A research report submitted to the Faculty of Commerce, Law and Management in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Commerce (specialising in Taxation). Johannesburg, 2015 / The existing South African tax system only acknowledges debt financing through the deduction allowed for interest payments, as compared to equity financing where no such deduction is allowed for dividend payments. Taxpayers are prejudiced should they wish to use equity financing to fund a project or company. The deductibility of interest creates the incentive for taxpayers to use debt funding even when it may not be in the best interests of the company. This paper considers some of the complications of the different tax treatment of the returns on debt and equity. Alternative models including the comprehensive business income tax, an allowance for corporate equity and a deduction for dividends are considered in order to establish whether the taxation of the returns on debt and equity could be improved or simplified in South Africa. Key Words: debt, equity, hybrid instruments, tax deductibility, comprehensive business income tax, allowance for corporate equity, dividend deductibility, South Africa

Thesis (MAcc)--University of Stellenbosch, 2010. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Die belastingaftrekbaarheid van werknemerverwante voorwaardelike aanspreeklik-hede, met spesifieke verwysing na die verkoop of beëindiging van ʼn besigheid, is in meegaande studie ondersoek. Dit word bevind dat in die geval van die beëindiging van ‘n besigheid, alle voorwaardelike aanspreeklikhede op datum van beëindiging van die besigheid, waarskynlik nooit vervul kan word nie, spesifiek in geval waar dit gekoppel is aan die vereiste dat ʼn werknemer op ʼn toekomstige datum steeds in diens moet wees van die besigheid. Die voorwaardelike verpligting word dus nooit vervul nie en geen betalings hoef aan voormalige werknemers gemaak te word nie. Geen aftrekking aan die voormalige werkgewer word dus toegestaan in gevalle waar verlof- of bonusbetalings gemaak word na beëindiging van die besigheid, indien die verpligting nie reeds onvoorwaardelik bestaan het voordat die beëindiging van die besigheid plaasgevind het nie. Dit word verder bevind dat in die geval waar ʼn besigheid gelikwideer word, die voormalige en voornemende werkgewer se verpligting teenoor die werknemers se voorwaardelike aanspreeklikhede verval. Verder is dit ook waarskynlik dat geen belastingaftrekking toegestaan sal word nie, omrede die voorwaardelike aanspreeklikheid nie vervul is op datum van likwidasie nie. Dit word verder bevind dat in die geval waar ʼn besigheid as lopende saak verkoop word, die voornemende werkgewer ingevolge Artikel 197 van die Wet op Arbeidsverhoudinge verplig word om alle dienskontrakte, tesame met alle regte en verpligtinge wat bestaan tydens die oordrag, oor te neem asof hy in wese in die skoene tree van die voormalige werkgewer. Voorts word die voormalige werkgewer ook gebind aan die betaling van bedrae, soos deur die verkoopskontrak bepaal, of andersins in gevalle waar die voornemende werkgewer nie die verpligting om te betaal, kan nakom nie. Beide die voormalige en voornemende werkgewer bly dus wetlik aanspreeklik vir die betaling van bedrae soos uitgestippel in die verkoopskontrak, in gevalle waar ‘n besigheid as lopende saak verkoop word. Dit word verder bevind dat die Inkomstebelastingwet ‘n belastingaftrekking moet toestaan aan die voormalige of voornemende werkgewer wat ‘n werknemerverwante-betaling maak uit hoofde van die wette soos neergelê deur die Wet op Arbeidsverhoudinge. Sodoende sal die Inkomstebelastingwet die oogmerke van die Wet op Arbeidsverhoudinge onderskraag, met gevolglike voordelige uitwerking op die ekonomie en beskerming van werknemers se werksekuriteit. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: This study explores the tax deductibility of employee-related contingent liabilities, with specific reference to the sale or discontinuation of a business. It is concluded that in the case of the discontinuation of business activities, all contingent liabilities at the date of discontinuation (with the specific requirement that employees will still be employed by the business at a future date) will probably never be fulfilled. The contingent liability is thus never fulfilled and no payments need be made to the former employees. No tax deduction is therefore granted to the former employer where leave or bonus payments were made after the discontinuance of business activities, if the liability did not unconditionally exist prior to the discontinuance of the business. It is further concluded that in the case of the liquidation of a business, the former and prospective employers are released from any obligation towards the contingent liabilities of the employees. Furthermore it is also unlikely that any tax deduction will be granted, due to the contingent liability being unfulfilled at the date of liquidation. It is further concluded that in the case where a business is sold as a going concern, the prospective employer is obliged to take over all existing employee contracts as well as all rights and obligations existing at the time of transfer, in terms of Section 197 of the Labour Relations Act. The former employer is also bound to the payment of amounts, as stipulated by the contract of sale, or otherwise in cases where the prospective employer cannot honour the liability to pay. Both former and prospective employers are legally liable for the payment of amounts as stipulated in the contract of sale, in cases where a business is sold as a going concern. It is further concluded that the Income Tax Act should allow a tax deduction to the former or prospective employer who makes an employee-related payment in terms of the Labour Relations Act. As a result the Income Tax Act will support the objectives of the Labour Relations Act, resulting in a positive effect on the economy as well as the protection of employees’ work security.

Quels sont les principes applicables pour la déduction fiscale des charges de l'entreprise en France et en Turquie? Tel est le thème de cette étude comparative qui a été menée afin de mettre en lumière la mise en pratique de ces principes tout en essayant d'apporter une réponse à la question « comment les entreprises françaises et turques appliquent ces principes aux charges effectuées durant l'exercice de leurs activités ?, et en traitant les sujets inhérents à ces charges déductibles. Elle révèle que le contenu de ces principes est le même dans les deux pays, mais qu'il est toutefois possible de rencontrer des divergences dans leur application et, parfois aussi, dans les décisions des juridictions administratives. La bonne application de ces principes relatifs à la déductibilité des charges en fiscalité des entreprises est essentielle pour déterminer la base d'imposition de l'entreprise. Cette dernière doit supporter les conséquences fiscales et pénales, en cas de non-respect de ces principes. Les entreprises sont libres dans leur gestion. L'administration ne peut s'y immiscer que dans les cas où sont constatés des actes anormaux de gestion ou des abus de droit. En comparant les deux systèmes, cette étude met également en exergue l'absence de certaines dispositions qui constitue la cause principale des contradictions relevées entre les jurisprudences. / What are the tax deductibility rules of costs incurred by a company in France and in Turkey? Here is the main theme of the present comparative study carried out in order to highlight the practical application of those rules. The study also aims to answer the question: "How do French and Turkish companies deal with the tax deductibility rules of their costs incurred during in the course of their economic activity?" We also aim to explain other topics related to tax deductibility of business costs. The dissertation shows that the content of tax deductibility rules is quite similar in both countries. However, the practical application of those rules and their interpretation provided by Administrative Courts in their respective case law shows differences. This being said, the correct application of tax deductibility rules related to business cost is essential in order to determine the taxable basis of a company. This later could face tax reassessments and penalties in case it would be non-compliant with the tax deductibility rules. Companies are free to manage their company in the way they want to. Tax Administration may not interfere in the management of a company unless it found out an abnormal management action or an abuse of law. The present comparative study also highlights the fact that both French and Turkish rules show a lack of specific provisions or measures which constitutes the principal cause of contradictions revealed between the two countries case laws.

Nowadays, the extensive development ofTax Law has left no branch of Law to remindout of its  influence, Labor Law not  beingany  exceptions.  In  fact,  some Labor Law institutions such as remuneration and utilitiescan have important tributary consequences.Because of this link, the author, in the present article, makes a tributary analysis of Labor Law, reflecting on aspects related to personnelcosts and their tax implications. / En la actualidad, el amplio desarrollo que ha tenido el Derecho Tributario hace que no haya rama del Derecho que no se relacioneen algún punto con éste, no siendo el Derecho Laboral una excepción. Así, algunas instituciones laborales como la remuneración y las utilidades pueden, asimismo, tener importantes consecuencias tributarias.En vista de esta relación, el autor, en el presente artículo, realiza un análisis tributario del Derecho Laboral, reflexionando sobre temas relacionados al gasto de personal y sus implicancias tributarias.