South Africa: Pay now, argue later
International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX
Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2024

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

South Africa: Pay now, argue later

dachs.jpg

Peter Dachs

The Tax Administration Act provides that a taxpayer is liable to pay tax once an assessment has been raised by the South African Revenue Service (SARS). In terms of section 164 of the Tax Administration Act, unless a senior SARS official otherwise directs in terms of subsection (3), the obligation to pay tax and the right of SARS to receive and recover tax will not be suspended by an objection or appeal or pending the decision of a court of law. In terms of section 164(2) a taxpayer may request a senior SARS official to suspend the payment of tax or a portion thereof due under an assessment if the taxpayer intends to dispute or disputes the liability to pay that tax.

Section 164(3) provides that a senior SARS official may suspend the payment of the disputed tax or a portion thereof having regard to:

  • The compliance history of the taxpayer;

  • The amount of tax involved;

  • The risk of dissipation of assets by the taxpayer concerned during the period of suspension;

  • Whether the taxpayer is able to provide adequate security for the payment of the amount involved;

  • Whether the payment of the amount involved would result in irreparable financial hardship to the taxpayer;

  • Whether sequestration or liquidation proceedings are imminent;

  • Whether fraud is involved in the origin of the dispute; or

  • Whether the taxpayer has failed to furnish information requested under the Tax Administration Act for purposes of a decision under section 164.

Section 164(6) states that from the date that SARS receives a request for suspension and ending 10 business days after notice of SARS' decision, no recovery proceedings may be taken against the taxpayer unless SARS has a reasonable belief that there is a risk of dissipation of assets by the taxpayer.

Therefore, as soon as a taxpayer receives an assessment from SARS which it intends to challenge, it should consider making application for a suspension of payment under section 164(2) of the Tax Administration Act.

The taxpayer should refer to and argue its case in terms of each of the grounds set out in section 164(3). The test is a composite one and therefore it is not necessary for a taxpayer to pass each of these tests.

If SARS decides not to grant the request for suspension of payment, a taxpayer cannot object and appeal against such decision. However, the exercise of the power granted to SARS to approve or refuse a request for a suspension of payment constitutes administrative action and is therefore reviewable by a court in terms of the principles of administrative law.

Peter Dachs (pdachs@ensafrica.com)

ENSafrica – Taxand

Tel: +27 21 410 2500

Website: www.ensafrica.com

more across site & bottom lb ros

More from across our site

Nusetti, global tax head at pharmaceutical company Lupin, tells ITR about being a tax magician, military aspirations and what makes tax cool
The UK tax agency unsuccessfully argued that a software company was not entitled to R&D tax relief
Pillar two anticipation may have led to stable international corporation tax rates according to the OECD; in other news, A&M has continued its lateral hiring spree
Singapore faces controversies with many trade partners and needs to constantly keep tax guidelines up to date, a local tax expert told ITR
With HMRC’s renewed enforcement focus, it’s as important as ever for UK companies to get their NRD compliance affairs in order, writes Lewin Higgins-Green of FTI Consulting
Senator Richard Colbeck’s remarks follow news that PwC Australia CEO Kevin Burrowes receives a salary of A$4 million, more than previously disclosed
Adam Frais will assume his new role on October 1 and will lead BDO’s 1,000-strong UK tax business
It comes after a decree which introduced a qualified domestic minimum top-up tax last year
The UK Upper Tribunal’s pragmatic approach to anti-abuse provisions will be welcomed by the secondary debt market, say Matthew Greene and Guy Bud of Stewarts
The party should aim to reduce corporation tax from 25% to 15%, one partner told ITR
Gift this article