The aim of this collection of essays is to provide a detailed and critical commentary on and analysis of the legislation and case law relating to the impact of the 'business purposes test' on section 103(1) of the Income Tax Act. The Income Tax Act No. 58 of 162 and case law that are the subject of these essays were promulgated on or before 28 February 1999. / Thesis (M.Acc.)-University of Natal, Durban, 1999.

M.Comm. / Herstelwerk vorm 'n belangrike gedeelte van die koste-struktuur van ondernemers. Natuurlike verwering en agteruitgang het tot gevolg dat herstelwerk aan sekere bates gedoen word. Meeste persone het 'n persepsie wat herstelwerk verteenwoordig. Die persepsie van wat ondernemers beskou as herstelwerk is nie noodwendig in ooreenstemming met artikel 11(d) van die Wet nie asook toetste wat deur die howe neergele is nie. Ten einde 'n sinvolle uiteensetting te verskaf was dit nodig om die onderwerp in sinvolle komponente te verdeel. Die inleidende paragraaf tot artikel 11 is eers ontleed aangesien dit ook die inleidende paragraaf tot artikel 11(d) – wat handel oor herstelwerk -verteenwoordig. Vervolgens is artikel 11(d) van die Wet ontleed ten einde die studie in konteks te plaas. Die begrip van herstelkoste is daarna ontleed en 'n onderskeid is gemaak met faktore wat kan dui op 'n verbetering. Die invloed van koste op beslissings is ook ondersoek. Met betrekking tot die inleidende paragraaf van artikel 11 is gevind dat "belasbare inkomste" bereken word deur van "bruto inkomste" vrystellings (soos in artikel 10 van die Wet uiteengesit) of te trek en daarna die ander aftrekkings soos in die Wet uiteengesit. Een van hierdie aftrekkings is herstelwerk wat in artikel 11(d) van die Wet uiteengesit word en die onderwerp van hierdie studie is. Aangesien hierdie "belasbare inkomste" deur 'n "persoon" verdien moet word is hierdie begrip ontleed. Daar is gevind dat die begrip "persoon" 'n afdelingsraad, munisipale raad, dorpsbestuur of derglike gesag; 'n maatskappy (of beslote korporasie); enige liggaam van persone, 'n natuurlike persoon; 'n vereniging van persone; die boedel van 'n oorlede persoon; 'n insolvente boedel en 'n trust insluit. Voordat 'n aftrekking toegestaan kan word om "belasbare inkomste" te bereken moet 'n "persoon" 'n bedryf "beoefen". Daar is vasgestel dat beoefen `n daadwerklike optrede moet wees en dat die "persoon" homself daarop moet toele. In die studie is gevind dat die begrip "bedryf' baie wyd is en nie uitputtend is nie. Daar is wel 'n omskrywing in artikel 1 tot die Wet maar die vraag of 'n bedryf beoefen word moet op grond van die feite beslis word. Met betrekking tot artikel 11(d) is eerstens gevind dat "onkoste" en "uitgawes" dieselfde betekenis het. Daar is vervolgens bevind dat daar 'n onvoorwaardelike regsaanspreeklikheid in die jaar van aanslag moet wees voordat die onkoste as 'n aftrekking toegelaat sal word. Alhoewel daar nie hofsake is wat handel oor die betekenis van "eiendom" ingevolge die spesifieke bepalings van artikel 11(d) nie word die afleiding gemaak dat dit verwys na geboue. Dit is 'n vereiste dat die eiendom of vir bedryfsdoeleindes geokkupeer moet word Of die eiendom moet in staat wees om inkomste voor te bring.

The purpose of this study was to examine whether the general expenditure incurred by developers constructing residential units, whereby life rights are exchanged for interest free loans, are deductible in terms of the provisions of the Income Tax Act (58/1962). Furthermore to determine whether the judgement in CSARS v Brummeria Renaissance (Pty) Ltd and others, 2007 (4) All SA 1338 (SCA) 69 SATC 205, and its findings in law and of fact affects the deductibility of expenses incurred by developers, especially in relation to the “amount” and nature of the “amount” in the hands of the taxpayer. The research also sought to determine whether the accounting of amounts in life right exchange agreements, especially as relates to the quantification of such amount, assist in quantifying the amount for tax purposes. The research object was determined by critically analysing the relevant provisions of the ITA (58/1962) with reference to case law and commentators and a critical evaluation of Brummerria Renaissance case supra (2007:205) to determine its affect on the deductibility of the expenses relating to the quantum and nature of the benefit amount received under the life right. Furthermore, an evaluation was done of the relevant accounting standards in relation to the transactional facts to determine whether an alternative valuation model of the benefit is available. It was determined that firstly permissible and then prohibited deductions must be addressed in accordance with the ITA (58/1962). It was further evaluated whether the provision of the right of use, through the life right, can constitute an expense for the developer. It was concluded that incurring general expenses meet the requirements of section 11(a), subject to a single qualification, would be deductible. It was also submitted that the provision of the life right as expenditure should be permissible as deduction against income. However, in both these cases the deductibility in question was held to be subject to the amount received as envisaged in Brummeria Renaissance case supra (2007:205) being revenue in nature. The deductibility of the repair or preparation costs was also examined in terms of section 11(d). The distinction between repair and improvement was discussed and established. It was determined that the determination of when the “income is receivable” was critical in determining the deductibility. It was concluded that this requirement was met if the property was in a condition to receive such income irrespective of whether legal rights to such income had been established at such time that the expenses were incurred. The application of this section is also subject to the amount received, as envisaged in Brummeria Renaissance case supra (2007:205), being revenue in nature. The requirement of “income” is critical in the application of section 11(a) and section 11(d) of the ITA (58/1962), because if the amount is found to be capital in nature no deduction is permissible. The nature of the rights, timing of the accrual and the valuation method of the amount were not decided in the judgement in Brummeria Renaissance case supra (2007:205), and as a result, formed part of the research. The nature of the amount was analysed and it was concluded that the amount was income in nature. The various case law and commentators, including SARS’ IN 58, was also analysed to determine which valuation method of the benefit amount would be the most appropriate in the application of the provisions of the ITA (58/1962). To this extent it was submitted that three possible valuation methods could apply, namely the valuation of the benefit as arms length interest on the loan, the valuation of the benefit as the sale of a usufructuary interest or that the benefit amount could be represented as market related rentals in an arm’s length transaction. It was concluded that in order to determine the value and the timing of the benefit the most suitable valuation method would be to calculate interest on the face value of the loan using a market related interest rate. The benefit would be recognised over the term of the loan by calculating the interest on an annual basis on value of the loan. The various applicable accounting standards were evaluated to determine which best represents the measurement of the benefit as envisaged in Brummeria Renaissance case supra (2007:205). It was concluded that the most appropriate of the various possible accounting standards was IAS 32 which prescribed that the benefit should be determined and valued on a yearly basis in relation to the loan as a financial instrument. It was concluded that the basis for valuing and recognising the benefit for accounting purposes interrelates with the suggested accrual and timing thereof for tax purposes. AFRIKAANS : Die doel van die navorsing was om ondersoek in te stel of die algemene uitgawes aangegaan deur ontwikkelaars in die konstruksie van residensiële eenhede waar lewensregte geruil word vir rentevrye lenings, aftrekbaar sal wees in terme van die bepalings van die Inkomstebelastingwet (58/1962). Daar is verder ook ondersoek ingestel om vas te stel of die uitspraak in Kommisaris van die Suid Afrikaanse Inkomstediens v Brummeria Renaissance (Edms) Bpk en andere, 2007 (4) All SA 1338 (SCA) 69 SATC 205, die aftrekbaarheid van die uitgawes aangegaan deur die ontwikkelaars affekteer, veral in verband met die “bedrag” en aard van die “bedrag” in die hande van die belastingbetaler. Met die navorsing word daar bepaal of die rekeningkundige hantering van bedrae in lewensreg ruilooreenkomste, veral ten opsigte van die kwantifisering daarvan, kan bydrae tot die kwantifisering daarvan vir belastingdoeleindes. Die navorsingsdoelstelling is vasgestel deur die relevante bepalings van die Inkomstebelastingwet (58/1962) met verwysing na hofsake en kommentaar, ‘n kritiese evaluasie van Brummerria Renaissance saak supra (2007:205), om vas te stel wat die uitwerking daarvan is op die aftrekbaarheid van die uitgawes wat verband hou met die hoeveelheid en die aard van die voordeel bedrag ontvang in terme van die lewensreg, asook die evaluering van die relevante rekeningkundige standaarde ten opsigte van die feite van die transaksie om te bepaal of ‘n alternatiewe waardasie model van die voordeel beskikbaar is. Daar is besluit dat die aftrekkings wat eerstens toegelaat en dan verbied word aangespreek moet word in ooreenstemming met die Inkomstebelastingwet (58/1962). Daar is verder bepaal of die voorsiening van die reg om te gebruik deur middel van die lewensreg, ‘n uitgawe in die hande van die ontwikkelaar kan wees. Daar is tot die gevolgtrekking gekom dat die aangaan van algemene uitgawes voldoen aan die vereistes van artikel 11(a) en aftrekbaar is. Dit is ook vasgestel dat die voorsiening van die lewensreg as uitgawe aftrekbaar sal wees teen inkomste. In albei hierdie gevalle is die aftrekbaarheid onderworpe daaraan dat die bedrag ontvang soos vasgestel in Brummeria Renaissance saak supra (2007:205) inkomste van aard is. Die aftrekbaarheid van die herstel- of voorbereidingskostes is ook ondersoek in terme van artikel 11(d). Die onderskeid tussen herstel en verbetering is bespreek en bepaal. Daar is vasgestel dat die bepaling van wanneer die “inkomste ontvangbaar” is, krities is in die bepaling van die aftrekbaarheid daarvan. Daar is tot die gevolgtrekking gekom dat die vereiste nagekom is as die eiendom in ‘n toestand is om inkomste te ontvang ongeag of die reg tot die inkomste bepaal is teen die tyd dat die uitgawes aangegaan is. Die toepassing van hierdie artikel is ook onderworpe daaraan dat die bedrag ontvang soos bepaal in Brummeria Renaissance saak supra (2007:205) inkomste van aard is. Die vereiste van “inkomste” is krities in die toepassing van artikel 11(a) en artikel 11(d) van die Inkomstebelastingwet (58/1962) omrede geen aftrekking toegelaat sal word indien die bedrag kapitaal van aard is nie. Geen besluit is geneem oor die aard van die regte, die tydstip van die toevalling en die waardasiemetode van die bedrag in die uitspraak in Brummeria Renaissance saak supra (2007:205), en as gevolg daarvan vorm dit deel van die navorsing. ‘n Analise van die aard van die bedrag is gedoen en daar is tot die gevolgtrekking gekom dat die bedrag inkomste van aard is. Die verskillende hofsake en kommentaar, insluitende SARS se IN 58, is ook analiseer om te bepaal watter waardasiemetode van die voordeel mees gepas sal wees in die toepassing van die Inkomstebelastingwet (58/1962). Tot hierdie mate is dit aanvaar dat daar drie moontlike waardasiemetodes van toepassing kan wees, naamlik die waardasie van die voordeel op die lening in ‘n armslengte transaksie, die waardasie van die voordeel as die verkoop van ‘n vruggebruik of die voordeel van die bedrag kan verteenwoordig word deur die markverwante huurinkomste in ‘n armslengte transaksie. In bepaling van die waarde en die tydstip van die voordeel is die gevolgtrekking gemaak dat die mees gepaste waardasiemetode sal wees om rente op die sigwaarde van die lening te bereken deur ‘n markverwantrentekoers te gebruik. Die voordeel sal dan erken word oor die tydperk van die lening deur die die rente jaarliks te bereken op die waarde van die lening. Die verskillende rekeningkundige moontlikhede is ondersoek om die metode te bepaal wat waardasie van die voordeel soos in Brummeria Renaissance saak supra (2007:205) die beste verteenwoordig. Daar is tot die gevolgtrekking gekom dat die mees gepaste rekeningkundige standpunt IAS 32 is waarvolgens die voordeel op ‘n jaarlikse basis bepaal word in verhouding met die lening as ’n finansiële instrument. Daar is tot die gevolgtrekking gekom dat die metode van die waardasie en erkenning van die voordeel vir rekeningkundige doeleindes regstreeks verband hou met die voorgestelde toevalling en tydstip daarvan vir belastingdoeleindes. Copyright / Dissertation (MCom)--University of Pretoria, 2012. / Taxation / unrestricted

The purpose of the study was to critically analyse sections 15 and 36 of the South African Income Tax Act which deals with capital allowances for mining taxpayers from an alluvial diamond miners’ perspective. The South African analysis was also compared to that of Canada and Namibia. In the analysis it was found that the ring fencing provisos in section 36 is unfair towards the alluvial diamond mine due to the potential loss of capital cost allowances and that there are grey areas in this proviso that may lead to disputes between SARS and the taxpayer. It was also found that the cross over from prospecting to mining activities in relation to alluvial diamond mining presents a grey area which might lead to disputes between the tax payer and SARS. It was also found that there is no case law, SARS interpretation notes or practise notes on the application of these sections to provide certainty as to the tax payers’ position. It was recommended that SARS and treasury evaluate and address the identified grey areas and short comings in the current legislation and practises to ensure a fair and equitable tax dispensation for the alluvial diamond miners. Copyright / Dissertation (MCom)--University of Pretoria, 2009. / Taxation / unrestricted

For a taxpayer to be able to carry forward a balance of an assessed loss from a prior year, there are two conditions which have to be fulfilled according to section 20 of the South African Income Tax Act, 58 of 1962 namely: <ul><li> The taxpayer has to be carrying on a trade and, </li><li> Income has to be generated from the trade. </li></ul> The onus to prove that both these requirements have been met rests on the taxpayer in terms of section 82 of the Income Tax Act. This study looks at the second requirement which has been a contentious issue as far as its interpretation is concerned. The first point of departure was to analyse the meaning of “income” in this requirement as there have been conflicting views between the South African Revenue Service’s Interpretation Note No. 33 and various High Court and Supreme Court of Appeal court cases. The area of concern is whether “income” in this context should have its ordinary meaning per the Income Tax Act of “gross income less exempt income” or whether it should be “pre-tax profit” or “taxable income”. The implementation of the “income from trade” requirement often leads to anomalies, unintended results and uncertainty with the application of section 20 of the Income Tax Act. This study takes a look at the “income from trade” requirement and whether the way it is implemented makes good tax policy by analysing the arguments for and against the retention of this requirement. The study also addresses the issue as to whether the use of the purposive interpretation, as opposed to the grammatical interpretation, of section 20 of the Income Tax Act could possibly be followed in cases where the implementation of the “income from trade requirement” leads to anomalies, unintended results and uncertainty with the correct application of section 20. / Dissertation (LLM)--University of Pretoria, 2013. / Mercantile Law / unrestricted

LL.M. (Tax Law) / This dissertation seeks to analyse the phrase “carrying on a trade” in the context of South African income tax law. South African income tax law places emphasis on the phrase “carrying on a trade”. The Income Tax Act 58 of 1962 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) makes reference to the phrase in several different contexts. Trading is relevant to the tax treatment of both income (the amount that falls in the gross income of the taxpayer) and expenditure (the amount that qualifies for deduction). The importance of “carrying on a trade” within the income tax law can be seen in light of the following provisions of the Act that form the crux of this dissertation: section 1 defines trade; section 7 provides for the treatment of income from the trade of spouses married in community of property; section 11 deals with deductions; section 20(1) deals with setting off of assessed losses; section 23(g) deals with deductions not permitted in terms of the Act; and section 24H deals with the treatment of income derived by a partner carrying on a trade in a partnership. It is important to note that though it is not explicitly mentioned in the Act, the revenue receipts or accruals arising out of trade are included in the taxpayer's gross income provided that the trade constitutes a scheme of profit-making. Section 11(a) of the Act contains what is often described as the general deduction

M.Com. (Taxation) / Please refer to full text to view abstract

No abstract / Mini Dissertation (LLM)--University of Pretoria, 2017. / Mercantile Law / LLM / Unrestricted

Thesis (MAcc)--Stellenbosch University, 2015. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: Section 24C of the Income Tax Act No. 58 of 1962 (‘the Act’) provides for a deduction of future expenditure that will be incurred by the taxpayer in the performance of his obligations under a contract from which the taxpayer derived income. Due to uncertainties regarding the meaning of certain words and phrases used in section 24C, the first aim of this assignment was to determine the meaning of the word ‘expenditure’ and the phrase ‘will be incurred’ as used in section 24C. The second aim was to establish how a taxpayer will prove with certainty that he will incur future expenditure in the performance of his obligations under a contract. This was done by discussing the effect of contractual terms and other circumstances and by taking into account certain additional guidelines regarding the interpretation of section 24C provided for in Interpretation Note: No. 78 (‘IN 78’). It was established that the word ‘expenditure’ means the amount of money spent, including the disbursement of other assets with a monetary value. The word ‘expenditure’ also specifically includes the voluntary payments and disbursements of assets. The word ‘expenditure’ can also include a loss if the word ‘loss’ can be equated to the word ‘expenditure’. The phrase ‘will be incurred’ implies that the taxpayer will, in a subsequent year of assessment, have an unconditional obligation to pay for expenditure, which must arise from the taxpayer’s obligations to perform under the contract. Contractual terms and other circumstances can indicate whether there is certainty that future expenditure will be incurred as aforementioned. Conditions and warranties are contractual terms that indicate that there is uncertainty regarding the taxpayer’s obligations to perform under the contract. A time clause in a contract can indicate that there is certainty regarding the taxpayer’s obligations to perform under the contract. Similar contracts with similar conditional obligations to perform cannot be grouped together in order to determine the probability, and thus the certainty, that future expenditure will be incurred in the performance of the taxpayer’s obligations under a contract. The probability that a taxpayer will perform his unconditional obligation under the contract must, however, be proved in order to demonstrate that there is certainty regarding the incurral of the future expenditure. IN 78 does not specify whether a loss which can, in certain circumstances, be equated to the word ‘expenditure’, is deductible under section 24C. This should be clarified. The new undefined phrases (a high degree of probability, inevitability, certainty and potentially contractually obligatory), as used in IN 78, might cause confusion when interpreting section 24C. These phrases should be defined and it should be explained how the high degree will be measured. Lastly, is was shown that an anomaly occurs regarding trading stock at hand at the end of a year of assessment, which will be utilised in a subsequent year of assessment in the performance of the taxpayer’s obligations under a contract. Such trading stock does not represent ‘future expenditure’ and must be excluded from the section 24C allowance. However, due to the interplay between section 24C and section 22(1), the taxpayer does not receive any tax relief for the expenditure actually incurred to acquire the closing trading stock in the year in which such trading stock is acquired. It is, therefore, questioned whether the established interpretation of section 24C is in agreement with the Legislator’s original intention with section 24C namely, to match income received under a contract with the related deductible expenditure. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Artikel 24C van die Inkomstebelastingwet No. 58 van 1962 (‘die Wet’) voorsien ʼn aftrekking vir toekomstige onkoste wat deur die belastingpligtige aangegaan sal word in die nakoming van sy verpligtinge ingevolge ʼn kontrak waaruit hy inkomste verkry het. As gevolg van onsekerhede ten opsigte van die betekenis van sekere woorde en frases wat in artikel 24C gebruik word, was die eerste doelstelling van hierdie navorsingswerkstuk om die betekenis van die woord ‘onkoste’ en die frase ‘aangegaan sal word’, soos wat dit in artikel 24C gebruik word, te bepaal. Die tweede doelstelling was om vas te stel hoe 'n belastingpligtige met sekerheid sal bewys dat hy toekomstige onkoste sal aangaan in die nakoming van sy verpligtinge ingevolge ʼn kontrak. Dit is gedoen deur die effek van kontraksbedinge en ander omstandighede te bespreek en deur sekere bykomende riglyne ten opsigte van die interpretasie van artikel 24C, soos vervat in Interpretasienota No. 78 (‘IN 78’), in ag te neem. Daar is vasgestel dat die woord ‘onkoste’ die bedrag van geld wat bestee word, insluitend die uitbetaling van ander bates met 'n geldwaarde, beteken. Die woord ‘onkoste’ sluit ook spesifiek vrywillige betalings en uitbetalings van bates in. Die woord ‘onkoste’ kan ook 'n verlies insluit, indien die woord ‘verlies’ gelyk gestel kan word aan die woord ‘onkoste’. Die frase ‘aangegaan sal word’ impliseer dat die belastingpligtige, in 'n daaropvolgende jaar van aanslag, 'n onvoorwaardelike verpligting sal hê om vir onkostes te betaal. Hierdie onkostes moet ontstaan weens die belastingpligtige se verpligtinge ingevolge die kontrak. Kontraksbedinge en ander omstandighede kan aandui of daar sekerheid is dat die toekomstige onkoste, soos hierbo genoem, aangegaan sal word. Voorwaardes en waarborge is kontraksbedinge wat daarop dui dat daar onsekerheid is rakende die belastingpligtige se verpligtinge om ingevolge die kontrak op te tree. ʼn Tydsklousule in 'n kontrak kan aandui dat daar sekerheid is rakende die belastingpligtige se nakoming van sy verpligtinge ingevolge die kontrak. Soortgelyke kontrakte, met soortgelyke voorwaardelike verpligtinge kan nie saam gegroepeer word ten einde te bepaal of dit waarskynlik, en gevolglik seker is dat toekomstige onkoste in die nakoming van ʼn belastingpligtige se verpligtinge ingevolge die kontrak aangaan sal word nie. Die waarskynlikheid dat 'n belastingpligtige sy onvoorwaardelike verpligting ingevolge die kontrak sal nakom moet egter bewys word ten einde aan te dui dat daar sekerheid is dat toekomstige onkoste aangegaan sal word. IN 78 spesifiseer nie of 'n verlies wat, in sekere omstandighede, gelyk gestel kan word aan die woord ‘onkoste’, ingevolge artikel 24C aftrekbaar is nie. Duidelikheid hieromtrent moet verskaf word. Die nuwe, ongedefinieerde frases ('n hoë graad van waarskynlikheid, onafwendbaarheid, sekerheid en potensieel kontraktueel verpligtend (vry vertaal)), soos in IN 78 gebruik, kan moontlik verwarring veroorsaak wanneer artikel 24C geïnterpreteer word. Hierdie frases moet gedefinieer word en daar moet verduidelik word hoe ʼn hoë graad gemeet gaan word. Laastens blyk dit dat 'n teenstrydigheid ontstaan ten opsigte van handelsvoorraad op hande aan die einde van 'n jaar van aanslag, wat in 'n daaropvolgende jaar van aanslag deur die belastingpligtige in die nakoming van sy verpligtinge ingevolge 'n kontrak gebruik sal word. Sodanige handelsvoorraad verteenwoordig nie ‘toekomstige onkoste’ nie en moet by die artikel 24C toelaag uitgesluit word. Die belastingpligte ontvang egter, weens die wisselwerking tussen artikel 24C en artikel 22(1), nie ʼn belastingverligting vir die onkoste werklik aangegaan in die jaar waarin sodanige handelsvoorraad verkry is nie. Dit word dus bevraagteken of die bewese interpretasie van artikel 24C in ooreenstemming is met die Wetgewer se oorspronklike bedoeling met artikel 24C, naamlik, om inkomste ontvang ingevolge ʼn kontrak met die verwante aftrekbare uitgawes te paar.

There is an increasing focus on environmental conservation worldwide, evidenced by such events as the signing of the Kyoto Protocol by developing countries, and by consumers becoming more environmentally conscious. The purpose of this study was to investigate how government could, through tax law, incentivise businesses to invest in environmental conservation. One of the major South African industries contributing to the GDP is the wine industry. South Africa, new in world wine production, is ranked among the top 10 wineproducing countries, together with countries such as Australia. The average foreign consumer is more environmentally conscious, which means that South African wineries also have to become environmentally aware to ensure that their products are competitive in the foreign markets. A negative aspect of investing in environmental conservation is that a substantial upfront capital investment is normally required, which could lead to wineries not investing unless they can see a significant benefit as a result. Given this, the purpose of this study was to determine whether or not there is an income tax benefit for wineries when investing in environmental conservation in terms of the Income Tax Act no.58 of 1962 (hereafter “the Act”). Government can, through tax law, either reward people for doing the right thing or punish them by imposing taxes for doing the wrong thing. The sections of the Act that have been identified as incentivising environmental conservation are Sections 11D, 12B, 12K, 12L, 37B and 37C, all with specific requirements before the incentives can be used. The study contains an analysis of the type of environmental conservation that wineries can carry out and considers whether those conservation activities would enable them to use the incentives stated in the Act. Some of the environmental conservation activities identified that wineries could perform include the use of solar power to minimise their energy consumption, thereby reducing their impact on the environment. Further, there are industrial codes which encourage recycling and waste management, certain aspects of which would enable a winery to use some of the sections in the Act. The incentives available in the Income Tax Acts of other wine-producing countries, such as France, Australia and the Oregon state in the USA, were also reviewed to see how the incentives in their Acts compare with those in the South African Income Tax Act. Lastly, a limited empirical study was conducted to determine the wineries’ perspective in respect of the incentives indicated in the Act and whether or not they find that the incentives encourage them to carry out further environmental conservation. / MCom (South African and International Taxation), North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2015