SA trusts, offshore heirs, and a 45% surprise

Planning to include a child who’s moved abroad in your South African trust? Recent tax changes mean that the decision could come with a steep cost.
Before recent amendments, having a non-resident beneficiary in a South African trust did not have major implications for the trust. 

If you have a South African trust and wish to add a non-resident beneficiary, such as a child who has moved abroad and is now a tax resident offshore, there are specific tax implications and exchange control regulations for non-resident beneficiaries that must be considered before doing so. Before adding a non-resident beneficiary, it is crucial to understand recent amendments to the Income Tax Act 58 of 1962 (“the Act’), which came into effect on 1 March 2024, and the implications these amendments may have.

Income vs. capital gains
Before delving into the implications, it is important to understand the difference between section 25B of the Act and paragraph 80 of the Eighth Schedule to the Act. Section 25B of the Act deals with income, while the latter addresses capital gains.

Before the amendment
To understand how section 25B of the Act impacts non-resident beneficiaries, consider the income tax implications before and after the amendment. Previously, the conduit principle applied to both residents and non-resident beneficiaries. In practice, this means that income distributed to a beneficiary during the specific year of assessment would flow through the trust to the beneficiary, who would then be taxed on that amount. In this case, the trust itself was not taxed, and the beneficiary was potentially taxed at a lower effective tax rate than the trust would have been. 

After 1 March 2024
However, from 1 March 2024, when the amendment took effect, the conduit principle no longer applies to non-resident beneficiaries. The amount distributed to non-resident beneficiaries will be taxed in the trust at a flat tax rate of 45%, regardless of whether the income is declared to the non-resident beneficiary. 

The recent amendments have thus aligned the tax treatment of income distributions with that of capital distributions for non-resident beneficiaries. A resident beneficiary is taxed on capital gains if the gain vests in them, typically at a lower rate than the trust would have paid. In contrast, where a capital gain is distributed to a non-resident beneficiary, the trust bears the tax liability.

Implications for trust planning
The tax implications for trusts are far more than they used to be before the amendment took effect. Careful planning is required before adding a non-resident beneficiary to a South African trust to mitigate tax implications and the financial impact on the trust. 

Having a non-resident beneficiary in your trust comes with a few obstacles that require careful planning and diligent discussions between the trustees and beneficiaries before making any decisions. It may be useful to approach a trust expert, estate planning expert or a tax expert for professional advice to assist in mitigating the obstacles at hand and to guide the trustees and beneficiaries in deciding what they are comfortable with. 

Disclaimer: This article is the personal opinion/view of the author(s) and is not necessarily that of the firm. The content is provided for information only and should not be seen as an exact or complete exposition of the law. Accordingly, no reliance should be placed on the content for any reason whatsoever and no action should be taken on the basis thereof unless its application and accuracy has been confirmed by a legal advisor. The firm and author(s) cannot be held liable for any prejudice or damage resulting from action taken on the basis of this content without further written confirmation by the author(s). 

 

July 16, 2025
Section 8C explained: Tax tips for employee share schemes

Section 8C explained: Tax tips for employee share schemes

Employee share schemes are often introduced to reward, retain, or align employees with long-term business growth. However, under section 8C of the Income Tax Act 58 of 1962 (the “Income Tax Act”), these arrangements can create significant and unexpected tax liabilities for employees when equity instruments vest. This article explains how section 8C operates, what qualifies as an “equity instrument,” and why careful structuring of share schemes is essential to avoid punitive tax outcomes.

The costly consequences of backdated share transactions

The costly consequences of backdated share transactions

The South African legislative framework regards backdated shares as a suspicious and illegal practice, as it arises when a share issue or transfer is recorded as having occurred on an earlier date than the actual transaction. While backdating may be viewed as an administrative oversight, the consequences may constitute compliance risk, serious misconduct on directors, beneficial owners and compliance officers who authorise the backdating of share transactions. This is because backdated shares may manipulate the timing of funds, obscure the source of funds, and distort a company’s beneficial ownership structure.

Tax transparency matters: Are your deals reportable?

Tax transparency matters: Are your deals reportable?

Some deals come with hidden reporting duties. Find out when your transactions could trigger SARS disclosure rules, and how to stay compliant. You may have heard the term “reportable arrangement” in tax conversations around commercial transactions. It sounds technical, and it is, but at its core, it’s about transparency. The South African Revenue Service (“SARS”) seeks information on certain transactions that could be used to avoid or reduce tax. If you enter a reportable arrangement, you may be legally required to report it. Failure to comply can result in significant penalties.

Sign up to our newsletter

Pin It on Pinterest