Compromise Agreement With Sars

SARS officials pointed out that tax debts of less than R5 million have a high probability of compromise, while the burden of proof is low. The SARS approach makes it clear that you are dealing with a competent tax authority. If you owe a high tax debt, it is best to act quickly and enter into a payment agreement with SARS. Your ideal result is to come clean, pay down reduced debts and take your name from the SARS radar. The Court of Justice`s decision provides a useful basis for comparing South African tax relief provisions with the tax provisions in force in Australia, which are considered in the judgment. While AUSTAA provides that a person is exempt from so-called eligible debts if he is able to prove that he must pay the full legitimate tax debt in case of serious difficulty, the situation is somewhat different under South African law. In its judgment, the court found that, in Burns`s case, the taxpayer was not only able to pay his fair cost of living, including basic needs such as food, clothing, medical care and accommodation, but that he would also be able to repay his tax debts with the excess of his monthly income and his partner. Our multidisciplinary team of tax lawyers and accountants has a proven track worth in negotiations with SARS and has helped many companies successfully seek a compromise agreement. We guarantee you a legal privilege and we take a strict legal and compliant approach with a thought based on solutions. A compromise cannot be considered if the taxpayer challenges the debt. Therefore, as long as a case is challenged or challenged, a compromise cannot be contemplated.

If the taxpayer wants to compromise, he must withdraw his appeal or complaint. The objective of the compromise is to achieve the highest net return on debt collection; and the request for compromise must be initiated by the taxpayer and SARS requires detailed information on the taxpayer`s financial matters before deciding whether the compromise is adopted. In considering whether a compromise should be reached with the subject, SARS will take into account the taxpayer`s payment history, past violations of tax legislation and why the taxpayer is unable to fully repay his or her debts. After SARS has increased its collection authority to fill a significant budget deficit, aggressive collection measures are undertaken, including salary-filling contracts, the appointment of sheriffs for the performance of taxpayer property, and even third-party dates for money directly from taxpayers` affairs and/or personal accounts without prior notice. In the face of this aggressive attitude, this is not the time to take risks. In certain circumstances, a compromise may be sought on the unpaid tax debt of a taxpayer. A SARS debt compromise is a procedure where a taxpayer requires SARS to “recoup” a large portion of its debt on a permanent basis, with the balance immediately paid in full by the taxpayer, provided the taxpayer meets all the conditions imposed by SARS. SARS submitted that the use of the term “material” under Section 205 applied to all information that had not been disclosed as substantial by the subject. In this context, SARS believes that SARS is entitled to complete and accurate information to carry out its tax collection mandate. SARS also submitted that the information provided to Section 205 was either accurate or inaccurate. Therefore, any misrepresentation or non-disclosure would automatically be essential. With regard to the compromise of a tax debt, TAA stated that SARS will only approve the compromise of a portion of a tax debt at the request of a “debtor” if the request complies with the TAA`s requirements, if Section 202 of the TAA stipulates that a senior SARS official must consider a tax debt to the extent that the compromise can lead to a compromise – the Court also found that the word “essential”