Thesis (MAcc)--Stellenbosch University, 2012. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: The requirements of broad-based black economic empowerment (‘BEE’) are set out in the BEE scorecard. When an entity incurs expenditure relating to indirect empowerment measures (i.e. the preferential procurement, enterprise development, skills development and socio-economic development categories on the BEE scorecard), it is unclear whether the expenditure will be deductible for income tax purposes (BEE Partner, 2008). The objectives of the current study are to determine whether such expenditure is deductible and to formulate best practice guidelines for the deduction of the expenditure. The best practice guidelines consist of factors that should be considered when determining whether expenditure is deductible, as well as recommendations on how to justify that such expenditure should, in fact, be deductible. The methodology used was to first consider the requirements of the BEE scorecard, the types of expenditure and the reasons for incurring expenditure towards indirect empowerment measures. The deduction of such expenditure was then considered in a general sense and specifically for each broad category of expenditure. Lastly, the best practice guidelines were formulated based on the conclusions reached. Common expenditure towards indirect empowerment measures of BEE was grouped into broad categories. The different reasons why entities incur such expenditure were identified, as the reason for incurring expenditure can influence whether it is incurred in the production of income (Van Schalkwyk, 2010b:110). It is submitted that expenditure that is excessive or that is incurred for philanthropic purposes would not be incurred in the production of income. Four issues were identified that could preclude a deduction in terms of the general deduction formula (section 11(a)) – notably, that expenditure has to be in the production of income and non-capital in nature to be deductible. In addition to section 11(a), special income tax deductions (sections 12H, 12I or 18A) and capital allowances (sections 11(e), 13sex or 15(a)) could also possibly apply, but only for certain types of expenditure and only in qualifying circumstances. The conclusions drawn as to the deductibility of expenditure are summarised as a guideline for taxpayers. The above-mentioned conclusions, along with the literature examined, were used to formulate general best practice guidelines. One such guideline is that the onus is on taxpayers to show (through one of the ways suggested) that expenditure is in the production of income. Taxpayers should also note that excessive expenditure is not in the production of income and that certain expenditure required by sector charters is more likely to be capital in nature. Furthermore, specific best practice guidelines were submitted for each broad category of expenditure and relate to, for example, the applicability of the identified special deductions and the quantification of non-monetary expenditure. The specific best practice guidelines should be considered when incurring expenditure in a specific category. In summary, even though expenditure towards indirect empowerment measures has been found to be deductible in most cases, there are exceptions of which taxpayers should be aware. The proposed best practice guidelines include guidance that could be considered before incurring expenditure towards indirect BEE measures. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Die vereistes van breë-basis swart ekonomiese bemagtiging (‘SEB’) word in die SEB-telkaart uiteengesit. Wanneer ’n entiteit onkostes met betrekking tot indirekte bemagtigingsmaatreëls (die telkaartkategorieë vir voorkeurverkryging, besigheidsontwikkeling, vaardigheidsopleiding en sosio-ekonomiese ontwikkeling) aangaan, is dit nie duidelik of sodanige onkoste vir inkomstebelasting-doeleindes aftrekbaar sal wees nie (BEE Partner, 2008). Die doelwitte van hierdie studie was om te bepaal of sulke onkostes belastingaftrekbaar is en om bestepraktyk-riglyne te formuleer vir die aftrekking van die onkostes. Die bestepraktyk-riglyne bestaan uit faktore wat oorweeg moet word in die bepaling of onkostes belastingaftrekbaar is, sowel as aanbevelings oor hoe aftrekbaarheid geregverdig kan word. Die studiemetodologie het eerstens ’n ondersoek behels na die vereistes van die SEB-telkaart, die soorte onkostes sowel as die redes vir die aangaan van onkostes wat met indirekte bemagtigingsmaatreëls verband hou. Daarna is die belastingaftrekbaarheid van sodanige onkostes in die algemeen sowel as spesifiek vir elke breë kategorie van onkoste oorweeg. Laastens is die bestepraktyk-riglyne opgestel op grond van die gevolgtrekkings wat bereik is. Algemene onkostes wat met indirekte SEB-maatreëls verband hou, is in breë kategorieë gegroepeer. Die verskillende redes waarom entiteite die uitgawes aangaan, is bepaal, aangesien dit kan beïnvloed of die uitgawe in die voortbrenging van inkomste is of nie (Van Schalkwyk, 2010b:110). Daar word aangevoer dat onkoste wat oormatige is of onkostes met betrekking tot filantropiese doeleindes nie as deel van die voortbrenging van inkomste beskou kan word nie. Vier kwessies is geïdentifiseer wat ’n aftrekking ingevolge die algemene aftrekkingsformule (artikel 11(a)) kan verhoed – die belangrikste is dat die onkostes in die voortbrenging van inkomste aangegaan moet word en nie kapitaal moet wees om afgetrek te kan word. Benewens artikel 11(a), kan spesiale belastingaftrekkings (artikel 12H, 12I of 18A) en kapitaaltoelaes (artikel 11(e), 13sex of 15(a)) ook moontlik geld, maar slegs vir sekere soorte onkostes en in omstandighede wat daarvoor in aanmerking kom. Die gevolgtrekkings oor die belastingaftrekbaarheid van onkostes word uiteindelik as ’n riglyn vir belastingbetalers opgesom. Bogenoemde gevolgtrekkings, tesame met die bestudeerde literatuur, is gebruik om algemene bestepraktyk-riglyne te formuleer. Een so ’n riglyn is dat die bewyslas op die belastingbetaler rus om (op een van die voorgestelde maniere) aan te toon dat onkostes in die voortbrenging van inkomste aangegaan word. Belastingbetalers moet ook daarop let dat oormatige onkostes nie as deel van die voortbrenging van inkomste beskou kan word nie en dat sekere onkostes ingevolge die vereistes van sektorhandveste meer waarskynlik kapitaal van aard sal wees. Spesifieke bestepraktyk-riglyne is voorts vir elke breë kategorie van onkostes voorgestel, byvoorbeeld met betrekking tot die toepaslikheid van die geïdentifiseerde spesiale aftrekkings en die kwantifisering van nie-monetêre onkostes. Hierdie spesifieke bestepraktyk-riglyne behoort in ag geneem te word wanneer onkostes in ’n spesifieke kategorie aangegaan word. Ter samevatting behoort belastingbetalers daarop bedag te wees dat hoewel onkostes met betrekking tot indirekte bemagtigingsmaatreëls in die meeste gevalle belastingaftrekbaar is, daar wel sekere uitsonderings is. Die voorgestelde bestepraktyk-riglyne bied derhalwe leiding oor die faktore wat oorweeg kan word voordat onkostes met betrekking tot indirekte bemagtigingsmaatreëls aangegaan word.

Section 11(a) of the Income Tax Act 58 of 1962 entitles taxpayers to a deduction in respect of expenditure actually incurred, provided that all the other requirements of section 11 and section 23 of the Act have been met. A company may issue its own shares, credited as fully paid up, as a payment for trading stock or services rendered, as was the case in C:SARS v Labat Africa (2011) 74 SATC 1. The question that was raised by this decision is whether the issue of shares constitutes “expenditure” as contemplated in section 11(a) of the Act. It is trite that a share in a company is a bundle of rights which entitle the holder to dividends when declared and to a vote in shareholders’ meetings and that a share does not come into the hands of a shareholder by way of transfer from the company, but is rather created as a bundle of rights for him in the company. In C: SARS v Labat Africa, the Supreme Court of Appeal decided that to issue shares as a payment for goods is not expenditure as contemplated in section 11(a) of the Act. The Act does not define “expenditure”. It has been interpreted in certain cases as a payment of money or disbursement, while it has been interpreted as the undertaking of a legal obligation in other cases. The Labat Africa case has been criticised for its interpretation of expenditure on the grounds that it is contrary to the principle that “actually incurred” does not mean “actually paid”. This research has argued that, in the context of the Labat Africa case, which related to an issue of shares in payment for goods, Harms AP’s judgment was concerned with showing why a share issue is not expenditure. He could not have intended to deny a deduction to transactions such as credit purchases.

The arrival of the Internet and the World Wide Web has had a radical impact on commerce and people’s ability to interact virtually. Through these channels various new methods of earning income have been created. Income earned virtually creates a new type of commerce not previously envisioned whilst the South African Income Tax Act was drawn up. The revenue earned is, however. encompassed in the Act. South African residents have as a result entered the taxation net of the South African Revenue Services without understanding the full implications of being taxed. Of particular importance are the deductions available to residents whose incomes are earned through virtual worlds. The various deductions available in the South African Income Tax Act do not specifically deal with the expenses incurred in the production of virtual world income. South Africans are thus exposed to taxation implications not fully explored by the South African Revenue Services nor the general public. The public needs guidance on this matter and the South African Revenue Services needs further research to be conducted in this area. The study revealed that deductions would be allowed against taxable income earned through conducting virtual world commerce. The general deduction formula should be applied to all expenses. Capital expenses should be researched further, for application in terms of the Act. However, it appears that the Act can be applied to non- capital expenses incurred for trading in virtual worlds. AFRIKAANS : Die aankoms van die Internet en die Wêreldwye Web het reeds ‘n geweldige impak op die handle en mense se vermoëns om virtueel in wisselwerking te wees. Deur middle van hierdie kanale het verskeie nuwe metodes onstaan om ‘n inkomste te verdien. ‘n Inkomste wat virtueel verdien word, skep ‘n nuwe sort handle waarvoor daar geen voorsiening gemaak is toe die Inkomste Belastingswetgewing opgestel is. Die inkomste wat verdien word is wel binne die bestek van die Wetgewing. Suid-Afrikaanse inwoners val dus binne die belastingsnet van die Suid-Afrikaanse Inkomste Dienste sonder om die volle implikasies van die belasting te begryp. Van besondere belang is die belastingsaftrekkings wat vir inwoners, wie se inkomste in die virtuele wêreld verdien word, beskikbaar is. Die verskeie aftrekkings beskikbaar in die Suid-Afrikaanse Inkomste Belastingswetgewing maak nie spesifiek voorsiening vir die uitgawes wat aangegaan word terwyl ‘n inkomste in die virtuele wêreld verdien word nie. Suid Afrikaners word duw aan belastingsgevolge blootgestel wat nie ten volle deur die Suid-Afrikaanse Inkomste Dienste, of die algemene publiek verken is nie. Die publiek het leiding in die opsig nodig en die Suid-Afrikaanse Inkomste Dienste benodig verdere navorsing in die verband. Die studie toon dat aftrekkings toegelaat sou word teen belasbare inkomste wat verdien word, deur handel in die virtuele wêreld te dryf. ‘n Algemene formule moet op alle uigawes toegepas word. Kapitale uitgawes moet verder nagevors word vir toepassing op die Wetgewing. Nieteenstaande, wil dit voorkom dat die Wetgewing op nie-kapitale uitgawes wat in die proses van handel dryf in die virtuele wêreld, toegepas kan word. Copyright 2011, University of Pretoria. All rights reserved. The copyright in this work vests in the University of Pretoria. No part of this work may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, without the prior written permission of the University of Pretoria. Please cite as follows: Moodley, T 2011, A critical analysis of the tax deductibility of expenses incurred in virtual worlds by the South African taxpayer, MCom dissertation, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, viewed yymmdd < http://upetd.up.ac.za/thesis/available/etd-03092012-112031 / > F12/4/163/gm / Dissertation (MCom)--University of Pretoria, 2012. / Taxation / unrestricted

The sale of an entity as a going concern has a number of tax consequences for both the purchaser and the seller. The tax deductibility of a contingent liability upon its transfer from the seller to the purchaser, where the selling price has been reduced by the value of the contingent liabilities transferred, remains uncertain following the decision in Ackermans Ltd v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service. An expense is either deductible under a specific section of the Income Tax Act, 58 of 1962, or under the general expense provisions in terms of sections 11(a) and 23(g). The Act does not contain a specific section relating to contingent liabilities and therefore a contingent liability will need to be considered for deduction under these sections. The Act further disallows an expense as a deduction under section 23(e), where a reserve is created (for example a leave pay provision). This study analyses the tax deductibility of a contingent liability, where the contingent liability has been transferred from the seller to the purchaser in a sale of an entity as a going concern and the purchase price has been reduced to compensate for the transfer of the contingent liability. The deductibility of the contingent liability was first assessed in terms of the provisions of the Act (sections 11(a), 23(g) and 23(e)) and associated case law. The decision in the Ackermans case and its preceding Income Tax Case 1839 was then analysed in order to establish the principles arising from the decisions. Finally the proposals in the Draft Taxation Laws Amendment Bill, 2011, and the subsequent Discussion Document issued by the South African Revenue Service were discussed. The analysis revealed the continuing confusion surrounding the status quo, thus demonstrating the importance of legislative intervention to provide guidelines for taxpayers.

Thesis (MAcc (Accountancy))--University of Stellenbosch, 2006. / The potential buyer of a business evaluates the attractiveness of the transaction by considering the financial status of the business being sold. In determining the financial status of a business it is more important to determine the nature of the assets and liabilities recorded on the balance sheet rather than the mere existence thereof. Included in the liabilities are accounting provisions recorded in terms of the Generally Accepted Accounting Practice (GAAP) to reflect a fair representation of the financial status. Although these provisions are made for accounting purposes, they cannot necessarily be deducted under the terms of the Income Tax Act, no 58 of 1962. The tax deductibility of accounting provisions has long been a potential contention when a business is sold. The Income Tax Act has specific sections that must be applied in determining the deductibility of accounting provisions, for example, section 11(a), which is the general deduction formula; section 23(g), which prohibits expenses not laid out for the purposes of trade; and section 23(e), which does not allow a deduction when a reserve fund is created (for example a leave pay provision). In conducting this study, seven types of accounting provision generally recorded by businesses were identified: the bonus provision, leave pay provision, warranty provision, settlement discount and incentive-rebate provision, post employment provision, retrenchment cost provision and other provisions. These provisions are discussed in view of their possible income tax deductibility, and relevant case studies were identified to confirm the possible deductibility of these accounting provisions. In this study, the transfer of accounting provisions during the sale of a business is considered for the purposes of both the buyer and seller. The tax implications for the buyer and seller are then evaluated, as well as the subsequent treatment of the accounting provisions for the purposes of the buyer. Because the wording of the purchase contract is extremely important when a business is acquired, three examples of the wording of a purchase contract are discussed as well as the income tax implications thereof. The extent of the advice given by a tax practitioner will depend on the allegiance of the practitioner (either for the buyer or seller) and will determine how the contract will be concluded. In conclusion a tax practitioner would want to assist his client to obtain the most effective tax position for the transaction and therefore each purchase contract must be reviewed on its own set of facts.

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.

Many South Africans may not have adequate retirement savings when they retire and this has the effect of a low income replacement ratio on retirement that may lead to a decrease in the standard of living of the retiree and in extreme cases the retiree becoming dependent on their family and the government. Owing to this trend of no or inadequate retirement savings, South Africa embarked on a retirement reform journey in 2004. The goal of this research is to determine whether the retirement reform mechanisms outlined by National Treasury would encourage individual retirement savings that should assist South Africans to achieve stability of income in their retirement. This research analysed the current retirement savings options and vehicles available for South Africans, the current tax incentives and disincentives and reviewed the proposed changes to tax incentives and disincentives during the accumulation phase of retirement savings and explained how these proposed tax incentives are harmonised for the accumulation phase of retirement. The research explained how National Treasury aims to limit pre-retirement withdrawals and how it intends to encourage the annuitisation of post-retirement benefits. The penultimate chapter of this research measured the effect (by making certain assumptions) of the changes proposed by National Treasury on the income replacement ratio of the retiree. Throughout the research comparisons were made between The OECD Roadmap for the good design of defined contribution pension plans and National Treasury’s proposals. This research did not directly address the effect of increased life expectancies on retirement savings or increases in youth unemployment and the effect that this may have on retirement savings. The effect of financial charges levied on retirement savings on the income replacement ratio of a retiree was also not explored. Furthermore, not all pension funds are regulated by the Pension Funds Act and how these pension funds can be brought within the purview of the Pension Funds Act was not investigated. Automatic enrolment of retirement savings for all employees in South Africa in retirement vehicles is a further research area that could be addressed.

The Master´s thesis discourse on the problem of value added tax in allowance organizations. The bases of the thesis are legislative sources related to the issues, primarily Act No. 235/2004 Coll., on value added tax. The practical part of the Master´s thesis concerns the particular allowance organisation named Lipka – school facility for environmental education. The thesis intended to be a guidance document on application of the value added 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)