Section 20 of the Income Tax Act, No 58 of 1962 allows a taxpayer that incurs an assessed loss to carry forward the balance of assessed loss incurred, to be set off against taxable income earned in or added to losses incurred in future years. The issues regarding the carry forward of assessed losses in terms of section 20 is complex and in terms of the said section, a company is only entitled to set off its assessed loss from the previous year against its taxable income in the current year, if the taxpayer has carried on a trade during the current year and has derived income from that trade. Under the provisions of section 20(2A), a taxpayer other than a company can utilise an assessed loss even if no trading has been conducted. Assessed losses of natural persons, may however be ring-fenced. The aim of this treatise was twofold. Firstly it was to gain clarity on the „trade‟ and „income from trade‟ issues and secondly to compare South African legislation with that of Australia, with a view to recommending a change in our rules regarding the treatment of assessed losses in the context of companies. The critical lessons to be learned from the cases presented, is that liquidators, creditors and others must ensure that the company continues trading in order to x keep the assessed losses valid. Realisation of assets (including stock), and the collection of outstanding debts during liquidation does not constitute the carrying on of a trade in terms of s 20(1). The continuity of trade is an important element in regard to the carry forward of assessed losses to be utilised in the current and future years. Therefore it is important that a company carries on some activity that falls within the definition of trade. In the landmark case of SA Bazaars, it was held that a company did not have to trade continuously throughout the year to qualify for the set-off of the assessed loss or carry forward of the assessed loss, that is, to trade for say part of the year. The court however left open the issue of whether it was necessary to derive income from that trade. In order to clarify the issues regarding assessed losses, SARS issued Interpretation Note 33 granting taxpayers a concession in certain cases where a company has traded, but not derived income from that trade. But in ITC 1830, the court ruled that a company must trade and must derive income from that trade in order to carry forward its assessed loss, which effectively means that SARS cannot apply Interpretation Note 33. SARS does not have the authority to make concession which is contrary to the wording of the Act. xi In Australia, operating losses can be carried forward indefinitely to be set-off against future income, provided a company meets the more than 50% continuity of ownership test. Where the continuity test fails, losses can be deducted if the same business is carried on in the income year (the same business test). From the research conducted and in order to solve the issues surrounding the carry forward of assessed losses it was suggested that one of the following be adopted :- The method used in Australia for the carry forward of assessed losses., or A decision of the Supreme Court of Appeal is needed for a departure from the literal meaning of the words pertaining to the requirements regarding the carry forward of assessed losses. Furthermore, to clarify the definition of „income‟, as used in the context of s20, is it gross income less exempt income or taxable income?. If section 20 relates to taxable income, then an assessed loss will never be increased, which it is submitted, is not what the legislature intended. Section 20 ought to be revisited to eliminate any uncertainty about the income requirement and in the context in which the word „income‟ is used in that section.

L.LM. (Corporate Law) / Please refer to full text to view abstract

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.

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.

This study presents an overview of the medical expenditure allowed to taxpayers in the South African Income Tax Act, 58 of 1962 (hereafter the “Income Tax Act”). The study traces the changes made to the allowed expenditure over time. Changes made to the Income Tax Act, illustrating the effect of qualifying medical expenses on the income of persons with disabilities in terms of the Income Tax Act, are described. Certain provisions of the Income Tax Act, as well as other legislation dealing with persons with disabilities, were analysed. Furthermore, the research shows the effect of moderate to severe limitations on a person’s ability to claim qualifying medical expenses. In particular, the change over from the medical tax deduction system (section 18 of the Income Tax Act) to the medical tax rebate system (sections 6A and 6B of the Income Tax Act) to redress the inequality between high income and low income earners, was analysed. Case studies were used to illustrate that the medical tax deduction system (section 18 of the Income Tax Act) favoured high income earners over low income earners. Finally, the change over from the medical tax deductions (section 18 of the Income Tax Act) system to the current system of medical tax rebates (sections 6A and 6B of the Income Tax Act) was analysed. Except for a very small group of taxpayers, the medical tax rebate system (sections 6A and 6B of the Income Tax Act) was found to be financially more favourable to all taxpayers. / Taxation / M. Compt. (Taxation)