"Pay Now, Argue Later" Rule – Before and After the Tax Administration Act

The South African Revenue Service (SARS) is entrusted with the duty of collecting tax on behalf of the South African government. In order to ensure effective and prompt collection of taxes, the payment of tax is not suspended pending an objection or an appeal, unless directed otherwise. This is also known as the "pay now, argue later" rule, and, for value-added tax purposes, is provided for in terms of section 36 of the Value-Added Tax Act 89 of 1991. The "pay now, argue later" rule in terms of section 36 of the Value-Added Tax Act prima facie infringes on a taxpayer's right of access to the courts as envisaged in section 34 of the Constitution. This is due to the fact that a taxpayer is obliged to pay tax before being afforded the opportunity to challenge the assessment in a court. In Metcash Trading Ltd v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service, the Constitutional Court held the "pay now, argue later" rule in terms of section 36 to be constitutional. Olivier, however, does not agree with the court on several matters. Amongst the problems she indicates are that the taxpayer does not have access to the courts at the time the rule is invoked, and that the court did not consider the fact that there might be less invasive means available which would ensure that SARS's duty is balanced with the taxpayer's right of access to the courts. Guidelines were also issued which provide legal certainty regarding the factors SARS may consider in determining whether the payment of tax should be suspended or not. These guidelines also evoked some points of criticism. Since 1 October 2012, the "pay now, argue later" rule has been applied in terms of section 164 of the Tax Administration Act 28 of 2011. The question arises whether this provision addresses the problems identified in respect of section 36 of the Value-Added Tax Act and the guidelines. In comparing these sections, only slight differences emerged. The most significant difference is that section 164(6) of the Tax Administration Act stipulates that the enforcement of tax be suspended for a period when SARS is considering a request for suspension. Section 164(6) does not provide a solution to the problems identified regarding section 36 of the Value-Added Tax Act. It is even possible that this section could give rise to further problems. Therefore, the legislature has failed to address the imbalance between the duties of SARS and the right of a taxpayer to access the courts.   

Puusta pidemmälle:Määrästä arvoon

Kotimaan vihreästä kullasta valmistetuista tuotteista saadaan monia tuotteita kiertotalouden avulla. Olemme kehittäneet uutta, puumateriaaleihin pohjautuvaa liiketoimintaa yhdessä yritysten, tutkimuslaitosten ja koulutusorganisaatioiden kanssa. Olemme hypänneet puusta pidemmälle – määrästä arvoon.Hankkeessa olemme luoneet metsäalalle uusia työkaluja ja toimintamalleja, joiden avulla puutuotteiden laatu korvaa määrän.Kiertotaloudessa puusta valmistetaan mahdollisimman pitkäikäisiä tuotteita, joita voidaan hyödyntää moneen kertaan ja siten luoda samalle puumateriaalille taloudellista arvoa yhä uudelleen ja uudelleen. Nykyään jätteeksi päätyvä puuaines hyödynnetäänkin jatkossa kestävästi uusien tuotteiden valmistamiseen. Puutuotteisiin voidaan lisätä myös aineetonta arvoa digitaalisten teknologioiden ja palveluiden avulla.Hankkeessa testattiin nopean kokeilun ja innovoinnin työpajamallia, jonka avulla metsäalan yritykset, muotoilijat ja markkinoijat kehittivät yhdessä uusia liikeideoita puutuotteille. Hankkeen aikana tutkittiin myös puutuotteiden kiertotalouden edistämismahdollisuuksia, toteutettiin puutuotteiden elinkaarilaskuri, tutkittiin digitalisaation mahdollisuuksia, sekä suunniteltiin ja testattiin kiertotalouden markkinointikonseptia kaikkien yritysten käyttöön.Lisäksi hankkeessa mukana olevat yritykset kehittivät yhdessä teknologiaa uudella tavalla hyödyntäviä puupohjaisia tuotteitaan. Tavoitteena on ollut luoda uutta, kiertotalouden mukaista liiketoimintaa Suomeen ja edistää samalla Suomen kansainvälistä kilpailukykyä.Hankkeen ajankohta: 4.5.2018-15.10.201

Amounts of non-fibrous components in recovered paper

Paper and board recycling is now a central issue in papermaking. Understanding of material flows, as a part of the total production chain, as well as, fibrous and non-fibrous component flows needs further clarification. These flows are studied at a European level, with special focus on Germany and Sweden. Non-fibrous components are discussed in terms of a material which hampers the processing of paper and board. Resource-efficiency improvements, in conjunction with economic benefits, are sought and recycling has been able to fulfil both of these. The main drivers to maximize the use of recovered paper in paper and board manufacturing, have been improved over the last decades. These drivers are cost, environmental image and good technical properties to be used as raw material. The increased recycling rate has reduced the quality of the collected paper, produced recycled paper, and replaced virgin pulp. Also, recycling as a process, like deinking, produces large amounts of waste material that has challenges to find proper utilization. These problem areas are addressed in this paper, to