EFF challenges budget process, calls for reset and VAT clarity
The EFF warned that Sars risked undermining public trust by acting on executive announcements rather than properly enacted legislation.
The Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) filed supplementary court papers in the Western Cape High Court on Saturday to intervene in the legal challenge regarding Parliament's adopted fiscal framework and revenue proposals.
The political party is taking a stand to defend constitutional principles and protect South Africans from what they consider an unjust VAT increase.
This legal action follows Finance Minister Enoch Godongwana's sudden reversal of the planned VAT increase.
On Thursday, shortly after midnight, the National Treasury announced that the proposed VAT increase had been canceled and would remain at 15%, ending a two-month dispute over the controversial tax hike.
ALSO READ: DA files supplementary affidavit to block the proposed VAT hike
EFF's constitutional concerns on budget
In their court filing, the EFF expressed 'deep concerns' about the conduct of the Speaker of the National Assembly and parliamentary secretaries, accusing them of entangling Parliament in partisan politics.
The party maintains that South Africa currently has no lawful budget, arguing that the fiscal framework and revenue proposals were adopted through processes that violate the Constitution and the Money Bills Amendment Procedure and Related Matters Act.
'The only legitimate and practical way forward is a full reset of the 2025 budget process to re-establish constitutional compliance and fiscal legitimacy,' the EFF asserted.
ALSO READ: EFF calls for 'apartheid tax' counter instead of VAT hike [VIDEO]
EFF challenge to Sars commissioner
In addition to the court filing, the EFF sent an urgent letter to South African Revenue Service (Sars) Commissioner Edward Kieswetter questioning the legal basis for the tax authority's communication regarding the VAT rate adjustment.
EFF National Chairperson and Parliamentary Chief Whip, Nontando Nolutshungu, criticised Sars for creating confusion by allowing two different VAT rates to operate simultaneously until May 15.
'We must further express our alarm at the absurdity of SARS's pronouncement permitting two VAT rates — 15% and 15.5% — to operate simultaneously until 15 May 2025.
'This reckless allowance not only sows confusion among vendors and consumers but also creates fertile ground for exploitation, price manipulation, and criminality,' Nolutshungu wrote.
Legislative authority questions
The EFF demanded clarification on how Sars could issue binding instructions to VAT vendors without proper legislative processes being completed.
'We seek to understand how such administrative instructions could be issued when Parliament has not yet lawfully repealed or amended the relevant fiscal framework through proper legislative processes,' Nolutshungu stated in the letter.
The party warned that Sars risked undermining public trust by acting on executive announcements rather than properly enacted legislation, cautioning that they reserved the right to pursue legal remedies if Sars failed to provide a satisfactory explanation within 24 hours.
ALSO READ: Budget 3.0 not unexpected, possible decrease in social grant increase
Godongwana's VAT reversal
Godongwana's reversal comes after significant opposition to his planned implementation of an initial 0.5 percentage point VAT increase on May 1, which would have been followed by another 0.5 percentage point increase on April 1 next year.
The National Treasury confirmed that Godongwana would introduce legislation to formally reverse this decision, keeping the VAT rate at 15%.
EFF calls for parliamentary integrity
The EFF urged Parliament to avoid political gamesmanship and prioritise its constitutional obligations.
'Parliament must remember that in terms of Section 44(1)(a)(ii) of the Constitution, the legislative authority to pass money bills resides with the National Assembly, and not with any member of the Cabinet,' the party emphasised in their statement.
The party called for decisive leadership during this critical period, advocating for 'a competent, consultative, and transparent Parliament that acts with integrity' and serves the interests of all South Africans, particularly the poor and working class.
NOW READ: Treasury reverses proposed VAT hike, will remain at 15%
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
IOL News
2 hours ago
- IOL News
The poor will always be last: The mirage of unity and the necessity of disruption
As South Africa once again contemplates a Government of National Unity (GNU), it is tempting to celebrate the idea of political stability, inter-party cooperation, and the so-called 'maturity' of our democracy. But beneath this surface lies a more troubling pattern; one that reveals the persistent exclusion of the poor, the co-optation of transformation discourse, and the retreat of the state from its moral obligation to disrupt patterns of inherited inequality. History has repeatedly shown us that, when elites call for unity, it is often a euphemism for consolidating power and preserving privilege. The original GNU of the post-1994 settlement, for all its symbolism, was a delicate compromise between political liberation and economic continuity. It preserved existing capital structures, deferred radical land reform, and entrenched a neoliberal macroeconomic framework that has since calcified into orthodoxy. It is no coincidence that Black poverty, youth unemployment, and rural underdevelopment remain defining features of our post-apartheid condition. Today, more than 30 million people live below the upper-bound poverty line. Approximately 60% of youth are unemployed, while more than 3.7 million people remain on the housing backlog, waiting for the dignity of a stable roof. Black Africans remain the least likely to own land. As of 2022, only 8.8% of land in private hands was black-owned, and a significant portion of this is not productive or urban land. These figures are not just numbers; they represent a systematic denial of opportunity to the very people who were promised transformation. Instead of material redress, millions of poor South Africans are locked in a downward spiral of dependency on social grants, a system which, while necessary for survival, is neither developmental nor liberatory. Over 18 million people depend on grants, and yet, every year, the promise of employment, industrial inclusion, and quality public services rings hollow. For over a decade, ambitious rhetoric about inclusive growth and social impact has failed to translate into measurable outcomes. The burden of this failure is borne disproportionately by indigenous South Africans, Black people and Africans in particular, who continue to suffer the most in a democratic society that has yet to reckon with the economic architecture of apartheid. The poor are not an unfortunate side-effect of incomplete transformation; they are a structural outcome of a society designed to exclude them. South Africa's political economy remains profoundly racialised, extractive, and elite-driven. The so-called 'black middle class' and a newly-minted billionaire class are often paraded as evidence of progress. Yet they serve largely as buffers, intermediaries between the desperation of the majority and the opulence of the few, without redistributing power in any meaningful sense. The emerging political consensus today, as represented by discussions of a GNU or coalition-based governance, is disturbingly void of any real commitment to economic justice. Instead, it pivots around the technocratic language of fiscal discipline, market confidence, and investor friendliness, language that insulates elite decision-making from democratic accountability. In this context, calls for unity function as a depoliticising mechanism. They silence dissent, dismiss radical alternatives, and pathologise the anger of the poor as destabilising or immature. Authentic transformation is not a product of elite negotiations behind closed doors; it is the outcome of struggle, disruption, and radical reimagination. If we are to honour the constitutional promise of substantive equality, we must reject the cynical notion that consensus is always virtuous. In truth, some interests are irreconcilable. A society cannot simultaneously defend property rights and guarantee land justice. It cannot shield monopolistic capital while claiming to empower informal economies. And it cannot continue to pacify the masses with promises of reform while the instruments of wealth creation remain in the hands of a tiny, racially exclusive elite. So what will it take to change the system? What will it take for Black South Africans, and Africans in particular, to participate fully in the economy and shape its architecture? It begins with reclaiming the narrative. We must stop accepting incrementalism as a virtue. True transformation requires a redistributive economic model that acknowledges historical injustice and deliberately dismantles racialised capital concentration. We must ask: what will it take to accelerate the pace of progress to see Africans leading as the majority in the corporate sector within JSE-listed companies? As of 2023, Black African CEOs led less than 15% of JSE's top 100 companies. This is not a failure of skills; it is a failure of imagination and will. It reflects the enduring gatekeeping of corporate South Africa and the superficial commitments to transformation targets that are never enforced. We must support Black businesses, not through token funding schemes or ceremonial procurement programmes, but through deliberate state-backed incubation, eased regulatory entry, access to markets, and ownership of infrastructure. SMMEs, particularly Black-owned enterprises, hold the key to mass employment, yet they face the highest barriers to financing, compliance, and market access. We must also cultivate a new generation of Black industrialists, farmers, and tech entrepreneurs. This is not about romanticising the idea of 'start-ups' in a vacuum. It is about building the ecosystem for innovation, from broadband and logistics infrastructure to research funding and digital education, so that we are not merely consumers of global technology but producers of indigenous solutions. We must build our own Silicon Valley, a Southern African tech frontier that draws from our realities, not imported templates. Finally, we must confront the painful truth that the current political elite, across party lines, is increasingly indistinguishable from the economic elite. Many of those who today speak the language of the poor have built careers by exploiting their pain. Their allegiance is not to justice, but to power. They wear the language of liberation like a mask while participating in the architecture of continued dispossession. In the end, unity without justice is a betrayal. It is unity for the sake of comfort for billionaires to retain their portfolios, for technocrats to deliver stability, and for political parties to secure positions. But for the poor, it is merely another season of waiting. Another promise postponed. Another betrayal repackaged as progress. Let us not be seduced by elegant formulations of compromise. Let us instead ask: who benefits, who decides, and who pays the price for this so-called unity? Only then can we begin to imagine a politics that does not merely include the poor, but is led by them.
The Citizen
2 hours ago
- The Citizen
uMkhonto weSizwe party's politics of convenience
It is ironic that the MK party has put itself forward as an organisation that fights for issues on principle when its own internal operations are not. When the Western Cape High Court in Cape Town ruled that it makes no sense for an impeached judge to sit on a body that selects judges, it struck a blow for the good guy in South Africa. For far too long a situation has been allowed to develop where the three arms of state, the judiciary, the executive and the legislature, are constantly being put at odds with each other, not for the positive development of the country, but for selfish short-term interests of corrupt individuals and their political parties. But this time, the judiciary said no, common sense must prevail. John Hlophe, who was impeached as a judge, cannot take part in the process of selecting judges. Former president Jacob Zuma's party uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) party has vowed to appeal the judgment on principle and not simply to have Hlophe reinstated to the Judicial Service Commission. It is not because it benefits the country that they want this to happen, but simply that it benefits the MK to have a decision of the legislature overturned by the courts. This way, the MK, although just the thirdbiggest party in parliament, can get to 'govern through the courts', something parties of the left have always accused opposition parties to the right of the political divide, like the DA, of doing. It is ironic that the MK has put itself forward as a party that fights for issues on principle when its own internal operations are nowhere close to being based on a set of established principles that can be identified by all and sundry, especially its own members. Its recently fired secretary-general (SG), Floyd Shivambu, found out in the most painful way that where there are no defined principles, anybody can be a victim. He was fired as SG for what he thought was acceptable within the party: identifying with a disgraced fugitive. He saw nothing wrong with that but was fired for it. ALSO READ: Court finds impeached judge John Hlophe unfit to serve on JSC Truth be told though it was not for meeting pastor Shepherd Bushiri that he was fired. The MK has shown a lot of brazenness when it comes to dealing with corruption-tainted prominent individuals that it has become their political home. In the bigger scheme of things, by their own standards, a meeting with Bushiri wouldn't move their moral needle. It was simply that Shivambu had served his purpose in the party. He was parachuted in to demonstrate that the party was not a Zuma one-man-show, an ethnically defined entity based in one province, but that it had appeal to all South Africans. Sadly, the learned Shivambu fell for the ruse and centred himself in a party where he was always an unwanted outsider from day one. Shivambu probably believed that he could mould the MK into the revolutionary force that he always publicly pronounced it to be but, from the beginning, he had to contend with defending unprincipled decisions, such as wanting parliament to accept that an impeached judge was a fit and proper person. In other words, honesty and good moral judgment could be sacrificed at the convenience of the party. That judgment by the court goes to the heart of what is wrong with this country and its politics: an organisation that does not embrace democracy in its own internal operations wants to control the outcomes of a democratically elected legislature and have them overturned. The lesson for Shivambu and the MK is that good, morally-based judgments might appear expendable in achieving short-term goals, but history leans towards what is right for society. NOW READ: MK party removes Floyd Shivambu as SG
Eyewitness News
2 hours ago
- Eyewitness News
Limited period for political parties to review their candidate lists to fill National Assembly vacancies
CAPE TOWN - The window has opened for a limited period for political parties to review the candidate lists used to fill vacancies in the National Assembly. Of particular interest during this window, is the Umkhonto we Sizwe Party, which has for the past year not filled all of its 58 seats owing to disputes over its lists which have led to court battles and the mass removal of names from its lists. In the first of two opportunities for this year, political parties have until Thursday to make changes. The Electoral Act makes provision for two review opportunities in the second year after an election, the first being a seven-day period which started on Friday, the day marking a year since members were designated to the assembly. Parliament said that during the first period, parties will be able to supplement their lists to fill all existing vacancies. It may also replace no more than 25 percent of those appearing on the list and also change the order in which they appear in the line of succession. After that, political parties will only be able to tinker with their lists until 12 June 2026. Currently, the official opposition has the most vacancies. MK Party Spokesperson Nhlamulo Ndhlela has indicated the party plans to fill eight seats. Last week the party announced after axing Floyd Shivambu as secretary general, that he's due to make a return to Parliament. However Parliament said that the party is yet to submit any changes it plans to make, and the speaker is not scheduled to administer the oath to any new MPs this week.
