South African parliament passes budget framework
JOHANNESBURG, June 11 (Reuters) - South Africa's lower house of parliament passed the budget's fiscal framework and revenue proposals on Wednesday.
The budget of Africa's biggest economy has been caught up in political wrangling for months. It has been reworked twice because of disagreements in the ruling coalition over plans to raise value-added tax.
A majority of 268 lawmakers, including from the two biggest political parties the African National Congress (ANC) and the Democratic Alliance (DA), voted in favour of the fiscal framework and revenue proposals, while 88 voted against and 2 abstained.
The ANC and the DA had been at loggerheads over the budget until the finance minister backtracked on a plan to raise value-added tax.
The two parties have more than half of the lawmakers in the 400-member National Assembly.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scottish Sun
an hour ago
- Scottish Sun
Households face council tax hikes and £10billion stealth levies as Reeves gets boxed into corner by shrinking economy
Economists warned the circumstances meant tax hikes are almost certain this autumn GOGGLE-BOXED IN Households face council tax hikes and £10billion stealth levies as Reeves gets boxed into corner by shrinking economy HOUSEHOLDS face council tax hikes and £10billion in stealth levies as Rachel Reeves gets boxed into a corner by the shrinking economy, experts warn. The Chancellor, who wore protective goggles during a visit to the University of Derby yesterday, learned growth fell 0.3 per cent in April — less than 24 hours after her £113billion spending review splurge. Advertisement 2 Rachel Reeves wears protective goggles during a visit to the University of Derby Credit: Simon Walker / HM Treasury 2 Households face council tax hikes and £10billion in stealth levies Credit: Getty Businesses are reeling from the National Insurance rise, a jump in the minimum wage and ongoing uncertainty over Donald Trump's global trade war. Economists warned the circumstances meant tax hikes are almost certain this autumn — along with hard-pressed town halls having to up council tax rates by five per cent next year to pay for local services. Former Office for Budget Responsibility committee member Andy King said 'the writing was on the wall for another fiscal hole' — which would trigger tax rises or possible spending cuts in the Budget. Another expert accused Ms Reeves of 'making up numbers' in her spending review as there were few clues where savings would be found. Advertisement READ MORE ON SPENDING REVIEW TAX BLOW Council tax bills to rise at fastest rate in 20 years after Reeves' review Paul Johnson, from the Institute for Fiscal Studies, said her demands that all Whitehall departments cut administration budgets by ten per cent a year were not the result of a 'serious analysis'. He also said that if Ms Reeves was forced to raise taxes, the most politically straightforward approach would be to extend the freeze on income tax thresholds. Mr Johnson added that her plans will result in a 'sting in the tail' because local authorities would have to raise their levies. More than half of Brits — 52 per cent — reckon Ms Reeves' spending review will have a negative economic impact rather than positive. Advertisement But one piece of good news did emerge yesterday, as it was revealed the UK was finally ready to sign its trade deal with the US.
Sky News
3 hours ago
- Sky News
Rachel Reeves 'a gnat's whisker' from having to raise taxes, says IFS
Rachel Reeves is a "gnat's whisker" away from having to raise taxes in the autumn budget, a leading economist has warned - despite the chancellor insisting her plans are "fully funded". Paul Johnson, director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS), said "any move in the wrong direction" for the economy before the next fiscal event would "almost certainly spark more tax rises". Speaking the morning after she delivered her spending review, which sets government budgets until 2029, Ms Reeves told Wilfred Frost hiking taxes wasn't inevitable. "Everything I set out yesterday was fully costed and fully funded," she told Sky News Breakfast. Her plans - which include £29bn for day-to-day NHS spending, £39bn for affordable and social housing, and boosts for defence and transport - are based on what she set out in October's budget. That budget, her first as chancellor, included controversial tax hikes on employers and increased borrowing to help public services. 3:43 Chancellor won't rule out tax rises The Labour government has long vowed not to raise taxes on "working people" - specifically income tax, national insurance for employees, and VAT. Ms Reeves refused to completely rule out tax rises in her next budget, saying the world is "very uncertain". The Conservatives have claimed she will almost certainly have to put taxes up, with shadow chancellor Mel Stride accusing her of mismanaging the economy. Taxes on businesses had "destroyed growth" and increased spending had been "inflationary", he told Sky News. New official figures showed the economy contracted in April by 0.3% - more than expected. It coincided with Donald Trump imposing tariffs across the world. Ms Reeves admitted the figures were "disappointing" but pointed to more positive figures from previous months. 7:57 'Sting in the tail' She is hoping Labour's plans will provide more jobs and boost growth, with major infrastructure projects "spread" across the country - from the Sizewell C nuclear plant in Suffolk, to a rail line connecting Liverpool and Manchester. But the IFS said further contractions in the economy, and poor forecasts from the Office for Budget Responsibility, would likely require the chancellor to increase the national tax take once again. It said her spending review already accounted for a 5% rise in council tax to help local authorities, labelling it a "sting in the tail" after she told Sky's Beth Rigby that it wouldn't have to go up.
BBC News
6 hours ago
- BBC News
Legal win for son tricked into moving to Africa by parents
A teenager who was tricked into going to boarding school in Africa has won a significant legal victory against his own 14-year-old boy, who cannot be identified, was taken from London to Ghana in March 2024 after being told a relative was ill. In fact, his parents wanted to get him out of London as they feared he was being drawn into criminal and homesick in Ghana, the boy found lawyers and brought a case against his parents to the High Court in London, which ruled against him in February. On Thursday, he won his appeal, so the case will be reheard. The most senior judge in the Family Division, Sir Andrew McFarlane, said there had been confusion in the previous decision."We have become more and more concerned as to the exercise the judge undertook," he added."For those reasons - we are agreed remittal should be allowed."He urged the family to find a solution through constructive dialogue. At the hearing, the boy's barrister, Deirdre Fottrell KC, said he is "desperate" to return to the UK."He is culturally displaced and alienated," she said."He considers himself abandoned by his family. He feels he is a British boy, a London boy."The boy remains in Ghana and has been attending a day school there. His solicitor, James Netto, described the appeal ruling as a "hugely significant" decision that would "resonate across international family law." He said: "We are very pleased indeed that the Court of Appeal has allowed our client's appeal, and has recognised the critical importance of listening to and assessing the voices of young people at the heart of legal proceedings that profoundly affect their lives."The parents' barrister, Rebecca Foulkes, said that staying in Ghana was the "least harmful" option for the boy."The parents found themselves in a wholly invidious decision when they made the decision they made," she said. "Ghana provided a safe haven, separate from those who exposed him to risk."The least harmful option is for him to remain in Ghana."The case centres on the question of parental responsibility, and whether the parents acted unlawfully by sending their son to boarding school without his boy previously told the court that he felt like he was "living in hell". He said he was "mocked" at the school in Ghana and "could also barely understand what was going on".During the previous judgement, High Court judge Mr Justice Hayden said the parents' wish for their son to move to Ghana was "driven by their deep, obvious and unconditional love".He found that the boy, who had lived in the UK since birth, was at risk of suffering greater harm by returning to said that the boy's parents believe "and in my judgement with reason" that their son has "at very least peripheral involvement with gang culture and has exhibited an unhealthy interest in knives".Sir Andrew said the case will now be reheard by a different judge, with the next hearing planned to take place in the next few weeks.A full decision will be given in writing at a later date.
