages and associated legal expenses for the purposes of determining taxable income in South Africa
- Authors: Madovi, Ezekiel
- Date: 2017
- Subjects: Income tax -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Damages -- Taxation -- South Africa , South Africa. Income Tax Act, 1962
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MCom
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/4344 , vital:20650
- Description: The deduction of damages and the associated legal costs must satisfy the requirements of the preamble to section 11 and section 11(a) of the Income Tax Act 58 of 1962, read with section 23(g) (referred to as the general deduction formula). This research examined under what circumstances a payer of damages and the associated legal costs would be able to claim a deduction from taxable income. This research also considered whether or not the issue of fault is a relevant consideration in determining whether a deduction should be allowed. In some cases the courts appear to have disallowed a deduction if the expenditure or loss was incurred as a result of a negligent or unlawful act. In other instances the courts have allowed the deduction of damages despite the expenditure or loss having been incurred as a result of a negligent or unlawful act. The research concludes that negligence is not a relevant consideration in the deduction of damages and the associated legal costs. In order to secure a claim for damages the taxpayer must prove that the expenditure was incurred in the production of income and it was expended for the purposes of trade. Associated legal costs are only deductible if the damages satisfy the requirements of section 11(c).
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2017
The illegal diamond trade in South Africa and its tax consequences
- Authors: Kumm-Schmidt, Megan
- Date: 2017
- Subjects: Diamond industry and trade -- South Africa , Diamond industry and trade -- Corrupt practices -- South Africa , Diamond industry and trade -- South Africa -- Taxation , Conflict diamonds -- South Africa , Income tax -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Tax evasion -- South Africa , South Africa. Income Tax Act, 1962 , South Africa. Prevention and Combating of Corrupt Activities Act, 2004 , South Africa. Tax Administration Act, 2011 , South Africa. ǂt Value-Added Tax Act, 1991 , Kimberley Process Certification Scheme
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MCom
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/4389 , vital:20656
- Description: The object of the research was to discuss the taxability of the illegal diamond trade in South Africa and to identify the consequences of not declaring income obtained from the illegal diamond trade to the South African Revenue Services. The research was conducted by means of a critical analysis of documentary data with specific reference to the Income Tax Act, the Value-Added Tax (VAT) Act, the Tax Administration Act and relevant case law. The Income Tax Act and the Value-Added Tax Act were referred to in relation to the tax consequences of the illegal diamond trade and the Tax Administration Act was used to determine the consequences of not declaring income to the South African Revenue Services. It was established that amounts received from the sale of illegal diamonds are to be included in the taxpayer's gross income, whilst in relation to income received from diamond theft it was not as clear. The MP Finance Group case held that the nature of the receipt and the way in which the transaction occurred in each individual situation will be the deciding factor as to whether or not the stolen diamonds will be taxable in the hands of the thief. The buying and selling of "blood" or stolen diamonds can amount to a trade. As there have been no definitive case decisions in South Africa, it remains unclear whether expenses relating to an illegal trade are deductible. Assuming that expenses relating to an illegal trade are deductible, the provisions of section 11(a) will apply to expenses incurred as a result of dealing in illegal diamonds and it was concluded that qualifying expenses will be deductible. A taxpayer buying and selling "blood" or stolen diamonds is required to register for VAT if sales exceed the threshold and would be required to account for VAT on these transactions. If the taxpayer does not declare the income for income tax purposes or register for and pay VAT to the South African Revenue Services from either the sale of illegal diamonds or the theft of diamonds, this will amount to tax evasion and the dealer will be subject to penalties and even imprisonment
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2017
The South African income tax implications of transactions entered into to earn points for a Broad- Based Black Economic Empowerment scorecard, with reference to a selection of structures
- Authors: Jaga, Praksha
- Date: 2021-04
- Subjects: Black Economic Empowerment (Program : South Africa) , South Africa. Income Tax Act, 1962 , Income tax -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Spendings tax -- South Africa , Tax deductions -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: thesis , text , Masters , MCom
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/177306 , vital:42808
- Description: This thesis discussed the South African income tax implications, in terms of the Income Tax Act, No. 58 of 1962, arising from complying with Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment requirements, and related principles established in case law. Various structures and transactions entered into for the purposes of earning points for the B-BBEE scorecard were identified. In the assessment of the deductibility of B-BBEE expenditure in terms of the preamble to section 11, section 11(a) and section 23(g) of the Act, it was highlighted that, in the South African economic environment, B-BBEE compliance represents a competitive advantage for entities. In addition, many South African organisations are required to comply with B-BBEE requirements for legal and regulatory purposes. The analysis of the deductibility of B-BBEE expenditure revealed that taxpayers that incur this expenditure would be carrying on a trade or commencing to do so. It was also concluded that B-BBEE expenditure is incurred in the production of income and would generally not be capital in nature, except in certain circumstances, in which case the Act provides certain allowances. Any deduction will only be allowed in the year of assessment in which the expenditure is actually incurred, or when the taxpayer incurs an unconditional legal obligation. This thesis explored several alternatives to achieve the requirements of the ownership element of B-BBEE and highlighted the income tax implications that arise because of these structures. It was also observed that there are a number of incentives in the Act that could be beneficial to taxpayers seeking to earn points for the remaining elements of the B-BBEE scorecard. A legal interpretive approach, in particular a doctrinal research methodology, was adopted in carrying out this research. This research concluded that the Act facilitates most of the B-BBEE transactions and structures, but due to the complex and sometimes uncertain nature of the tax consequences of B-BBEE transactions and structures, there is a need for further guidance in this area of tax law. , Thesis (MCom) -- Faculty of Commerce, Accounting, 2021
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2021-04