Management accounts still OK for BEE verifications?

“My manufacturing business has been growing steadily and I expect it will go above the R50 million turnover mark this financial year. That said, its not a given, and I’m hesitant to spend on BEE planning before I’m sure we will go over this mark. Will I be able to first wrap up the financial year and thereafter do the necessary BEE expenditure and verify the business using management accounts for the first quarter after the financial year-end?”

In August 2020, the South African National Accreditation System (SANAS) issued a communication to B-BBEE verification agencies that measured entities shall not be permitted to conduct a B-BBEE audit using management accounts outside of their financial period. SANAS also encourages the use of financial statements rather than management accounts. 

However, given that a company’s financial audit may only be completed some time after their financial year-end and there could be urgency in obtaining a BEE certificate, a company would be allowed to use management accounts for the same period as their financial year for purposes of undergoing a BEE verification. 

So, to answer your question. You will not be allowed to verify using management accounts that fall in the period after your financial year. If a verification agency does allow this, which would be highly unlikely, you run the risk that should SANAS pick up this non-compliance, your BEE certificate could be cancelled.

Our advice is to rather conduct proper BEE planning now, an exercise that should in any event be conducted well in advance of your financial year-end, and in that planning evaluate the various scenarios for if your turnover fails to exceed/does exceed the R50 million turnover mark. With some careful planning and with the help of your BEE consultant you should be able to prepare for both scenarios and not run the risk of a poor BEE certificate due to inadequate planning.

September 14, 2021
Culture vs style: When workplace dress codes cross the line

Culture vs style: When workplace dress codes cross the line

Dress codes are a familiar part of many workplaces, yet employers often fail to calibrate how far they are allowed to go in regulating employee personal appearance. While employers may enforce standards of neatness, safety and professionalism, these rules cannot override constitutional rights, nor can they operate in a discriminatory manner. A recent reminder of this emerged from the Supreme Court of Appeal, where the court had to consider the fairness of dismissing correctional officers for refusing to cut their dreadlocks, contrary to the employer’s dress code.

Competition Commission guidelines on confidential information

Competition Commission guidelines on confidential information

The Competition Commission of South Africa (“Competition Commission”) identified a need to guide merger parties and stakeholders on claiming confidentiality over information. In September 2025, the Competition Commission issued Guidelines on the Commission’s handling of confidential information (“Guidelines”), which, however, are not binding on the Competition Commission, the Competition Tribunal or the Competition Appeal Court, but must be taken into account by these authorities when interpreting and applying the Competition Act 89 of 1998 (“Competition Act”).

Termination of joint ownership, rights in question: PIE Act explained

Termination of joint ownership, rights in question: PIE Act explained

In a recent Western Cape court case where the court ordered the termination of joint ownership of properties, an interesting question arose as to whether the termination of joint ownership did not amount to an eviction contrary to the Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act, 19 of 1998 (PIE Act)? We look at the requirements for the termination of joint ownership by our courts and whether this can infringe on the PIE Act.

Sign up to our newsletter

Pin It on Pinterest