Magister Economicae - MEcon / Countries reform their tax systems to improve economic and administrative efficiency, the impact on income distribution and their revenue-raising capacity. Globalisation has also affected the fiscal autonomy of countries and resulted in the reality of tax competition. The South African tax authorities have made significant changes to the tax system in over the past 20 years. The first phase occurred after the publication of the Margo Commission’s report in 1987 and the second phase followed the work done by the Katz Commission since 1996. The objectives of the reforms included the improvement of tax administration and collection, a re-evaluation of the efficiency and equity aspects of the different taxes, the broadening of the tax base, and most important, to bring the South African tax system in line with changing international tax practise.The main objectives of this study are to give a descriptive overview of the reforms, to investigate the economic rationale behind the reforms and to answer the question of whether the objectives of the reforms were actually achieved. The study fills an important void in the South African literature as it is the first comprehensive overview of the tax reforms since the 1990s.The nature of the study is qualitative and investigative. An overview of the theoretical literature is presented together with some evidence from developing countries. To determine whether the objectives were achieved, descriptive statistics are presented using secondary data from South African Revenue Service (SARS); National Treasury, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the South African Reserve Bank (SARB). The main findings are that the establishment of SARS contributed significantly to the administrative efficiency and revenue-raising capacity of the tax system. The taxing of fringe benefits under the personal income tax, the introduction of capital gains tax (CGT) and the residence-based principle contributed to the broadening of the tax base. The decrease of marginal rates of personal income tax (PIT) to be more in line with the rate on company income decreased the possibility of tax arbitrage. The phasing out of the secondary tax on companies together with the decrease of the rate of company income tax (CIT) increased the attractiveness of South Africa for capital-exporting countries. Significant tax relief to middle and lower-income earners over various years improved the equity impact. However it did not improve the position of the really poor, who are not liable for PIT. The increasing contribution of value-added tax (VAT) compensated to the decreasing contribution of trade taxes; the fact that the VAT rate has stayed constant, since 1993 is an indication of the unpopularity of the tax.

M.Com. (SA & International Taxation ) / Players’ contracts in sports are assets for the professional clubs. Like any other assets, these contracts could be sold to other clubs, locally or internationally, at a fee. The South African Revenue Service has issued a “Draft guide on the taxation of professional sports clubs and players” (hereafter the Guide). This Guide was issued as a draft in 2010 and had not been finalised at the time of the completion of this dissertation. Using a doctrinal research methodology, which includes a systematic exposition of the Guide by using the Income Tax Act 58 of 1962 (hereafter the Act), case law and the other appropriate literature, this study is aimed at interpretatively reviewing the contents of this Guide, specifically the section of the Guide that deals with the income tax implications arising from the transfer of players. The review of the Guide revealed that the Guide is technically incorrect in certain aspects. For instance, the definition of “asset” per the Eighth Schedule of the Act was incorrectly cited to specifically exclude trading stock. In addition, the Guide has excluded from its scope transactions between residents and non-resident clubs and players. Furthermore, the Guide did not deal with all aspects relating to player transfers, such as player swops and third party ownership of player rights. In some instances, the Guide was found to be ambiguous, especially in dealing with free transfers. The study has found that the transfer fees could either be included in gross income or be subject to capital gains tax for the transferor club, depending on whether their nature was revenue or capital. The deciding factor was determined to be the intention of the transferor club at the time of transfer of the player rights. Where the intention of a transferor club is to enter into a profit-making scheme, the transfer fees would be revenue in nature and included in gross income in terms of s 1 of the Act (Elandsheuwel Farming (Edms) Bpk v SBI, 39 SATC 163). Where the intention of a transferor club is to use the player as income-producing asset, then the transfer fees would be capital in nature, and be subject to capital gains tax. For the transferee club, it was determined that the player is usually acquired to bring to the club an advantage of the enduring benefit (British Insulated and Helsby Cables v Atherton 1926 A.C. 205). This therefore implies that the transferee club would not be able to claim the deduction under s 11(a) of the Act. The study will be useful to the sports clubs as it provides a comprehensive guide on the income tax treatment of player transfers.

M.Comm. (International Taxation) / Lyn Bourne (n.d.) once wrote "The concept of royalties evolved from a time when the government owned all of the land, including mines, to the situation where free miners won the right to claim minerals, but paid a portion of their production to the royal treasury. Today, a mineral royalty is a payment to the owner of the mineral rights for the privilege of producing the mineral commodity"...