Real Estate Investment Trusts (REIT’s) provide certain benefits for investors as opposed to them directly investing in property. Many countries worldwide have already established tax systems for REIT’s which give natural persons and companies the benefit of not outlaying substantial capital, and provide certain tax dispensations to them. The concept of a REIT is new to South Africa. The vehicles that have been used by investors in the past to invest indirectly in property have been Property Unit Trusts (PUTs) and Property Loan Stock Companies (PLS). These different types of entities have had different taxation rules applied to them, as they differed in legal entity, i.e. a trust versus a company. The different types of entity were historically a deterrent to foreign investors who preferred to invest in countries that had the REIT structure and certain tax dispensations. The National Treasury and the South African Revenue Service (SARS) decided to collaborate in this matter so as to encourage foreign property investment, and launched with effect from 1 April 2013, a new REIT tax dispensation for investors in property portfolios. The REIT created a unified regime in South Africa. All portfolios wanting to call themselves REITs had to qualify under certain requirements, and then they would be eligible for the new section 25BB tax dispensation. The South African REIT market is relatively new when compared to the Australian REIT market, which is the second largest in the world. The Australian REIT market has been around for approximately forty three years more than the South African REIT market. The Australian REIT regime is analysed in terms of how REITs are taxed in that country. The final chapter provides a comparison between the South African and Australian REIT regimes. The major differences are identified as to how each country taxes the REITs and the respective shareholders, and from these a few proposals are made which could improve the South African REIT regime in order for it to stand up to worldwide scrutiny.

A research report to be submitted to the Faculty of Commerce, Law and Management, University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Commerce( Specialising in Taxation); March 2016 / The present study sought to investigate self-selection among internal and international migrants in Gauteng by making use of the Gauteng City Region Quality of Life Survey data. The present study also sought to disentangle the effects of observed and unobserved characteristics in the self-selection of migrants by conducting Oaxaca-Blinder decomposition on overall employment and self-employment outcome variables. Preliminary descriptive statistics indicated that international migrants experienced markedly higher levels of employment than both locals and internal migrants driven by higher rates of informal and self-employment. System GMM analysis of pseudo panel data confirmed these results and showed that international migrants had a higher probability of employment and self-employment. Oaxaca Blinder decomposition indicated that unobserved characteristics explained the greatest share of the differences in the rates employment and self-employment of locals, internal migrants and international migrants. These results provide evidence for the positive selection of international migrants to Gauteng on unobservable characteristics relevant to the region’s labour market. Key Words Self-Selection; Migration; Self-Employment; Employment / GR2018

Revenue losses due to tax non-compliance pose a substantial risk for all governments, including the South African government. As part of its risk management system, the South African Revenue Service has identified the small, medium and micro enterprise sector as one of the seven high-risk areas and indicated that non-compliance in this sector remains high. The first focus area of any tax compliance risk management system is to ensure registration for the relevant taxes payable. The objective of this study was to establish whether any demographic factors could be used to select small businesses to investigate whether they are meeting their registration compliance requirements for income tax, Value-Added tax as well as the employee related taxes. In order to achieve the research objectives of the study, two sequential research methods were applied. During the first phase of the research, a literature review was conducted to develop a heuristic model consisting of two levels. The first level described the factors that could influence the tax compliance behaviour of a small business. The second level of the heuristic model describes the different taxes a small business could be liable for and when it must register for each of those taxes. During the second phase, the variables influencing registration compliance were statistically analysed for each of the taxes to determine if they significantly influence the compliance status. The study found that several factors have an impact on the registration compliance of small businesses. The demographic factors were analysed separately for each of the three different tax groups used in the study. The results indicate that in the majority of cases all three tax groups share the same demographic factors that would either have a positive or negative impact on the compliance of the entity. Profiles for the most compliant business type (per tax type) and the least compliant business type (per tax type) were compiled. The results of the study can be used by the South African Revenue Service to target their compliance and information actions to help improve registration compliance by small businesses. / Taxation / M. Com. (Accounting)

Thesis (LLD)--Stellenbosch University, 2014. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: Trusts are used for a variety of purposes, both in South Africa and abroad. Like so many other entities, trusts often do not function only in one jurisdiction and may therefore be exposed to international double taxation. South Africa, like most other states, enters into bi-lateral double taxation treaties, to limit the effects of international double taxation. Most of these treaties are based on the OECD Model Tax Convention on Income and on Capital (the OECD MTC). The South African trust is a unique creature. It is not based on the dual ownership concept on which most common law trusts are based, yet, it is not a juristic person either. The question that this research aims to address is how South Africa will interpret and apply certain provisions of the OECD MTC to trusts. Although the South African position is investigated, it is compared to the positions of the United Kingdom, Canada and the Netherlands. The dissertation starts with an analysis of the trust law in each of the relevant states, followed by an overview of the taxation regime governing trusts (and the parties thereto) in each state. The status of double taxation treaties and their interpretation are examined before certain critical provisions of the OECD MTC are analysed to determine how South Africa will apply these provisions to trusts. Hence it is explored whether a trust will be regarded as a person, whether it may be a resident and a beneficial owner for purposes of the OECD MTC. Furthermore, possible solutions for conflicts of attribution in the application of double tax conventions to trusts are investigated. The dissertation concludes that South Africa will regard a trust as a person for purposes of the OECD MTC. Moreover, some types of trusts may be viewed as residents and as beneficial owners for purposes of the OECD MTC. The solution proposed in the OECD’s Partnership Report should be applied to resolve conflicts of attribution involving trusts. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Trusts word vir ‘n groot verskeidenheid doeleindes gebruik, nie net in Suid-Afrika nie, maar ook in die buiteland. Net soos baie ander entiteite funksioneer trusts baie keer nie net in een jurisdiksie nie. Trusts word dus ook blootgestel aan internasionale dubbelbelasting. Soos die meeste ander state, sluit Suid-Afrika dubbelbelastingooreenkomste om die effek van internasionale dubbelbelasting te beperk. Die meeste van hierdie ooreenkomste is gebaseer op die OECD Model Tax Convention on Income and on Capital (die OECD MTC). Die Suid-Afrikaanse trust het ‘n unieke aard. Dit is nie gebaseer op die konsep van verdeelde eiendomsreg waarop die meeste gemeenregtelike trusts gebasseer is nie, maar tog is dit ook nie ‘n regspersoon nie. Die vraag wat hierdie navorsing probeer beantwoord is hoe Suid-Afrika sekere bepalings van die OECD MTC sal interpreteer en toepas op trusts. Alhoewel die Suid-Afrikaanse posisie ondersoek word, word dit deurgaans vergelyk met die posisie in die Verenigde Koningkryk, Kanada en Nederland. Die proefskrif begin met ‘n analise van die trustreg in elk van die betrokke state en word gevolg deur ‘n oorsig van die belastingstelsel wat trusts (en die partye daartoe) belas in elk van die state. Die status van dubbelbelastingooreenkomste en hul interpretasie word ondersoek voordat sekere kritiese bepalings van die OECD MTC geanaliseer word om vas te stel hoe Suid-Afrika hierdie bepalings sal toepas op trusts. Daar word dus ondersoek of ‘n trust beskou sal word as ‘n persoon, of dit ‘n inwoner en ‘n uiteindelik geregtigde kan wees vir doeleindes van die OECD MTC. Voorts word moontlike oplossings vir toerekeningskonflikte in die toepassing van dubbelbelastingooreenkomste op trusts, ondersoek. Die proefskrif kom tot die gevolgtrekking dat in Suid-Afrika die trust beskou sal word as ‘n persoon vir doeleindes van die OECD MTC. Verder sal sommige tipes trusts gesien word as inwoners en as uiteindelik geregtigdes vir doeleindes van die OECD MTC. Die oplossing voorgestel in die OECD se Verslag oor Vennootskappe behoort toegepas te word om toerekeningskonflikte op te los.

Revenue losses due to tax non-compliance pose a substantial risk for all governments, including the South African government. As part of its risk management system, the South African Revenue Service has identified the small, medium and micro enterprise sector as one of the seven high-risk areas and indicated that non-compliance in this sector remains high. The first focus area of any tax compliance risk management system is to ensure registration for the relevant taxes payable. The objective of this study was to establish whether any demographic factors could be used to select small businesses to investigate whether they are meeting their registration compliance requirements for income tax, Value-Added tax as well as the employee related taxes. In order to achieve the research objectives of the study, two sequential research methods were applied. During the first phase of the research, a literature review was conducted to develop a heuristic model consisting of two levels. The first level described the factors that could influence the tax compliance behaviour of a small business. The second level of the heuristic model describes the different taxes a small business could be liable for and when it must register for each of those taxes. During the second phase, the variables influencing registration compliance were statistically analysed for each of the taxes to determine if they significantly influence the compliance status. The study found that several factors have an impact on the registration compliance of small businesses. The demographic factors were analysed separately for each of the three different tax groups used in the study. The results indicate that in the majority of cases all three tax groups share the same demographic factors that would either have a positive or negative impact on the compliance of the entity. Profiles for the most compliant business type (per tax type) and the least compliant business type (per tax type) were compiled. The results of the study can be used by the South African Revenue Service to target their compliance and information actions to help improve registration compliance by small businesses. / Taxation / M. Com. (Accounting)

The research examined whether the services provided by the “sharing economy” platforms are adequately dealt with by the current South African tax systems. In addressing this main goal, the research analysed how the South African tax systems deal with the income and expenses of Uber, Airbnb and their respective service providers. The research also investigated how South Africa could classify “sharing economy” workers and how this would affect the deductibility of the worker’s expenses. A brief analysis was made of the taxation of the “sharing economy” businesses in Australia and the United States of America. These countries have implemented measures to effectively deal with regulating the “sharing economy” businesses. An interpretative research approach was used to provide clarity on the matter. Documentary data used for the research consists of tax legislation, case law, textbooks, commentaries, journal articles and theses. The research concluded that the current taxation systems have loopholes that are allowing participants in the “sharing economy” to avoid paying tax in South Africa. The thesis recommends that the legislature could adopt certain measures applied in Australia and the United States of America to more effectively regulate “sharing economy” in South African and remedy the leakages the current tax systems suffer, causing SARS to lose potential revenue.

This research examined the legal nature of the presumption of guilt created by section 235(2) of the South African Tax Admiration Act and considered whether or not its practical application violates the taxpayer’s fundamental right contained in section 35(3) of the Constitution, which gives every accused taxpayer the right to a fair trial, including the right to be presumed innocent. The research also provided clarity on the constitutionality of this presumption because it has been widely criticised for unjustifiably violating the taxpayer's constitutional right to a fair trial. The conclusion reached is that the presumption created by section 235(2) of the Tax Administration Act constitutes an evidentiary burden rather than a reverse onus. It does not create the possibility of conviction, unlike a reverse onus where conviction is possible, despite the existence of a reasonable doubt. Therefore, it does not violate the accused taxpayer’s the right to a fair trial and the right to be presumed innocent and hence it is constitutional. Accordingly, the chances that the accused taxpayer will succeed in challenging the constitutionality of section 235(2) of the Act are slim.

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 (MAcc) -- Stellenbosch University, 2004. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: In order for a taxpayer to be entitled to a deduction for expenditure actually incurred, the taxpayer must meet the requirements of section 11(a), read with the provisions of sections 23(f) and 23(g). The preamble of section 11 requires that the taxpayer should incur the expenditure in the carrying on of a trade, before it will be deductible. Therefore, taxpayers who do not carry on a trade will not be allowed any deductions for expenditure actually incurred in terms of section 11(a). In the case of a holding company that grants loans to its subsidiaries or associates, there is a general prevailing view that the holding company does not carry on a trade in respect of the loans granted. Therefore it is argued that the holding company is not entitled to any deductions in terms of section 11(a). This study questions the above-mentioned general view by considering case law and the opinions of various tax experts. The question is raised whether the holding company could be regarded as carrying on a trade, and if so, under what circumstances that will be the case. A secondary issue that will be considered is whether the holding company is entitled to deductions in respect of interest expenditure actually incurred. In this regard a distinction is made between moneylenders and non-moneylenders. The writer reaches the conclusion that the definition of “trade” is not all-inclusive, and that the Legislator intended that the term should be interpreted as widely as possible. Therefore, the writer is of the opinion that taxpayers who are not moneylenders could, under certain circumstances, be carrying on a trade in respect of the granting of loans and should thus be entitled to income tax deductions for expenditure incurred. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Vir ‘n belastingpligtige om op ‘n aftrekking vir uitgawes werklik aangegaan, geregtig te wees, moet aan die bepalings van artikel 11(a), saamgelees met dié van artikels 23(f) en 23(g) voldoen word. Die aanhef tot artikel 11 vereis dat ‘n belastingpligtige die uitgawes in die beoefening van ‘n bedryf moet aangaan voordat ‘n aftrekking gëeis kan word. Belastingpligtiges wat dus nie ‘n bedryf beoefen nie, sal op geen aftrekkings vir uitgawes werklik aangegaan ingevolge artikel 11(a) geregtig wees nie. Met betrekking tot ‘n houermaatskappy wat lenings aan sy filiale of geassosieerdes toestaan, heers daar ‘n algemene siening dat die houermaatskappy nie ‘n bedryf beoefen met betrekking tot die toestaan van lenings nie. Daarom word geargumenteer dat die houermaatskappy nie ingevolge artikel 11(a) op enige aftrekkings geregtig is nie. In hierdie studie word bogenoemde algemene siening krities aan die hand van regspraak en menings van belastingkenners oorweeg. Die vraag word gevra of die houermaatskappy nie wel beskou kan word om ‘n bedryf te beoefen nie, en indien wel, onder watter omstandighede dit so sal wees. ‘n Sekondêre aspek wat oorweeg word, is of die houermaatskappy op ‘n aftrekking vir rente uitgawes werklik aangegaan by die toestaan van die lenings geregtig is. In hierdie verband word ‘n onderskeid tussen geldskieters en nie-geldskieters getref. Die skrywer kom tot die gevolgtrekking dat die omskrywing van “bedryf” nie allesomvattend is nie, en dat dit blyk of dit die Wetgewer se bedoeling was om die begrip so wyd as moontlik te stel. Dit is die skrywer se mening dat belastingpligtiges wat nie geldskieters is nie, wel onder bepaalde omstandighede beskou kan word om ‘n bedryf te beoefen met betrekking tot die toestaan van lenings. Daarom behoort sulke belastingpligtiges wel op inkomstebelastingaftrekkings vir uitgawes werklik aangegaan, geregtig te wees.

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.