M.Comm. / Due to uncertainties experienced while working for the South African Revenue Services and the fact that there are no specific sections in the Income Tax Act no. 58 of 1962 dealing with interest, foreign exchange and bad and doubtful debts of commercial banks there were a need to undertake a study. The study therefore undertakes an examination to determine if the existing sections of the Income Tax Act dealing with interest, foreign exchange and bad and doubtful debts are enough legislation to deal with the interest, foreign exchange and bad and doubtful debts of commercial banks. The study also try to clear all existing uncertainties experienced and mentioned in this study. The study can be divided into the following four parts: A literature study of the definition of "bank" and "banking operations", in terms of history and current legislation. A study of the definition of "interest" and "finance charges", in terms of sections of the Income Tax Act, Act no. 58 of 1962 and applicable court cases. The chapter also concentrates on the application of section 24J of the Income Tax Act on the interest-transactions of commercial banks as well as the identification of any short falls of the section. Before interest can be treated in terms of section 24J of the Income Tax Act, the source of the interest will have to be in South Africa. General sourse principles applicable to commercial banks as well as the deductability of interest expenses when expenced to generate exempt income will therefore also be covered in this chapter. A study of the application of section 241 of the Income Tax Act dealing with the foreign exchange of commercial banks. An examination of the way commercial banks should treat their bad and doubtful debts and the factors taken into account in court decisions relating thereto. The most important activities of a bank are identified in this study as the acceptance of deposits, the provision of credit, rendering of financial services and the trade in exchange and the utilisation of money and interest received. In terms of section 24J of the Income Tax Act, interest include finance charges, premiums or disconto's, all interests and the difference between all amounts payable or receivable in terms of a sale and leaseback agreement. It was found that all the interest of a commercial bank are included in the definition of interest and all the transactions of a commercial bank are treated in terms of section 24J of the Income Tax Act for income tax purposes. Section 241 of the Income Tax Act focuses on foreign exchange transactions and are found to be enough legislation for the foreign exchange transactions of commercial banks. Although bad and doubtful debts are not part of the activities of a commercial bank they are part of the uncertainties experienced while working for the South African Revenue Services. During the study it was found that doubtful debts can not be deducted in terms of section 11(a) of the Income Tax Act but only in terms of section 11(j) of the Income Tax Act. It is practice for the South African Revenue Services to only allows 25% of the full amount of doubtful debts, but as this discretion is subject to objection and appeal, the bank is entitled to claim a higher percentage as a deduction if they can provide proveto justify a higher deduction. It was also found that commercial banks can claim their bad debts in term of section 11(a) of the Income Tax Act.

Submitted in fulfillment of the requirements of the Degree of Doctor of Technology: Business Administration, Durban University of Technology, 2012. / In conversation, people often base their arguments on the assumption that the knowledge that one has about a subject influences one’s attitude about that subject. From this they deduce that education would alter the attitude that people have towards that subject; taxation is no different. Its complexity and equity are often used as major points of discussion. This researcher chose to study income tax to determine if the knowledge that South Africans have of taxation in general influences their attitude towards taxation. It also determined which biographical details of people in South African influence their knowledge of, and their attitudes towards income tax. It also tried to lay a foundation for future students in this field broad field of accounting who may continue this investigation so as to build a knowledge base of the subjects in the accounting fields. A questionnaire was designed by asking registered master’s students in taxation to determine the major questions to be asked about the various taxation acts to establish their knowledge and attitudes. The additional information about other types of taxation was to be used in future research. These questions were discussed by all full-time staff and the questionnaire was limited to 20 questions in each category. A pilot study was then undertaken after which questions were further refined or deleted. The population consisted of all the people living in South Africa. Within each of the nine provinces in South Africa a convenience sample was chosen. To each of these members of the sample a self-administered questionnaire was given. The raw data was captured using SPSS and then analysed extensively. The results showed that knowledge of income tax was affected by age, race, and level of education, type of occupation the person is in, the province a person lived in and the income they earned. Attitudes towards income tax were affected by age, race, occupation of the person, the province they come from and the income they earned. The research indicated that there was relationship of 40 to 49 percent between the various biographical details of people in South African and the knowledge that they had of various sections of income tax act. There was also a 29 to 33 percent relationship between the biographical details of people in South Africa and the attitudes they have towards various statements about income tax. There was a 20 to 30 percent relationship between the knowledge that respondents had of income tax and their attitude towards income tax.

Thesis (MComm)--Stellenbosch University, 2006. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Hierdie werkstuk begin deur te ondersoek watter rol rekeningkundige beginsels en praktyk tot op datum by die uitleg van die inkomstebelastingwetgewing in Suid-Afrika gespeel het. Die gevolgtrekking word gemaak dat rekeningkundige beginsels 'n baie beperkte rei gespeel het. Die beginsels van wetsuitleg word dan ondersoek en die gevolgtrekking word gemaak dat daar wei ruimte vir rekeningkundige beginsels en praktyk is om 'n meer uitgebreide rol in die uitleg van die inkomstebelastingwetgewing, en meer spesifiek die bruto inkomste-omskrywing en die algemene aftrekkingsformule, te speel. Die werkstuk oorweeg dan die rol wat rekeningkundige beginsels en praktyk in die uitleg van die inkomstebelastingwetgewing in beide Australie en die Verenigde Koninkryk gespeel het. Die gevolgtrekking word gemaak dat rekeningkundige praktyk in beide hierdie jurisdiksies 'n meer uitgebreide rei in die uitleg van inkomstebelastingwetgewing as in Suid-Afrika gespeel het. Die mening word uitgespreek dat Suid-Afrika baat kan vind deur 'n soortgelyke benadering te volg as wat in bogenoemde jurisdiksies gevolg word. Die werkstuk sluit dan af deur die voor- en nadele van 'n stelsel te ondersoek waar die belasbare inkomste en rekeningkundige inkomste ooreenstem. Die gevolgtrekking word gemaak dat 'n mate van ooreenstemming aan te bevel is, maar dat volkome ooreenstemming nie sinvol is nie. Die inagneming van rekeningkundige beginsels in die uitleg van inkomstebelastingwetgewing kan bydra om die optimale graad van ooreenstemming te bereik. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: Traditionaly accounting principles and practice played a very limited role in the interpretation of the income tax legislation in South Africa. This study starts off by investigating the role that accounting principles and practice played to date in the interpretation of the income tax legislation in South Africa. The conclusion is reached that accounting principles played a limited role. The principles of interpretation of legislation is then considered and a conclusion is reached that there is scope for accounting principles and practice to play an extended role in the interpretation of the income tax legislation, especially in the interpretation of the gross income definition and the general deduction formula. The study then considers the role that accounting principles and practice played in the interpretation of the income tax legislation in both Australia and the United Kingdom. The conclution is reached that in both these jurisdictions accounting practice played a more extensive role in the interpretation of income tax legislation than in South Africa. The opinion is expressed that South Africa can benefit from a similar approach as was taken in the abovementioned jurisdictions. The study concludes with an investigation into the advantages and disadvantages of having the calculation of taxable income conform to the calculation of income for accounting purposes. The conclusion is reached that conformity to some degree is advisable but that total conformity is not sensible. Taking accounting principles and practice into account in the interpretation of income tax legislation can help attain the optimal degree of conformity.

Thesis (MComm)--University of Stellenbosch, 2006. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Kollektiewe Beleggingskemas in Effekte ("KBS in Effekte") en Kollektiewe Beleggingskemas in Eiendom ("KBS in Eiendom") is besigheidstrukture wat baie gewild is in Suid-Afrika. Desondanks bestaan daar nog heelwat onsekerhede rondom die belastinghantering van hierdie twee tipes Kollektiewe Beleggingskemas ("KBS"). Die Suid-Afrikaanse KBS industrie is In multi biljoen rand industrie hoofsaaklik as gevolg van die feit dat dit uitstekende beleggingsgeleenthede vir Jan en alleman asook groot finansiële instellings soos versekeraars bied. Dit is dus logies om te verwag dat die belastinghantering van KBS met redelike sekerheid gereguleer word. In KBS kan of as In trust opgerig word of as In oop beleggingsmaatskappy. Die belastinghantering van In KBS hang dus daarvan af of dit as In trust of oop beleggingsmaatskappy opgerig is. Die Inkomstebelastingwet No. 58 van 1962 ("die Inkomstebelastingwet") bevat inkomsteen kapitaalwinsbelastingbepalings wat uitdruklik die belastinghantering van KBS in Effekte en KBS in Eiendom reguleer ("die spesiale belastingreels"). In KBS in Effekte word vir belastingdoeleindes as In maatskappy beskou en so hanteer. Dit is nie maklik om vas te stel wat die wetgewer se onderliggende bedoeling was toe daar besluit is om In KBS in Effekte as In maatskappy te hanteer. Dit blyk wei dat hierdie besluit van die wetgewer nie deeglik deurdink is nie na aanleiding van die verskeie praktiese en teoretiese probleme wat met die belastinghantering van KBS in Effekte bestaan. Meeste van hierdie probleme is In direkte gevolg van die besluit om In KBS in Effekte vir belastingdoeleindes as In maatskappy te hanteer. Een die probleme wat in die konteks van KBS in Effekte bestaan hou verband met die vraag of die geleibuisbeginsel, wat bepaal dat inkomste wat deur In trust aan sy begunstigdes uitgekeer word hul aard en karakter behou, in die konteks van In KBS in Effekte (wat as In trust opgerig is) toepassing vind. Alhoewel die KBS in Effekte as In trust opgerig is, word dit vir belastingdoeleindes as 'n maatskappy hanteer en dit is duidelik dat die geleibuisbeginsel nie in die konteks van 'n maatskappy geld nie. Na oorweging van die regsaard van 'n KBS in Effekte wat as 'n trust opgerig is asook die gevolge van die vrystellingsbepalings in artikel 10 van die Inkomstebelastingwet wat ten opsigte van KBS in Efekte geld, word daar aan die hand gedoen dat die geleibuisbeginsel wei toepassing sal vind in die geval van 'n KBS in Effekte was as 'n trust opgerig is. Die gevolge van die vrystellingsbepalings in artikel 10 van die Inkomstebelastingwet is sodanig dat die inkomste wat die KBS in Effekte (wat as 'n trust opgerig is) aan sy begunstigdes uitkeer op dieselfde basis as die geleibuisbeginsel belas word. Gevolglik blyk dit of voorgenoemde standpunt van die skrywer in ooreenstemming met die bedoeling van die wetgewer is. Soortgelyke probleme kom voor in die konteks van die 'verbonde persoon' definisie in artikel 1 van die Inkomstebelastingwet sowel as die terugkoop van 'n deelnemende belang deur 'n KBS in Effekte, veral waar daardie KBS in Effekte as 'n trust opgerig is. Daarteenoor word 'n KBS in Eiendom nie as 'n maatskappy vir belastingdoeleindes hanteer nie. Indien "n KBS in Eiendom dus as 'n trust opgerig is word dit vir belastingdoeleindes soos "n trust hanteer. Ewe-eens, indien 'n KBS in Eiendom as "n oop beleggingsmaatskappy opgerig is, is dit vir aile doeleindes In maatskappy en sal so hanteer word vir belastingdoeleindes. Die belastinghantering van KBS in Eiendom bied ook sekere probleme veral waar die KBS in Eiendom wat as 'n oop beleggingsmaatskappy opgerig is sy aandele terugkoop. In hierdie verband bepaal die Wet op Beheer van Kollektiewe Beleggingskemas No. 45 van 2002 ("die Wet op Beheer van KBS") dat artikel 85 van die Maatskappywet No. 61 van 1973 ("die Maatskappywet") nie ten opsigte van 'n terugkoop van 'n deelnemende belang deur 'n oop beleggingsmaatskappy geld nie. Dit beteken egter nie dat 'n oop beleggingsmaatskappy nie sy eie aandele mag terugkoop nie. Vir belastingdoeleindes sal daar vasgestel moet word of bepalings in die Inkomstebelastingwet wat na artikel 85 van die Maatskappywet verwys, soos paragraaf (c) van die 'dividend' definisie, steeds met betrekking tot sodanige terugkoop toepassing sal vind siende dat die terugkoop nie ingevolge artikel 85 van die Maatskappywet gedoen word nie. Na oorweging van die wye omvang van paragraaf (c) van die 'dividend' definisie, word daar aan die hand gedoen dat paragraaf (c) van die 'dividend' definisie steeds toepassing sal vind om die terugkoop van aandele deur "n oop beleggingsmaatskappy te reguleer, nieteenstaande die feit dat artikel 85 van die Maatskappywet nie op die terugkoop van toepassing is nie. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: Notwithstanding that Collective Investment Schemes in Securities ("CISS") and Collective Investment Schemes in Property ("CISP") are common business vehicles in the South African economy, there remains uncertainty with regard to the tax treatment of these business structures. The South African Collective Investment Scheme ("CIS") industry is a multibillion rand industry as it offers attractive investment vehicles for the general public as well as for big financial institutions such as insurers. One would therefore think that the tax treatment thereof would be fairly tightly regulated. A CISS and CISP may either be constituted as a trust or as an open ended investment company ("OEIC"). The tax treatment of a CIS differs depending on whether it is constituted as a trust or as an OEIC. The Income Tax Act No. 58 of 1962 ("the Income Tax Act") contains specific income tax and capital gains tax provisions that regulates the tax treatment of CISS and CISP (the "special tax provisions"). For tax purposes, a CISS is deemed to be a company and treated as such. It is difficult to ascertain what the intention of the legislature was in deciding to treat a CISS as a company. It does however seem as if this decision was not thoroughly considered by the legislature based on the fact that the application of the special tax provisions to CISS presents many practical and theoretical problems. Most of these problems are directly attributable to the legislature's decision to treat CISS as companies for tax purposes. For example, one difficulty relates to the question whether the conduit pipe principle, which determines that income distributed by a trust during a year of assessment will retain its nature and character, will find application in respect of a CISS constituted as a trust. For although the CISS is constituted as a trust, it is deemed to be company for tax purposes and it is clear that the conduit pipe principle cannot find application in the instance of a company. However, considering the legal nature of a CISS constituted as a trust, as well as the effect of the exemption provisions in section 10 of the Income Tax Act relating to CISS, it is submitted that the conduit pipe principle will find application in respect of a CISS constituted as a trust. The effect of the exemption provisions is such that the income distributed by a CISS to its investors will be taxed on the same basis as if the conduit pipe principle applied. As such, the aforementioned submission also appears to be in accordance with the intention of legislator. Similar difficulties arise in the context of the 'connected person' definition in section 1 of the Income Tax Act as well as the repurchase of a participatory interest by a CISS, especially where such CISS is constituted as a trust. Contrary to a CISS, a CISP is not deemed to be a company for tax purposes. Thus, where the CISP is constituted as a trust, it will be treated as a trust for tax purposes. By the same token, if the CISP is constituted as an OEIC, it will be a company for all intends and purposes and will therefore be treated as such. The tax treatment of CISP also presents difficulties, especially where it is constituted as an OEIC. In the instance of a repurchase of a participatory interest by a CISP constituted as a OEIC, the Collective Investment Schemes Control Act 45 of 2002 ("CISCA") states that the provisions of section 85 of the Companies Act 61 of 1973 (lithe Companies Act"), does not apply in respect of such repurchase. However, that does not mean that an OEIC may not repurchase its own shares. For tax purposes, one will have to determine whether the provisions in the Income Tax Act relating to section 85 of the Companies Act that governs the repurchase of shares by an OEIC, such as paragraph (c) of the 'dividend income' definition, will still apply to determine the tax consequences of the repurchase. After considering the wide scope of paragraph (c) of the 'dividend' definition, it is submitted that paragraph (c) of the 'dividend' definition will still find application in respect of a repurchase of shares by a OEIC, notwithstanding the fact that the repurchase is not effected in terms of section 85 of the Companies Act.

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.

"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.

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’.

Thesis (MAccounting)--Stellenbosch University, 2013. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: The interaction between the income tax provisions contained in sections 9B, 9C, 11(a) and 22 of the Income Tax Act No. 58 of 1962 (the Act), and the capital gains tax (CGT) provisions of the Eighth Schedule of the Act, are complex and share dealers should approach the tax consequences of share dealing profits with caution. The objective of the assignment was to ensure that the share dealing profits of share dealers (who transact on revenue account) are taxed correctly, with specific reference to the interaction between the aforementioned provisions. This was achieved by considering tax cases, the interpretation notes of the South African Revenue Services (SARS) and commentary of tax writers. Examples of share disposals were incorporated to illustrate that consistency is required between the calculation of profits for income tax and CGT purposes. The guidelines laid down by case law to determine the revenue nature of share disposals were investigated. It was concluded that share dealing profits which are designedly sought for and worked for, either as part of a business operation or not, are of a revenue nature and taxable as such. The method of identification of shares sold as trading stock is important when calculating the income tax profit, since it is used in order to determine both which shares are sold as well as the cost of the shares sold. It was concluded that the method of identification applied in terms of generally accepted accounting practice (GAAP) is generally also acceptable from an income tax perspective. Section 9C of the Act provides a share dealer income tax relief when a ‘qualifying share’ is disposed of. Any amount received or accrued as a result of the disposal of a qualifying share is deemed to be of a capital nature, regardless of the revenue intention of the share dealer. Prior to 1 October 2007, section 9B of the Act provided similar relief to the disposal of an ‘affected share’. It was concluded that section 9C of the Act has a wider scope of application compared to section 9B of the Act. Because the proceeds received on the disposal of affected or qualifying shares are excluded from gross income, the acquisition costs previously incurred and deducted in respect of such shares must be included in taxable income. It was determined that the amount to be included in income is the actual cost of such shares and not the opening trading stock value determined in terms of GAAP and claimed in terms of section 22(2) of the Act. It was concluded that the first-in-first-out (FIFO) method of identification should be applied to determine which affected or qualifying shares have been disposed of. From a CGT perspective, it was illustrated that a share dealer loses the opportunity to choose which identification method to apply and is obliged to also apply the FIFO method in calculating the CGT base cost of the shares. It is concluded that the Eighth Schedule of the Act should be amended to clarify that the FIFO method should be applied for CGT purposes where sections 9B or 9C of the Act find application. Only then will the tax profits of a share dealer be in sync with his or her cash benefit. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Die interaksie tussen die inkomstebelastingbepalings vervat in artikels 9B, 9C, 11(a) en 22 van die Inkomstebelastingwet No. 58 van 1962 (die Wet), en die kapitaalwinsbelastingbepalings (KWB bepalings) van die Agtste Bylae tot die Wet is kompleks en aandelehandelaars moet die belastinggevolge van aandelewinste met omsigtigheid benader. Die doelwit van die werkstuk was om te verseker dat die winste van aandelehandelaars (wat aandele verkoop op inkomsterekening) korrek belas word, met spesifieke verwysing na die interaksie tussen die voorgenoemde bepalings. Dit is bereik deur die oorweging van hofsake, uitlegnotas van die Suid-Afrikaanse Inkomstediens en kommentaar deur belastingskrywers. Voorbeelde van aandeleverkope is gebruik om te illustreer dat konsekwentheid tussen die berekening van winste vir inkomstebelasting en KWB-doeleindes ‘n vereiste is. Die riglyne wat deur regspraak daargestel is om die inkomste-aard van aandeleverkope vas te stel, is ondersoek. Daar is bevind dat aandelewinste wat opsetlik nagejaag word en voor gewerk word, ongeag of dit deel van die bedryf van 'n besigheid is al dan nie, van ‘n inkomste-aard is en aldus belasbaar is. Die metode van identifikasie van aandele wat as handelsvoorraad verkoop word is belangrik by die berekening die inkomstebelastingwins aangesien dit gebruik word om vas te stel watter aandele verkoop is en wat die koste van die verkoopte aandele is. Daar is bevind dat die metode wat ingevolge algemeen aanvaarde rekeningkundige praktyk (AARP) toegepas is, gewoonlik ook vir inkomstebelastingdoeleindes toelaatbaar is. Artikel 9C van die Wet verskaf aan ‘n aandelehandelaar inkomstebelastingverligting met die verkoop van 'n 'kwalifiserende aandeel' deurdat die bedrag ontvang of toegeval geag word van 'n kapitale aard te wees, ongeag die inkomstebedoeling van die aandelehandelaar. Voor 1 Oktober 2007 het artikel 9B van die Wet soortgelyke verligting verskaf met die verkoop van n 'geaffekteerde aandeel’. Daar is vasgestel dat artikel 9C van die Wet 'n wyer toepassing het in vergelyking met artikel 9B van die Wet. Omrede die opbrengs ontvang met die verkoop van geaffekteerde of kwalifiserende aandele uitgesluit word van bruto inkomste, moet die vorige aankoopskostes wat voorheen ten opsigte van die aandele aangegaan en afgetrek is, by belasbare inkomste ingesluit word. Daar is bepaal dat die bedrag wat by belasbare inkomste ingesluit word, die werklike koste van die aandele is en nie die AARP openingswaarde van handelsvoorraad wat ingevolge artikel 22(2) van die Wet geëis nie. Daar is bevind dat die eerste-in-eerste-uit (EIEU) metode van identifikasie gebruik moet word om te bepaal watter geaffekteerde of kwalifiserende aandele verkoop is. Vir KWB doeleindes verloor 'n aandelehandelaar ook die geleentheid om te kan kies watter identifikasiemetode toegepas moet word. Hy of sy is verplig om die EIEU metode toe te pas in die berekening van die KWB basiskoste van die aandele. Daar word tot die gevolgtrekking gekom dat die Agtste Bylae van die Wet gewysig moet word om te bevestig dat die EIEU metode toegepas moet word vir KWB doeleindes waar artikels 9B of 9C van die Wet van toepassing is. Slegs dan is die belasbare wins van 'n aandelehandelaar in lyn is met sy of haar kontantvoordeel.

Thesis (MComm)--Stellenbosch University, 1998. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: In the Fifth Interim Report of the Katz Commission recommendations were made on a number of fundamental tax issues, including the distinction between the source and residence principle. The Commission decided that the source principle should remain but that a distinction between "active" and "passive" income should be made. "Active" income should then be taxed on the source principle and "passive" income on the residence principle. With effect from 1 July 1997 exchange controls for South African residents were softened, which meant that South Africans could thereafter invest in foreign countries to a limited extent. To protect the South African tax base, sections 9C and 90 were incorporated in the Income Tax Act with effect from 1 July 1997. Section 9C regulates the taxation of investment income earned in foreign countries. The main purpose of this study was to investigate the taxation of foreign investment income in South Africa. For this purpose a critical analysis of section 9C was done within the context of the recommendations made by the Katz Commission in their Fifth Report. The focus of the study was aimed at the requirements for the exclusion of so-called active investment income according to section 9C(3)(a). In the analysis of section 9C it was necessary to determine where the terms used in the section were derived from. The terms which are not new in the South African tax context were analysed based on the opinions of tax specialists and national case law. The terms which are new in the South African tax context were mostly derived from international models of tax conventions and foreign tax codes. These were analysed according to the use thereof mainly in the Model Tax Convention on Income and on capital of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and the Commentaries thereon. The critical analysis of section 9C also included the applicability of the section on other sections in the Income Tax Act, a brief commentary on section 90 and the relief provided to taxpayers where the section leads to double taxation. The ability of the South African Revenue Service to collect the tax, the effect of the tax on immigrants and the effect of the electronic future on the tax were also investigated. The conclusion arrived at in this study is that most of the terms in section 9C are based on internationally used terms and could be analysed according to international tax conventions and case law. The South African Revenue Service will have to provide guidelines for the uncertainties and provide measures to rectify the irregularities and inconsistencies found in the section. In the light of further examinations to be done by the South African Revenue Service, based on the recommendations of the Katz Commission in their Fifth Report, section 9C provides a set of internationally accepted principles as a solid base for future regulation. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Die Katz-kommissie het in die Vyfde Interim Verslag aanbevelings aangaande 'n aantal fundamentele belastingkwessies, insluitend die onderskeid tussen die bron- en verblyf-grondslag, gemaak. Die Kommissie het tot die gevolgtrekking gekom dat die bron-grondslag behou moet word, maar dat daar 'n onderskeid tussen "aktiewe" en "passiewe" inkomste gemaak moet word. "Aktiewe" inkomste moet dan op die bron-grondslag belas word en "passiewe" inkomste op die verblyf-grondslag. Met ingang 1 Julie 1997 is die valutabeheermaatreels vir Suid-Afrikaanse inwoners verslap wat beteken het dat Suid-Afrikaners voortaan tot 'n beperkte mate in die buiteland beleggings kan maak. Om die Suid-Afrikaanse belastingbasis in die tussentyd te beskerm is artikels 9C en 9D met ingang 1 Julie 1997 tot die Wet gevoeg. Artikel 9C reguleer die belasting van beleggingsinkomste uit buitelandse bronne. Die hoofdoel van hierdie studie was om die belasting van beleggingsinkomste uit buitelandse bronne in Suid-Afrika te ondersoek. 'n Kritiese analise van artikel 9C is gedoen binne die konteks van die voorstelle gemaak deur die Katz-kommissie in die Vyfde Verslag. Die klem van die studie het op die vereistes vir die uitsluiting van sogenaamde aktiewe beleggingsinkomste in artikel 9C(3)(a) geval. Tydens die ontleding van artikel 9C was dit noodsaaklik om vas te stel waar die terme wat in die artikel gebruik is, ontstaan het. Die terme wat nie vir die eerste maal in die Suid-Afrikaanse belastingkonteks gebruik is nie, is ontleed na aanleiding van die menings van Suid-Afrikaanse belastingspesialiste en nasionale regspraak. Die nuwe terme kom meesal in internasionale modelle van belastingkonvensies en buitelandse belastingkodes voor. Die terme is hoofsaaklik ontleed na aanleiding van die gebruik daarvan in die Model Tax Convention on Income and on capital of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. Die kritiese ontleding van artikel 9C het die toepaslikheid van die artikel op ander afdelings in die lnkomstebelstingwet, 'n kortlikse verwysing na artikel 9D en die verligting beskikbaar aan belastingpligtiges ten opsigte van dubbele belasting, ingesluit. Die invorderbaarheid van die belasting, die effek van die belasting op immigrante en die effek van die elektroniese toekoms op die belasting is ook ondersoek. Die slotsom waartoe die skrywer in hierdie studie gekom het, is dat meeste van die begrippe in artikel 9C internasionaal verstaanbaar is en ontleed kon word, wat die Wet wereldwyd meer aanvaarbaar en verstaanbaar behoort te maak. Die Suid-Afrikaanse lnkomstediens sal egter riglyne ten opsigte van die onduidelike begrippe moet verskaf en die nodige ongelykhede en inkonsekwenthede in die Wet moet regstel. In die lig van verdere ondersoeke deur die Suid-Afrikaanse lnkomstediens, na aanleiding van die voorstelle deur die Katz-kommissie in die Vyfde Verslag, verskaf artikel 9C 'n stel internasionaal aanvaarde beginsels waarop toekomstige regulasies gebaseer sal kan word.