Red Flags hang over BMA

Mesina-Beitbridge border crossing - Google MapsAccording to Eye Witness News, a draft law aimed at creating a new, overarching border control entity has run into problems.

Parliament’s Home Affairs Portfolio Committee has been briefed on the Border Management Authority Bill by the department, the South African Police Service (Saps) and National Treasury.

Cabinet approved the Bill in September 2015 to deal with weaknesses in the state’s ability to secure the country’s ports of entry.

The Bill proposes harnessing the responsibilities of Home Affairs, the police and the South African Revenue Service (Sars) among others in one agency under a commissioner.

The authority will take over the customs control functions currently undertaken by the South African Revenue Service. There are fears within the industry that it could compromise SARS’s achievements in modernising its customs administration that has facilitated the movement of goods across the border.

Red flags have been raised by both the SA Police Service and National Treasury over the Border Management Authority Bill.

Treasury’s Ismail Momoniat says while they support a single border control body, SARS must remain in charge of customs and excise and revenue collection.

“We’re talking of significant revenue collection, and that is a speciality… The Bill is a framework, it’s important it doesn’t generate uncertainty for an important institution like SARS.

The authority will be governed by a commissioner and overseen by an interministerial consultative committee, a border technical committee and advisory committees.

The SAPS’ Major General David Chilembe says the Constitution says South Africa must have a single police force. He says it may have to be amended if the new border authority takes over policing duties.

Chilembe also says the police, and not Home Affairs, should lead the new entity. Source: EWN.

Advertisements

Its Annual Budget time – Tobacco, Tax and the Black Market

Cigarettes+XXX+smokingThe nation awaits the 2015 Budget Speech with trepidation to know if income taxes will rise. But there is unanimous certainty there will, as per usual, be an increase in ‘Specific Excise Duties’. The only question is by how much? Taxation of cigarettes and tobacco products appears to be the path of least resistance for tax-collectors. It receives little backlash from the wider public (unlike e-tolls) and even support in some quarters.

The imposition of the so-called “sin taxes” on cigarettes and liquor products, in addition to generating significant fiscal revenues, does serve an economic purpose. Unlike normal goods and “necessity” products, cigarettes are not an essential good which people need to survive. As far back as the 1700s, Adam Smith averred “Sugar, rum, and tobacco, are commodities which are nowhere necessaries of life … are therefore extremely proper subjects of taxation.” Again, the notion of the importance of tobacco to the fiscal basket is exemplified in utmost simplicity and honesty – if a politician, or an emperor in this case can be believed –

This vice brings in one hundred million francs in taxes every year. I will certainly forbid it at once – as soon as you can name a virtue that brings in as much revenue [Napoleon III (1800s) – reply when asked to ban smoking]

Despite all the furore over public health and governments efforts to decrease the demand for cigarettes, South Africa is no different to other nations – annual tobacco revenues to the state coffers amounts to around R10 Billion! Another round of sin tax increases in the upcoming budget appears inevitable, and these increases are spawning a range of unintended (but not unexpected) consequences – the illicit trade. Source: Polity.org / DNA Economics.