A critical analysis of the distintion between mining and manufacturing for South African income tax purposes

"Mining operations" and "mining" are defined in s 1 of the Income Tax Act (ITA). A concept that is of great significance to this definition is the matter of when a mineral is won and the related question of when does the mining process end and the process of manufacture commences...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Cloete, Loriaan
Format: Others
Language:English
Published: Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University 2010
Subjects:
Online Access:http://hdl.handle.net/10948/1344
id ndltd-netd.ac.za-oai-union.ndltd.org-nmmu-vital-8948
record_format oai_dc
spelling ndltd-netd.ac.za-oai-union.ndltd.org-nmmu-vital-89482017-12-21T04:22:37ZA critical analysis of the distintion between mining and manufacturing for South African income tax purposesCloete, LoriaanMining corporations -- South AfricaIncome tax -- South AfricaIncome tax -- Law and legislation -- South AfricaMining law -- South Africa"Mining operations" and "mining" are defined in s 1 of the Income Tax Act (ITA). A concept that is of great significance to this definition is the matter of when a mineral is won and the related question of when does the mining process end and the process of manufacture commences. Case law has not established a definitive point that can be used by the mining taxpayer to determine where the mining process ends for income tax purposes. The Supreme Court of Appeal was presented with the perfect opportunity in the Foskor1 case to clearly define the boundaries between these processes. Unfortunately, the court did not seize this opportunity to provide legal certainty. The significance of the distinction lies in the fact that a mining taxpayer is allowed to claim accelerated capital allowances. The objective of these allowances is to provide tax relief to the mining taxpayer taking the immense risk of investing billions of rands in capital expenditure. The capital expenditure incurred will also result in direct foreign investment. This in turn will result in economic growth and job creation. Currently, there is no legal certainty as to which processes will qualify as mining operations for income tax purposes. This may result in mining taxpayers being hesitant to incur capital expenditure as the risk relating to a project would have increased. The accelerated capital allowances may therefore not serve their intended purpose. The gross domestic product (GDP) contribution from gold mining has been decreasing in the last number of years, but this decrease has to a large extent been offset by an increase in the downstream or beneficiated minerals industry. This industry has also been identified by Government as a growth sector. The downstream or beneficiated mineral industry may not be catered for in the current definition of "mining operations" and "mining" and may therefore not qualify for beneficial tax allowances. It is therefore proposed that the term "won" as used in the definition of "mining operations" and "mining" should be defined in s 1 of the ITA as follows: A mineral is "won" when all the requisite and necessary processes, including, amongst other things, refinement, beneficiation, smelting, separation, have been undertaken to the mineral to render it saleable in an open and general market. This extension will provide legal certainty to a mining taxpayer and will ensure that South Africa obtains direct foreign investment and maximum value for its minerals. This will contribute to economic growth for South Africa's developing economy and result in job creation.Nelson Mandela Metropolitan UniversityFaculty of Business and Economic Sciences2010ThesisMastersMComxi, 83 leavespdfvital:8948http://hdl.handle.net/10948/1344EnglishNelson Mandela Metropolitan University
collection NDLTD
language English
format Others
sources NDLTD
topic Mining corporations -- South Africa
Income tax -- South Africa
Income tax -- Law and legislation -- South Africa
Mining law -- South Africa
spellingShingle Mining corporations -- South Africa
Income tax -- South Africa
Income tax -- Law and legislation -- South Africa
Mining law -- South Africa
Cloete, Loriaan
A critical analysis of the distintion between mining and manufacturing for South African income tax purposes
description "Mining operations" and "mining" are defined in s 1 of the Income Tax Act (ITA). A concept that is of great significance to this definition is the matter of when a mineral is won and the related question of when does the mining process end and the process of manufacture commences. Case law has not established a definitive point that can be used by the mining taxpayer to determine where the mining process ends for income tax purposes. The Supreme Court of Appeal was presented with the perfect opportunity in the Foskor1 case to clearly define the boundaries between these processes. Unfortunately, the court did not seize this opportunity to provide legal certainty. The significance of the distinction lies in the fact that a mining taxpayer is allowed to claim accelerated capital allowances. The objective of these allowances is to provide tax relief to the mining taxpayer taking the immense risk of investing billions of rands in capital expenditure. The capital expenditure incurred will also result in direct foreign investment. This in turn will result in economic growth and job creation. Currently, there is no legal certainty as to which processes will qualify as mining operations for income tax purposes. This may result in mining taxpayers being hesitant to incur capital expenditure as the risk relating to a project would have increased. The accelerated capital allowances may therefore not serve their intended purpose. The gross domestic product (GDP) contribution from gold mining has been decreasing in the last number of years, but this decrease has to a large extent been offset by an increase in the downstream or beneficiated minerals industry. This industry has also been identified by Government as a growth sector. The downstream or beneficiated mineral industry may not be catered for in the current definition of "mining operations" and "mining" and may therefore not qualify for beneficial tax allowances. It is therefore proposed that the term "won" as used in the definition of "mining operations" and "mining" should be defined in s 1 of the ITA as follows: A mineral is "won" when all the requisite and necessary processes, including, amongst other things, refinement, beneficiation, smelting, separation, have been undertaken to the mineral to render it saleable in an open and general market. This extension will provide legal certainty to a mining taxpayer and will ensure that South Africa obtains direct foreign investment and maximum value for its minerals. This will contribute to economic growth for South Africa's developing economy and result in job creation.
author Cloete, Loriaan
author_facet Cloete, Loriaan
author_sort Cloete, Loriaan
title A critical analysis of the distintion between mining and manufacturing for South African income tax purposes
title_short A critical analysis of the distintion between mining and manufacturing for South African income tax purposes
title_full A critical analysis of the distintion between mining and manufacturing for South African income tax purposes
title_fullStr A critical analysis of the distintion between mining and manufacturing for South African income tax purposes
title_full_unstemmed A critical analysis of the distintion between mining and manufacturing for South African income tax purposes
title_sort critical analysis of the distintion between mining and manufacturing for south african income tax purposes
publisher Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University
publishDate 2010
url http://hdl.handle.net/10948/1344
work_keys_str_mv AT cloeteloriaan acriticalanalysisofthedistintionbetweenminingandmanufacturingforsouthafricanincometaxpurposes
AT cloeteloriaan criticalanalysisofthedistintionbetweenminingandmanufacturingforsouthafricanincometaxpurposes
_version_ 1718564773444976640