1. Presentation Footer1 PRESENTATION TO THE SCoF 2010 06 01 Muneer Hassan: Project Director Tax Wessel Smith: Member of SAICA’s NTC Puleng Owen Manyaka: Project Manager Tax

2. FOCUS AREAS 1.Narrowing the interest threshold exemption 2.Employer-provided motor vehicles 3.Tax-free fringe benefits for employer- provided professional fess and indemnity payments Presentation Footer2

3. FOCUS AREAS 1.Narrowing the interest threshold exemption Page 9 – 11 of the SAICA Submission 2.4 of the Explanatory Memorandum Presentation Footer3

4. 4 NARROWING THE INTEREST THRESHOLD EXEMPTION Current law: Section 10(1)(i)(xv) Exempts interest received by or accrued to “resident natural persons” as follows: Under 65R22 300 (2010: R21 000) Aged 65 years and olderR32 000 (2010: R30 000) Of the total interest exemption, the first R3 700 (2010: R3 500) of foreign interest and dividend received is exempt from tax

5. NARROWING THE INTEREST THRESHOLD EXEMPTION Proposed change: “these exemptions will be limited to savings through widely available interest-bearing instruments, such as bank deposits, government retail bonds and collective investment money market funds” Specific inclusion list – new section 10C of the Act 5

6. NARROWING THE INTEREST THRESHOLD EXEMPTION Problem statement: Taxpayers entitled to consistency and certainty Amendment favours certain categories of interest bearing products Affects retired individuals who have invested in private projects Affects legitimate transactions (example 1) Big blow for small businesses (example 2) Presentation Footer6

7. NARROWING THE INTEREST THRESHOLD EXEMPTION Problem statement: Affects legitimate transactions Taxpayer A grants 20 year loan to Taxpayer B (house used as security) Loan bearing interest at market rates A receives from B interest BUT no interest exemption Had A received the cash and then invested in a bank the interest earned would be EXEMPT 7 Taxpayer A Seller: Primary residence Taxpayer B Purchaser: Unable to obtain financing Unconnected

8. Problem statement: Big blow for small businesses Unconnected person: R278 750 Options: Either invest in business or bank at 8% return Return = R22 300 (R278 750 at 8%return) 8 NARROWING THE INTEREST THRESHOLD EXEMPTION Start up business cannot obtain loan funding from a bank Unconnected investor: loan funding Owner: obtain loan from bank and on lends to business

9. NARROWING THE INTEREST THRESHOLD EXEMPTION Problem statement: Big blow for small businesses Investment: R278 750Return: 8% pa 9 BusinessBank Return pa22 300 Interest exemption022 200 Balance subject to tax22 3000 Tax8 9200 Post tax returns13 38022 300 Net return as % of investment4.8%8%

10. NARROWING THE INTEREST THRESHOLD EXEMPTION Proposed solution: Main Remove the proposed exemption to limit the interest exemption Focus on the avoidance schemes Current anti-avoidance legislation:  Specific - Sections 7(1) – 7(11)  General - Sections 80A – 80K “GAAR” 10

11. NARROWING THE INTEREST THRESHOLD EXEMPTION Proposed solution: Alternative Remove the proposed exemption to limit the interest exemption Add specific anti-avoidance legislation after extended consultation period with stakeholders 11

12. COMPANY CARS Pages 1 to 5 of SAICA submission and pages 16 to 20 of Explanatory Memorandum Explanatory memorandum: “The percentage rate for employer-provided vehicles (including the first) will now be 4% per month of the vehicle’s determined value (instead of the current 2.5% rate for the first car).” “Determined value” to include VAT and maintenance plan 80% of fringe benefit subject to employee tax (3.2%)

13. COMPANY CARS – Example “effect of the proposal” On vehicle with cost of R300 000 excluding VAT, and employee on maximum marginal tax rate (40%): Before amendments: 2.5% cash value = R7 500, therefore monthly tax at 40% = R3 000. After amendments: 4% cash value, but 3.2% subject to PAYE = R13 680 x 80% = R10 944, therefore monthly tax at 40% = R4 378. After amendments: At year-end, if no business mileage can be proved, then the monthly tax effect would be R5 472! 13

14. COMPANY CARS Problem: “Determined value” to include VAT although employer in some cases will be able to claim back the input VAT! 14 Proposed solution: Where an employer is able to claim the input VAT on a vehicle, the determined value should not include the VAT portion.

15. COMPANY CARS Problem: Maintenance plan also included in determined value - Vehicles that include maintenance / service plans will, if the amendment is effected, carry a higher fringe benefit rate when compared to vehicles that do not have maintenance plans. It is also submitted that part of the 4% monthly fringe benefit value already includes a portion for the fringe benefit relating to the employer incurred maintenance cost. 15

16. COMPANY CARS Problem: Maintenance plan included (continued) 16 Proposed solution: The maintenance plan should be excluded from the determined value to achieve an equitable outcome for all vehicles as it relates to an operating expense.

17. COMPANY CARS Problem: There is no distinction made between “tool of trade” vehicles and the company car “schemes”. By “tool of trade” we mean that the vehicle is an essential tool that enables the employees to perform his / her duties, for example a delivery man that has the dedicated use of a small bakkie, van or delivery vehicle. 17

18. COMPANY CARS Problem: “tool of trade” vehicles (continued) 18 Proposed solution: We propose that the legislation be amended to distinguish between benefit “schemes” such as those that allocate funds from a Cost To Company package and a “tool of trade” vehicle given for legitimate business use.

19. COMPANY CARS Problem: We submit that the 4% value applied against the value of the vehicle is not in line with the actual cost of maintaining and running the vehicle. On R200 000 vehicle AA rates cost = R7 186, while the fringe benefit value would be R8 000! The fringe benefit is therefore higher than the actual benefit received. 19

20. COMPANY CARS Problem: 4% value (continued) 20 Proposed solution: The rate of 4% should be revised to bring it in line with the actual benefit received, i.e. the expense incurred by the employer or the expense that the employee would have incurred if he/she had purchased, maintained and run the car themselves.

21. COMPANY CARS Problem: Employee tax - Employees that do travel frequently for business would have a higher percentage of business travel mileage than 20% of their total. It follows that such employees would only be able to claim relief on assessment. We believe that the delay experienced between the monthly employees’ tax charged and the refund upon assessment could create hardship for employees. 21

22. COMPANY CARS Problem: Employee tax 80% (continued) 22 Proposed solution: The employer should have the ability to, on a discretional basis; lower the percentage from 80% to a lower percentage for the purposes of withholding employees’ tax on a monthly basis. Alternatively, the employee should have the option to apply to SARS for a hardship directive to fix the percentage of tax withholding on a monthly basis in this regard.

23. COMPANY CARS Problem: This proposal will also now include 80% of the deemed private use of the vehicle (4%) in the calculation for amounts due for Skills Development (“SDL”) and Unemployment Insurance Fund (“UIF”). The presumption of private use is, therefore, extrapolated to the SDL and UIF contributions due for these employees regardless of actual business use. 23

24. COMPANY CARS Problem: SDL and UIF contributions (continued) 24 Proposed solution: The SDL and UIF contribution should both exclude a travel allowance and the fringe benefit on employer provided motor vehicles.

25. FOCUS AREAS 3.TAX-FREE FRINGE BENEFIT FOR EMPLOYER-PROVIDED PROFFESSIONAL FEES AND INDEMINITY INSURANCE Page 11 – 12 of the SAICA Submission 2.8 of the Explanatory Memorandum Presentation Footer25

26. 26 TAX-FREE FRINGE BENEFIT FOR EMPLOYER- PROVIDED PROFFESSIONAL FEES AND INDEMINITY INSURANCE Current law: Paragraph 13(2)(b) of the Seventh Schedule to the Act Professional fees and indemnity insurance paid by employers on behalf of their employees are exempted from fringe benefit tax under paragraph 13(2)(b) of the Seventh Schedule. Example of such fees are membership fees paid to professional bodies and insurance indemnity payment in the following professions:  Charted Accountants; Medical Doctors; Attorney’s; Engineers

27. TAX-FREE FRINGE BENEFIT FOR EMPLOYER- PROVIDED PROFFESSIONAL FEES AND INDEMINITY INSURANCE Problem Statement: Paragraph 13(2)(b) of the Seventh Schedule v Sec 23(m) of the Act The exemption provided under paragraph 13(2)(b) of the Seventh Schedule on the payment of the professional fees and indemnity insurance payments is discriminatory. Proposed amendment only favours certain categories of taxpayers (e.g. only taxpayers who receive this kind of benefit from their employers). Taxpayers who do not enjoy this privilege of being provided with this kind of benefit by their employers and have to pay these fees for themselves are not allowed get a tax deduction in terms of section 23(m) of the Act. Taxpayers entitled to consistency and certainty. 27

28. TAX-FREE FRINGE BENEFIT FOR EMPLOYER- PROVIDED PROFFESSIONAL FEES AND INDEMINITY INSURANCE Proposed solution: Main Clarity that the legislation provides in terms of paragraph 13(2)(b) of the Seventh Schedule is welcomed. HOWEVER we propose the relief be extended to also allow professional fees and insurance indemnity payments as a tax deduction for the employee in terms of section 23(m) of the Act. 28