Dissertations / Theses on the topic 'Tax evasion – Law and legislation – Zimbabwe'

The federal income tax system in the United States depends upon a high degree of voluntary compliance. The IRS estimates that the voluntary compliance level is declining and that this tax compliance gap cost the government an estimated $90.5 billion in 1981. Between 1979 and 1982, Congress made several changes in the tax laws designed to improve tax compliance. Extensive data was collected by the IRS for 1979 and 1982 through the random sample audits of approximately 50,000 taxpayers on the Taxpayer Compliance Measurement Program (TCMP), which is conducted every three years. During the period 1979 through 1982, Congress lowered the marginal tax rates, added some fairly severe penalties, for both taxpayers and paid return preparers, and increased information reporting requirements for certain types of income. In this research, it was hypothesized that voluntary compliance should increase in response to lower marginal rates, a higher risk of detection due to additional reporting requirements, and increased penalties. Multiple regression analysis was employed to test these hypotheses, using 1979 and 1982 TCMP data. Because of the requirements for taxpayer confidentiality, it was necessary for the IRS to run the data and provide the aggregate data results for the research. The results provided insight into the effectiveness of tax compliance legislation. While the overall voluntary compliance level (VCL) increased from 1979 to 1982 by 1.53 per cent, the VCL increase for taxpayers in high marginal rates was much smaller (.42 percent) than the overall increase. This is very inconsistent with the notion that high marginal rates are driving noncompliance, and suggests that marginal rates may not be strong determinants of compliance. Probably other factors, such as opportunity for evasion, may be more important. There was little change from 1979 to 1982 of the compliance of returns done by paid return preparers. Because of the timing of many TEFRA provisions (effective in 1983), further research for years after 1982 is needed.

Tax avoidance has been the subject of intense scrutiny lately by both the South African Revenue Service ("the SARS") and the media. This attention stems largely from the recent withdrawal of section 103(1) together with the introduction of section 80A to 80L of the South African Income Tax Act. However, this attention is not limited to South Africa. Revenue authorities worldwide have focused on the task of challenging tax avoidance. The approach of the SARS to tackling tax avoidance has been multi-faceted. In the Discussion Paper on Tax Avoidance and Section 103 (1) of the South African Income Tax Act they begin with a review of the distinction between tax evasion, tax avoidance and tax planning. Following a call for comment the SARS issued an Interim Response followed by the Revised Proposals which culminated in the withdrawal of the longstanding general anti-avoidance rules housed in section 103(1) and the introduction of new and more comprehensive anti-avoidance rules. In addition, the SARS has adopted an ongoing media campaign stressing the importance of paying tax in a country with a large development agenda like that of South Africa, the need for taxpayers to adopt a responsible attitude to the management of tax and the inclusion of responsible tax management as the greatest measure of a taxpayer's corporate and social investment. In tandem with this message the SARS have sought to vilify those taxpayers who engage in tax avoidance. The message is clear: tax avoidance carries reputational risks; those who engage in tax avoidance are unpatriotic or immoral and their actions simply result in an unfair shifting of the tax burden. The SARS is not alone in the above approach. Around the world tax authorities have been echoing the same message. The message appears to be working. Accounting firms speak of a "creeping conservatism" that has pervaded company boardrooms. What is not clear, however, is whether taxpayers, in becoming more conservative, are simply more fully aware of tax risks and are making informed decisions or whether they are simply responding to external events, such as the worldwide focus by revenue authorities and the media on tax avoidance. Whatever the reason, it is now critical, particularly in the case of corporate taxpayers, that their policies for tax and its attendant risks need to be as sophisticated, coherent and transparent as its policies in all other areas involving multiple stakeholders, such as suppliers, customers, staff and investors. How does a company begin to set its tax philosophy and strategic direction or to determine its appetite for risk? A starting point, it is submitted would be a review of the distinction between tax evasion, avoidance and planning with a heightened sensitivity to the unfamiliar ethical, moral and social risks. The goal of this thesis was to clearly define the distinction between tax evasion, tax avoidance and tax planning from a legal interpretive, ethical and historical perspective in order to develop a rudimentary framework for the responsible management of strategic tax decisions, in the light of the new South African general anti-avoidance legislation. The research methodology entails a qualitative research orientation consisting of a critical conceptual analysis of tax evasion and tax avoidance, with a view to establishing a basic framework to be used by taxpayers to make informed decisions on tax matters. The analysis of the distinction in this work culminated in a diagrammatic representation of the distinction between tax evasion, tax avoidance and tax planning emphasising the different types of tax avoidance from least aggressive to the most abusive and from the least objectionable to most objectionable. It is anticipated that a visual representation of the distinction, however flawed, would result in a far more pragmatic tool to taxpayers than a lengthy document. From a glance taxpayers can determine the following: That tax avoidance is legal; that different forms of tax avoidance exist, some forms being more aggressive than others; that aggressive forms of tax avoidance carry reputational risks; and that in certain circumstances aggressive tax avoidance schemes may border on tax evasion. This, it is envisaged, may prompt taxpayers to ask the right questions when faced with an external or in-house tax avoidance arrangement rather than simply blindly accepting or rejecting the arrangement.

The Income Tax Bill (2012) proposes certain changes to the existing Income Tax Act that will impact on the method used to determine the taxable income of a taxpayer in Zimbabwe. Therefore, it is important to understand the tax consequences the Income Tax Bill creates for the taxpayer. The research aimed to elaborate on and explain the tax consequences that will arise as a result of applying the Income Tax Bill in Zimbabwe. The research was based on a qualitative method which involved the analysis and the interpretation of extracts from legislation and articles written on the proposed changes. The current “gross income” of a taxpayer consists of amounts earned from a source within or deemed to be from within Zimbabwe The proposed changes to the Act will change the tax system to a residence-based system, where resident taxpayers are taxed on amounts earned from all sources. Therefore, the driving factor which determines the taxability of an amount will become the taxpayer’s residency. Clause 2 of the proposed Act provides that income earned by a taxpayer should be separated into employment income, business income, property income and other specified income. This will make it unnecessary to determine the nature of an amount because capital amounts will be subject to income tax. The current Act provides for the deduction of expenditure incurred for the purpose of trade or in the production of income. Section 31(1)(a) of the proposed Act will restrict permissible deductions to expenditure incurred in the production of income. Consequently, expenditure not incurred for the purpose of earning income will no longer be deductible when the Income Tax Bill is implemented. The proposed Income Tax Act will increase the taxable income of a taxpayer as it makes amounts that are not currently subject to tax taxable, whilst restricting the deductions claimable.

This treatise was undertaken to critically analyse the new general anti avoidance rules (new GAAR) as set out in sections 80A to 80L of the Income Tax Act1. A discussion on the difference between tax evasion and tax avoidance was performed in the first chapter. The goals of this treatise were then set out. An analysis of the requirements for the application of the new GAAR was performed in the second chapter. The courts have historically reviewed the circumstances surrounding an arrangement when determining whether tax avoidance has occurred. The new GAAR requires the individual steps of an arrangement to be reviewed in isolation. Secondly, the courts have historically held that the purpose test, when determining the taxpayer‘s purpose, was subjective. The wording of the new GAAR indicates that this test is now objective. Thirdly, the courts have historically viewed the abnormality of an arrangement based of the surrounding circumstances. The wording of the new GAAR requires an objective view of the arrangement. An analysis of the secondary provisions contained in sections 80I, 80B and 80J of the new GAAR was performed in the third chapter. With regards to section 80B, it was submitted that the Commissioner should issue an Interpretation Note detailing all the methods ―he deems appropriate.

Taxation statutes often provide opportunities for tax avoidance by taxpayers who exploit the provisions of the taxing statute to reduce the tax that they are legally required to pay. It is, however, important to distinguish between the concepts of tax avoidance and tax evasion. The central issue, especially where the contract has no business purpose, is whether it is possible for the substance and legal form of the transaction to differ to such an extent that a court of law will favour the substance rather than the legal format. The debate is whether the courts should be encouraged to continue with their "judge-made" law or whether the tax jurisdictions should be supporting a legislative route as opposed to a judicial one, in their efforts not only to combat tax avoidance but also to preserve taxpayer certainty. The question is whether the Doctrine of "Substance over Form" as applied by the judiciary is effective in combating tax avoidance, or whether a legislated general anti-avoidance provision is required. An intensive literature survey examines the changes which have occurred in the application of judicial tests from the 1930's to date and investigates the different approaches tax jurisdictions follow in order to combat tax avoidance. The effect of the introduction of anti-avoidance provisions in combating tax avoidance is evaluated by making a comparison between the United Kingdom and South Africa. [n the United Kingdom, the courts are relied on to create anti-tax avoidance rules, one of which is the Doctrine of "Substance over Form". The doctrine is very broad and identifies various applications of the doctrine, which have been developed by the courts. In South Africa, the Doctrine of "Substance over Form" has been applied in certain tax cases; however the South African Income Tax Act does include anti-tax avoidance sections aimed at specific tax avoidance schemes, as well as a general anti-tax avoidance measure enacted as section 103. The judicial tests have progressed and changed over time and the introduction of anti-avoidance legislation in the Income Tax Act has had an effect on tax planning opportunities. A distinction needs to be made between fraudulent and bona fide transactions while recognising the taxpayer's right to arrange his or her affairs in a manner which is beneficial to him or her from a tax perspective. Judicial activism and judicial legislation in the United Kingdom has created much uncertainty amongst taxpayers and as a result strongly supports the retention of a general anti-avoidance section within an Income Tax Act. A general anti-avoidance provision, following a legislative route, appears to be more consistent and effective in combating tax avoidance.

Moneymaking schemes such as prostitution, drug dealing, fraud, corruption, pyramid schemes and the sale of counterfeit goods have been around for years. The taxing of these transactions/schemes has become a contentious issue. It has recently been reported in the press that SARS has lodged a claim for R183 million in income taxes against the estate of the slain mining magnate, Brett Kebble, in respect of the R2 billion allegedly stolen by him from the mining companies of which he was a director.4 It is further reported that the Master of the High Court has rejected the claim on the grounds that the amounts on which SARS sought to levy tax constituted money stolen by Kebble, and that stolen money is not subject to income tax. It has been reported that SARS is to take the Master’s decision in this regard on review.5 The Kebble case raises an interesting and unresolved tax issue and, in view of the large sum at stake, it may be a case that will go all the way to the Supreme Court of Appeal and bring long-overdue certainty to the law. The Income Tax Act No. 58 of 1962 (the Act) is of no assistance in determining the issue. Section 23(o) states that payments that are illegal in terms of Chapter 2 of the Prevention and Combating of Corrupt Activities Act No. 12 of 2004 or that constitute a fine or penalty for any “unlawful activity carried out in the Republic or in any other country if that activity.

Tax evasion has been happening for decades, but after the highly publicized cases with two foreign banks, LGT and UBS, the United States (US) is cracking down on tax evaders. The latest addition to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS)’s repertoire of enforcement tools is the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act, otherwise known as FATCA. The Act was enacted to incentivize tax information release by foreign financial institutions (FFIs) who would otherwise face a 30% withholding tax on any US source income. The question was whether or not the design of the Act and its implementation successfully met this goal. This paper explores the history leading up to FATCA’s creation, beginning from the basic data underlying tax evasion. With the US losing approximately $100 billion a year of tax revenue, the IRS is keen on reducing the money flow out of the US. It will dig deeper into the facts of the LGT and UBS cases which led to Congress’s realization that their other enforcement mechanisms were not sufficient and describe FATCA’s unintended impact. Through researching articles on the predicted impact of FATCA, surveys of FFIs, testimonials from US citizens, this paper will explain how FATCA has unfortunately detrimentally impacted FFIs and US citizens living abroad.

The purpose of this study was an empirical investigation of the factors considered by the United States Tax Court in determining whether the principal purpose for an acquisition was tax avoidance (or alternatively, given the totality of the surrounding circumstances, whether there was an overriding business purpose for the acquisition).

The research examined whether the services provided by the “sharing economy” platforms are adequately dealt with by the current South African tax systems. In addressing this main goal, the research analysed how the South African tax systems deal with the income and expenses of Uber, Airbnb and their respective service providers. The research also investigated how South Africa could classify “sharing economy” workers and how this would affect the deductibility of the worker’s expenses. A brief analysis was made of the taxation of the “sharing economy” businesses in Australia and the United States of America. These countries have implemented measures to effectively deal with regulating the “sharing economy” businesses. An interpretative research approach was used to provide clarity on the matter. Documentary data used for the research consists of tax legislation, case law, textbooks, commentaries, journal articles and theses. The research concluded that the current taxation systems have loopholes that are allowing participants in the “sharing economy” to avoid paying tax in South Africa. The thesis recommends that the legislature could adopt certain measures applied in Australia and the United States of America to more effectively regulate “sharing economy” in South African and remedy the leakages the current tax systems suffer, causing SARS to lose potential revenue.

Income tax in South Africa is levied in terms of the Income Tax Act, 58 of 1962 (the South African Income Tax Act) on taxable income, which by definition, is arrived at by deducting from ''gross income" receipts and accruals that are exempt from tax as well as deductions and allowances provided for in the Act. The South African Income Tax Act provides no guidance with regard to the taxation of income and expenditure from illegal activities. In this mini thesis, case law and legislation is reviewed in an attempt to provide clarity on the tax consequences of income and expenses arising from illegal activities. An overview is provided of the taxation of income and expenditure in respect of illegal activities in the United States of America, Australia and New Zealand. Similarities are found between the American, Australian, New Zealand and South African tax regimes in relation to the taxation of income earned from illegal activities, but there appears to be more certainty in America, Australia and New Zealand with regard to the deduction of expenses arising from illegal activities. In South Africa, taxpayers earning income from ongoing illegal activities will, in principle, comply with the definition of “trade” as defined in section 1 of the South African Income Tax Act. However, this is contrary to the view of the South African Revenue Service that illegal activities do not meet the definition of “trade”, a viewpoint that may not hold if challenged in court. Recommendations are made for the amendment of the South African Income Tax Act to specifically provide for the inclusion in “gross income” of income from illegal activities and to prohibit the deduction of expenditure arising from illegal activities.

Abstract in English, Afrikaans and Zulu
In 2016, Zimbabwe introduced specific transfer pricing legislation to prevent abusive tax strategies by taxpayers. This study uses a qualitative interpretive inquiry to assess the adequacy of the new transfer pricing regime. This study contributes to the body of knowledge in that it explores transfer pricing as a tax avoidance tool, a concept that is at its nascent stage in academic taxation literature. Furthermore, it addresses a methodological gap by employing a qualitative inquiry in an area that is predominated by quantitative research. Indepth interviews and document review were used to gather data, and deductive content analysis was employed with the aid of ATLAS.ti 8™. This study confirms previous findings that tax consultants play a significant role in the compliance decisions of Multinational Enterprises (MNEs) through the examination of the exploitative strategies practiced by these MNEs. The comparison of the OECD and UN transfer pricing guidelines in search for the applicability of international guidelines to Zimbabwe’s specific needs helped uncover the contemporary dilemmas in global standards versus domestic standards. This study responds to the knowledge gap regarding the transfer pricing phenomenon in Zimbabwe through the lenses of an under-explored three-layered rationality concept; legal, implementation and exploitative rationality. The argument maintained in this study is that this rationality trichotomy is a useful lens to understand transfer pricing as a tax avoidance tool, and that international standards are not universal and so each country’s unique situation should be addressed at a domestic level.
Zimbabwe het in 2016 bepaalde oordragprysingswetgewing ingestel om onregmatige belastingstrategieë deur belastingbetalers te voorkom. Hierdie studie het ’n kwalitatief-interpretatiewe ondersoek gebruik om die toereikendheid van die nuwe oordragprysingsregime te assesseer. Die studie lewer ’n bydrae tot die kennismateriaal omdat dit oordragprysing as ’n belastingvermydingsinstrument ondersoek, ’n konsep wat in sy kinderskoene in akademiese belastingliteratuur staan. Dit verken ook ’n metodologiese gaping deur ’n kwalitatiewe ondersoek te gebruik op ’n gebied wat deur kwantitatiewe navorsing oorheers word. Omvattende onderhoude en dokumentbeoordelings is gebruik om data in te samel en deduktiewe inhoudsontleding is met behulp van ATLAS.ti 8™ gedoen. Hierdie studie bevestig vorige bevindinge dat belastingkonsultante ’n baie belangrike rol speel by die nakomingsbesluite van multinasionale ondernemings (MNO’s), gebaseer op die ondersoek van die uitbuitende strategieë wat deur hierdie MNO’s beoefen word. ’n Vergelyking van die Organisasie vir Ekonomiese Samewerking en Ontwikkeling (OESO) en die Verenigde Nasies (VN) se oordragprysingsriglyne om die toepaslikheid van internasionale riglyne ten opsigte van Zimbabwe se bepaalde behoeftes te bepaal, het gehelp om die eietydse dilemmas van globale standaarde versus huishoudelike standaarde bloot te lê. Hierdie studie stem ooreen met die kennisgaping rakende die oordragprysingsverskynsel in Zimbabwe deur deur die lens van ’n onderontgindedrielaag-rasionaliteitskonsep, naamlik wetlike, implementerings- en uitbuitende rasionaliteit, te kyk. Die studie voer aan dat hierdie rasionaliteitsdrieledigheid ’n nuttige manier is om oordragprysing as ’n belastingvermydingsinstrumente te verstaan, dat internasionale standaarde nie universeel is nie en dat elke land se unieke situasie derhalwe op ’n huishoudelike vlak aangespreek moet word.
Ngonyaka we-2016, izwe laseZimbabwe lithula imithetho ebhekene ngqo nokwedluliselwa kwezezimali zentengiselwano ukuvimbela ukusetshenziswa ngendlela esakuhlukumeza amasu ezentela ngabakhokhintela. Lolu cwaningo lusetshenziselwa uphenyo olukhombisa ukuhumusha okuphathelene nobungaki bento ukuze luhlolisise ukudluliselwa kwesikhathi sokuphatha esisha ekudlulisweni kokubekwa kwamanani emali. Ucwaningo lunomethelela olwazini olufanele ngokuthi lihlola ukubekwa kwamanani njengethuluzi eligwema ukukhokhwa kwentela, njengomqondo osesesigabeni sokuqala ukukhula ezifundweni zemibhalo yezentela. Ngaphezu kwalokho, sikhuluma ngegebe elikhombisa indlela yokwenza izinto ngokusebenzisa uphenyo olukhombisa ubungako bento endaweni egxile ocwaningweni olubheke obungako bento. Ukuthola ulwazi ngalokhu kuye kwasetshenziswa izinhlolokhono ezijulile kanye nokubuyekezwa kwemiqulu yamabhuku, kanye nokusetshenziswa kokuhlaziya okuqukethwe okuphunguliwe ngokubambisana nosizo le-ATLAS.ti 8™. Lolu cwaningo luqinisekisa okutholakale ngaphambilini okubonisa ukuthi abeluleki bezentela badlala indima ebalulekile ezinqumweni zokuthobela imithetho yezinkampani zamazwe angaphandle ngokusekelwe ekuhlolweni kokuxhashazwa kwamasu enziwa yizo izinkampani zamazwe angaphandle. Ukuqhathaniswa kwe-OECD kanye ne-UN mayelana nokudlulisela imihlahlandlela yamanani ekufuneni ukusebenza kwemihlahlandlela yeziqondiso zomhlaba wonke ngokwezidingo zaseZimbabwe kusize ekwembuleni izinkinga zesikhathi esizayo emazingeni omhlaba ngokuhambisana namazinga ezindinganiso zomhlaba jikelele ngokuhambisana namazinga asekhaya. Lesi sifundo siphendula igebe lolwazi elimayelana nokwedluliselwa kwesimo sokubekwa kwenani lemali kwezezintengiselwano eZimbabwe ngokusetshenziswa kokubhekwa komqondo onezigaba ezintathu ongaphansi kwesilanganiso sokuhlola, okungumthetho, ukwenziwa kwakhona kanye nokuxhashazwa kwemiqondo. Lolu cwaningo luphikisana nokuthi lomqondo ongunxantathu yinto ebhekwe ngamehlo abomvu futhi ebalulekile ekuqondeni ukudluliselwa kokubekwa kwesimo sezemali njengethuluzi lokugwema ukukhokhwa kwentela, okusho ukuthi amazinga omhlaba awasiyo into efanayo nokuthi izwe ngalinye linesimo salo esingafanani nelinye okwenza ukuthi isimo ngasinye sibhekwe ngokwesimo sezinga lasekhaya.
Financial Accounting
D. Phil. (Accounting Sciences)

A research report submitted to the Faculty of Commerce, Law and Management, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Commerce (specialising in Taxation) Johannesburg, 2017
As a result of a weakening and slow global economy and rising debt, many foreign governments are finding it difficult to implement strategies to ensure continued inclusive and sustainable growth. It is based on this troubling perspective of global uncertainty that tax authorities worldwide have unanimously persisted in their fight against tax evasion through the under-declaration of income from foreign assets, the illegal movement of money abroad, the misapplication and / or manipulation of transfer pricing legislation and mistreatments of tax treaties. The G20 Leaders together with the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (“OECD”) have developed standards such as the Common Reporting Standard (“CRS”) for the Automatic Exchange of Information (“AEOI”) between tax authorities to enhance the sharing of information and transparency of information between tax authorities worldwide. South Africa has pledged to implement the CRS and automatically share tax information with other jurisdictions on an annual basis in the fight against tax evasion and avoidance. Of significance, in terms of timing for South African tax residents, is that South Africa has undertaken to be one of the early adopters of the CRS and committed to commence the first exchange of information from 2017. In light of the standards and actions coming into place, it has become clear that before long the likelihood of the South African Revenue Services (“SARS”) and the South African Reserve Bank (“SARB”) detecting tax evasion and avoidance is increasingly high. Based on this, non-compliant taxpayers have a limited timeframe to manoeuvre freely in and what may be their last opportunity to voluntarily disclose these assets and the income derived therefrom to SARS and SARB without facing heavier penalties and possible criminal prosecution.
MT 2018

A research report submitted to the Faculty of Commerce, Law and Management, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Commerce (Specialising in Taxation) Johannesburg, 2017
Trusts are an essential tool for estate planning. The interest in trust structures by taxpayers has increased over the years and the South African Revenue Services (‘SARS’) and National Treasury (‘NT’) have placed trusts on their agenda due to their perceived tax avoidance resulting from the use of trust structures. Section 7C was introduced into the Income Tax Act 58 of 1962 (as amended) (‘the Act’) in order to curb the avoidance of estate duty. However, the work undertaken by SARS and NT over the years and the insertion of this section in the Act, created an impression that there is avoidance of taxation through the use of trust structures. This study will interrogate the provisions of s 7C in order to determine the effectiveness of this section in curbing the avoidance of estate duty and/or tax through the use of trust structures. The well thought out manner in which this section was drafted and the existence of other tax provisions in the Act which pertain to trusts and the funding mechanisms of trusts suggest that this new inclusion is a convenient and easy manner to monitor the abuse by SARS and NT and subsequently curb the perceived abuse. The interplay of this section with ss 7 and 31 of the Act indicate a risk of unintended double taxation. This and the circumvention options that taxpayers may embark on are matters that may render the section ineffective, although it is evidenced that this section closes that last door that remained open for taxpayers in respect of funding a trust. Key Words: Tax avoidance, estate duty avoidance, National Treasury, SARS, National Budget Speech, Davis Tax Committee Reports on estate duty, Interest-free and low interest loans, Affected Transactions (s 31), Donor attribution rules (s 7), Donations and donations tax, Double taxation.
GR2018

This study was undertaken to analyse the developments in the anti avoidance legislation over a five year period from 1 March 2006 to 28 February 2011. Emphasis were placed on describing the road from the old section 103 provisions leading to the new general anti avoidance rules (GAAR) as contained in sections 80A to 80L of the Income Tax Act 58 of 1962. The study began with a detailed analysis of the differences between tax evasion and tax avoidance based on definitions and interpretations by various courts. It then went further in chapter two to formulate an acceptable distinction between Tax evasion, Tax planning and impermissible tax avoidance as currently used by the South African Revenue Services (SARS). It appeared from the study that firstly, courts have historically reviewed the circumstances surrounding an arrangement when determining whether tax evasion has occurred. The new GAAR requires the individual steps of an arrangement to be reviewed in isolation. Secondly, the courts have historically held that the purpose test, when determining the taxpayer‘s purpose, was subjective. The wording of the new GAAR indicates that this test is now objective. Thirdly, the courts have historically viewed the abnormality of an arrangement based of the surrounding circumstances. The wording of the new GAAR requires an objective view of the arrangement. A comparison was made between countries that have adopted statutory GAAR with a view of understanding how they have applied these general anti avoidance provisions successfully to tax avoidance cases. This comparison revealed that there is an inconsistent application of these general anti avoidance provisions by different countries. Courts and administrators apply them differently, based on circumstances and the nature of avoidance. Lastly, it has been acknowledged that most avoidance schemes are very complex and their perpetrators are always on the look for gaps in tax systems, hence any avoidance legislation to effectively curb tax evasion will need to be revised on a regular basis. Therefore, the Commissioner would be expected to issue regular updates on anti avoidance provisions and latest developments in the form of interpretation and or practice notes.
Thesis (MBA)-University of KwaZulu-Natal, Westville, 2011.

The additional tax ("penalties") imposable in terms of section 76(1) of the Income Tax Act (No 58 of 1962) when a taxpayer is in default, can be very harsh (up to 200% of the tax properly chargeable). The Commissioner may, in terms of section 76(2)(a), remit any penalty imposed, as he sees fit. However, when there was intent on the part of the taxpayer to evade the payment of tax, the Commissioner may not remit any portion of the 200% penalty imposable, unless he is of the opinion that "extenuating circumstances" exist. This dissertation examines the meaning of "extenuating circumstances", as interpreted by the judiciary, and lists the factors and defences that a taxpayer may plead to justify a remission of penalties, both in the case of an intention by the taxpayer to evade tax and in cases where the taxpayer is merely in default of section 76(1).
Accounting
MCOM (Accounting)

A research report submitted to the Faculty of Commerce, Law and Management, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Commerce (specialising in Taxation)
Tax avoidance is the legal utilisation of the tax regime to one's own advantage, to reduce the amount of tax that is payable by means that are within the law. Tax evasion entails taxpayers deliberately misrepresenting or concealing the true state of their affairs to the tax authorities in order to reduce their tax liability, and includes, in particular, dishonest tax reporting (such as declaring less income, profits or gains than actually earned; or overstating the deductions). The revised general anti-avoidance measures were introduced in the Income Tax Act 58 of 1962 ('the Act') on 2 November 2006 in the form of section 80A to 80L, in order to replace the complicated and confusing as well as ineffective anti-avoidance measures contained in section 103(1).
AC 2018

This work entails a study of some of the schemes that are employed by country residents when companies and trusts are used as vehicles for investing in offshore tax-haven and low tax jurisdictions so as to avoid taxes. The study also entails a critical analysis of the effectiveness of the some of the laws in South Africa that curb such offshore tax avoidance schemes. Similar laws in the United Kingdom and in the United States are analysed in order to come up with some recommendations that could be considered for possible reform of the relevant South African laws where they are found wanting. Since offshore tax avoidance is an international issue, the effectiveness of the recommendations of some international organisations in preventing the depletion of countries' tax bases are also analysed.
JURISPRUDENCE
LLD