TAX AVOIDANCE AND THE RIGHT TO AVOID TAX – Project topics materials

Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »

GENERAL ANTI-AVOIDANCE RULES

The anti-avoidance mechanisms discussed above have a limited scope because they apply to specific transactions. The substance over form rule only applies to transactions that are simulated, and SAARs only apply to specific transactions that are within the ambit of the relevant rule. A possible limitation of SAARs as a measure against impermissible tax avoidance, is that the number of transactions that can be created by taxpayers in response to individual provisions of the Act is unknown, and drafting SAARs for each tax provision is basically impossible. This means that SAARs, or the substance over form rule alone, may never curb impermissible tax avoidance effectively.
The limitations of these anti-avoidance mechanisms are offset by the presence of a GAAR which, as its name implies, is a rule of more general application. In ITC 155826 it was contended that generalia specilibus non derogant, which, when translated, means that a general provision cannot supersede a specific provision and apply where the specific provision does not apply. The taxpayer sought to rely on this principle to exclude the application of the GAAR to the transaction in question, on the basis that the applicable SAAR could not be applied to deny the tax benefits obtained. However, the court dismissed the taxpayer’s contentions and held that the GAAR could apply in such situations. Moreover, in terms of section 80I of the Act the Commissioner has the power to apply the GAAR in the alternative; it therefore follows that the Commissioner can apply the GAAR in tandem with a SAAR, or the substance over form rule, as alternative remedies.
Broadly defined, a GAAR is a rule in tax legislation that is enacted to strike down impermissible tax avoidance transactions. It is created by parliament to protect the provisions of the Act from abuse and to prevent taxpayers from circumventing tax liability byimpermissible means.

READ THE POLICY ENVIRONMENT SUPPORTING TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT AS IT RELATES TO EDUCATION

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1. BACKGROUND
2. RATIONALE OF THE STUDY .
3. SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
4. METHODOLOGIES .
5. RESEARCH QUESTIONS
6. STRUCTURE
CHAPTER 2: TAX AVOIDANCE AND THE RIGHT TO AVOID TAX
1. INTRODUCTION
2. TAX
3. TAX AVOIDANCE
4. PERMISSIBLE TAX AVOIDANCE
5. IMPERMISSIBLE TAX AVOIDANCE
5. CONCLUSION
CHAPTER 3: ANTI-AVOIDANCE RULES IN SOUTH AFRICA
1. INTRODUCTION
2. SIMULATION AND THE COMMON LAW SUBSTANCE OVER FORM RULE
3. SPECIFIC ANTI-AVOIDANCE RULES
4. GENERAL ANTI-AVOIDANCE RULES
5. REGULATION OF TAX PRACTITIONERS
6. REPORTABLE ARRANGEMENTS
7. NON-LEGAL MEAUSURES AGAINST IMPERMISSIBLE TAX AVOIDANCE .
8. CONCLUSION .
CHAPTER 4: THE HISTORICAL BACKGROUND TO THE SOUTH AFRICAN
GENERAL ANTI- AVOIDANCE RULE
1. INTRODUCTION
2. SECTION 90 ..
3. SECTION 103(1) .
4. CONCLUSION
CHAPTER 5: THE SOUTH AFRICAN GENERAL ANTI-AVOIDANCE RULE
1. INTRODUCTION
2. THE GAAR: SECTION 80A – 80L .
3. ANALYSIS OF THE GAAR..
4. CONCLUSION
CHAPTER 6: THE AUSTRALIAN GENERAL ANTI-AVOIDANCE RUL
CHAPTER 7: THE CANADIAN GENERAL ANTI-AVOIDANCE RULE
CHAPTER 8: THE JUDICIAL DOCTRINES TO COUNTER IMPERSSIBLE TAX
AVOIDANCE IN THE US
CHAPTER 9: THE JUDICIAL ANTI-AVOIDANCE RULES AND GENERAL ANTIAVOIDANCE RULE IN THE UK