The aim of this technical report is to serve as a handy expose of the relevant provisions of various statutes for attorneys, accountants and other advisors who have to deal with the relevant tax laws affecting the establishment, utilisation and dissolution of trusts. The South African Acts which are the subject of this technical report were promulgated on or before 31 December 1998. They are as follows: • The Income Tax Act, No. 58 of 1962. • The Transfer Duty Act, No. 40 of 1949. • The Value Added Tax Act, No. 89 of 1991. • The Estate Duty Act, No. 45 of 1955. The principal South African taxes dealt with in this report are as follows: • Normal Tax. • Donations Tax. • Transfer Duty. • Value Added Tax. • Estate Duty. / Thesis (LL.M.)-University of Natal, Durban, 1999.

This treatise tests the effectiveness of withholding taxes imposed by the South African tax authorities with respect to amounts paid from a South African source to a non-resident in respect of interest, royalties and foreign entertainers and sportspersons. The first research objective discusses the alignment of the meaning of words and phrases in both the domestic law of South Africa and Double Tax Agreements (DTA.) The second issue outlines whether the DTA supports the domestic law through the waiving of tax claims in favour of the country of source. In last instance the attribution of income is discussed. The interpretation attached to the words for the purpose of levying normal tax, serves as the methodology for identifying inconsistencies with the levying of withholding tax. The wider scope of withholding taxes with respect to the meaning of ‘interest’, ‘royalties’ as well as ‘foreign entertainer and sportsperson’ misaligns with the corresponding meaning of it in the DTA. This creates the risk that amounts paid to non-residents will either not be subjected to withholding tax in the source state or that the income will be taxable in the resident state as a result of the application of other articles of the DTA. DTA’s concluded between South Africa and other countries are based on the OECD Model Tax Convention. These DTA’s tend to favour the residence state with respect to the waiving of tax claims. The source state’s right to collect withholding tax on income from royalties and interest is prevented if the foreign person is physically present in South Africa for more than 183 days and if the interest/royalty payment is effectively connected with a permanent establishment in South Africa. The domestic law and DTA are misaligned with respect to the attribution of interest and royalty income since the recipient of the income for the purpose of the domestic law is not necessarily the beneficial owner of the debt claim or intellectual property. It can therefore be recommended that South Africa must renegotiate DTA’s to favour taxation in the source state. Withholding tax provisions must also be redrafted to align them with the DTA meaning.

South Africa's right to tax the income of a non-resident is determined in terms of the South African "source rules" established by court decisions in relation to the imposition of tax in terms of the Income Tax Act. Unless a non-resident's income is captured by the South African "source rules" (on the basis that hi slits income is derived from a South African source), South Africa would have no right to tax such income, even if such non-resident creates a permanent establishment in South Africa by performing business activities within South Africa which could be considered essential (but not dominant) in nature. In such scenario the activities performed by the non-resident in South Africa may utilise the natural resources and the infrastructure of South Africa, but the South African fiscus would be deprived of the right to any tax revenues attributable to the income produced partly by such activities within South Africa. The South African "source rules" refer only to the main or dominant activities giving rise to the income for the purpose of determining the source of such income (and accordingly the right to tax such income). On the other hand, the "permanent establishment rules" as set out under the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development Model Tax Convention on Income and on Capital refer to all the taxpayer's essential business activities for the purpose of determining whether or not such activities create a pennanent establishment. The result of the narrow nature of the South African "source rules" is that, under certain circumstances, the South African fiscus would not necessarily be granted the right to tax all income produced partly within South Africa. The research demonstrated that incorporating the principles underlying the "pennanent establishment rules" into South African legislation would be a reasonable and logical solution to the problem of detennining the source of income. In so doing, the South African "source rules" would determine the source of income, and consequently South Africa's taxing rights, with reference to the essential business activities giving rise to such income. In such case South Africa would be afforded the right to tax the income of a non-resident in the event that it performs any of its essential business activities within South Africa, albeit not the dominant or main activities giving rise to the income.

M.Comm. (International Taxation) / Under the South African income tax system, para 12 of the Eighth Schedule states that, when a person ceases to be a resident, he/she is deemed to have disposed of his/her worldwide assets (subject to certain exclusions) at market value the day before he/she terminates his/her residency. Such deemed disposal triggers a capital gains tax charge. Commonly referred to as the ‘exit tax’, it has been in place since the introduction of capital gains tax on 1 October 2001. A recent ruling in the Supreme Court of Appeals found that according to article 13 of a double tax agreement (hereafter “DTA”) based on the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Model Tax Convention, a deemed disposal is regarded as an alienation of property, and (provided the exclusions do not apply) exclusive taxing rights are given to the Resident State. This has the effect to include the deemed disposal rules relating to exit taxes under this article and potentially override the application of an exit tax under domestic legislation. The override of exit taxes based on a DTA can deprive a country of its fair share of taxes and there is no protection for a country’s tax base. It is important to understand the exit tax and the interaction with DTAs to ensure that there is fairness and equity in the South African income tax system.

The objective of the study was to investigate the right of the South African Government to tax the income earned by a foreign company when rendering services in South Africa to a South African associated enterprise on a recurrent basis, together with the right to tax the amounts paid to the employees of the permanent establishment for services rendered in South Africa. At the same time the research investigated whether the services rendered by a foreign company to an associated enterprise in South Africa on a recurrent basis would constitute a permanent establishment, as this is essential before South Africa may tax either the foreign company or the employees of the permanent establishment (where such employees are not resident in South Africa).The research was conducted by means of a critical analysis of documentary data and data from a limited number of interviews with academics and the authors of textbooks and articles. In order to limit the scope of the research, a number of assumptions were made. Conflicting viewpoints underlying certain of these assumptions were discussed. Some of the important conclusions reached are that the provisions of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties should be taken into account when interpreting South African legislation (including Double Tax Agreements), and that the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) Commentary may be relied upon when interpreting OECD based Double Tax Agreements in South Africa. No conclusion was reached on whether to apply an ambulatory or a static basis of interpreting the OECD Commentary, however. The final conclusion of the research is that the services rendered in South Africa on a recurrent basis would be geographically and commercially coherent and consequently meet the "location test'. It is clear that as the services are rendered regularly and recurrently, they would be regarded as having the necessary permanence and would meet the 'duration test'. The place of business would therefore be regarded as being fixed (having the necessary degree of permanence). As the services would be rendered at the place of business of the South African entity, they would be regarded as being rendered 'through' the place of business and the foreign entity would be regarded as having a permanent establishment in South Africa (as defined in Article 5(1) of the OECD Model Tax Convention}. The South African Government would therefore be entitled to tax the income attributable to the permanent establishment and the income earned by the non resident employees, who rendered services in South Africa for the permanent establishment. Once the entitlement to tax exists, South African legislative rules determine how South Africa proceeds to tax the income.

"Mining operations" and "mining" are defined in s 1 of the Income Tax Act (ITA). A concept that is of great significance to this definition is the matter of when a mineral is won and the related question of when does the mining process end and the process of manufacture commences. Case law has not established a definitive point that can be used by the mining taxpayer to determine where the mining process ends for income tax purposes. The Supreme Court of Appeal was presented with the perfect opportunity in the Foskor1 case to clearly define the boundaries between these processes. Unfortunately, the court did not seize this opportunity to provide legal certainty. The significance of the distinction lies in the fact that a mining taxpayer is allowed to claim accelerated capital allowances. The objective of these allowances is to provide tax relief to the mining taxpayer taking the immense risk of investing billions of rands in capital expenditure. The capital expenditure incurred will also result in direct foreign investment. This in turn will result in economic growth and job creation. Currently, there is no legal certainty as to which processes will qualify as mining operations for income tax purposes. This may result in mining taxpayers being hesitant to incur capital expenditure as the risk relating to a project would have increased. The accelerated capital allowances may therefore not serve their intended purpose. The gross domestic product (GDP) contribution from gold mining has been decreasing in the last number of years, but this decrease has to a large extent been offset by an increase in the downstream or beneficiated minerals industry. This industry has also been identified by Government as a growth sector. The downstream or beneficiated mineral industry may not be catered for in the current definition of "mining operations" and "mining" and may therefore not qualify for beneficial tax allowances. It is therefore proposed that the term "won" as used in the definition of "mining operations" and "mining" should be defined in s 1 of the ITA as follows: A mineral is "won" when all the requisite and necessary processes, including, amongst other things, refinement, beneficiation, smelting, separation, have been undertaken to the mineral to render it saleable in an open and general market. This extension will provide legal certainty to a mining taxpayer and will ensure that South Africa obtains direct foreign investment and maximum value for its minerals. This will contribute to economic growth for South Africa's developing economy and result in job creation.

This treatise was undertaken to critically analyse the new general anti avoidance rules (new GAAR) as set out in sections 80A to 80L of the Income Tax Act1. A discussion on the difference between tax evasion and tax avoidance was performed in the first chapter. The goals of this treatise were then set out. An analysis of the requirements for the application of the new GAAR was performed in the second chapter. The courts have historically reviewed the circumstances surrounding an arrangement when determining whether tax avoidance has occurred. The new GAAR requires the individual steps of an arrangement to be reviewed in isolation. Secondly, the courts have historically held that the purpose test, when determining the taxpayer‘s purpose, was subjective. The wording of the new GAAR indicates that this test is now objective. Thirdly, the courts have historically viewed the abnormality of an arrangement based of the surrounding circumstances. The wording of the new GAAR requires an objective view of the arrangement. An analysis of the secondary provisions contained in sections 80I, 80B and 80J of the new GAAR was performed in the third chapter. With regards to section 80B, it was submitted that the Commissioner should issue an Interpretation Note detailing all the methods ―he deems appropriate.

Income tax is levied upon a taxpayer’s taxable income. Various steps are taken in order to arrive at the taxpayer’s taxable income. The starting point when calculating taxable income is determining the taxpayer’s ‘gross income’. ‘Gross income’ is defined in terms of section 1 of the Act. Various terms within the gross income definition are not clearly defined, except in the case of a ‘resident’. Even in the case of the definition of a ‘resident’, the aspect of ‘ordinarily resident’ is not defined and nor is the ‘place of effective management’. The following components fall within the definition of ‘gross income’: • The total amount in cash or otherwise; • received by or accrued to, or in favour of, a person; • from anywhere, in the case of a person who is a resident; • from a South African source (or deemed source), in the case of a non-resident; • other than receipts or accruals of a capital nature. The ‘total amount’ in ‘cash or otherwise’ is the first step when determining the taxable income of a taxpayer for a particular year of assessment. Gross income only arises if an amount is received or has accrued; this amount need not be in the form of money but must have a money value. The next component, ‘received by or accrued to’, is related to time and implies that a taxpayer should include amounts that have been ‘received by’, as well as amounts that have ‘accrued to’ him during the year of assessment. ‘Resident’ and ‘non-resident’ unlike the other components, are defined in terms of section 1 of the Income Tax Act. There are two rules used to determine whether natural persons are residents, these are: • To determine whether natural persons are ‘ordinarily resident’; or • where the natural person is not an ‘ordinarily resident’, the ‘physical presence test’ will be applied. ‘Source’ means origin and not place; it is therefore the ‘originating cause of the receipt of the money’. There is no single definition for the word ‘source’ as circumstances may differ in various cases. The facts of each case must be analysed in order to determine the actual source of income for that particular case. The last component of the definition of ‘gross income’ is the exclusion of ‘receipts and accruals of a capital nature’. The Act does not define the meaning of ‘capital nature’ but does indicate that receipts or accruals of a capital nature are, with certain exceptions, not included in ‘gross income’. Receipts or accruals that are not of a capital nature is known as ‘revenue’ and subjected to tax. This study is primarily aimed at an examination of court cases related to the various components falling within the definition of ‘gross income’.

M.Com. / Please refer to full text to view abstract

Damit bei Wegfall einer Person deren Rechts- und Pflichtenstellung weder untergeht noch herrenlos wird, ordnet das zivilrechtliche Gesamtrechtsnachfolgeprinzip den Übergang des Vermögens vom Rechtsvorgänger auf den Gesamtrechtsnachfolger an. In den verwaltungsrechtlichen Gesetzen fehlen derartige allgemeine Regelungen. Dabei ist auch im Hinblick auf verwaltungsrechtliche, insbesondere einkommensteuerrechtliche Positionen darüber zu entscheiden, ob diese mit dem Rechtsvorgänger untergehen oder noch dessen Vermögen beeinflussen oder unmittelbar dem Gesamtrechtsnachfolger zuzurechnen sind. Gerade ein und derselbe einkommensteuerrelevante Umstand kann bei Rechtsvorgänger und Gesamtrechtsnachfolger zu ganz unterschiedlichen Folgen führen. Im ersten, allgemeinen Teil der Arbeit wird ein System erarbeitet, mit dessen Hilfe über das Schicksal verwaltungs- einschließlich steuerrechtlicher Positionen bei Gesamtrechtsnachfolge entschieden werden kann. Im zweiten, einkommensteuerrechtlichen Teil folgt die Probe aufs Exempel: Fallgruppenweise wird untersucht, wie sich der Erbfall als der Urtyp der Gesamtrechtsnachfolge auf die Einkommensteuer des Rechtsvorgängers und des Gesamtrechtsnachfolgers auswirkt. Behandelt werden die „fertigen“ Ansprüche aus dem Einkommensteuerschuldverhältnis bei ledigem und verheiratetem Erblasser sowie die Einkünfte einschließlich der Verluste des Erblassers. Ein besonderes Augenmerk wird auf die sog. unfertigen Rechtslagen gelegt, insbesondere die sog. nachträglichen Einkünfte bei gespaltener Tatbestandsverwirklichung, die sog. stillen Reserven bei Wirtschaftsgütern des Betriebsvermögens, die Wertsteigerungen im Privatvermögen einschließlich Anschaffungsvorgang und vom Rechtsvorgänger ausgelöster Fristen, schließlich auch die einkommensteuerrechtlichen Wahlrechte.