Vat legal challenge could have wider implications
Court still to decide on constitutional validity of altering tax rates by 'announcement'.
The next crucial chapter in the value-added tax (Vat) case before the Western Cape High Court relates to the power given to the minister of finance to alter a tax rate by virtue of an announcement in the annual budget.
Political parties the DA and EFF challenge the constitutionality of Section 7(4) of the Vat Act. However, this case may even have wider implications since the Income Tax Act bestows a similar power on the minister of finance to alter other tax rates, including income tax, donations tax and dividend-withholding tax.
In 2022 Ben Cronin, lecturer at the University of Cape Town and advocate of the high court, in his thesis 'Law by decree: A critique of section 5(2) of the Income Tax Act' addressed the question of whether the power to 'alter a tax rate by announcement' infringes on the separation-of-powers doctrine and the Constitution.
This unique power has never been tested in court.
However, this specific power and Finance Minister Enoch Godongwana's reliance on Section 7(4) of the Vat Act to raise the rate in his budget from 15% to 15.5% is now being challenged.
Section 7(4) of the Vat Act bestows the minister with the same powers as Section 5(2) of the Income Tax Act to increase the tax rate by way of an announcement in his annual budget.
The Western Cape High Court has suspended the Vat rate increase pending the passing of legislation regulating the rate or the final determination of Part B (of the applications) – whichever occurs first.
ALSO READ: Godongwana consents to court order against VAT increase
Constitutional validity
In Part B the DA asks the court to declare Section 7(4) of the Vat Act constitutionally invalid. The declaration should only be retrospective to 1 March 2025. It does not ask for full retrospectivity as that would undo the increase from 14% to 15% in 2018.
Two issues that came before the court when the DA, EFF, speaker of parliament, and the minister of finance presented their cases related to separation of power between the legislature and the executive, and public participation.
These issues were extensively dealt with in Cronin's thesis that questioned the delegation of power that allows the minister to increase tax rates in the Income Tax Act, 'whether income tax, donations tax, or dividends withholding tax'.
These taxes have all been amended subject to a ratification by parliament within 12 months.
This unique power given to the minister was first introduced in 2016 and has subsequently been substituted by Section 3 of the Taxation Laws Amendment Act of 2018.
'Section 5(2) of the Income Tax Act as it reads today, in fact, represents a dramatic departure from the pre-existing statutory regime which recognised the authority of Parliament to determine the income tax rate on an annual basis,' Cronin stated in his thesis.
An important question that he addressed is whether parliament could 'assign an inherently legislative power to a member of the executive – namely to make law'.
ALSO READ: Practical implications of reversing the 0.5% VAT increase – Sars
Delegation of power
Cronin quotes the Second Executive Council Judgment case before the Constitutional Court, where the court's position appeared to be that parliament simply cannot delegate its plenary function to make primary legislation.
There is scope for the delegation of secondary law-making powers to members of the executive, but in this regard the legislature must nevertheless jealously guard its exclusive legislative competence and can only justifiably delegate such secondary law-making powers within the context of clear legislative guidelines.
The 'outright assignment' of the power to announce new tax rates in Section 5(2) of the Income Tax Act is therefore incompatible with the application of the Separation of Powers Doctrine envisaged by the Constitutional Court.
Cronin added that when parliament purported to delegate the power to determine and amend the income tax rate in terms of Section 5(2), it was attempting to assign a power that 'exceeds the competence of Parliament itself'.
'The law-making process cannot be given effect to by mere fiat declarations and in its original or plenary form it certainty cannot be delegated away by Parliament,' he argued.
ALSO READ: Budget 3.0 not unexpected, possible decrease in social grant increase
Public participation
Cronin also noted in his thesis that parliament must create opportunities to comment and influence the final wording of legislation.
This is simply 'axiomatically not possible' where laws are amended by mere announcement by a member of the executive as is envisaged in Section 5(2) of the Income Tax Act.
He submitted that if the minister uses the section to 'unilaterally amend a standing law', he would be indirectly pulling the entire law-making process into the troubled waters of conflicting directly with the Constitution that requires public access to and involvement in the legislative processes of the National Assembly.
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
Daily Maverick
6 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
Borders signal the edge of a nation, they must never be the edge of the law
The management of borders represents a critical point where state authority meets human rights and national security concerns. Borders in both the United States and South Africa serve as enforcement areas that test constitutional law boundaries and state authority limits through ethical governance challenges. Despite the existence of strong constitutional frameworks, borders often emerge as zones where power is exercised with minimal oversight and have increasingly become the subject of heated debates under the pressure of opposing interests. Judicial mechanisms offer post-facto challenges to abuse, but don't deter injustice from occurring before any intervention takes place. At stake are not only questions of territorial control, but fundamental civil liberties. While judicial mechanisms exist to challenge abuse, their retrospective nature means infringement is effected before remedy is available. A meaningful solution requires proactive legal training, deeper transparency and a strong culture of accountability. South Africa: consolidation with broad powers The formal establishment in April 2023 of the Border Management Authority (BMA) marked a significant structural shift in South Africa's border enforcement as envisioned in terms of the Border Management Authority Act, 2020. The launch of the BMA aimed to unify fragmented tasks within immigration, customs and security functions as a bold step towards operational efficiency. However, with consolidation comes concentration of power and, arguably, insufficient legal guardrails are in place. Current training of South African border agents appears to place overwhelming emphasis on security protocols, logistics and document verification. Detailed information about the standard training for officials has not yet been publicly documented. At the front lines, however, critical dimensions such as constitutional rights, international refugee protections and administrative justice remain underdeveloped or entirely absent. This knowledge gap opens the door for discretionary overreach. Border agents routinely make major impactful decisions, often without sufficient legal grounding. While the Constitution guarantees rights to both citizens and non-citizens, the implementation at borders of those rights remains inconsistent. Legal training should be a vanguard defence against such inconsistency, focusing not only on the technicalities of immigration law but also on values such as proportionality, rationality and dignity, all central to South Africa's constitutional vision. A training curriculum that includes real-world case studies and evolving jurisprudence would provide border officials with the legal literacy necessary to act effectively and lawfully. Borders are not lawless zones South African jurisprudence offers strong guidance. The Supreme Court of Appeal determined in Minister of Home Affairs v Watchenuka (2004) that constitutional rights apply to non-citizens and invalidated the idea that state power at borders escapes constitutional oversight. The Constitutional Court's decision in Dawood v Minister of Home Affairs (2000) established the necessity for defined guidelines to limit discretionary immigration actions while affirming that arbitrary decisions stand in opposition to constitutional principles of governance. In Gaertner and Others v Minister of Finance (2014), the court struck down provisions permitting customs officials to conduct warrantless property searches. While emphasising judicial oversight and opposing unchecked surveillance at borders, the court reinforced that, even at the border, constitutional safeguards must apply. Collectively, these cases make clear that South African borders are not constitutional vacuums. They are spaces where state interest and individual rights must be carefully balanced, a principle that must be embedded in policy, training and enforcement alike. The US: oversight in theory, discretion in practice US border agents carry out their duties under the Fourth Amendment's 'border search exception', which permits searches at international borders without warrants. While initially designed for luggage and customs inspections, the doctrine has expanded to include searches of electronic devices, sparking privacy concerns. In United States v Cotterman (2013), the Ninth Circuit introduced a distinction between 'basic' and 'forensic' device searches, requiring reasonable suspicion for the latter. This case was critical in defining the legal thresholds for state intrusion into digital privacy. Yet, reasonable suspicion, a circumstantial belief based on specific facts, remains a vague and flexible standard. Oversight mechanisms, while present, often fail to prevent real-world overreach. On paper, the US legal framework provides stronger judicial review than in many jurisdictions. The Fourth Amendment, the exclusionary rule and civil rights litigation offer meaningful remedies. But these mechanisms are largely retrospective. They rely on the injured party to challenge misconduct after it has already occurred, a process few travellers are equipped to initiate. Even with oversight, systemic issues such as racial profiling, device confiscation and prolonged detentions persist. Lessons from Cato's Letters Cato's Letters, a series of 18th-century essays written by Trenchard and Gordon, warned eloquently of the dangers of unaccountable power. Their call for liberty, limited government and the rule of law echoes loudly in today's border enforcement regimes. They warned that unchecked authority, even in the name of security, leads inevitably to oppression and abuse. Their defence of transparency, legal constraint and civic vigilance remains a powerful lens through which to evaluate modern border agencies. Whether it is US Customs and Border Protection or South Africa's BMA, concentrated authority without immediate oversight fosters environments where individual rights are routinely subordinated to institutional convenience or, even worse, ignorance. Technology is not a silver bullet In the US, billions have been spent on advanced border technologies: facial recognition, drone surveillance, biometric scanning and AI-powered analytics. These tools increase efficiency, but also amplify state power, and raise serious concerns about surveillance overreach and algorithmic bias. South Africa, while historically underresourced in this domain, is catching up. Home Affairs Minister Leon Schreiber has recently emphasised the digitisation of border processes and initiated a drone surveillance programme aimed at improving security along hard-to-patrol land borders. These innovations are promising, but require legal frameworks and ethical training to ensure that they enhance, not undermine, accountability. Technology alone cannot substitute for legal safeguards, ethical enforcement and public scrutiny. Without strong norms and oversight, technology simply makes it easier to abuse power faster and more efficiently. South Africa's systemic challenges Corruption remains a long-standing problem in South Africa's border management system. With a land border network spanning more than 4,700km, complex challenges in border management, surveillance and cross-border movement are common. Beit Bridge and Lebombo, the two busiest land border posts by movement of both people and goods, have gained notoriety for their involvement in bribery schemes, fostering illegal and fraudulent migration, and smuggling operations. Yet, these incidents are not exclusive to those posts. Both law enforcement operations and public trust in government institutions suffer from these prevailing situations. While integration under the BMA may help streamline accountability, corruption is a human problem, solved not by structure alone but through culture, leadership and training. The US, too, has struggled with ethical lapses in border enforcement, including documented abuses during the Trump administration involving family separations, inadequate detention conditions and racially biased screening practices. In both countries, external accountability mechanisms – including independent oversight bodies, public reporting and whistle-blower protections – are essential to preventing and addressing misconduct. Training is the real infrastructure Perhaps the clearest point of divergence between the US and South Africa lies in training systems. In the US, border agents attend standardised courses at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Centers covering constitutional law, immigration enforcement and ethical decision-making. By contrast, in South Africa training has been historically fragmented. The establishment of the BMA has offered an opportunity to establish standardised, law-based training that integrates legal, technical and ethical components. Given the BMA's expanded scope, this is not optional; it should be critical. A border agent without sufficient legal literacy is not just a weak link in enforcement but a risk to the rights of every traveller, migrant or citizen they encounter. Too often abuse is reported and remains unchecked. The human element in reform Ultimately, border enforcement is about people, those enforcing the law and those subject to it. The most sophisticated policy or technology will fail if the individuals tasked with implementation are poorly trained, poorly supervised or poorly supported. Ethics, empathy and law must inform every aspect of border interaction. Both the US and South Africa must invest not only in infrastructure but in human capital. Agents must be trained to understand not only how to detect threats, but how to respect rights. Performance metrics should include not just seizures or interdictions, but fair treatment, procedural integrity and respect for dignity. The front lines of democracy and eternal vigilance Border zones are not places outside the law. They are 'stress tests' for democracy and constitutionalism. In South Africa and the United States alike, the challenge is not whether the state can exercise power at the border, but how that power is constrained, overseen and made just. Legal training, transparency and accountability are not luxuries; they are the foundation of legitimate enforcement. As Cato's Letters reminds us, liberty depends not only on institutions but on 'eternal vigilance'. DM
IOL News
6 hours ago
- IOL News
Sugar drinks industry concerned by audits as SARS tightens compliance among producers
Shepstone &Wylie Attorneys in a statement by Erasmus Theron and Herman de Jong revealed that despite there being no increase in Sugar Tax there has been an increased focus by SARS on manufacturers' compliance within the sugary beverages industry Image: Karen Sandison Independent Newspapers The sugary beverages industry in South Africa is bracing itself for potential impacts as the South African Revenue Service (SARS) intensifies its focus on compliance among manufacturers. SARS is now targeting businesses involved in the manufacturing of sugary beverages, with the revenue collector saying manufacturers of sugary beverages must be registered as commercial manufacturers if they use more than 500kg of sugar in their manufacturing process. Professionals from Shepstone & Wylie Attorneys, Erasmus Theron and Herman de Jong, on Tuesday said the government was facing a daunting tax deficit following the vacuum left by an unchanged sugar tax amidst rampant fiscal constraints. They said that with an ambitious revenue target of R2.006 trillion set for the 2025/2026 tax period, the government has turned towards indirect taxes—specifically excise duties, fuel levies, and carbon taxes—as keystones to bridge the financial gap caused by failed proposals to increase the Value-Added Tax (VAT) rate. "Although the failure to increase sugar tax for the third consecutive year could be viewed as indicative of the fact that the importance of sugar tax is being diluted from a fiscal and health policy perspective, current experience, to the contrary, tends to indicate an increased focus by SARS on manufacturers' compliance within the sugary beverages industry," they said. The South African sugary beverages market for 2025 is estimated at R57 billion, which is a major contributor to the country's gross domestic product (GDP) through direct manufacturing, job creation, and distribution activities within the formal and informal sectors. In the 2024 tax year, the HPL contributed over R2.306 billion to the fiscus, which is less than the initial R2.446bn collected at the inception of the Health Pomotion Levy regime during the 2019/2020 tax period. "Although the reduced contribution to the fiscus could be attributed to reformulation strategies by manufacturers and lobbying activities by the sugar industry, it is also important to note that since the inception of the HPL regime, SARS' focus on compliance within the sugary beverages industry has been limited when compared to other industries such as the alcohol, tobacco, and petroleum industries," Shepstone & Wylie Attorneys said. However, Shepstone & Wylie Attorneys said this appears to be changing. The attorneys said there has been a noticeable increase in SARS queries and audits at sugary beverage manufacturers over the past 12 months. Chris Engelbrecht, chairperson of the Association of Southern Africa Sugar Importers (ASASI), said on Tuesday that this was concerning for the entire sugar industry. 'It's worrying that the government could be looking for more ways to collect revenue and conducting these audits could be a way to collect revenue. The beverage industry may be doing well but the sugar industry has its challenges especially with Ilovo Sugar and Huletts,' he said. Engelbrecht added if the manufacturing process was affected in sugar beverages it could lead to loss of profit. 'When there is a loss of profit it can lead to job losses and in South Africa we have high unemployment so this is something we don't want to see. The other factor is when the manufacturing of sugar products is affected. It has a ripple effect on sugar cane farmers due to less demand which will affect their operations.' SA Canegrowers said that they were concerned about the situation and felt the sugar industry already faces challenges with the sugar tax. 'The sugar tax has been nothing but destructive for South Africa. Ultimately, we believe that the [National] Treasury should scrap the tax, to help ensure that the government drives job creation and economic growth, as per its commitments outlined in the Sugarcane Value Chain Master Plan 2030.' BUSINESS REPORT
The South African
8 hours ago
- The South African
'We don't want Helen Zille as mayor': Ntsiki Mazwai
Outspoken media personality Ntsiki Mazwai has called for South Africans to reject former DA leader Helen Zille's plans to run for mayor of Joburg. Known for her controversial comments, the Moja Love star has gone as far as to call the 74-year-old a 'white supremacist'. Last week, the woman dubbed 'GodZille' confirmed that she was contemplating the monumental task of 'saving' Johannesburg. In a viral X post, Ntsiki Mazwai appealed to South Africans to reject Helen Zille's Joburg mayoral bid. She said: 'We cannot afford to have Helen Zille as mayor of Joburg. She is 100 million times worse than Cyril Ramaphosa. 'She is a white supremacist, and if you look at the Western Cape, you'll see that black people are abused there. They live in s**t conditions. She wants to bring that to Joburg'. Ntsiki – who has repeatedly called out politicians, particularly from the SA, added: 'She comes from a traumatic past for black people and she is triggering. We don't want her, she can go and retire, it's good'. She added that voting for Helen Zille as Joburg's next mayor would be 'a huge and scary mistake that would negatively impact the black masses' In another comment, Ntsiki agreed with her followers that the current mayor, Dado Morero of the ANC, was not the best option for the city. 'Anyone is better than Dada, guys. Helen is still not the answer', she posted. While Ntsiki Mazwai has rejected Gozille's ambitions, others are supporting it. In a tweet that also went viral, author Khaya Dlanga urged South Africans to give Helen Zille a chance, claiming that she offered a 'real, visible alternative' Anti-Apartheid activist Adam Habib stated that Helen was 'Johannesburg's best hope'. He added: 'Joburg needs water, power, roads, and frankly, governance. No one else has delivered it. Zille can!' Actor Siv Ngesi added, 'Jozi is such a huge mess, even the locals who hate @helenzille know that this would be the best thing for that dump of a place!' Speaking to eNCA, Helen Zille claimed that she had until Friday to officially submit her application to contest her bid as Johannesburg mayor. The DA's selection panel would then pick a suitable candidate from several names, including Zille's. 'Joburg is my hometown. I was born in Hillbrow, which looks very different than what it does today. Joburg was a functional city that I love and believe is the powerhouse of South Africa. Its health and its functionality is make or break for South Africa.' She added: 'If Joburg doesn't succeed, South Africa does not succeed.' Subscribe to The South African website's newsletters and follow us on WhatsApp , Facebook , X, and Bluesky for the latest news. Let us know by leaving a comment below, or send a WhatsApp to 060 011 021 1 .
