Assignment (MComm)--University of Stellenbosch, 2007. / Bibliography. Also available via the Internet.

M.B.A. / Capital gains taxation has been a hotly debated topic in South Africa for a number of years. The Franzsen Commission recommended its introduction in the late 1960's. When the Minister of Finance announced the introduction of CGT in the 2000 budget speech as part of a wider tax reform, there was widespread opposition to the introduction of CGT. The study attempts to gain an understanding of the introduction of CGT in order to determine its potential effects. This research study looks at both sides of the arguments, that is, the issues raised in favour for the introduction of CGT as well as the issues raised against the introduction of CGT. This research study is of an exploratory nature, made up of two sections. The first section is a quantitative analysis of the literature reviewed in terms of the theories of taxation, the main arguments in favour and against the introduction of CGT, and finally an international comparison of CGT was conducted. The second section was conducted on taxpayers; to gauge their opinions with regards to CGT in order to collaborate the findings to the literature reviewed. The reasons for the introduction of CGT as stated in the 2001 budget speech: CGT will enhance the efficiency of the income tax system by reducing the incentive to convert ordinary income into tax-free capital income. The equity of the tax system will be improved by ensuring that taxpayers with similar income levels will bear a similar burden of taxation regardless of the form in which income is received. Additional revenue will be collected through CGT directly and indirectly through the enhanced efficiency of the overall system. SARS estimates that, when fully operational, CGT can raise an additional R1-2b. From the direct revenue, as well as the indirect effect that more income tax will be collected, the introduction of CGT will support the V government's overall tax reform policy of broadening the tax base and reducing the rates of income tax. The reduction of distortions of real economic activity so that risks capital is allocated more efficiently through rules, which permit the offsetting of capital losses. In summary the reasons for opposing the introduction of CGT: The SA Revenue Service already has laws to prevent abuse of capital profit. Research has shown that CGT is not international best practice, though it may be common in developed countries. Even Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan is on record as saying that CGT goes contrary to the promotion of enterprise and the best rate would be "zero". Most developed countries would like to dump it. For SA to support CGT because it is widely applied in developed countries is unrealistic. We need to note what developing countries are doing. None of those which are rapidi .y industrialising with whom we have to compete for scarce capital have CGT. CGT will harm Trade & Industry Minister Alec Erwin's efforts to put into place incentives to woo investors. The potential effects of CGT are wide and far- reaching. Some of the common potential effects raised in the debates concerns the following: economic growth, investments, savings, risk taking, entrepreneurship and the lock-in effects. This research findings concludes that CGT would hinder economic growth and reduce the rate of personal savings, although the findings also suggest that the introduction of CGT would not deter foreign investors from investing in South Africa.

No description available.

This study investigates the implications of the introduction of Capital Gains Tax that came into effect on the 1st October 2001 through the Income Tax Act. The study poses two questions, the first being, whether to elect the actual value of an asset at 1 October 2001 for base cost purposes, or to accept the 'default' time apportionment method? The second question posed raises the subject of whether an asset owner should delay doing a valuation exercise on the assets they presently own or proceed with a valuation exercise now? A number of actual examples were obtained from accounting firms and analysed to see what values the different methods of determining the base cost gave and hence the amount of tax payable. The results clearly show that the longer the asset has been owned by the business or individual prior to the implementation date, the bigger the impact the Time Apportionment Formula has on the answer. The reason for this is the Time Apportionment Formula that states the following "the effect of the formula is to multiply the actual pre-valuation economic expense by a factor, which increases it in the ratio of the pre-valuation period to the whole period of ownership. When this amount is deducted from the actual proceeds, it gives the effect of the gain having arisen at an equal amount per annum over the whole period of ownership". The Market Value Method comes into play when the assets are less than two years old. The results obtained also answer the second part of the question posed of whether to wait or do the valuation exercise now. A quote from the tax planning journal answers the question in the best possible way 'to delay is to pay'. In some of the cases presented the difference between the two methods is substantial and the taxpayer would have had to pay the amount given by the Time Apportionment Formula due to the fact that the Market Value Method has a time restriction placed on it. The Act is quite explicit in the use of the Market Value Method and it's cut off date. The conclusion drawn from the study indicates that it is in the best interest of businesses and individuals to do a valuation exercise on all capital assets owned without delay. These valuation exercises will then help those businesses and individuals determine which base cost calculation method will be in their best interest. / Thesis (MBA)-University of Natal, 2002.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of New South Wales, 2003. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 267-280). Also available online.

Capital asset pricing theory assumes a no-tax, after-tax efficiency equivalence; ie., that the efficient information produced in a no-tax analysis is equivalent to that which is produced in an after-tax analysis. However, if the effect of income taxes is not systematic throughout the market, the useful application of the theory may be impaired by this assumption. This research seeks to determine the effect of income tax imposition on the risk-return expectations or individual investors. If the effect of income tax imposition is to produce non-homogeneous after-tax investor risk-return expectations, then the efficiency equivalence hypothesis must be rejected. This efficiency equivalency hypothesis is evaluated by testing two alternative hypotheses, (1) the systematic riskiness of any individual security, both with and without adjustment for the imposition of income tax, is equivalent, and (2) the no-tax and after-tax expected risk-return rank order of each individual security is the same. An after-tax capital asset pricing model is derived. This model is based upon the premise that the current income tax laws, which require investors to share with the taxing government the uncertain returns from risky assets, allow investors to reduce the riskiness of those returns. The returns on investment assets are derived from both capital gains and from ordinary income distributions. However, the tax treatment of capital gains (losses) and ordinary income (dividends/interest) is not the same. This results in an unsystematic effect on the risks and returns of investments, thus, the income tax effect is not likely to be homogeneous as an efficiency equivalence hypothesis would imply. The analysis focuses on the expected risk-return equivalencies for 465 firms, using ex-post data over a 10 year period. The findings of this study imply that income tax effects on the market are not homogeneous. Income tax differentials are apparent in both the observed beta terms and the risk-return rank-ordering of the securities.

The small business Capital Gains Tax (CGT) concessions were introduced by the Federal Treasurer on 21 September 1999. The provisions are based on the landmark Review of Business Taxation. The Federal Government's intention was to remove impediments to efficient asset management, improve capital mobility, reduce complexity and compliance costs and generally, make Australia's CGT regime internationally competitive. Division 152 contains four separate small business concessions. In order to qualify for the four CGT concessions, the small business must satisfy stringent tests (basic conditions). It is possible that the small business will receive significant concessional treatment if these basic conditions are satisfied. Commentary by academics and tax practitioners indicate that the small business CGT concessions are excessively complex. There is concern that the provisions are not achieving their desired outcomes. This thesis involves a critical evaluation of Division 152 against the traditional criteria for a good tax system, using a legal research methodology designed by Wade. Within Wade's framework, the research includes a comparative analysis of the Australian and United Kingdom legislative provisions for small business CGT concessions. This comparison is undertaken with a view to highlighting strengths and weaknesses in the respective legislation to better meet the goals of equity, efficiency and simplicity. The culmination of this thesis will be the proposal of policy recommendations to Subdivision 152-A. This thesis states the law available as at 30 April 2006. In the light of this, an appendix is inserted to cover changes since this date.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Wisconsin--Madison, 1943. / Typescript. Vita. eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliography.

M.Comm. / Limited tax implications of capital gains tax in South Africa is addressed in this study with reference to the Eighth Schedule of the Income Tax Act (hereafter the Act). Various publications by the South African Revenue Service (hereafter SARS) and leading tax specialist's publications available on the website www.cgtsa.co.za were also consulted. Employee Share Ownership Schemes (hereafter ESOP's) are defined and the most commonly used schemes in South Africa are explained with reference to various internal publications by PricewaterhouseCoopers. The Income Tax implications as well as the capital gains tax implications on selected schemes will be discussed. The implications of capital gains tax on all transactions in South Africa falls outside the scope of this study, as this study focuses on the basic explanation of the core capital gains tax provisions in South Africa, with specific application to certain employee share ownership programmes (hereafter ESOP's) used in South Africa.

Thesis (M.Com. (Taxation))--University of the Witwatersrand, Faculty of Commerce, Law and Management, School of Accountancy, 2014. / South Africa has the status of being the richest country based on mineral reserves. This status incentivised many offshore investors to invest in shares in South African mining companies which, in turn, hold mining rights and/or prospecting rights. This research evaluates, with specific reference to offshore investors, whether any South African capital gains tax implications would arise upon the disposal by non-residents of shares in a South African company holding prospecting rights or mining rights. The report focuses on paragraph 2 of the Eighth Schedule to the Income Tax Act 58 of 1962 (‘the Act’) as well as the legal nature of mining rights, prospecting rights and prospecting information to determine whether such rights and information would fall within the ambit of paragraph 2 of the Eighth Schedule to the Act. The report concludes on whether the disposal by non-resident shareholders of shares in a South African company which holds mining rights and/or prospecting rights would fall within the ambit of paragraph 2 of the Eighth Schedule to the Act.