AGRICULTURAL

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE AGENTS ACT:

Re-Nomination of Candidates for Appointment to Agricultural Produce Agents’ Council (APAC)

G 54455 GoN 7348

02 April 2026

FULL TEXT

DETAILS

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

NO. 7348 2 April 2026

RE-NOMINATION OF CANDIDATES FOR APPOINTMENT TO THE

AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE AGENTS’ COUNCIL (APAC) IN TERMS OF THE AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE AGENTS ACT 1992, (ACT No. 12 OF 1992)

The Minister of Agriculture invites nominations of suitable persons to be considered for appointment as members of the Agricultural Produce Agents Council (APAC) to replace all existing members whose terms have and will expire in 2026.

The objectives of APAC are to regulate the occupations of fresh produce, export and livestock agents and to maintain and enhance the status and dignity of those occupations and the integrity of persons practicing those occupations. Nominations are hereby called for persons to represent the following:

• Fresh Produce Producers (2);

• Fresh Produce Agents (3);

• Livestock Producers (2);

• Livestock Agents (3);

• Export Agents (3);

• Department of Agriculture (1);

• The Minister (2); and

• The consumers (2).

A written acceptance of the nomination by the nominee, together with a copy of his or her ID document, a comprehensive Curriculum Vitae, documentary proof of all qualifications and a declaration that he or she is not disqualified to serve on the Council in terms of section 3(7) of the above-mentioned Act should accompany each nomination.

Each candidate should indicate the category he/ she would like to be considered for.

The nomination of candidates to enhance representation in terms of race and gender are encouraged.

Members of the Council shall be paid such remuneration or allowances from the funds of the Council, as the Council may determine.

Members are appointed for a maximum of three years in terms of section 3(1) of the Act.

The successful candidates will be subjected to a personnel suitability check (including citizenship, criminal record, qualification/s and financial asset/record check as well as employment verification).

Nominations should reach either of the following addresses on or before 24 April 2026:

Department of Agriculture

Sefala Building, Office 118 or 210

503 Belvedere street

Arcadia

Pretoria

Hand Delivery Nominations should be clearly marked for the attention of Ms F Makinta at the telephone number (012) 319-8456 and Ms J Mabuso (012) 319 8123 or email APACnominations@nda.gov.za

Those who previously submitted nominations are requested to resubmit their candidates

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

Agricultural Produce Agents Act: Re-Nomination of Candidates for Appointment to Agricultural Produce Agents’ Council (APAC)

G 54455 GoN 7348

02 April 2026

54455gon7348.pdf

ACTION

Interested parties need to submit their applications timeously.

CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND INTERNATIONAL TRADE

NOTICE

SUMMARY

LINK

Customs and Excise Act: Amendment to Part 3 of Schedule No. 6 (No. 6/3/67) (English/Afrikaans)

G 54445 RG 11978 GoN 7341

01 April 2026

This Notice amends Part 3 of Schedule No. 6 to the Customs and Excise Act by substituting Note 6(b). The amendment sets out revised fuel levy and Road Accident Fund (RAF) levy refund rates for eligible users of distillate fuel.

54445rg11978gon7341.pdf

Customs and Excise Act: Amendment to Part 5A of Schedule No. 1 (No. 1/5A/183) (English/ Afrikaans)

G 54445 RG 11978 GoN 7340

01 April 2026

This notice amends Part 5A of Schedule No. 1 to the Customs and Excise Act by substituting Note 8. The amendment sets revised fuel levy rates by specifying how the general fuel levy and carbon fuel levy combine for different fuel products.

54445rg11978gon7340.pdf

ENERGY AND PETROLEUM

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

PETROLEUM PRODUCTS ACT: REGULATIONS:

Single maximum national retail price for Illuminating Paraffin

G 54443 RG 11976 GoN 7336

31 March 2026

DETAILS

DEPARTMENT OF MINERAL AND PETROLEUM RESOURCES

NO. R. 7336 31 March 2026

PETROLEUM PRODUCTS ACT, 1977 (ACT No. 120 OF 1977)

REGULATIONS IN RESPECT OF THE SINGLE MAXIMUM NATIONAL RETAIL PRICE FOR ILLUMINATING PARAFFIN

1. I, Mr. G. Mantashe, Minister of Mineral and Petroleum Resources, under section 2(1)(c) of the Petroleum Products Act, 1977 (Act No. 120 of 1977), determine that a maximum retail price for Illuminating Paraffin (excluding the price of any form of packaging) will become effective on the first Wednesday of every month.
2. The single maximum retail price for illuminating paraffin, excluding the price of any form of Packaging for the period 01 April 2026 to 05 May 2026 will be 3147.00 c/l.

3. Commencement

These regulations shall come into operation at 00:01 on 01 April 2026.

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

Petroleum Products Act: Regulations: Single maximum national retail price for Illuminating Paraffin

G 54443 RG 11976 GoN 7336

31 March 2026

54443reg11976gon7336.pdf

ENVIRONMENTAL

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT: AIR QUALITY ACT:

National Dust Control Regulations

G 54440 RG 11975 GoN 7335

31 March 2026

APPLIES TO: 

The Regulations apply nationally to:

• Mining, prospecting, exploration and production right or permit holders;
• Persons conducting reclamation, including historical mine dumps;
• Persons conducting listed activities required to hold an atmospheric emission licence;
• Controlled emitters with the potential to generate dust; and
• Any activity reasonably suspected by an air quality officer of causing dust nuisance.

SUMMARY

Purpose

The National Dust Control Regulations, 2026 establish a national framework for the control and management of dust, with the aim of:

• Preventing and minimising dust emissions across South Africa, and
• Preventing nuisance impacts caused by dust on people, property, and the environment.

Dust Measurement Standard

• Dustfall must be measured using SANS 1137 (or an equivalent approved method).
• Dust refers to settleable particulate matter capable of settling by weight from ambient air.

Prescribed Dustfall Limits

Dust Management Plans (DMPs) 

Requirement

• Affected persons must develop and submit a Dust Management Plan within 60 days of the Regulations coming into operation.
• Approval is required from the municipal air quality officer or licensing authority, depending on the activity.
• New operations must have an approved plan before commencing activities.

Key contents of a DMP

A Dust Management Plan must include, among other things:

• Responsible persons for implementation;
• Identification of dust sources;
• Best practicable control measures (time‑bound);
• Dust complaint management procedures;
• Measures to prevent dust nuisance;
• Dustfall monitoring programmes (where required); and
• Protection of sensitive receptors such as schools, hospitals and ecological areas.

Reporting Obligations

• Monthly (or otherwise directed) implementation reports must be submitted.
• Reports must detail:
  • Dust control measures applied;
  • Complaints received and responses;
  • Monitoring results versus legal limits;
  • Meteorological data; and
  • Proof of SANAS‑accredited testing where applicable.

Review and Enforcement

• Authorities may require a review of the Dust Management Plan if:
  • Dust limits are exceeded;
  • Control measures are inadequate; or
  • New or expanded dust‑generating activities occur.

• Reviewed plans must be resubmitted within 60 days and approved before implementation.

Transitional Provisions

• Existing Dust Management Plans approved under the 2013 regulations must be updated within 60 days.
• A transition period (up to 6 months) is allowed to move from ASTM D1739 to SANS 1137 dustfall measurement.

Offences and Penalties

• Failure to comply with key requirements constitutes a criminal offence.
• Penalties include:
  • Up to R5 million fine or 5 years’ imprisonment for a first offence; and
  • Up to R10 million or 10 years’ imprisonment for repeat offences.

Repeal

• The National Dust Control Regulations, 2013 (GN R.827) are formally repealed.

FULL TEXT

DETAILS

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act: National Dust Control Regulations

G 54440 RG 11975 GoN 7335

31 March 2026

54440reg11975gon7335.pdf

ACTION

These Regulations significantly:

• Increase compliance and documentation requirements for mining, construction, reclamation and industrial operations;
• Strengthen dust nuisance enforcement powers of air quality officers; and
• Introduce heavier penalties for non‑compliance

FINANCE

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

Section 43A(3) of the Financial Intelligence Centre Act 38 of 2001:

Directive on the risk and compliance return

G 54439 GoN 7334

31 March 2026

APPLIES TO: 

If the organisation handles other people’s money, assets, investments, credit, gambling funds, crypto, or high‑value goods as part of its business, it is likely accountable.

Simple identification guide

SUMMARY

Purpose of the Directive

Directive 11 of 2026 requires specified accountable institutions to submit their 2026 Risk and Compliance Return (RCR) to the Financial Intelligence Centre.

The RCR is intended to assess:

• Money laundering risks
• Terrorist financing risks
• Proliferation financing risks
• The adequacy of institutions’ risk‑based controls under FICA

Submission Requirements

Format

• The RCR must be:
  • Completed electronically
  • Submitted via the official FIC Risk and Compliance Return Platform
  • Accessed through www.fic.gov.za

Content

Institutions must:

• Answer all applicable questions
• Base responses on:
  • Their understanding of risk exposure
  • Their current compliance and control measures under FICA

Submission Dates

Commencement of submissions

• Monday, 4 May 2026

Due dates

• 30 June 2026 (by 17:00):
  • Item 11 (non‑banks)
  • Items 14, 21, 22 (including crypto asset service providers)
  • Items 2 and 9 (casinos)

• 31 July 2026 (by 17:00):
  • Items 1, 3, and 9 (non‑casinos)
  • Item 20 (high‑value goods dealers, including precious metals, stones and Krugerrands)

Consequences of Non‑Compliance

Failure to submit the 2026 Risk and Compliance Return constitutes non‑compliance and may result in:

• Administrative sanctions under section 62E of FICA
• Potential fines, directives, or enforcement action by the FIC

Practical Impact

• Applies broadly across financial, gambling, crypto, property, legal, and high‑value goods sectors
• Reinforces the FIC’s risk‑based supervision approach
• Requires institutions to ensure:
  • Up‑to‑date risk assessments
  • Documented AML/CFT/PF controls
  • Accurate and consistent reporting

FULL TEXT

DETAILS

DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE

NO. 7334 31 March 2026

DIRECTIVE IN TERMS OF SECTION 43A(3) OF THE FINANCIAL INTELLIGENCE CENTRE ACT, 2001 (ACT 38 OF 2001)

1. Title

Directive 11 of 2026 on the submission of the 2026 risk and compliance return to the Financial Intelligence Centre (Centre) by accountable institutions as specified in this Directive (the specified accountable institutions).

2 Purpose

2.1 This Directive is issued by the Centre in terms of section 43A(3)(a) of the Financial Intelligence Centre Act, 2001 (Act 38 of 2001) (FIC Act).

2.2 The Directive requires the specified accountable institutions contemplated in paragraph 4 of this Directive to submit their 2026 risk and compliance return to the Centre.

3. Definitions

In this Directive, the ‘Act’ means the Financial Intelligence Centre Act, 2001 (Act 38 of 2001) and includes any regulation or directive made under the Act, and, unless the context otherwise indicates, any word or expression to which a meaning has been assigned in the Act has that meaning, and:

(a) “Risk and compliance return” includes, but is not limited to, the risk and compliance return questionnaires issued by the Centre, which may be subject to change from time to time.

(b) “Risk and compliance return platform” means the electronic system designated for accessing and completing the 2026 risk and compliance return and the receipt of the 2026 risk and compliance return by the Centre

4. Application

4.1. Subject to paragraph 4.2, this Directive applies to every specified accountable institution referred to in items 1, 2, 3, 9, 11 (non-bank), 14, 20, 21 and 22 of Schedule 1 of the Act.

4.2 This Directive does not apply to a bank, mutual bank and a co-operative bank that carries on a business of a credit provider contemplated in item 11 of Schedule 1 of the Act.

5. Directive

5.1 Every specified accountable institution contemplated by this Directive must submit the completed 2026 risk and compliance return electronically to the Centre in accordance with the Schedule to this Directive, from the commencement date on Monday, 4 May 2026.

5.2 The specified accountable institutions must answer all applicable questions in the 2026 risk and compliance return, based on their understanding of money laundering, terrorist financing and proliferation financing risks and their current implementation of risk-based controls in compliance with the obligations set out in the Act.

5.3 The 2026 risk and compliance return must include the requested information for the specific reporting periods and must be submitted electronically to the Centre from the commencement dates and by the due dates, as specified in the Schedule below, as follows:

5.3.1 Specified accountable institutions falling under items 1, 2, 3, and 9 of Schedule 1 to the FIC Act, must submit the completed 2026 risk and compliance return for the information period of 1 April 2023 to 31 March 2026, both dates inclusive.

5.3.2 Specified accountable institutions falling under items 11 (excluding banks, mutual banks and co-operative bank credit providers), 14, 20, 21 and 22 of Schedule 1 to the FIC Act, must submit the completed 2026 risk and compliance return for the information period of 1 July 2023 to 31 March 2026, both dates inclusive.

5.4 The 2026 risk and compliance return is an electronically completed, captured and submitted return. Specified accountable institutions are required to access and populate the required information directly on the 2026 risk and compliance return platform as made available via the Centre’s website, www.fic.gov.za.

SCHEDULE

FOR 2026 RISK AND COMPLIANCE RETURN SUBMISSIONS (IN RESPECT OF DIRECTIVE 11 OF 2026)

6. Failure to comply with the Directive

A specified accountable institution that fails to comply with the provisions of this Directive is non-compliant and is subject to an administrative sanction in accordance with section 62E of the Act.

7. Commencement

This Directive takes effect on Wednesday, 1 April 2026.

PIETER SMIT

ACTING DIRECTOR

FINANCIAL INTELLIGENCE CENTRE

31 MARCH 2026

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

Section 43A(3) of the Financial Intelligence Centre Act 38 of 2001: Directive on the risk and compliance return

G 54439 GoN 7334

31 March 2026

54439gon7334.pdf

ACTION

Ensure you submit your return before 30 June or 31 July 2026.

HEALTH AND SAFETY

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

COMPENSATION FOR OCCUPATIONAL INJURIES AND DISEASES ACT:

Amendment: Manner of Calculating Compensation and Increase in Monthly Pensions

G 54458 GoN 7349

02 April 2026

APPLIES TO: 

Who Is Affected

The amendment affects:

• Employees receiving permanent disablement pensions;
• Dependants receiving survivor pensions;
• Employers contributing to the Compensation Fund; and
• The Compensation Commissioner and Compensation Fund administrators.

SUMMARY

Key Changes Introduced

1. Increase in Monthly Pensions

• Monthly pensions payable under COIDA (e.g. for permanent disablement or dependants of deceased employees) are increased.
• The increase is applied uniformly in line with the annual adjustment mechanism provided for in Schedule 4 of the Act.
• The increase applies to existing pension recipients whose pensions were awarded before the effective date.

2. Amendment to the Manner of Calculating Compensation

• The Notice updates Schedule 4, which governs:
  • How compensation amounts are calculated, and
  • The salary and pension‑related formulas used by the Compensation Fund.

• This ensures compensation calculations remain aligned with:
  • Current earnings benchmarks, and
  • Inflationary and actuarial considerations.

Effective Date

• The amended calculation method and pension increases take effect from the date specified in the Notice (customarily linked to 1 April of the relevant year, unless otherwise stated).

Practical Impact

• Pension recipients will receive higher monthly benefits.
• Employers are not required to take direct action, as pension adjustments are implemented by the Compensation Fund.
• HR and payroll teams should be aware of the change when advising affected employees or dependants.

FULL TEXT

DETAILS

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

Compensation for Occupational Injuries and Diseases Act: Amendment: Manner of Calculating Compensation and Increase in Monthly Pensions

G 54458 GoN 7349

02 April 2026

54458gon7349.pdf

ACTION

Take note of the amendment.

PUBLIC SECTOR

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION MANAGEMENT AMENDMENT ACT 7 OF 2025

G 54449 GoN 7345

01 April 2026

APPLIES TO: 

1. Public sector employees

2. Municipal employees

3. Public entities

4. Former public employees (in limited cases)

• Former employees who were involved in procurement or contract awards
• Subject to the 12‑month “cooling‑off” period, during which they may not work for or benefit from service providers they previously dealt with.

5. Service providers doing business with the State

SUMMARY

Purpose of the Amendment Act

The Amendment Act strengthens governance, ethics, labour control and workforce coordination across the entire public administration, including national, provincial, municipal and public entities. It aims to:

• Prevent conflicts of interest and corruption,
• Standardise conditions of service with financial impact,
• Improve mobility and skills development in the public sector, and
• Centralise oversight of remuneration and employment practices.

Key Changes Introduced

1. Stricter prohibition on doing business with the State

• Public employees may not conduct business with any organ of state.
• Employees may not be directors of companies that do business with the State.
• Contraventions are:
  • A criminal offence (fine or imprisonment up to 5 years), and
  • Serious misconduct leading to dismissal.

2. “Cooling‑off” period for procurement officials

• Employees involved in awarding contracts may not:
  • Work for,
  • Provide services to, or
  • Serve on the board of the service provider for 12 months after contract award.
• Service providers are equally prohibited from employing such officials.
• Offence penalty: Fine up to R1 million.

3. Central control over conditions of service with financial implications

• Salaries, benefits, bonuses, pension benefits and incentives:
  • Require approval through a Committee of Ministers.

• National, provincial, municipal and public entities:
  • May not negotiate or determine financially impactful conditions without consultation with the Minister and Minister of Finance.

4. Removal of unfair pay disparities

• The Minister may prescribe:
  • National norms and standards for remuneration ceilings, and
  • Measures to remove unjustifiable disparities.
• No employee’s remuneration may be reduced.

5. National School of Government becomes a national department

• The National School of Government is formally constituted as a national department.
• It provides:
  • Mandatory and optional training,
  • Skills development,
  • Qualifications and certifications for public officials.

6. Streamlined transfers and secondments

• Employees may be transferred:
  • Between departments,
  • Between municipalities,
  • Between the public service and municipalities.

• Transfers must:
  • Be operationally justified,
  • Have employee consent,
  • Not reduce pay or conditions without consent.

7. Expanded definitions and wider application

• The Act now clearly covers:
  • National and provincial departments,
  • Municipalities,
  • Public entities,
  • Government components.
• This ensures uniform application across the public administration.

Practical Impact

• Public sector employees: stricter ethics rules, post‑employment restrictions.
• Employers & HR: reduced autonomy over pay negotiations.
• Procurement officials: mandatory cooling‑off periods.
• Government entities: stronger central oversight and accountability.

FULL TEXT

DETAILS

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

Public Administration Management Amendment Act 7 of 2025 (English/ IsiXhosa)

Act 7 of 2025

G 54449 GoN 7345

01 April 2026

4449-publicadministrationmanagement-act-7-2025.pdf

ACTION

1. Confirm who is covered

• Identify all employees, officials, managers and executives who fall within:
  • National or provincial departments
  • Municipalities

• • Public entities (PFMA and MFMA entities)
• Include procurement, SCM, HR, finance and executive staff.

2. Stop prohibited business activities immediately

• Ensure no employee:
  • Conducts business with any organ of state; or
  • Is a director or partner in a company doing business with the State.
• Require written declarations from employees confirming compliance.

3. Implement procurement “cool‑off” controls

• Identify employees who:
  • Set tender criteria
  • Evaluated, adjudicated, recommended or approved contracts

• Prevent those employees from:
  • Working for the service provider
  • Consulting to the service provider
  • Sitting on its board

for 12 months after contract award.

• Update SCM policies and exit procedures accordingly.

4. Update ethics, HR and disciplinary policies

• Align internal policies to reflect that:
  • Breaches are criminal offences, and
  • Also constitute serious misconduct.

• Ensure disciplinary codes expressly reference:
  • Business with the State prohibitions
  • Post‑employment restrictions

5. Strengthen declaration and monitoring systems

• Require:
  • Annual conflict of interest declarations
  • Declarations upon appointment, promotion or role change

• Monitor:
  • Company directorships
  • External remunerated work
  • Supplier relationships

6. Align remuneration and conditions of service decisions

• Do not conclude or amend:
  • Salary structures
  • Benefits
  • Bonuses

• • Incentives or pension‑related benefits

if they have financial implications, unless proper approvals are obtained.

• Ensure consultation with:
  • The Minister, and
  • The Minister of Finance, where required.

7. Prepare for central oversight

• Recognise that:
  • A Committee of Ministers now governs approval of conditions of service with financial impact.

• Keep clear audit trails for:
  • Collective agreements
  • Remuneration decisions
  • Affordability assessments

8. Implement training and awareness

• Train employees on:
  • Ethics and conflicts of interest
  • Procurement‑related restrictions
  • Post‑employment limitations
• Use programmes from the National School of Government, now a national department.

9. Review transfer and secondment procedures

• Ensure:
  • Transfers are operationally justified
  • Employee consent is obtained
  • Pay and conditions are not reduced without consent
• Apply uniform transfer rules across departments and municipalities.

10. Prepare for enforcement

• Assume the Act will be enforced through:
  • Audits
  • Investigations
  • Criminal referrals

• Maintain evidence of:
  • Compliance actions
  • Policy updates
  • Employee declarations

TRANSPORTATION

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

ROAD CARRIER PERMITS

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

Road Carrier Permits

54454 2-4-2026

FINANCE ARTICLES

SOUTH AFRICA

Regulator vetoes unfair premiums for credit cover

Move will see consumers pay lower premiums as the debt owed to credit providers decreases

The National Credit Regulator (NCR) has provided consumers who pay mandatory credit life insurance with a lifeline, calling out inconsistent industry practices in calculating premiums.

The move will see consumers pay progressively lower premiums as the debt owed to credit providers decreases.

Credit life insurance has become a money spinner for insurers and, accord­ing to data from the National Financial Ombud Scheme, premiums paid by consumers of credit life insurance amount to about R15bn a year. Yet insurers pay out claims amount­ing to only R1.5bn a year.

Credit life insurance is a policy designed to pay off a borrower’s outstanding debt — such as personal loans, credit cards or vehicle finance — if they die, become disabled or are retrenched.

The NCR in its guidelines said it is seeking an alignment between premiums charged and actual risk exposure and the avoidance of unreasonable or excessive cost to the consumer.

This is due to a divergent implementation of the National Credit Act by industry players.

One approach has been to calculate premiums at the start of the credit agreement, when the outstanding debt is greatest, and not decrease them as the debt is paid down.

The other approach has been to calculate the premium so that when the overall debt decreases due to the consumer’s payments, so does the premium amount.

The NCR has told the industry that the latter approach is the correct interpretation of the National Credit Act, warning that it will closely monitor the market to determine the level of compliance with its guideline and will take whatever steps are necessary to ensure compliance.

Brendan Olivier and Dylan Cunard from law firm Werksmans Attorneys said the effect of the NCR’s guideline is that as a borrower pays down their debt, the mandatory credit life insurance cover and therefore its cost should reduce accordingly.

“In an economic environment that many believe looks set to worsen, the NCR’s opinion provides consumers with some much-needed respite from credit life insurance costs that are excessive,” they said.

“The NCR’s opinion seeks to restore coherence and fairness, and settle an ambiguity that prevailed to the detriment of consumers and the credit life insurance industry as a whole. The NCR’s opinion is therefore a welcome clarification: both timely and consequential.”

The NCR move will bring relief to households saddled with a R2.6-trillion debt pile.

There has over the years been widespread abuse of consumers of credit life insurance in South Africa, prompting the government to cap the premium that can be charged.

Consumers who are locked out of the regulated credit space have resorted to illegal platforms to supplement their stretched disposable incomes.

The Credit Association of South Africa yesterday raised concerns about the growing rise in illegal lending, warning that increasing financial pressure on consumers and tightening access to formal credit are driving more South Africans into the unregulated credit market.

“Consumers do not stop needing credit when they are declined; they simply look else­where. What we are seeing now is a growing migration from the regulated credit market into illegal and informal lending,” association CEO Leonie van Pletzen said.

“This creates a parallel credit system that operates completely outside consumer protection mechanisms. Credit has become a necessity for many households. Unfortunately, when consumers are excluded from formal credit they are not protected; they are exposed.”

By Kabelo Khumalo

Businessday

Trusts now also face automated penalties

Time to rectify non-compliance is running out.

From 4 May a monthly administrative penalty of up to R16 000 per outstanding return will apply – for up to 36 months or until the trustee rectifies the non-compliance.

Non-compliant trusts are the latest group of taxpayers who will be facing potentially punitive administrative penalties in future.

The South African Revenue Service (Sars) recently introduced automated administrative penalties for trusts, similar to those imposed on individuals and companies.

Sars started issuing final demands to trusts with outstanding 2024 and 2025 returns in February. Following requests from industry bodies it allowed more time for non-compliant trusts to get their house in order.

In March, Sars gazetted a public notice in terms of the Tax Administration Act (TAA) allowing it to impose monthly penalties for failing to submit the 2024 and 2025 tax returns. The time to do so finally arrives on 4 May.

These final demands represent the first wave of automated penalties, says Phia van der Spuy, founder of Trusteeze.

Individuals and companies already incur administrative penalties when they do not file their tax returns. The penalties were initially introduced on two years of non-compliance before being extended to prior years.

Significant non-compliance

According to Van der Spuy, non-compliance among trusts is significant.

The number of trusts registered with Sars is estimated to be around 300 000 (testamentary and inter vivos) of which only 180 000 filed tax returns.

The estimated tax gap is between R50 billion and R60 billion.

To ensure full compliance, trusts, trust representatives and their tax practitioners must submit all outstanding trust income tax returns, verify and update trust information with Sars, settle any outstanding tax liabilities and ensure that financial records are accurate and complete, says Roxshanna du Toit, head of trust at Tax Consulting SA.

The penalty regime was gazetted on 27 March 2026, signalling finality in an area historically associated with non-compliance and perceived lenient treatment by Sars.

“No trustee can claim that Sars has not given adequate warning or allowed insufficient time to regularise their affairs,” she adds.

Can of worms

The administrative penalty is automatically imposed on the assessed loss or taxable income and ranges between R250 and R16 000 (depending on the income) per outstanding return per month for up to 36 months or until the trustee rectifies the non-compliance.

Taxpayers can submit a request for remission if they disagree with the penalty. This can be done through the eFiling system for trusts.

Van der Spuy advises trustees to focus on the 2024 and 2025 tax returns to avoid immediate penalties.

Afterwards, they should submit all outstanding tax returns to prevent future penalties.

However, this may prove difficult for more complex trusts. It could open a can of worms if the attribution rules were not applied correctly and the rollover calculations are incorrect.

In terms of the attribution rules, income or capital gains arising in a trust may be attributed back to the person who funded the trust.

If attribution rules apply, the donor or funder is taxed first, the beneficiaries are taxed if the income was distributed to them, and the trust is taxed as a taxpayer of last resort if neither donor nor beneficiaries were taxed.

Sars has been gathering information about the tax affairs of beneficiaries and it might be prudent to consider voluntary disclosure applications where the rules were not applied or not applied correctly, remarks Van der Spuy.

No exemption, dormant or inactive

Du Toit notes that Sars has repeatedly indicated that all resident trusts must register and are required to submit annual income tax returns. It makes no difference whether a trust is dormant, unfunded, or inactive, she warns.

“Many trustees mistakenly believe that a trust with no income, no assets or no activity, is exempt from tax obligations. That is simply not the case,” she says in a published statement.

A trust’s tax compliance obligations only come to an end once it has been formally deregistered with Sars.

If a trust has been deregistered with the Master of the High Court or is no longer required to be registered for income tax in South Africa, a formal deregistration process with Sars must be initiated.

The deregistration process includes submitting all outstanding tax returns, settling any outstanding tax liabilities and then providing supporting documentation confirming the termination of the trust.

“Until this process is finalised, the trust remains active for tax purposes and exposed to penalties should [it] not comply,” Du Toit adds.

Amanda Visser ·

SIU cancels R14m grant in fraud scandal

The Special Investigating Unit (SIU) has succeeded in obtaining a Special Tribunal order declaring a R14 million grant awarded for a community cultural village project by the National Lotteries Commission (NLC) fraudulent, invalid and unlawful.

Retired Special Tribunal President Judge Margaret Victor issued a ruling in February, which was released by the Special Investigating Unit (SIU) on Tuesday. The ruling reviewed and set aside the grant awarded to the non-profit organisation Madumelani Community Project, whose contract was signed in February 2018. The grant has been declared void ab initio (from the beginning).

She declared that brothers Tshimangadzo and Ndoweni Mukutu, who is an employee of the Electoral Commission of South Africa, Tshilidzi David Netswinganani, Mudonde Events and Investment, Rum Management Consultancy, Ndhava Management, Tshisimba Collin Mukondoleli and Thwala Front acted in concert and with the intention to defraud the NLC.

The Mukutu brothers were the principal participants in the grant funding and are both directors of Madumelani Community Project, according to the Tribunal.

Judge Victor also declared Mudonde Events and Investment, Rum Management Consultancy, Ndhava Management and Thwala Front are deemed not to be juristic persons in respect of any right, obligation, or liability of these companies to the NLC. She held the directors personally liable for the repayment of the R14m.

In addition, she said there was a clear case in which the directors of Mudonde and Rum Management Consultancy knew of the fraud and used the companies as tools to perpetuate it; therefore, the directors must be held liable.

“I find that the scheme established by the two brothers, Mukutu, are clearly fraudulent. Ndoweni Mukutu’s lack of knowledge cannot be explained in any plausible or credible manner by him. The raising of R14m is no simple matter. Tshimangadzo Mukutu’s claim that he could not afford legal representation is implausible. He is a project manager responsible for managing millions of rand,” reads the ruling.

Judge Victor stated that Tshimangadzo could have drafted his own affidavit and filed his opposition.

“He could have, of his own accord, sought an interview with the SIU investigator. He could have produced documentation demonstrating the project’s authenticity. Instead, he sought to remain silent and ride on his brother’s coatails, rather than deposing to an affidavit and opposing the relief sought,” the judge added.

According to Judge Victor, a lot of planning and intention went into executing the scheme from obtaining a copy of the constitution of Madumelani, to appointing fake office bearers, to inserting fraudulent signatures to the grant application, opening up a bank account and immediately paying out millions of rand, and as stated, ultimately Ndoweni Mukutu receiving the sum of nearly R7.5m, almost 50% of the grant.

The SIU has indicated that the grant was intended for the construction of a cultural village in Hammanskraal, Tshwane, and the project was already established in 2015 by Maubane Cultural Village and Community Arts and Centre, not by the Madumelani Community Project, following receipt of a R300,000 grant from the NLC.

The SIU’s probe found that between March and July 2018, the Madumelani Community Project made nine transactions with Rum Management Consultancy, owned by Ndoweni Mukutu, totaling just under R3.1m.

Ndhava Management Consulting, owned by Mukondoleli, received a payment of almost R5m in March 2018 and on the same day, Thwala Front, owned by Mukondoleli’s wife, Kharivhe Fulufhelo Promise, was paid R1.4m. The following month five payments totaling R4.65m were also made, with R3.519m going to Mudonde Events and Investment owned by Ndoweni Mukutu and these included a payment of R3m to a trust associated with Advocate William Huma, a former NLC board member.

The tribunal last year ordered Huma to reimburse R21m in misused grant funds and the SIU obtained a preservation order for R10m from the sale of his luxury residence.

Loyiso Sidimba

The Star Early Edition

STANDARDS ARTICLES

SOUTH AFRICA

New plug standard in South Africa: regulation versus reality

Forcing the adoption of South Africa’s new plug and socket standard, officially called SANS 164-2 or Type N, but often referred to as the “ZA Plug”, would not lead to a good outcome.

“A fully forced implementation would likely cause more problems than it solves,” Gido Group manager Douglas Deerans has told MyBroadband.

“However, the current slow rollout is also not ideal from a safety and standardisation perspective.”

The most rational approach, therefore, is a hybrid model where adoption is enforced in certain areas, but allowed to gradually proceed elsewhere.

“This is essentially what South Africa is currently doing, albeit imperfectly. There is room to further enforce the new standard where change is cheap.”

Deerans said regulators should consider implementing rules which force new appliances and people doing major renovations to adopt the new standard.

As things currently stand, contractors are only obliged to install sockets that incorporate the new standard in new buildings. The wall outlets may still include the old socket standard.

“This is a deliberate decision, not uncertainty on the part of regulators,” Deerans stated. The ZA Plug has been part of building code amendments for several years.

However, the standard has taken time to gain traction, despite 2016 amendments to South Africa’s wiring code that require every new electrical outlet to include at least one ZA Plug socket.

These updates went into effect in 2018, allowing outlets to include older socket designs alongside the new ones.

The code was tightened again in 2020 to make the ZA Plug configuration mandatory in new buildings, irrespective of the building’s purpose.

There is no requirement for households or businesses with older electrical infrastructure to replace their existing sockets.

Deerans argued that the latter concession was a good thing, as forcing a hard transition would have a massive financial impact.

Forced migration to ZA Plug could backfire

“There was initial resistance over cost and practical issues, and adoption has been slow despite years of availability,” stated Deerans.

“This suggests a forced transition could backfire and could ironically lead to more adapters, DIY electrical work, and other forms of non-compliance, which undermines the new socket’s safety goal.”

Deerans explained that the new plugs are much safer than the old standard. For example, they are recessed and have safety shutters, reducing the risk of contact with live pins.

Supporting more sockets per outlet and Europlug compatibility also reduces reliance on unsafe adapters and multi-plugs.

“These are a known fire risk. From a purely engineering and safety perspective, the old Type M system is outdated,” said Deerans.

While standardisation would reduce long-term chaos, Deerans argued the benefits of the new system would be undermined if the change were disruptive and costly.

“Millions of homes and appliances still use the old plugs, and a full transition could take 20 to 50 years. Forcing the new standard means immediate incompatibility for households.”

To speed up uptake, Deerans said regulators should help encourage retail availability of the new plugs and sockets, combination sockets (which are already available), and gradual consumer adoption.

South Africa adopts standard, Europe reneges

European countries elected to keep their plugs and sockets rather than standardise

South Africa’s migration to the ZA Plug has been a decades-long process that began in the mid-1980s with the goal of unifying plug and socket standards for 250V systems worldwide.

It started when the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) introduced IEC 60906–1, originally labelled IEC–906–1.

Hopes were high that this “international plugs and socket system” would be adopted globally, but European countries ultimately decided against it.

Brazil and South Africa were the only nations to incorporate the standard. However, even Brazil diverged in practice by supplying both 127V and 220V through the same socket.

By the time it was clear that Europe would not follow the IEC proposal, South Africa had already made substantial progress on its own adoption.

Local authorities also believed they could expand the standard’s influence into other African nations through the Southern African Development Community (SADC).

Despite being left in the lurch by the international community, South Africa could gain several advantages from adopting the new standard, which Deerans has highlighted.

Slow adoption

MyBroadband recently visited retailers that stock electrical supplies and appliances, and it was clear that ZA Plug’s uptake remains slow.

Earthed appliances continue to use the old triangular Type M plug, while many multiplugs and adapters only feature Europlug sockets rather than the ZA Plug.

By Jan Vermeulen

TRAVEL ARTICLES

SOUTH AFRICA

Say goodbye to passports and boarding passes at airports

South Africans and other people around the world could soon travel through airports without needing a physical passport or boarding pass.

That is according to the International Air Transport Association (IATA), which has published the results of several digital identity Proofs of Concept (PoCs).

These PoCs were conducted with airlines, airports, governments and technology providers across Europe and the Asia-Pacific region.

The trials showed that contactless, biometric-enabled international travel is already technically possible and no longer a futuristic concept.

The IATA explained that travellers can use a secure digital version of their passport stored on their smartphone, while facial recognition or other biometric checks verify their identity as they move through the airport.

This means passengers may no longer need to repeatedly present paper documents at different points in their journey.

According to IATA, the tests showed that digital identity systems can already support seamless journeys, even when multiple airlines and different digital identity wallets are involved.

These included solutions such as Digital ID in Apple Wallet for US passport holders, Google ID Pass for UK and US passport holders, and national systems such as India’s Digi Yatra.

The PoCs were built around IATA’s One ID standards, its Contactless Travel Directory, and international standards developed by ISO, OpenID and W3C.

“We have proven that digital identity for international travel works securely and efficiently,” said Willie Walsh, IATA’s Director General.

“For travellers to benefit from this important modernisation, governments must accelerate efforts to issue and accept Digital Travel Credentials (DTCs)—secure digital versions of passports.”

He added that the benefits would be significant, and said the result would be “stronger security, smoother journeys, and greater efficiency”.

The trials also showed that passengers could securely share only the information required for travel in advance, with their consent.

This allows checks to be completed before they even arrive at the airport. This could help cut queues and reduce the need for repeated document inspections.

Governments can begin putting in place frameworks to adopt DTCs

Biometric verification was also shown to be capable of replacing manual checks at airport touchpoints, creating what IATA describes as a seamless “tap-and-go” experience.

Walsh said secure digital passports would make travel more secure and more efficient, no matter where they travel to or from.

“By sharing identity data in advance, checks can be completed earlier, reducing the need for document checks at airports and cutting queues,” he said.

“Industry collaboration has shown digital identity works in practice. The next step is for governments to put the frameworks in place to integrate digital identity into global travel processes.”

The push toward digital travel documents follows proposals made last year by the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO).

Speaking to 702 last year, Andy Smith, director of industry and innovation at SITA, said the technology is now within reach. “It’s a very exciting journey and one we’ve been on for a while,” said Smith.

“Where we’re getting to now is the ability for travellers to get a very positive idea that they are going to be able to travel through an airport, across borders, seamlessly and without having to present either their passport or their boarding pass.”

Smith said the system would allow travellers to complete much of the process before even leaving for the airport.

“Before you set out for the airport, you know that you have completed all the airline processes,” he said.

“You know that you’re going to have a seamless experience through the airport, and more importantly, when you get to your destination, you’re going to have a very simplified arrival experience.”

IATA noted that governments can now begin putting in place legal, technical, and operational frameworks to issue and accept these Digital Travel Credentials across borders.

However, it’s important to note that paper-based options should remain available, ensuring that travel remains accessible for everyone.