International Tax Review is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 8 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2023

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

South Africa: Settlements with SARS


Peter Dachs

It has been widely reported that the South African Revenue Service (SARS) is making application for the sequestration of Julius Malema, the head of the Economic Freedom Front political party, after the 'collapse' of a settlement agreement between the parties. These reports state that Malema did not correctly disclose the source of the funds used to settle the tax debt which formed part of the agreement. In determining whether settlement is appropriate the Commissioner of SARS must consider a variety of factors including the potential costs of litigation to SARS and its likelihood of success, factual or evidentiary difficulties which would make litigation or alternative dispute resolution problematic, whether settlement is in the best interest of good management of the tax system, overall fairness and use of SARS' resources.

It is specifically stated that a person participating in a settlement procedure must disclose all relevant facts during the discussion phase of the process of settling a dispute. In addition a settlement is conditional upon full disclosure of material facts known to the person concerned at the time of the settlement.

A written agreement must then be concluded between the parties which includes details on, for example, how each issue is settled, relevant undertakings by the parties and arrangement for payment.

Section 148 of the Tax Administration Act provides that SARS is not bound by the terms of the written agreement if the taxpayer has failed to make full disclosure in settlement discussions or if there was fraud or misrepresentation of the facts. It is this point that SARS has allegedly raised in respect of its settlement agreement with Julius Malema.

In conclusion, while settlement should always be considered in a tax dispute, there are various risks associated with such process including the risk that the settlement agreement is subsequently not adhered to by SARS on the basis that material facts were not disclosed by the taxpayer or that there was fraud or misrepresentation of the facts.

Peter Dachs (

ENSafrica – Taxand Africa

Tel: +27 21 410 2500


more across site & bottom lb ros

More from across our site

Two months since EU political agreement on pillar two and few member states have made progress on new national laws, but the arrival of OECD technical guidance should quicken the pace. Ralph Cunningham reports.
It’s one of the great ironies of recent history that a populist Republican may have helped make international tax policy more progressive.
Lawmakers have up to 120 days to decide the future of Brazil’s unique transfer pricing rules, but many taxpayers are wary of radical change.
Shell reports profits of £32.2 billion, prompting calls for higher taxes on energy companies, while the IMF warns Australia to raise taxes to sustain public spending.
Governments now have the final OECD guidance on how to implement the 15% global minimum corporate tax rate.
The Indian company, which is contesting the bill, has a family connection to UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak – whose government has just been hit by a tax scandal.
Developments included calls for tax reform in Malaysia and the US, concerns about the level of the VAT threshold in the UK, Ukraine’s preparations for EU accession, and more.
A steady stream of countries has announced steps towards implementing pillar two, but Korea has got there first. Ralph Cunningham finds out what tax executives should do next.
The BEPS Monitoring Group has found a rare point of agreement with business bodies advocating an EU-wide one-stop-shop for compliance under BEFIT.
Former PwC partner Peter-John Collins has been banned from serving as a tax agent in Australia, while Brazil reports its best-ever year of tax collection on record.