La presente tesis muestra cómo la comisión mercantil de fuente extranjera en operaciones. Multinivel generada por Persona natural domiciliada influye en el Impuesto a la Renta de tercera categoría. Para la presente investigación se toma el caso de la Empresa Herbalife, se muestran cómo operan estas empresas y como permite que las personas naturales obtengan ingresos(comisiones) del exterior y decir que por desconocimiento y falta de información no declaran en el régimen que le corresponde y que esto podrían afectar significativamente en su economía al afrontar contingencias tributarias This thesis shows how the commercial commission of foreign source in operations Multilevel generated by natural person domiciled influences the Third Income Tax category. For the present investigation the case of the Herbalife Company is taken, shown how these companies operate and how they allow individuals to earn income (commissions) from abroad and say that due to lack of knowledge and lack of information they do not declare the regime that corresponds to it and that this could significantly affect its economy face tax contingencies

No description available.

Due to the nature of the digital economy, multi-national entities are able to trade in countries over the internet without a physical presence, they are setting up group structures across the world, housing intellectual property in tax havens and shifting profits between jurisdictions, lowering their group tax rates. This treatise considered the OECD/G20 BEPS Project 2015 Final Report on Action Plan 1 which discusses the nature, risks and proposed options to combat base erosion and profit sharing (BEPS). Although the OECD have made no recommendations in their report many countries have taken action to protect their tax bases. The scope of this treatise is limited to multi-national entities who avoid tax presence in a country or shift profits to off-shore entities in low/no tax jurisdictions. The aim of this treatise is to identify the risks posed by the nature of the digital economy to direct taxation and analyse proposed solutions to respond to these risks. A comparative study of the proposal and changes implemented in the UK, Australia and India was undertaken to gain an understanding of international thinking regarding the best way to combat BEPS. These proposals were then compared to the South African perspective in order to determine which of the proposals would be feasible to combat BEPS in South Africa.

No contexto do sistema tributário nacional brasileiro, uma apuração correta da renda tributável demanda o respeito a princípios abrigados pela Constituição Federal expressa ou implicitamente e, dentre estes, vale citar o princípio da realização da renda que, numa descrição simplificada, auxilia na detecção da capacidade econômica apta a sofrer tributação, uma vez que delineia diretrizes mais concretas para a identificação do momento adequado para que tal tributação se implemente. Este estudo enfoca o momento temporal em que se consideram ocorridos os fatos econômicos individuais que se ajuntam para compor a apuração da renda tributável. Não se trata, portanto, de uma abordagem direta acerca do aspecto temporal próprio da regra-matriz de incidência do imposto de renda, aquele que se identifica normalmente com o término do período de um ano. O tema é abordado com enfoque na tributação da renda, apresentando parâmetros para a conceituação do referido princípio e buscando delinear suas funções, bem como descrever seu âmbito de aplicação no Direito Tributário brasileiro, especialmente no que concerne à apuração do imposto de renda (sobretudo o de pessoas jurídicas). O princípio da realização é examinado sob três diferentes perspectivas. Primeiro, faz-se uma análise dos conceitos de renda (e noções correlatas de realização) fornecidos pelas ciências financeiras e econômicas. Segundo, há uma análise sob a perspectiva histórica que apresenta a evolução deste princípio na Alemanha, nos E.U.A., no Reino Unido e também no Brasil. E, por fim, sob a perspectiva estritamente jurídica, enfocando-se o sistema normativo atualmente vigente no Brasil, discutem-se a posição sistêmica do princípio da realização e as limitações impostas pela Constituição Federal de 1988 e pelo Código Tributário Nacional. Ainda nesta última perspectiva, avaliam-se as funções desempenhadas pelo princípio da realização como integrante dos princípios de contabilidade geralmente aceitos e as relações entre Direito Contábil e Direito Tributário. O princípio da realização é examinado em seus diferentes elementos (cumprimento da obrigação, mudança da posição patrimonial, troca no mercado, mensurabilidade, liquidez e certeza). Por fim, propõe-se uma estrutura para classificação dos diferentes critérios que informam o princípio da realização à luz da legislação brasileira. / In the context of the Brazilian tax system, a correct calculation of taxable income demands respect for the principles sheltered, expressly or implicitly, by the Federal Constitution and, among these, it is worth mentioning the realization principle. In a simplified description, said principle helps in the detection of the economic capacity that is able to suffer taxation, since it outlines more specific guidelines for identifying the right time where taxation may be implemented. This study focuses on the timing of the economic facts that are gathered up to comprise the basis for calculation of the taxable income. It is not, therefore, a direct approach on the temporal aspect of the basic rule of incidence of income tax (aspect which is usually identified with the end of the taxable period of one year). The issue is discussed with focus on taxation of income, showing parameters for the conceptualization of realization principle and seeking to outline its functions, as well as to describe its scope within the Brazilian Tax Law, especially on what concerns the calculation of the income tax (especially the corporate income tax). The realization principle is examined from three different perspectives. First, the study presents an analysis of the concepts of income (and related notions of realization) provided by the financial and economic sciences. Second, there is an analysis on the historical perspective that presents the evolution of this principle in Germany, the USA, the UK and also in Brazil. Finally, under a strictly legal perspective, focusing on the regulatory system currently in force in Brazil, it discusses the systemic position of the realization principle and the limitations imposed by the Federal Constitution of 1988 and the National Tax Code. With respect to the latter perspective, the study examines the functions performed by the realization principle as part of the generally accepted accounting principles and the relations between Accounting and Tax Law. The realization principle is examined in its different elements (achievement of the obligation, change in the property position, market exchange, measurability, liquidity and certainty). Finally, it proposes a structure for the classification of the different criteria that inform the realization principle in accordance with the Brazilian legislation in force.

M.Com. (SA & International Taxation) / South Africa is currently undergoing a political, economic and social transformation. Business organisations are being called upon to playa role in national reconstruction and development in South Africa. The African National Congress ("ANC") has made it clear that they will be far more prescriptive than the previous government on issues such as affirmative action and social upliftment practices required from employers. Business contributes towards socio-economic reconstruction through so-called 'Corporate Social Responsibility' ("CSR") programmes. A recent Business Marketing Intelligence ("BMI tI ) survey estimated that South African companies spend R840 million per annum on social upliftment programmes (Consultative Business Movement 1993:82)...

The purpose of this study was to examine whether unmined ore stockpiles fall within the ambit of the definition of trading stock in section 1 of the Income Tax Act (58/1962) and therefore needs to be considered for the purposes of section 22 in the determination of taxable income. Furthermore the judgement in Richards Bay Iron&Titanium (Pty) Ltd and Another v CIR (1996:55) would be analysed to determine whether a distinction could be made between the stockpiled material held in that case as opposed to unmined ore. The research object would be determined by analysing the nature of ore stockpiles, the accounting treatment ore stockpiles and its effect on the tax treatment as well as the taxation of stockpiles in terms of case law. As to the first part, a distinction in the legal sense was examined between movable and immovable property. It was concluded that stockpiles could by its nature in certain circumstances, be considered immovable property even though they became movable by its separation from the soil. Intention was furthermore identified as one of the most important criteria in a three tier test for the determination of the legal nature of stockpiles. As to its tax nature, it was concluded that even though case law suggests that the intention to realise through mining activities could make such stockpiles floating capital, it was submitted that intention remains the conclusive criteria and therefore only once an intention exist, to utilise mining property in a mining process that is a scheme of profit making, does the intention change and does the fixed capital (both immovable property and movable stockpiles) become floating capital. In the second chapter an analysis was done of the financial reporting requirements for stockpiles and whether the accounting treatment thereof would influence the tax treatment. It was concluded that the accounting treatment would influence the tax treatment as the definition of trading stock in section 1 of the ITA (58/1962) is actually an extension of the normal grammatical meaning, the latter for which the accounting treatment is critical. In terms of IAS1 it was found that an essential criterion for a current asset was that it must be expected to be realised in the 12 months after the reporting date. It was found that even though mined ore and crushed ore could be seen as work in progress and thus inventories, such ore still had to comply with the requirements of IAS1 and IAS2 to be classified as inventory. The valuation of the ore would be in terms of IAS2 if at historical cost and in terms of SANREC if at net realisable value. It was concluded that stockpiles that did not meet the trading stock criteria due to various uncertain circumstances could be disclosed as non-current assets at historical cost, but not in terms of IAS16. However, if no reasonable expectation of future benefits existed, then no disclosure would be required. In examining the taxation of stockpiles the definition of trading stock was analysed. It was concluded that to the extent that the normal grammatical meaning did not apply, the extension to the definition still had to be considered. It was held that the extension to the definition had two parts of which the first required that the object must be acquired, produced or manufactured for the purpose of use in a manufacturing process, irrespective of whether the object was saleable in its current condition. The second part required no intention but was an objective enquiry of whether a saleable object was disposed of and which the proceeds would be revenue in nature It was also found that a distinction between a mining process and a manufacturing process exists in the South African tax law and that objects intended for use in the different processes could be treated differently from a tax perspective. Finally the analysis of the Richards Bay case (1996:55) revealed that even though the court considered that stockpiles are raw materials or work-in-progress, it was the taxpayer’s admission of a manufacturing process and his lack of distinction of the mining process that was critical in the decision against him. The court accepted the taxpayer’s contentions and withheld opinion on these two critical matters. It was concluded that stockpiles of unmined ore did not constitute trading stock in the extended definition and only under very specific circumstances could it be considered trading stock under the normal grammatical meaning when inferred from accounting disclosure and valuation requirements. Copyright / Dissertation (MCom)--University of Pretoria, 2009. / Taxation / unrestricted

With effect from 26 October 2004, section 8C was introduced into the Income Tax Act No 58 of 1962 and replaced the previous section 8A. The main purpose of the new section was to effectively tax directors and employees on the receipt of income from equity based incentive schemes and therefore close potential ‘loopholes’ that existed in the previous section 8A. The purpose of this study was to critically analyse section 8C and specifically the principles of ‘vesting’ and ‘restricted equity instruments’ as introduced by the section. Since no case law exists and the application of the principles within the section is deemed to be detailed and complex, the possibility for inconsistent treatment or misinterpretation exists. Due to limited information being available regarding the application of section 8C and in order to determine whether different interpretations may exist in practice, selected tax practitioners and/or specialists were also asked to provide information through the completion of a questionnaire. Section 8C has already been amended since its introduction and as indicated in the study, further amendments may be necessary in order to address problem areas. Employers with equity based incentives need to be aware of the significant impact that section 8C has on the taxation of equity instruments and have to ensure that they comply. Depending on the instruments in use it could also have a major impact on the administrative duties of employers, who have the responsibility of calculating and paying the necessary taxes on time. Copyright / Dissertation (MCom)--University of Pretoria, 2010. / Taxation / unrestricted

Die gevolge van 'n belastingpligtige se handelinge word binne die belastingreg beoordeel aan die hand van verskillende maatstawwe. Die maatstaf van doel word deur die Wetgewer by die klassifikasie van die belastingpligtige se handelinge by die toepassing van verskeie belastingreëls voorgeskryf. Die howe het oak by geleentheid die maatstaf van doel by die interpretasie van verskeie belastingreëls, waar dit nie uitdruklik voorgeskryf is nie, toegepas. Verskeie vertakkinge van die reg onderskei tussen motief, doel en bedoeling wannear die maatstaf van doel of bedoeling toegepas moet word. Hierdie begrippe is by die interpretasie van verskeie belastingreëls, waar die toepassing van die maatstaf van doel voorgeskryf word, ingevoer. Sommige kenners meen dat 'n soortgelyke onderskeiding nie in die belastingreg tuishoort nie. Die doel van hierdie ondersoek was om, met verwysing na die betekenis en toepassing. van die begrippe, motief, doel en bedoeling in ander regsvertakkinge, die betekenis en toepassing daarvan in die Suid-Afrikaanse belastingreg vas te stel. Met ander woorde, die ondersoek behoort aan te toon of 'n onderskeiding tussen motief, doel en bedoeling in die belastingreg toegepas word, en indien dit nie toe gepas word nie, of dit wei nuttig toegepas kan word. Verder is gepoog om die beperkings van en noodsaaklikheid vir die toepassing van die maatstaf van doel in die belastingreg vas te stel. Dit blyk uit die ondersoek dat die toepassing van die maatstaf van doel by die toepassing van bepaalde belastingreëls nag nie gesuiwer is nie en dat dit lei tot regsonsekerheid en onbillikheid. Verder blyk dit duidelik uit die ondersoek dat die toepassing van die maatstaf van doel wei gesuiwer kan word deur die betekenisse van die begrippe, motief, doel en bedoeling te onderskei en gevolglik korrek toe te pas. In die laaste plek toon die ondersoek aan dat die toepassing van die maatstaf van doel in die belastingreg deur verskeie faktore beperk word, maar dat die toepassing daarvan om verskeie redes noodsaaklik is. Daar word aanbeveel dat die Wetgewer kennis moet neem van die betekenisse van die begrippe motief, doel en bedoeling en 'n vermenging daarvan by die formulering van belastingreëls moet vermy. Dit sal 'n bydrae lewer tot eenvoudiger interpretasie van die betrokke reëls asook 'n meer korrekte toepassing daarvan op die handelinge van die belastingpligtige. Verder behoort die howe nie die onderskeiding van motief, doel en bedoeling by die toepassing van die maatstaf van doel, by die uitleg van belastingreëls te vermy nie. Dit sal onsekerheid en onbillikheid met betrekking tot die toepassing van die betrokke reëls verhoed. ENGLISH : The Income Tax Law in South Africa requires that a taxpayer's actions or transactions are to be classified Qudged) with reference to various criteria. The Legislature requires the application of the criterium of purpose to classify a taxpayer's activities and transactions in terms of various tax rules. Even the Courts applied the criterium of purpose in the interpretation of various tax rules where the criteria has not been specifically required by the legislature. Various branches of the law distinguishes between motive, purpose and intention where the criteria of purpose or intention are required to classify activities. The study indicated that various learned writers are of the opinion that a similar distinction cannot be applied in the Income Tax Law of South Africa. The purpose of this study was to determine the meaning of motive, purpose and intention within the South African Income Tax Law by studying the meaning of the words as they are used in other branches of the law. In other words, the result of the study should indicate whether a similar distinction between motive, purpose and intention is applied in the Income Tax Law and if not, whether such a distinction can be applied in the Income Tax Law. Furthermore, the limitations and necessity of the application of the criteria of purpose in the Income Tax Law was determined. The study indicated that the application of the criterium of purpose in the interpretation of various tax rules had not been clearly distinguished and defined. This fact leads to uncertainty and unfairness in the application of these tax rules. It also became apparent that the application of the criteria of motive, purpose and intention could be more clearly defined and distincted in order to lead to more certain and fair application of income tax rules. Lastly, the study indicated that the application of the criteria of purpose and intention in the Income Tax Law are being limited by various factors but that the application thereof in the Income Tax Law are, because of various reasons, inevitable. It is proposed that the Legislature must take cognisance of the meaning of the criteria of motive, purpose and intention in other branches of the law and that the correct distinction in the formulating of tax rules must be applied. This will contribute to a more just interpretation of the various tax rules as well as a more proper application thereof in the classification of the taxpayer's actions or transactions. Furthermore, it is proposed that the Courts, in the interpretation of the various tax rules, should not avoid to distinguish between motive, purpose and intention. This will have the result that uncertainty and unfairness will be reduced in the application of the various tax rules. Copyright / Dissertation (MCom)--University of Pretoria, 2012. / Auditing / Unrestricted

No abstract available. Copyright / Dissertation (MPhil)--University of Pretoria, 2011. / Taxation / unrestricted

Tax avoidance through interest deductions has been highlighted internationally as a concern with the effect of eroding tax revenues of countries, including South Africa (SA). The evident cause of this concern is what is termed base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS) mainly orchestrated by multinational companies using aggressive tax planning schemes. Although the concern continues to exist, comprehensive measures are in place in SA such as the anti-avoidance rules and exchange control regulations to mitigate the concern. The study was undertaken to analyse the legislation on interest deductions in terms of the Income Tax Act No 58 of 1962 (‘the Act’) with particular focus on anti-avoidance. A number of issues pertaining to the operation of the provisions in the Act; administrative challenges as well the possible exploitation of loopholes within the provisions were identified. Furthermore, a comparative analysis conducted against Australia and the United Kingdom indicated that the measures adopted in SA are relatively similar, if not ahead. The effect the anti-avoidance measures have on the economic growth was considered. The results were positive in that the measures do not counteract the pursuit of economic growth. Lastly, the study assessed the position of SA against the internationally recommended best practice on the subject matter and it became evident that opportunities exist to improve the current measures applied in SA to mitigate the BEPS risks through interest deductions.