The SA Revenue Service (Sars) is on the hunt for alleged “gold mafia” Andries Greyvensteyn’s assets in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and US, seeking to recoup about R3bn it says is due to the fiscus.
Greyvensteyn’s movements out of the country have been severely restricted, with his outfit, Gold Kid, now under the management of a curator, having been found by the tax agency to be fraudulent.
The curator is authorised to dispose of the assets by means of auctions or out-of-hand sales and to pay the proceeds of the sales to Sars in reduction of any tax liability of Greyvensteyn and Gold Kid.
Gold Kid’s activities came to the public domain via a four-part investigation by al Jazeera’s investigative unit, which showed how multiple gangs smuggle gold from Zimbabwe and use it to launder vast amounts of money.
Staff at SA bank Sasfin were implicated in colluding with the money launderers. The tax agency last year served Sasfin with a civil summons for R4.87bn plus interest and costs, which the bank is opposing.
Sars believes Gold Kid obtained gold Kruger Rands, on which VAT is not levied, which it smelted and sold as highly refined unwrought gold. Sars alleges the company claimed VAT refunds for which it had not paid.
Greyvensteyn has unsuccessfully tried to have three provisions of the Tax Administration Act declared unconstitutional.
The provisions, among other things, empower Sars to seek a court order to repatriate assets located offshore to satisfy tax debt, limit the taxpayer’s right to travel outside the country and require the taxpayer to surrender his or her passport to the tax agency.
In extreme cases, the provisions allow Sars to withdraw a taxpayer’s authorisation to conduct business in SA where such trading enables the taxpayer to evade paying taxes.
Greyvensteyn said the provisions violated his rights by limiting his rights to travel outside SA and to earn a living, an argument the North Gauteng High Court dismissed in a landmark case that strengthened Sars’ arm to pursue tax dodgers.
“Given the allegations of fraudulent trade on the part of the fourth respondent [Gold Kid], seizure of the applicant’s [Greyvensteyn] foreign assets and a limit on his trade and ability to travel seems appropriate. As noted previously, the limitation was subject to oversight by a curator bonis who was ordered to not withhold permission unreasonably,” reads last month’s judgment by acting judge Waheeda Amien.
“Under the circumstances, it seems that a less restrictive means could not be imposed to achieve the purpose of the limitation.”
Sars commissioner Edward Kieswetter has placed emphasis on improving the efficiency of tax administration to recoup about R800bn that remains uncollected annually from individuals and companies.
Kieswetter welcomed Amien’s judgment.
“This precedent-setting decision reaffirms Sars’ legal authority to discharge its work of collecting all revenue due to the state in an efficient and effective manner. Importantly, was the court’s reiteration that the provisions that allow Sars to determine third-party liability, repatriation of foreign assets and restrictions of travel are lawful and constitutional,” he said.
“Sars will continue to provide certainty and clarity to taxpayers while making it easy and simple to transact with the organisation. However, Sars will vehemently oppose any action by the taxpayer intended to undermine its mandate.”
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.