R466bn ‘hit' as National Treasury lowers SA GDP forecast
'This is the main contributor to the projected increase in the country's debt-to-GDP ratio' – DG Duncan Pieterse.
South Africa's National Treasury has lowered its GDP growth forecast for the country (to 1.4%) for 2025, as well as for the next two years (1.6% in 2026 and 1.8% in 2027), in the wake of 'international trade volatility and policy uncertainty' due to US President Donald Trump's tariffs and the resultant threat of a global trade war.
The slower growth over the next three years is expected to have a R466 billion 'hit' on the SA economy, Director-General (DG) of the Treasury Duncan Pieterse confirmed in response to questions during a Budget 3.0 media Q&A session on Wednesday.
In the March budget, Treasury forecast 1.9% GDP growth for 2025, 1.7% for 2026, and 1.9% for 2027. However, it had to revise this downwards in the latest budget.
Facing questions about SA's 'weaker fiscal position' reflected in the country's higher debt-to-GDP forecast of 77.4% in Budget 3.0 (up from 76.2% in the March budget), Pieterse said the downward revision in economic growth 'is what's driving' the increase in debt-to-GDP projections over the next three years, not higher government debt levels or significant increases in spending.
ALSO READ: Sensible or underwhelming? Economists react to Godongwana's Budget 3.0
He said that due to the revision of the economic outlook, SA is now forecast to see 'a R130 billion movement' in nominal GDP growth for 2025 – essentially less-than-expected growth.
'In 2026/27, the impact would be around R161 billion, and in 2027/28, around R178 billion … The cumulative effect [of the lower GDP growth] is some R466 billion,' Pieterse later added.
'Included in this is the fact that we ended up with lower-than-expected GDP growth in the last quarter of 2024 [0.6%, instead of the forecast 0.8%]. Remember that the Q4 2024 GDP outcome was not included in the March budget [it was not released at the time],' he explained.
Source: National Treasury
Pieterse said the lower GDP growth forecast effectively 'pushed up the debt-to-GDP' or debt as a percentage of GDP metric.
'However, for us, the de facto fiscal anchor is the primary surplus … And that is getting better. We believe our fiscal objectives are on track,' he said, echoing Finance Minister Enoch Godongwana.
ALSO READ: Budget 3.0 was not a chainsaw budget, economists say
Pieterse stressed that more focus should be placed on SA's primary surplus and the fact that the forecast budget deficit as a percentage of GDP was still 'intact' at 4.6% for 2025/26.
'As global growth has faltered, South Africa's economic outlook has also weakened, with GDP expected to grow by only 1.4% in 2025. Global risk and economic weakness reinforce the need for us to put our fiscal house in order,' he said in the foreword of the latest Budget Review, tabled with other budget documents in parliament on Wednesday.
'The fiscal strategy remains on course so that government can spend less on debt-service costs and more on critical public services. As per our commitment, government debt will stabilise in 2025/26 at 77.4% of GDP. For the first time since the 2000s, government is consistently running a primary surplus, where revenue exceeds non-interest expenditure,' Pieterse added.
This article was republished from Moneyweb. Read the original here.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Citizen
16 hours ago
- The Citizen
Merafong residents brace for major tariff hikes after municipal budget approval
Residents of Merafong are set to experience significant increases in municipal service charges from 1 July 2025, after the 2025/2026 municipal budget was officially approved during a Special Council Meeting on 28 May. The newly approved budget outlines steep hikes across various services: Water tariffs will rise by 15.30% Electricity tariffs will increase by 8–11%, depending on usage Sewerage services will go up by 9.5% Refuse removal will increase by 6% Sundry tariffs will also rise by 6% In addition, property rates for residents living in towns will rise by 5%, while agricultural properties and Public Service Infrastructure (PSI) will see a 3% increase. Mine property rates will rise by 4.4%. The total budgeted expenditure exceeds R2.7 billion, with the largest portion allocated to debt repayment, followed by spending on bulk purchases such as water and electricity. Employee-related costs are expected to total R466,720,835. Despite opposition from the Democratic Alliance (DA) and the Freedom Front Plus (FF Plus), the budget was passed by majority vote. These increases are likely to place additional financial strain on residents already grappling with rising living costs. The municipality has defended the hikes as necessary to ensure service delivery and cover growing operational expenses. At Caxton, we employ humans to generate daily fresh news, not AI intervention. Happy reading!
The South African
a day ago
- The South African
Back to drawing board for 2026 revised SASSA SRD grant
Parliament sent back the revised SASSA SRD grant to the Department of Social Development this week. It's touted to become a Basic Income Grant for the unemployed in 2026. However, the working group wants to see urgent changes before it is approved. As such, a draft policy for the revised SASSA SRD grant was initiated with the committee for Social Protection, Community and Human Development back in November 2024. However, the committee sent it back to the DSD on Wednesday this week, citing 'affordability and economic opportunities for beneficiaries.' The none-permanent COVID-19 Social Relief of Distress grant has been extended every year since 2020. Image: File Before the new-look stipend is approved, it must survive various engagements. Like with the Office of the Presidency, National Treasury and Department of Employment and Labour. The South African Social Security Agency believes this will be concluded within a few months. From there a draft will be published for public comment. Policymakers from the DSD were told to 'better integrate pathways from income support to employment.' Currently, the grant pays out R370 each month to roughly 9-million beneficiaries living below the poverty line. However, the committee wants to see it become better 'aligned with broader economic objectives,' like jobs … South Africa's unemployment rate has only been increasing in the last decade, forcing many to exist in the informal sector. Image: File Essentially, the 2026 Basic Income Grant will be for those without jobs, but not to the point of creating long-term dependency on the grant. Therefore, the DSD and SASSA have to improve their data systems and align government programmes to make it work efficiently. Government is concerned that if and when they make the grant permanent, it must be budgeted for every year to remain viable (unlike the current R370 SRD which isn't permanent). While the department sets to work 'tightening' the revised SASSA SRD grant, it has requested that the National Treasury extend SRD for two more years. However, the Treasury has only approved the continuation of the current SRD grant until March 2026. There's simply not enough taxpayer money to ensure everyone who applies for a SASSA grant will be approved for one. Image: File In response to yet another delay to the revised SASSA SRD grant, many MPs were scathing of the DSD's work. The EFF's Noluvuyo Tafeni noted the policy has been in development for over two decades and was still not ready. Likewise, the DA's Alexandra Abrahams questioned whether the revised SASSA SRD grant policy would ever see the light of day. Finally, the MK's Nhlanhla Gcwabaza argued that SASSA should work to help people exit the grant system, not make them dependent on it … Let us know by leaving a comment below, or send a WhatsApp to 060 011 021 1. Subscribe to The South African website's newsletters and follow us on WhatsApp, Facebook, X and Bluesky for the latest news.
TimesLIVE
2 days ago
- TimesLIVE
Illicit financial flows are derailing Africa's future
Illicit financial flows (IFFs) continue to undermine the future of Africa, hampering the ability of governments to adequately fund education, healthcare and development projects essential for lifting people out of poverty and fostering sustainable economic growth. As business leaders, politicians, academics and citizens, we cannot sit back. We must help curb the illegal flow of money out of our country through a cohesive effort by all stakeholders, both local and international, to ensure safeguards are put in place, laws are harmonised, and all enforcement agencies work together to address the problem. At the same time, we must not do anything that will deter investment. Ahead of G20 summit in Johannesburg in November, as well precursor meetings — such as the G20 finance ministers' and central bank governors' meeting and the T20 midterm conference held this month — we must formulate proposals that integrate the perspectives of public and private sector institutions, nonprofit organisations, think-tanks and universities. Together we can make valuable policy recommendations, such as using AI to turn vast amounts of data into information for developing strategic interventions. Working alongside each other, we can identify gaps in current legal frameworks and areas where greater co-operation is required. We must seek ways to stem illicit money flows. When individuals or companies evade their tax obligations, deliberately falsify import or export documents, or misappropriate funds intended for development projects, they are not committing victimless crimes. These outflows not only weaken our reputation in the eyes of the international markets, but also make it harder for the government to raise capital at manageable interest rates. We already owe too much: the National Treasury predicts that debt on our national balance sheet will be 77% of GDP this year. IFFs directly undermine economic growth, costing the South African economy the equivalent of almost 5% of annual collected tax revenue — losses of about R92.5bn. On the African continent, the numbers are more alarming, with between $50bn (about R889bn) and $90bn stolen annually, according to the UN. A 2020 report from a UN conference on trade and development states that IFFs represent as much as 3.7% of Africa's GDP. This figure has almost certainly grown since then, given that those who break laws will keep doing so if they are not held accountable. We recently convened a G20 multi-stakeholder dialogue to better understand this challenge, quantify its impact, assess current solutions, and identify new ones . One of our speakers, deputy minister of international relations and co-operation Alvin Botes, spelt out what this theft means: countries with high IFFs spend at least 25% less on healthcare and 50% less on education compared with their peers. IFFs wipe out any good the $65bn in aid Africa receives each year might do. They reduce progress made in making people's lives better. There are initiatives under way to address IFFs. For example, the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) collaborates with the UN to strengthen countries' financial systems and prevent illicit outflows. While South Africa's inclusion on the FATF's grey list is viewed by some as an embarrassment, it enables us to strengthen our legal and regulatory frameworks, as well as enhance our anti-money-laundering capabilities. While South Africa's inclusion on the FATF's grey list is viewed by some as an embarrassment, it enables us to strengthen our legal and regulatory frameworks, as well as enhance our anti-money-laundering capabilities. We are also seeing prosecutions of high-level fraudsters, especially those who use dubious accounting methods to move money around and avoid paying their fair share of taxes. It is gratifying to see that action has been taken in this regard. Other UN entities have developed discussion platforms and measurement systems. There are 10 asset-recovery inter-agency networks that have 178 member countries, allowing illicit money flows to be traced across borders. In addition, Interpol supports national and international law enforcement agencies to investigate, trace and prosecute those responsible for these crimes. We must all strive towards expanding such interventions, as well as advocate for and enable closer alignment between government departments and between local law enforcement agencies and their international counterparts. However, our solutions must not cause more harm than good by discouraging legitimate investment. We should not, for example, implement unfair tax regimes that could result in capital flight. We must also not inhibit international investment inflows by making it nearly impossible to comply with legislation and regulations. Such a state of affairs would merely encourage companies to operate businesses in sectors such as import and export under the radar. Through working together by sharing data, harmonising laws and holding those responsible for IFFs accountable, we can strengthen the economy by plugging the holes through which money leaks and encouraging investment. Our people deserve nothing less.
