‘We have a National Treasury problem': Fuel levy hike defended amid criticism over tax strategy
Petrol pumps are pictured at a filling station in Melville on 20 January 2021. Picture: Tracy Lee Stark
The National Treasury has defended its decision to increase the general fuel levy in the budget 3.0 amid criticism over its broader tax policy.
On Friday, officials from the Treasury and the South African Revenue Service (Sars) appeared before Parliament in a joint meeting of the Standing Committee on Finance and the Select Committee on Finance.
They were responding to public submissions on the fiscal framework and revenue proposals, which outline South Africa's economic policies, revenue projections, and government expenditure limits.
This follows the tabling of Finance Minister Enoch Godongwana's third national budget for the 2025/2026 financial year, after months of political impasse.
The budget includes a fuel levy increase of 16 cents per litre for petrol and 15 cents for diesel, effective from 4 June.
However, the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) are challenging the hike in court.
National Treasury's revenue projections
Treasury's head of tax and financial sector policy, Christopher Axelson, addressed the committee on the revised revenue outlook.
Axelson noted that revenue projections had decreased by R61.9 billion compared to the budget tabled in March.
This decline was driven in part by the withdrawal of proposed increases to value-added tax (VAT) and adjustments to zero-rated items.
'That increase was reduced slightly, but it still required a large amount of additional revenue to make sure we have a fiscally sustainable trajectory for our debt and debt-service costs, and because of that, this May 2025 budget does include R18 billion in additional revenue for 2025/2026 and has R1 billion in tax relief in 2026/2027,' the Treasury official said.
He also indicated that a further R20 billion in unspecified tax policy adjustments is anticipated for the 2026 budget.
To fund expenditure priorities, Treasury has opted for a range of tax measures, including no changes to personal income tax brackets or rebates, an inflationary increase in the fuel levy, and above-inflation hikes in excise duties on alcohol and tobacco.
Diesel refund relief for primary sectors was also announced.
ALSO READ: Budget 3.0: Fuel levy replaced VAT hike but is it the better option?
Axelson pointed out that past personal income tax increases had failed to raise the intended revenue, while corporate income tax remains 'highly volatile'.
'Corporate income tax increases are the most damaging to growth, and if you reduce growth, it reduces the tax bases as well, so it is not as effective.'
Axelson pointed out that a VAT increase was the most efficient revenue-raising option but had to be scrapped due to opposition.
As a result, a bulk of the revenue shortfall was addressed by not adjusting personal income tax and rebates for inflation.
He also explained that Treasury has aimed to avoid increasing taxes over the last five years in an effort to support economic recovery, adding that the country's tax system was 'progressive'.
National Treasury defends fuel levy hike
Moreover, Axelson responded to comparisons between the fuel levy hike and a VAT increase.
'The quantum is very different. The VAT increase over three years would have raised about R75 billion. Increasing the fuel levy by inflation is closer to around R12 billion.'
He defended the levy hike, arguing that it had not been raised in the previous three budgets.
'Part of that was due to the very high oil, petrol and diesel prices [but] those have been coming down lately. The recent non-adjustment in the March budget was to provide relief for VAT.'
READ MORE: VAT reversal overshadowed by fuel levy hike
Axelson emphasised that the fuel levy is a significant source of state revenue, contributing about 5% to total tax revenue.
'This is a specific tax, a cents per litre, so these kinds of specific taxes, which are the same as excise duties, they need to be adjusted by inflation; otherwise, the real value of that tax will go down over time.'
He warned that Treasury would lose about R3.5 billion in revenue by failing to increase the fuel levy.
'The vast majority of the tax revenue increase is all on the personal income tax side. Around R16.7 billion of the R18 billion in increases is all on personal income tax.'
Watch the meeting below:
Axelson told the committee that various alternative revenue proposals – such as eliminating the employment tax incentive (ETI), increasing corporate income tax, introducing a wealth tax, and partially adjusting tax brackets – will be considered in the 2026 budget.
'A lot of them are very good and interesting proposals which we are going to have to consider very carefully and hopefully have a more consultative process before the next budget.'
He added that although the finance minister has the authority under the Customs and Excise Act to implement an interim fuel levy adjustment via a notice in the government gazette, Parliament has the right to intervene.
'We do hope the notice will be published quite soon [but] Parliament may decide to intervene [as] there is legislative oversight.'
Tax policy criticised
Civil society and political parties reacted strongly to the Treasury's presentation.
The Budget Justice Coalition, one of the organisations that made submissions, rejected claims of a progressive tax system.
'Our tax system can look progressive on paper, but it doesn't actually work that way, and we know that all too well in a country that is marked by some of the highest levels of inequality,' the organisation's chairperson, Matshidiso Lencoasa, said.
She argued that South Africa's tax policy burdens the poor, while wealthy individuals and corporations continue to exploit loopholes to their advantage.
READ MORE: Fuel levy pain: Brace for possibility of petrol price hike in June
Lencoasa further criticised the proposed VAT and fuel levy increases, describing them as 'blunt instruments' that would place a heavier financial strain on the country's most vulnerable populations.
Pieter Faber, senior executive of taxation at the South African Institute of Chartered Accountants (Saica), also expressed concern.
Faber said the institution cannot support further tax increases in an already high-tax environment, especially amid rising national debt and ongoing concerns about the lack of government accountability, as highlighted in the Auditor-General's report on local government this week.
Fuel levy increase under scrutiny
MK Party MP Des Van Rooyen criticised the delayed implementation of alternative proposals.
'My expectation was that most of the inputs would be accommodated in this budgeting cycle,' Van Rooyen said.
He asserted that the fuel levy increase was more regressive than the scrapped VAT hike.
'There should be a thunderous response against this proposal.'
Democratic Alliance (DA) MP Pieter Britz called for a fairer distribution of the tax burden.
READ MORE: EFF files urgent interdict to stop proposed fuel levy hike
EFF MP Omphile Maotwe strongly disagreed with Treasury's position on the fuel levy.
'National Treasury refuses to increase corporate income tax for ideological reasons and not practical ones. They oppose a wealth tax because their underlying assumption is that the state must serve those who already have wealth.'
She also challenged the narrative of a progressive tax system.
'The claim that our tax system is progressive cannot be taken seriously,' Maotwe said, accusing the department of ignoring alternative proposals.
'It is clear that we have a National Treasury problem,' she added.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Maverick
an hour ago
- Daily Maverick
Take the liquor industry's claims on pricing with a fistful of salt
The legal liquor industry is a major contributor to injury, disease and death in South Africa. Studies point to alcohol as a factor in 60% of femicides, half of all homicides, two-fifths of rapes and a quarter of traffic fatalities due to driver error. Late last year, National Treasury proposed the introduction of minimum unit pricing to reduce heavy drinking. There has since been a steady infusion of articles by the liquor industry claiming a sharp increase in the production and sale of illicit alcohol over the past decade, and suggesting an even more chilling effect on tax revenues if minimum unit pricing were to be implemented. Clearly, this narrative is meant to push the buttons of a government struggling to balance its books. Things came to a head on 8 August 2025 when Business Day led with claims by South African Breweries (SAB) CEO Richard Rivett-Carnac that minimum unit pricing will 'punish the poor and turbocharge the illicit market, harming both the industry and public safety'. These claims need to be dissected, both for their truthfulness and their logic. But before we do that, it is important to explain how minimum unit pricing works and what it is intended to do. Floor price Minimum unit pricing is not a tax, but a floor price for a unit of pure alcohol, below which the beverage containing it may not be sold. So, for instance, if the minimum unit pricing is R12 per unit, then a 330ml bottle of beer, which contains one unit (15ml) of pure alcohol (ethanol), could not be sold below that price. Thus, the introduction of minimum unit pricing would have no effect on the price of a 330ml bottle of Castle Lager, which at 5% alcohol by volume contains 1.1 units of ethanol and currently sells in a major retail store for R16. On the other hand, a minimum unit pricing of R12 would have a significant effect on the price of a one-litre bottle, which contains 3.3 units of ethanol and sells for just R22, or R6.67 per unit of pure alcohol. If the minimum unit price were R12, its selling price would have to go up by 80%. No wonder the CEO of its manufacturing company is worried. Of course, the question must be asked why alcohol in one-litre containers is sold so cheaply in the first place. It can't be that the cost of production of each unit of alcohol in the smaller container is more than twice that of the larger one. This price differential suggests deliberate tactics that encourage heavy drinking. In fact, a study from Tshwane published in 2018 found that drinkers who consumed alcohol from containers designed to hold more than one unit of ethanol – a standard drink – were nearly eight times more likely to drink heavily. No doubt the causality works both ways: those who need to drink heavily will buy cheaper liquor, and cheaper liquor feeds their craving to drink more. Injury, disease and death The fact is that the legal liquor industry is a major contributor to injury, disease and death in South Africa. Blood alcohol levels are not routinely taken from the perpetrators and victims of violence, but the many studies conducted over the past decade point to alcohol as a factor in 60% of femicides, half of all homicides, two-fifths of rapes and a quarter of traffic fatalities due to driver error. If the assertions of a study commissioned by the Drinks Federation of South Africa into illicit alcohol are true – that illegal trade constitutes about a fifth of the total market – that still implies that legally produced alcohol contributes up to four-fifths of the total alcohol harm in South Africa. And unlike the industry's suggestion, the major damage is not the occasional death from ill-derived concoctions, but widespread harm from heavy drinking of all liquor products, irrespective of whether it is legally produced or not. Heavy consumption When we say South Africa has a big drinking problem, we are not talking about the number of people who drink, but the volume of alcohol that is consumed by those who do. Only one-third of adults say they drink, but the average drinker consumes five standard drinks a day – that's 2½ times more than what could be regarded as the upper limit of 'responsible drinking'. The liquor industry benefits from heavy drinking – the very same companies that appeal to public health and safety as reasons not to introduce minimum unit pricing. Their claims must be taken with a fistful of salt. Much of the excessive supply of liquor finds its way into poorer communities, where the death rate from alcohol is 4½ times higher than in wealthier ones. Here, the call to 'drink responsibly' rings hollow as many drink heavily to escape the hardships of a daily life devoid of recreational alternatives. The industry compounds their misery by flooding their communities with large quantities of liquor at low prices. It is this behaviour that punishes the poor, not the proposed introduction of minimum unit pricing. Where minimum unit pricing has been introduced in other countries such as Scotland and Wales, Australia and Russia, it has reduced the prevalence of heavy drinking, with positive health benefits for all, including poorer consumers. A systematic review published in 2023 found that immediate reductions in acute alcohol-related hospital admissions ranged between 2% and 9%. Unsurprisingly, admissions for chronic alcohol-related conditions such as liver cirrhosis lagged by two to three years, but then reduced by 4%-9% annually. Illicit sales There may well be some growth of the illicit market, which could affect tax revenues. However, it is clear from the abovementioned review that the illegal market in countries implementing minimum unit pricing did not grow as much as industry had predicted, certainly not enough to undermine its substantial health benefits and consequent savings in healthcare costs. In South Africa, the claim by the liquor industry that illicit sales have increased by 53% since 2017 must be fully interrogated, given that legal beer and wine sales have both increased markedly over the past decade. That report must be made publicly available if it's to be taken seriously. As it stands, there is no objective evidence of substantial erosion of the legal market that would have been expected if illicit sales had expanded sharply – especially as South African consumers have been under pressure for a long time. Nonetheless, the growth of the illicit trade is a real risk that must be dealt with in the same way that illegal cigarettes should be – with effective enforcement of a track-and-trace system from the point of production to the point of sale. There is nothing to stop industry taking the lead in this regard, unless, of course, it is hesitant to divulge where its own products end up. Tax revenue Any excise tax losses will also be offset by the increase in VAT revenues. Modelling by UCT academics Corné van Walbeek and Naomi Gibbs shows that, taking all factors into account, government revenues will increase if minimum unit pricing is set at about R12 per unit (at 2025 prices). Consumption among moderate drinkers – who tend to buy higher-priced products – will be largely unchanged, while consumption among heavy drinkers will decrease. That is exactly what minimum unit pricing is intended to achieve – a reduced burden on society and net savings to the fiscus. Government must not be deterred by claims that minimum unit pricing will reduce tax revenue. The role of extra taxation of the liquor and tobacco industries is to make them pay for the damages they cause to society. If the liquor industry caused less harm to our society in the first place, Treasury would need less money to pay for its damages. SAB's Rivett-Carnac would have us believe that the status quo represents an optimal balance between the liquor industry's societal harm and economic benefit – in a country with twice the average global consumption per drinker, 10 times the worldwide prevalence of foetal alcohol spectrum disorder, eight times the global homicide rate, 1.3 times the traffic fatality rate and 1.1 times the incidence of intimate partner violence compared with the global average. The experience of other countries that have implemented minimum unit pricing and other strategies to reduce heavy drinking proves that we should not swallow that fallacy. DM
TimesLIVE
3 hours ago
- TimesLIVE
Merafong in dire straits as half its water is lost to leaks and illegal mining
He added that a further R50m was paid last month in terms of an agreement with the National Treasury. 'The major contributions are non-recovery of revenue due to non-technical and technical water losses,' he said. Mabuza said the persistently low revenue collection rate undermined the municipality's ability to service creditors, fund infrastructure maintenance, and meet operational obligations. There were many broken meters that had not been replaced over the years, which had put a dent on the collection rate of the institution as these old meters result in inaccurate billing, and will require huge capital to replace in a short space of time, Mabuza said. He told the committee that from October until last month, Rand Water reduced the bulk supply of water to the municipality by 20%. This meant that some areas would end up with dry taps. Mabuza said there were times when the utility did not issue public notices to the community about the lack of water, which led to a public outcry. 'The municipality urgently outsourced water tankers, which further severely hampered the cash flow of the municipality, with a cost of over R5m. The municipality is unable to keep up with monthly invoices due to revenue collection being inadequate to cover the R45m a month billed by Rand Water [for] debt. [The] Eskom bill also ranges between R40m and R83m per month, depending on summer or winter tariffs.' Nelisiwe Ntlhola, director of municipal finance support in Merafong, told the committee that some of the root causes affecting revenue collection were unemployment, poverty and the influx of undocumented foreigners into the municipality. 'There is high unemployment in Merafong and high poverty, which is socioeconomically affecting the revenue of the municipality,' she said. Ntlhola said the province should step in and help the municipality by identifying people who can afford to pay and those who cannot. She said that after this profiling, the enforcement of collection should follow. Ntlhola said there was a lack of support from law enforcement officials when it came to the crime associated with water losses from illegal mining. DA MPL Solly Msimanga said the municipality has not had a proper maintenance plan, and this meant 'you are going to continue having losses'.
The Citizen
7 hours ago
- The Citizen
SETA not resolving skills shortage, just eating our tax money
More than two decades after its inception, South Africa continues to face a serious skills shortage that damages long-term economic growth. Although South Africa has one of the worst employment rates in the world, it also has a skills shortage that remains a critical barrier to economic growth. A study has found that while the Sector Education and Training Authority (SETA) was created to solve this problem, but instead it only eats our tax money at a rate of R20 billion per year, reaching only 0.6% of the workforce. The government created the system to resolve the skills shortage, but it has proven to be inefficient and ineffective, according to research by the Bureau for Economic Research (BER). The BER proposes to resolve the skills problem by restructuring and moving towards a more effective approach that prioritises skills for growth. BER researchers Robert Botha, Roy Havemann and Claire Bisseker say South Africa faces a serious skills shortage, which is damaging long-run economic growth. They cite the BER's Manufacturing Survey as an example that shows that around half of all manufacturing businesses cite skilled labour as a significant business constraint. The SETAs were intended to increase skills levels in the economy by solving market failures in skills training, such as underinvestment in skills development, by compelling firms to contribute to the collective cost of training through a mandatory levy. ALSO READ: Training authority believes this sector could be key to jobs and economic growth Systemic underperformance Botha, Havemann and Bisseker identified systemic underperformance as the root cause of the failure, saying that while the SETA system operates at a significant scale, its performance is undermined by deep-rooted inefficiencies and a 'leaky pipeline' where a substantial number of students exit programmes without certification. Between 2011/12 and 2023/24, the system registered 2.6 million individuals across various programmes, with 2 million completions. However, these headline figures mask critical weaknesses, as more than 630 000 registrations did not lead to a successful certification. This leakage is most severe in the programmes designed to address deep skills and facilitate workforce entry. The total number of SETA skills programme registrations in 2023/24 was only 1% of the employed and 0.7% of the labour force. Botha, Havemann, and Bisseker say this is in sharp contrast to similar international schemes where uptake is very high. In France's equivalent scheme, approximately 50% of employees participate, while in Canada approximately 30% participate. The researchers also noted that the system's overall performance statistics are significantly inflated by short, arguably low-complexity skills programmes. These programmes account for 48.3% of all registrations and 60.8% of completions, boasting a high 96% throughput rate. However, when these short programmes are excluded, the throughput rate for more substantive interventions, such as learnerships, internships and artisanal programmes, plummets to 57%. ALSO READ: Setas empowers youth through skills development programme SETAs fail to meet most of their targets Botha, Havemann, and Bisseker point out that the system consistently fails to meet performance targets. SETAs failed to achieve most of their cumulative targets over the period of review. For internships, for example, targets were missed for 10 out of the 13 years under review. The researchers point out that the SETAs have highly variable labour market absorption rates. 'The ultimate goal of SETA programmes is employment, but tracer studies reveal vastly inconsistent absorption rates. This challenges the idea of a uniform 'SETA absorption rate' and points to highly contextual performance. Tracer studies find absorption rates varied between 83% to 6.1%.' They say the build-up and hoarding of surpluses and cash reserves point to significant financial inefficiency and chronic mismanagement. 'The SETA system commands significant financial resources but is defined by inefficiency and a failure to spend its budget on its core mandate.' The researchers found that more than the review period, R164 billion was disbursed to the SETAs, and total revenue consistently exceeded expenditure, leading to large net surpluses, which stood at R6.7 billion at the end of 2023/24. The researchers also found that the SETA's total number of employees grew by 60%, from 1 716 in 2011/12 to 2 748 in 2023/24, while the wage bill grew by 12% on average annually between 2014/15 and 2023/24, significantly outpacing both average consumer price inflation (5%) and the growth of the broader public service wage bill. ALSO READ: Higher education minister withdraws appointment of Seta board chairpersons SETAs also expensive system, costing more than university SETA is also an expensive system. In 2023/24, the cost per SETA certification was R181 269, significantly higher than the cost per university enrolment of R76 405, NSFAS funding per university student of R73 829 and TVET college funding per student of R34 230. The researchers say when the low-cost, high-volume skills programmes are excluded to get a truer picture of the cost for substantive qualifications, the SETA cost per certification skyrockets to R388 052, which is even higher than the cost per university graduate of R370 923, although universities also have research mandates. With all this money, the SETA system is only achieving 4% to 6.6% of the overarching target set out in the National Skills Development Plan, in conjunction with the National Development Plan and the New Growth Plan. Based on these overarching plans, the Seta system should aim to facilitate and co-finance training 'for approximately 10% of the workforce annually'. In 2023/24, the labour force was 24 million, which would imply a target of 2.4 million. However, the total number of SETA registrations was 165,125 in that year, while the total number of programmes completed was 98,834. ALSO READ: 'We should be grateful we have a government that listens': Ramaphosa says Seta board appointments a 'mistake' Options to resolve the problem Botha, Havemann, and Bisseker give four options to resolve the problem: Option 1: phase out the SETAs entirely, including the levy. However, the researchers point out that it is likely that SETAs increase unemployment on a net basis and phasing them out is likely to increase employment. Even if firms do not increase employees significantly, firm profits and corporate tax will rise. The main disadvantage it would take away funding for skills development. Although the SETAs are inefficient, the system creates an existing pool of funding that could arguably still be used for developing skills, but in a better way. Option 2: Reduce the levy. The SETAs are not spending their entire allocations, with excess funds accumulating in growing surpluses and cash reserves. This increases unemployment without the offsetting benefit of an increase in skills. Option 3: Redirect the levy. There have been calls to use the levy for other purposes, and the researchers believe this is a second-best (but still relatively good) option, although it does not directly address the skills shortages and mismatches that the economy currently faces. Option 4: Convert the system to one based on a revenue-neutral tax incentive. Economic theory suggests that a market failure in skills development arises because firms are not incentivised to upskill their employees with general skills, nor is there an incentive to skill up the unemployed. ALSO READ: Outa and whistle-blower accuse government's skills training bodies of 'repurposing' funds Best option, according to researchers Botha, Havemann, and Bisseker argue that it would be a better solution to shift from the current SETA system to a revenue-neutral skills tax incentive, funded from the skills development levy and paired with other employment creation incentives such as the Youth Employment Service (YES) and the Employment Tax Incentive (ETI). The proposed design would mirror the Research and Development Incentive, where firms would be able to claim their qualifying skills programme spend off their skills development levy contribution. The researchers say this would essentially create a ring-fenced pool of money for each firm to spend on skills. The choice of skills development would be at the firm level, rather than at a centralised SETA level. Depending on budget pressures, over time, the deduction can be increased, such as the Research and Development Incentive that allows for 150% of qualifying spend to be deducted from tax.
