South Africa: Non-resident non-executive directors: VAT registration ruling

International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Garden, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

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

South Africa: Non-resident non-executive directors: VAT registration ruling

intl-updates-small.jpg
kruger.jpg
bennett.jpg

Des Kruger

Anne Bennett

Non-executive directors (NEDs) of South African companies are reacting with dismay to a ruling from the South African Revenue Service (SARS) requiring them to register and account for VAT on their directors' fees from June 1 2017.

Binding General Ruling 41 (BGR 41), issued on February 10 2017, and updated on May 4, provides that NEDs must register and charge VAT on directors' fees where these fees (and other vatable supplies made by them, if any) exceed ZAR 1 million ($75,000) in any 12-month period. Services rendered in South Africa will attract VAT at the standard rate while any services physically rendered outside South Africa may be zero-rated.

In the case of non-resident NEDs, questions around the legal basis for this ruling are being hotly debated. The requirement to charge VAT depends on whether or not a person carries on an "enterprise" (taxable activity) wholly or partly in South Africa. As a general rule, the VAT Act provides that the rendering of services by the holder of any office in performing the duties of the office does not amount to the carrying of an "enterprise" to the extent that any "remuneration" (as defined in the Income Tax Act) is paid to the holder of that office. South African company law requires directors to be natural persons and South African sourced directors' fees paid to non-resident NEDs are specifically included in the definition of "remuneration" for South African income tax purposes.

Since directors' fees earned by a non-resident NED constitute "remuneration" as defined, the agreed starting position is that services rendered by non-resident NEDs are generally not "enterprise" activities and non-resident NEDs should not need to register for South African VAT. However, the VAT Act does go on to provide that services rendered by the holder of an office can, notwithstanding the general rule, nevertheless constitute "enterprise" activities if such person "accepted (the office) in carrying on any enterprise …independently of the employer or concern by whom the amount of remuneration is paid or payable".

SARS argues in BGR 41 that as NEDs are required under South African law to carry out their duties independently of the companies in respect of which they act as directors, the directorship services concerned therefore constitute "enterprise" supplies for VAT purposes.

This argument seems to overlook the legal requirement that for remuneration to be subject to VAT, the relevant office holder must accept the office in carrying on an enterprise. The acceptance of a directorship arguably does not in itself result in a non-resident NED embarking on an "enterprise" – some nexus is required between the acceptance of the directorship and a pre-existing enterprise already being carried on by the non-resident NED.

While there may be foreign individuals who are carrying on independent enterprises at least partly in South Africa which result in their being offered South African board positions, these are likely to be the exception. In the majority of cases, non-resident NEDs are individuals who are not separately conducting any form of business activity at all, or alternatively whose other business activities have no nexus to South Africa. It is hard to see in these scenarios how SARS can argue that an NED has accepted a local directorship in carrying on an independent "enterprise".

Non-resident NEDs who do not believe the ruling can apply to them face a dilemma. Failure to register and account for VAT after June 1 will no doubt put them on a collision course with SARS, and at risk for VAT and potentially even interest and penalties. It is consequently recommended that non-resident NEDs obtain legal advice based on their specific circumstances before adopting a final position regarding their South African VAT obligations.

Des Kruger (des.kruger@webberwentzel.com) and Anne Bennett (anne.bennett@webberwentzel.com)

Webber Wentzel

Tel: +27 11 5305886

Website: www.webberwentzel.com

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

The threat of 50% tariffs on Brazilian goods coincides with new Brazilian legal powers to adopt retaliatory economic measures, local experts tell ITR
The country’s chancellor appears to have backtracked from previous pillar two scepticism; in other news, Donald Trump threatened Russia with 100% tariffs
In its latest G20 update, the OECD also revealed tense discussions with the US where the ‘significant threat’ of Section 899 was highlighted
The tax agency has increased compliance yield from wealthy individuals but cannot identify how much tax is paid by UK billionaires, the committee also claimed
Saffery cautioned that documentation requirements in new government proposals must be limited if medium-sized companies are not exempted from TP
The global minimum tax deal is not viable without US participation, Friedrich Merz has argued
Section 899 of the ‘one big beautiful’ bill would have spelled disaster for many international investors into the US, but following its shelving, attention turns to the fate of the OECD’s pillars
DLA Piper’s co-head of tax for the US and Latin America tells ITR about her fervent belief in equal access to the law, loving yoga, and paternal inspirations
Tax expert Craig Hillier agrees with the comparison of pillar two to using a sledgehammer to crack a nut
The amount is reported to be up 57% from the £5.6bn that the UK tax agency believes was underpaid in the previous year
Gift this article