Once again, the latest Budget Speech featured a tax revenue shortfall, this time to the tune of R43bn. And despite promising initiatives implemented by the South African Revenue Service (Sars), it appears that its tribulations in meeting its collection target have not yet waned.
Image source: Getty/Gallo
With the pressure mounting on the revenue office to make up the shortfall, it has become more assertive with its collection stratagems and payroll audits seems to be Sars' latest weapon of choice.
The simple reason behind targeting payrolls when it comes to extra revenue is purely because of payrolls tend to contain errors. There's also the potential to collect large sums from a single taxpayer.
Mistakes are magnified by the size of the company’s payroll and Sars can, and will, collect any underdeclared taxes from the employer, as opposed to the individual taxpayers themselves.
In the case of a large payroll with many employees, even the smallest errors can leave a company with a large tax exposure, as these errors are proliferated across the employee base.
In other instances, inexperienced payroll administrators simply do not know the law, which results in glaring errors such as failing to tax fringe benefits or paying lump sums without getting tax directives.
The truth is that Sars will find something, and most employers only become fully compliant once they have gone through the ordeal of a payroll audit.
As if the challenges of a payroll audit are not daunting enough, a new trend has become apparent that makes it increasingly difficult to get a clean bill of health from the Sars audit team.
Rather than identifying specific items that were inaccurately treated on payroll, Sars has now turned its gaze to the financial statement aspect of payroll.
These statements are assessed for an understatement or short payment of employees’ tax purely on the basis that there is a discrepancy between the company’s payroll reconciliation and the cost of employment as reflected in the company’s annual financial statements.
This is despite Sars’ awareness that not all amounts reflected in the annual financial statements under cost of employment should be processed to the payroll.
Nevertheless, the onus is placed on companies to dispute this and to explain why the amounts making up the difference is either exempt or not taxable. This is a quarrelsome task, as this effectively equates to finding a needle in a haystack and then proving that it is not subject to tax.
LEGAL DISCLAIMER: This Message Board accepts no liability of legal consequences that arise from the Message Boards (e.g. defamation, slander, or other such crimes). All posted messages are the sole property of their respective authors. The maintainer does retain the right to remove any message posts for whatever reasons. People that post messages to this forum are not to libel/slander nor in any other way depict a company, entity, individual(s), or service in a false light; should they do so, the legal consequences are theirs alone. Bizcommunity.com will disclose authors' IP addresses to authorities if compelled to do so by a court of law.