FANews
FANews
RELATED CATEGORIES
Category Tax
SUB CATEGORIES Tax | 

Withholding taxes: a costly administrative burden?

14 May 2013 Fiona Zerbst
Fiona Zerbst, FAnews Online Editor

Fiona Zerbst, FAnews Online Editor

South Africa has had the distinction of being one of the few African countries that doesn’t impose a requirement to deduct tax on payments to non-residents, but a withholding tax on cross-border service fees will be introduced from 1 March 2014. Governmen

This announcement has been made against the backdrop of the introduction of a withholding tax on dividend and interest payments and an increase in the rate of withholding tax on royalties.

The question is, why are we departing from international norms in this regard? There are two possible reasons – one, the fact that it’s ‘easy money’ for government; and two, government intends aligning all withholding taxes (including the dividends tax and withholding tax on interest) so the rates are aligned – the proposed rate is 15%.

And while this may put off new investors who are considering investing in South Africa, the possible adverse economic impact is twofold. “We can’t really say exactly how South African businesses will be affected, but the real cost of implementation will affect profit margins,” says Jelle Keijmel, a senior manager in PwC’s international tax team.

A withholding tax should be an advance payment of tax on profits but, in practice, a withholding tax is inadvertently imposed on turnover at percentages that range from 5% to 20%, which effectively erodes the profit margins made by businesses. To safeguard their margins, non-resident service providers tend to price-in the effect of this tax, which ultimately increases the cost of doing business for local businesses with a potential ripple effect on the prices of goods and services across the nation.

An administrative burden

Until recently, South Africa only imposed a withholding tax on royalty payments and certain disposals by non-residents, as well as on payments to entertainers and sportspeople who visit the country. But times are changing. In fact, withholding taxes are common in developed countries, with the amount withheld and paid taking the form of pre-payment of income tax – it’s refundable if it exceeds the income-tax liability that’s determined when annual tax returns are filed.

As an international concept, a number of countries require tax to be deducted in advance on payments to non-residents, such as dividend, interest, royalty and rent. This is simple for governments to administer.

If you are used to obtaining services from abroad, be prepared for an administrative burden – you’ll be obliged to deduct the tax, remit the tax to SARS and ensure proof of the tax is obtained from SARS and sent to the service provider. “Although guidelines on compliance with the administration of the tax are yet to be released, this unrewarded obligation will require a fair amount of investment (both time and infrastructure) and recurring man hours from taxpayers,” says Brandt.

“Service payments which tend to be more frequent will no doubt require significant man hours in terms of administration as well as upgrades to existing accounting systems.”

Editor’s thoughts:
At the very least, aligning and co-ordinating these withholding taxes, will assist companies who have foreign clients and service providers, and tax practitioners will be able to advise their clients in terms of logistics. What do you think of the withholding taxes – are they likely to drive away foreign investment? Comment below or email fiona@fanews.co.za.

Comments

Added by Irene, 14 May 2013
Why should it drive away investment from ethical entities wishing to conduct business in SA? It was high time that government did something to protect local tax-paying businesses who have to compete with international competitors operating in SA and who do not have to price-in tax. The global trend is to take a closer look at companies - often registered in tax heavens - operating internationally and who fail to pay their fair share of taxes and have an unfair advantage against the local competitors. For too long international business has been allowed to enjoy an advantage over local businesses and avoid paying taxes in all the countries they have been generating profits from - Starbucks, Google, Amazon, etc being prime example of such unsavoury practice.
Report Abuse

Comment on this post

Name*
Email Address*
Comment
Security Check *
   
Quick Polls

QUESTION

What do you think the high volume of inquiries and withdrawal requests means for the future of the two-pot system?

ANSWER

It suggests high demand and potential success of the system
It indicates possible problems with the system’s implementation or communication
It points to financial stress among individuals that could affect long-term retirement planning
It could be detrimental to the economy and people's retirement security
It’s too early to determine the impact on the system’s future
fanews magazine
FAnews August 2024 Get the latest issue of FAnews

This month's headlines

Women’s Month spotlight: emphasising people and growth in the workplace
The power of skills transfer and effective mentorship
Advisers and investors hold thumbs the GNU will restore bond and equity valuations
What are the primary concerns of insurers and brokers?
The Two-Pot System: regulatory challenges ahead
How comprehensive is your clients' critical illness cover?
Subscribe now