Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - [email protected]

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4
31
Shares / Re: TAX
« on: February 13, 2015, 07:42:40 pm »
Hi,

Just a correction on the above posts.  In simple terms (and based on your facts), there is no need to for you to treat it as a revenue (or trading) gain.  You will however need to include it as a capital gain, and can apply the CGT exemption against it.

The detail is however more complex, (and at the risk of boring you), there is essentially two tests under south african tax law to determine whether it is a capital gain (taxed as capital gains) or as a revenue/trading profit (treated as normal income).  These tests are

1. What was your intention when you bought the share (or sold the share)?    Did you for example indulge in the business of trading, or did you have a more longterm (investing) view?  (Case law and precedent is complex in this regard, and i'll return to it later)
2.Any result obtained in 1 above will be overriden if you hold the instrument for longer than 3 years.  In which case you are obliged to treat any profit as a capital gain (or loss).  I.e. you are essentially deemed to have a long term intention, and any profit is taxed as a capital gain.

In your case, as you've only held the shares for 1 year, point 2 above isn't relevant.  And the intention question is key.  The traditional tests to confirm intention is things like
- Number of trades
- Frequency of trades
- Length held etc.
- Reasons for sales

In your case, i'm adamant that your intention was capital (i.e. long term), based on the following;
- You only ever purchased one instrument
- You held it for a relatively long period of time (1 year)
- Frequency of trades is minimal.
- The instrument you purchased, unit trusts (even more so a balanced fund), is not traditionally an instrument used by traders.  An indicates a long term intention
- You are selling the instrument to re-balance your portfolio  (very NB)
- (never admit you are selling to take profit).

From the evidence, i'd say you always had a long term investing intention, and thus you're gains should be taxed as capital gains.  My view of the risk of SARS differing in view as being low to non-existent. 

Note.  Above is based on the info that you have given.



32
Shares / Re: Anyone here invest offshore?
« on: February 07, 2015, 07:40:10 pm »
I use Td Direct investing (formally Internaxx).  Can be found here.  http://int.tddirectinvesting.com/  I'm very happy with them and has served me well over the years.

Although i must admit, there is a far better selection of local brokers offering international products now than when i first opened my offshore account.  I haven't done detailed research, but i'm sure you can find one that offers you want you need.

33
Shares / Re: Tax
« on: December 09, 2014, 07:48:29 pm »
Hi,  I think it must have been a dream.  I'm also not too sure why you would want to do it (will elaborate on that later).  Whether you are a "trader" or a "investor", any loss would be effectively be (depending on your status and tax situation) deductable immediately or carried forward to deduct against future profits (or gains). 

As a example, should your share sales be regarded as a "investor" and subject to capital gains.  The the following principle will apply.  Any capital losses will first be set off against any capital gains earned in the tax year, and if after setting off capital gains, any (net) capital losses remains, they will be carried forward to your next year of assessments to be set off future capital gains.  Ringfencing provisions may modify the above principle, but the basic principle would normally be valid for share sales.

If you're a trader, broadly the same principles apply, but depending on your own individual situation, trading loss may be set off against other taxable income (e.g. salary income) prior to being carried off.  Again, there may be specific ringfencing provisions that may limit your ability to set off against taxable income.

Note, that your suggestion achieves the same result, to the extent the replacement share is sold.  i.e, the benefit of the loss is only received when the replacement share is (eventually) sold.

Hope that all makes sense.


34
Shares / Re: Savings - Bond or Unit trust
« on: November 02, 2014, 07:22:34 pm »
Hi,

I like your thinking, you've clearly put a lot of thinking in to this analysis.  It is however a complex area, touching on both taxation and investment principles.  Some pointers/corrections though, followed by suggestions.

1.  Your return on unit trusts, will potentially be a mix of dividends, capital gains and interest.  In all likelihood, in the scenario you have pitched (general equity unit trust), your returns will probably be a mix of dividends and capital gains.
2.  Any dividends and interest are, depending on the rules, distributed monthly, quarterly, semi-annually or annually.  You can elect to re-invest your distributions.  This essentially enables you to compound your return.
3.  The tax treatments on these difference streams of income are;
3.1  Interest.  Taxed annually, and after deducting a annual interest exemption, effectively taxed at marginal rates.  Which could be up to 40%. 
3.2 Dividends.  Subject to a dividends tax of 15% on declaration.  For a individual investor, this will be unavoidable.
3.3 Capital gains.  Subject to capital gains tax annually when your unit trusts are disposed (NB) of.  Effectively, and depending on your individual tax situation, this could be taxed at (after deducting an annual exemption) at anything from a rate of 0% to 13.3% 
4. Note that the annual exemptions identified in 3.1 and 3.3 are not carried forward if not used.  I.e. If you retain all your unit trusts in year 1 and 2 and dispose of them all in 3.  You are only permitted to deduct the annual exclusion of 30k.  (yes, it may be in your benefit to sell and re-invest  some unit trusts annually).
5. Almost forgot, you get no direct tax benefit of paying your bond off first.  But you do get the indirect tax benefit of this "return" being effectively tax free.

None of the above changes the facts in your scenario though.  You essentially are comparing the after  tax effects of either;
1. paying off your bond.  This way you effectively "earn" tax free interest of 8.25% (24 750/300 000).
vs
2. Or earning income (or capital gains) of 13% pre tax.  As discussed above, this would be taxed differently, depending on how its earned.  For comparison purposes, lets take the worst case scenario (for the tax calc) and assume the entire 13% return will be returned via dividend distributions.  This means your after tax return will be 11.05% (13% return minus 15% tax) .  Compare this to your 8.25% return indicated above.

This comparison will only get better if you start doing the same calculation with capital gains tax rates and utilization of annual capital gains tax exemptions.

However, this doesn't mean you must run out and buy unit trusts immediately......
1.  Long term return on the JSE is probably around 12.5% to 13.5%.  Knock off a 1% or 2% for unit trusts management fees, and you're probably looking at a real return of of anything between 10.5% to 12.5%.   If you choose (or guess badly) and end of on the lower end of the scale (10.5%).   Deduct (say) 15% tax, and your return is hovering at just under 9%.    Making it marginal over the bond.
2.  There is risk in investing in unit trusts.  Whereas investing in your bond is relatively safe.    The risk in equity unit trusts are as follows.
2.1  Volatility.   Your return on unit trusts won't be a smooth 13%, the return will change as the market moves.   It is possible for the value of your investments to drop in value over the short term.  Over the long term, it will probably return to the 13% return you referred to.  The risk here, is that you need to access the monies (i.e. pay for a deposit on your next house), at the same time as your market has lost (and your unit trusts) have lost value.  Wait it out, and the value will recover......  But the opportunity to buy the house may be gone. 
2.2. You may in fact invest in a "dog" of a unit trust, and you get nowhere close to the 13% you are looking for....... 
Stick it in to the bond, and you don't have the above risks.

I'm not familiar with your personal investment portfolio, retirement plan and aptitude to risk, so i'm loath to make recommendations,    But some considerations for you.
1.  If you have an access bond, you may want to place the majority of your monies in to your bond.  And then invest piecemeal in to unit trusts.  This will give you time to familiarize yourselves with the industry, returns and your aptitude to risk....
2.  Consider investing in a low cost index tracker unit trust (or ETF).  This eliminates the risk of picking a "dog", whilst obtaining market equivalent returns
3.  Consider your investment time horizon before making the choice between unit trust or bond.  I.e. if you reckon you're going to need the money earlier than the 3 years referred to, then weight your investment in the bond.  If greater than 3 years, then start looking at unit trusts etc.
4.  Also note that there will be a new tax exempt investment vehicle to be made available next year.  This will be subject to contribution limits, but all returns are tax exempt.  It might be worth leaving some monies in your bond to make use of this savings vehicle (note that there is nothing stopping you selling/transferring  from unit trusts into this vehicle).
5.  Consider the business cycle before making your investment.  My opinion is that the equity market is overvalued currently (this view is debatable).  But if true, this will result in reduced returns on your unit trusts over the short term.  On your bond front, we are definitely in a rising interest rate cycle, so unless you've had your interest rate fixed, interest on the bond are going to increase and in the short term, close the gap in interest returns vs equity returns.  Increased interest rates will also increase your monthly installments, putting pressure on disposable income.  So it may be worth having overpaid on your bond.....
6.  Tax legislation changes from time to time.  For example, i am expecting an increase in tax rates in higher income individuals next year.  Ditto for CGT rates.

My last bit of advice, DO NOT make your choice purely on the tax effect of either investment choice.  Yes, consider it and let it be a factor, but don't let it choose your investment for you...... 

35
Shares / Re: Long Term Portfolios.
« on: November 01, 2014, 04:50:08 pm »
In my view, those are poor performing funds for long term. If you actively invest in funds that are relatively immune to market downturns such as non cyclical stocks that I will mention bellow.
The STX40 has only averaged 7% pa since 2008. That is in my mind a poor performance compared to the the stocks that are immune to corrections. On long term, you will exceed 36% pa that these stocks have been achieving for years.
EOH
NPN
SHP
TRU

This is not advice to you but my own advice to me. Pity I never listened.

Some returns (excluding dividends) to compare.  Note that return indicated is not the annualised return, but the total return for the period.
STX40
1 year - 9.41%
3 Year - 52.95%
5 Year - 87.62%
10 Year - 322.18%

SHP
1 Year - Minus 13.07%
3 Year - 37.37%
5 Year - 149.66%
10 Year - 1276.23%

EOH
1 year - 32.37%
3 Year - 374.10%
5 Year - 1138.43%
10 Year - 2769.87%

TRU
1 Year - Minus 21.35%
3 Year - Minus 5.86
5 Year - 67.78%
10 Year - 439.67

NPN
1 Year - 46.16%
3 Year - 261.23%
5 Year - 382.56%
10 Year - 2342.42%

REM
1 Year - 23.77%
3 Year - 109.94%
5 Year - 174.98%
10 Year - 736.02%

I have included my favourate "buy and forget" share (Remgro) for interests sake.  Not as the returns indicated exluded dividends and the unbundlings, Remgro's return will be understated.

I do find it interesting, that of the 4 shares listed by Orca's, only 2 outperformed the STX40 over a 1 year horizon.  The other had negative returns....

Over the longer periods, the outperformance on the selected shares are highlighted.....  Questions  to be asked by any investor (in particular any casual investor).

1.  Can these long term returns be replicated into the future, and if so, for how long.  Certainly mathematically, they would eventually return to the market mean.   In the case of SHP and TRU, the negative returns over the short term are worrying and may be indicative of this effect. 
2.  Can an individual investor afford the volatility of individual shares.  Or does he need a safety net of  "buying the market"?  This will differ from person to person depending on his level of knowledge and aptitude to risk.

My take on the 4 shares listed (NPN, SHP, EOH and TRU), is that they will NOT come close to a 36% per annum return (over the long term).  I think that there are opportunities in SHP.  I'm not confident in TRU and NPN (although NPN offshore investments are certainly interesting).  EOH, i'm not familiar enough with the fundamentals to comment on.

Key to material outperformance over the market, it to find the next winner, not the last winner.  That's not an easy task.....

Matter of interest, my personal SA portfolio is as follows
CLI
MPC
REM
JSE
SOL

With smaller holdings in
CML
CPI
ILA
PNC

Some of the positions were taken with a specific view and have served there purpose.  Overall, my portfolio is in need of re-balancing, but i tend to do that in January/February (when i have a better view on my tax position).  Return over the last 10 years returns hasn't been too shabby, showing a annualised growth (including dividends) of 23.6%.   








36
Shares / Re: Tax
« on: September 23, 2014, 09:20:18 am »
Not skelm.  Fully compliant with the letter of the law

Umm.... Not actually......

37
Shares / Re: Tax
« on: May 14, 2014, 05:36:19 pm »
Delusion and I will have assets in SA in the form of shares on the JSE. As my wife and I have formally emigrated, we cease to be residents and will pay no tax on divies and our interest earned will also not be taxed.
Delusion on the other hand, has not formally emigrated and will have to pay the witholding tax on all his divies and normal tax on his interest if over the limit here as normal.


Hi Orca

Wrong on multiple accounts.

1.   There is absolutely no reference to formal immigration in the South African income tax act as far as tax residency is concerned.  You can for example formally immigrate, and be found to be a SA resident via the physical residence test.  For your reference, the definition of residence in the income tax act is as follows. 
"resident

means any—
a)natural person who is—
i)ordinarily resident in the Republic: or
ii)not at any time during the relevant year of assessment ordinarily resident in the Republic, if that person was physically present in the Republic-
aa)for a period or periods exceeding 91 days in aggregate during the relevant year of assessment, as well as for a period or periods exceeding 91 days in aggregate during each of the five years of assessment preceding such year of assessment; and
bb)for a period or periods exceeding 915 days in aggregate during those five preceding years of assessment,
in which case that person will be a resident with effect from the first day of that relevant year of assessment,"


The act of formally emigrating will assist in determining if you are ordinarily resident in the SA.  But it is not the only test.

2.  Any dividends paid to a non-SA resident (whether you've formally emigrated or not), will be subject to a dividend withholding tax.  Exceptions include the following;
a)  Where the company declaring the dividend is not resident in SA (i.e.  easy way to remember it, its a non-SA resident company paying a dividend to a non-SA resident.  Why would you pay SA tax on it?)
b) Where the withholding tax is amended by the specific provisions of a double taxation agreement with a country in which you are resident. 

3.  Any interest paid to a non-SA resident (whether you've formally emigrated or not) will typically (there are exceptions) be exempt from South African income tax. 

I also refer you to the SARS info page on the South African tax consequences of being a non-residence are nicely captured on the SARS website.  Note however this is not complete and i advise any individual to consult a professional when the need arises

http://www.sars.gov.za/ClientSegments/Individuals/Learn-About-Taxes/Pages/Non-Residents.aspx

It is also important to differentiate the income tax consequences away from exchange control rules.  They are different animals governed by different legislation.

Another important consideration is other consequences of seeking to be deemed a non-resident, these included deemed capital gains and potential withholding tax on property sales.  It is important to consult an expert if you are affected.  It could save you in the long run.






38
Shares / Re: Tax
« on: May 13, 2014, 09:08:29 pm »
Oh.  Almost forgot.  Do not confuse citizenship, residency and being a resident for tax purposes.  They are different animals.

39
Shares / Re: Tax
« on: May 13, 2014, 09:07:03 pm »
Hi Orca

Your interpretation of SA residence is incorrect.  At no stage does the lack of formal immigration automatically treat you as a South African tax resident for tax purposes.  It is of course a indicator of residence, but not a conclusive one.  Just think of all the kids that have done there 2 years in the UK and never come back - with no intention of coming back.  They have never formally emigrated, but are not regarded as South African residents for tax purposes.

1-I am not maintaining a household in S.A.I do not see myself returning to S.A in the near future,for at least 5 years if at all.I do see S.A as my home,but I don't specifically have any intention of going back unless I have to.

2-I have been out of the country for 3 years and have not returned since.I may return to visit people for s short period of time but I plan to stay out of country for the foreseeable future.

As detailed in one of my earlier posts, there are 2 tests.  One being regarded as a SA residence under common law, and another via the so called physical residence test..  Hence the 2 questions above.  To interpret your answers and give you guidance.

1.  Under common law, you will be regarded as a SA resident for tax purposes, if you regard SA as your home.  Case law has also indicated that if it is your intention to return to SA after your wanderings, you would be regarded as a SA resident.  The whole concept is a bit "iffy", and if you had to re-evaluate your position and find that you have no real intention (with no contradictory evidence) of returning to SA, i'd say you could regard yourself as a non-resident.  The fact that you have no SA household and no-need to return assists in this argument.

2.  Under the physical presence test, as long as you're not in the country for a certain period of times (90 days plus in a tax year) for each of the last 5 tax years), then you don't meet the requirements of being regarded as a SA resident via the physical residence test.  In your case, you don't meet this requirement for SA residency.

Hence, you'd have a good argument for being regarded as a non-resident for tax purposes.

Hope it all makes sense

40
Shares / Re: Tax
« on: May 01, 2014, 03:53:08 pm »


2-I am not emigrating.I am just a non-resident.Am I correct in assuming that as a non-resident I do not have to submit anything except change my adress?


Key concept of resident (for tax purposes), is whether the SA tax act deems you to be a resident etc.

You say you are a non-resident, but haven't formally emigrated.  Some questions which will go a long way to resolving your post.
1.  Even though you are out of the country, do you still see SA as your home?  Are you maintaining a household in SA?  When (or if) do you see yourself returning to SA?
2,  How long have you been out the country?  How many days a year a year do you spend out the country.

I'll address your other questions in a separate post once i have clarity on the above.


41
Shares / Re: Tax
« on: April 18, 2014, 08:12:35 pm »
Hi,

its a two fold test.  To be regarded as a SA resident, you need to be either ordinarily resident OR meet the physical presence test.  Meet either one of those tests, then you are a SA resident.  In your case, i'd argue that when you formally immigrate AND move your household, you'd meet the ordinarily resident test (to be a non-resident), then you just need to be outside of the requirements of the physical presence test and you'll be outside the SA resident net.

42
Shares / Re: Tax
« on: April 18, 2014, 07:17:25 pm »
Hi Orca.  The legislation is pretty clear, and is covered in para 2 of the 8th schedule, which reads as follows

"Subject to paragraph 97, this Schedule applies to the disposal on or after valuation date of—
a)any asset of a resident; and
b)the following assets of a person who is not a resident, namely –
i)immovable property situated in the Republic held by that person or  any interest or right of whatever nature of that person to or in immovable property situated in the Republic; or
ii)any asset which is attributable to a permanent establishment of that person in the Republic"


Effectively the 8th schedule (which contains our capital gains tax legislation), simply does not apply to non-residents (as defined by the income tax act.)  (however note the exclusion of immovable property and business establishments from this general rule).

You need however to look very closely at the definition of a "resident" in the income tax act.  For example, it is possible that you fall within the definition of a "resident" after you formally immigrate, in which case you would be subject to further capital gains.   I'd however argue that the "exit tax" or deemed capital gain is only triggered when you fall outside of the definition of a a resident for income tax purposes.

43
Shares / Re: Tax
« on: April 17, 2014, 06:05:19 pm »
Thank you .That is  informative.

Could you or anyone else please paraphrase point 4,especially the second half of it?I'm unclear on it.

Orca covered this aspect.  Let me know if you need more detail.
Secondly,I am a non-resident,which means that I do not have to pay CGT in S.A.What would happen if after a few years I have to be classified as a resident in SARS eyes?Will I have to pay back that CGT I hadn't paid in previous years?

Or must this CGT tax be paid in the country of residence?

1.  The day you become a resident (or deemed to be a resident), the market value of your assets (world wide) are deemed to be the base cost for SA CGT tax purposes.  You only pay SA CGT tax on any subsequent increase in value from this point in time.
2.  If you are a non-resident, you may be subject to tax (on world wide income) in your country of residence - but this all depends on local tax legislation. 
3. Also note that the differing countries have differing rules on taxation and residence. 
4.  For example, there are countries, that tax you on your world wide income, irrespective of residence.  An example of this, is the US, where if you are a US citizen, you are taxed on your worldwide income, irrespective of residence or location.  Reliance would then have to be placed on DTA and legislation that may reduce the effect of double taxation.

Hope that all makes sense.




44
Shares / Re: Tax
« on: April 15, 2014, 07:31:22 pm »
A couple of points on residents/non-residents, dividends and DTA's

1. Any dividend is exempt from South African income tax (normal tax), whether resident or not.
2. Dividends received by a non-resident, would still be subject to a dividends withholding tax.  The following being the notable exceptions
       a) any dividend declared by a foreign company listed on the JSE  (i.e. the dividend is paid from a non-resident to a non-resident).  BHP is an example.
       b) where via a DTA, the dividend withholdings tax has been reduced to below the 15% withholding tax rate.  For example, the DTA with the UK, allows the withholding tax to be reduced to 10%.  Having a quick look at the SA-Portugal DTA, the rate stays at 15%
3. To qualify for the exemption/reduction referred to 2(a) or 2(b) above, one needs to apply for exemption with the withholding agent, typically your stock broker.
4. Note that when your residency status (via either the "ordinarily residence" test or "physical presence test"), changes from resident to not resident, you have a deemed capital gain (at current market value) on any shares held for investment purposes.
5. Thereafter,  any capital gains on the RSA shares are exempt from South African Capital gains tax.  But may, depending on local rules, be subject to tax in any other tax jurisdiction.
6. The effect of DTA, is to clear up source rules (i.e. where taxed), and attempt to eliminate any possible double taxation.  Similar rules, also exist in the RSA income tax act which may assist in ensuring you aren't taxed in two countries.
7.  The general underlying principles that exist with DTA, is that you only get taxed once, and that any withholding tax paid in the other country, could be set off against the tax that you pay in the 1st country.  I.e. should you be resident in Portugal, and receive a dividend from a South African company, any withholding tax withhold in South Africa, may (depending on the provisions of the DTA and the Portuguese tax legislation), be set off against your Portuguese tax liability.
8.  Do not assume that a DTA exists between the two countries.  Check - they are all listed on the SARS website.  Individual provisions can differ between DTA's.
9.  Also do not assume South Africa principles apply in other juridicitions, i.e, dividends may be taxed as ordinary income, and the tax rate be higher than the 15% you effectively pay in SA.
10.  If in doubt, consult a tax expert who deals with DTA's.  Tt might save you money.

Hope all the above makes sense


45
Shares / Re: Tax
« on: November 15, 2013, 10:16:20 pm »
Hi.  Anything related to the bricks and mortar itself.......

Although, if I had to get technical, the trigger is not the claiming of the expenditure, but it's the use thereof for trade purposes.  I.e.  If you utilized that room for your business, and didn't claim anything for income tax purposes, that room would still be excluded from your primary residence exclusion on the basis that it was was used for trade purposes.  Practically however, I wouldn't be concerned unless you acclaimed expenditure related to it.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4