How Have the Courts Decided What De Minimis is in Tax Law?
This article analyses how South African courts have decided the applicability of the de minimis non curat lex maxim and, more broadly, considered the de minimis concept in tax law. A doctrinal research methodology is employed with the focus on an analysis of predominantly reported judicial decisions...
Saved in:
Published in: | Potchefstroom electronic law journal Vol. 27 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , |
Format: | Journal Article |
Language: | Afrikaans English |
Published: |
North-West University
31-10-2024
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Abstract | This article analyses how South African courts have decided the applicability of the de minimis non curat lex maxim and, more broadly, considered the de minimis concept in tax law. A doctrinal research methodology is employed with the focus on an analysis of predominantly reported judicial decisions. The applicability of the maxim is found to be decisive in only one tax case: the Diageo SA (Pty) Ltd v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service case of 5 July 2023. Consequently, this study thus also reviews judicial precedent in respect of the applicability of the maxim in other areas of the law with consideration of the relevance to tax law. Further, several tax cases that refer to the broader de minimis concept or to trivial or trifling matters are examined. As there is no one definitive test to determine the applicability of the maxim, the courts have used several factors to guide their determination. Through inductive reasoning, the following conclusions are drawn. (i) In respect of statutory interpretation: First, the primary factor in the determination of the applicability of the maxim is the purpose of the provision. This is aptly demonstrated in the Diageo judgment. Secondly, where the statute sets a clear, objectively verifiable limit or amount, there is essentially no room for the application of the maxim in interpreting the statute. Where, however, no such verifiable basis is provided, a purposive interpretation is paramount – which may in fact require the application of the maxim. (ii) The use of the de minimis concept in tax law appears to depend on whether the matter is one of principle (substance) or practicality (administrability). In the former case, the amount (the factor of extent or value) is irrelevant whereas in the latter, the de minimis concept has been applied. |
---|---|
AbstractList | This article analyses how South African courts have decided the applicability of the de minimis non curat lex maxim and, more broadly, considered the de minimis concept in tax law. A doctrinal research methodology is employed with the focus on an analysis of predominantly reported judicial decisions. The applicability of the maxim is found to be decisive in only one tax case: the Diageo SA (Pty) Ltd v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service case of 5 July 2023. Consequently, this study thus also reviews judicial precedent in respect of the applicability of the maxim in other areas of the law with consideration of the relevance to tax law. Further, several tax cases that refer to the broader de minimis concept or to trivial or trifling matters are examined. As there is no one definitive test to determine the applicability of the maxim, the courts have used several factors to guide their determination. Through inductive reasoning, the following conclusions are drawn. (i) In respect of statutory interpretation: First, the primary factor in the determination of the applicability of the maxim is the purpose of the provision. This is aptly demonstrated in the Diageo judgment. Secondly, where the statute sets a clear, objectively verifiable limit or amount, there is essentially no room for the application of the maxim in interpreting the statute. Where, however, no such verifiable basis is provided, a purposive interpretation is paramount – which may in fact require the application of the maxim. (ii) The use of the de minimis concept in tax law appears to depend on whether the matter is one of principle (substance) or practicality (administrability). In the former case, the amount (the factor of extent or value) is irrelevant whereas in the latter, the de minimis concept has been applied. |
Author | De Lange, Silke Malan, Monique Tessa |
Author_xml | – sequence: 1 givenname: Silke orcidid: 0000-0003-3939-5209 surname: De Lange fullname: De Lange, Silke – sequence: 2 givenname: Monique Tessa orcidid: 0000-0002-4923-9595 surname: Malan fullname: Malan, Monique Tessa |
BookMark | eNpNkFtLwzAUx4NMcM59h4DPtUlza_RBZF42mPgy8TGcJqnL2FpJ66bf3naTscOBc4P_Oed3iQZVXXmErim5oYoKnVKVqYSpnKYZyXi6zVQgQBXPyRkaHoeDk_wCjZtmRTpjjOacD9HttN7hKWw9bpceT-rv2Db40dvgvMMfS2i7Ar-GKmxCg3uv8AJ-8Bx291fovIR148f_cYTen58Wk2kyf3uZTR7mie3OJAnkQpQFyUvZVVoVnBJQXpeZLQqREacZSEpyzZ0UyhIopFaMA_da2LLgjI3Q7KDraliZrxg2EH9NDcHsG3X8NBDbYNfeuKJ7VeZOAhDerdHEAXVacqt0KYTstO4OWjbWTRN9edSjxOypmh6W6WGZnqo5ocr-AOKyagQ |
Cites_doi | 10.1136/bmj.3.5932.693 10.2307/1283494 10.1071/PVv1999n79 10.3928/0147-7447-19800601-14 10.1093/he/9780199672684.001.0001 |
ContentType | Journal Article |
DBID | AAYXX CITATION DOA |
DOI | 10.17159/1727-3781/2024/v27i0a17480 |
DatabaseName | CrossRef DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals |
DatabaseTitle | CrossRef |
DatabaseTitleList | CrossRef |
Database_xml | – sequence: 1 dbid: DOA name: Directory of Open Access Journals url: http://www.doaj.org/ sourceTypes: Open Website |
DeliveryMethod | fulltext_linktorsrc |
Discipline | Law |
EISSN | 1727-3781 |
ExternalDocumentID | oai_doaj_org_article_db17268d6aa040a790da1d964c79f556 10_17159_1727_3781_2024_v27i0a17480 |
GroupedDBID | -OY 123 1RF 29O 2WC 4JU 5VS AAYXX ABDBF ABXHO ADBBV ADUOI AEIZH AKPQQ ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS APOWU BCNDV CITATION ESX GCT GROUPED_DOAJ HCSNT HISYW HOCAJ JRA KQ8 KWQ M~E OK1 RFP RHO SCD |
ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-c1710-a855fb08f671097b410a7e9f2cbb520d93a610894d657c0ab69734a4e95cfb433 |
IEDL.DBID | DOA |
ISSN | 1727-3781 |
IngestDate | Mon Nov 04 19:56:08 EST 2024 Wed Nov 06 13:25:18 EST 2024 |
IsDoiOpenAccess | true |
IsOpenAccess | true |
IsPeerReviewed | true |
IsScholarly | true |
Language | Afrikaans English |
LinkModel | DirectLink |
MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c1710-a855fb08f671097b410a7e9f2cbb520d93a610894d657c0ab69734a4e95cfb433 |
ORCID | 0000-0002-4923-9595 0000-0003-3939-5209 |
OpenAccessLink | https://doaj.org/article/db17268d6aa040a790da1d964c79f556 |
ParticipantIDs | doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_db17268d6aa040a790da1d964c79f556 crossref_primary_10_17159_1727_3781_2024_v27i0a17480 |
PublicationCentury | 2000 |
PublicationDate | 2024-10-31 |
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 2024-10-31 |
PublicationDate_xml | – month: 10 year: 2024 text: 2024-10-31 day: 31 |
PublicationDecade | 2020 |
PublicationTitle | Potchefstroom electronic law journal |
PublicationYear | 2024 |
Publisher | North-West University |
Publisher_xml | – name: North-West University |
References | 417002 417046 417003 417047 417004 417048 417005 417049 417006 417007 417008 417009 416998 417040 417041 417042 417043 417000 417044 417001 417045 416999 417013 417057 417014 417058 417015 417059 417016 417017 417018 417019 417050 417051 417052 417053 417010 417054 417011 417055 417012 417056 417024 417068 417025 417026 417027 417028 417029 417060 417061 417062 417063 417020 417064 417021 417065 417022 417066 417023 417067 417035 417036 417037 417038 417039 417030 417031 417032 417033 417034 |
References_xml | – ident: 417027 – ident: 417052 – ident: 417000 – ident: 417004 – ident: 417023 – ident: 417033 – ident: 417056 – ident: 417065 – ident: 417036 – ident: 417061 – ident: 417042 – ident: 417013 – ident: 417008 – ident: 417046 – ident: 417003 – ident: 417051 – ident: 417028 – ident: 417024 – ident: 417007 – ident: 417030 – ident: 417034 – ident: 417055 – ident: 417059 – ident: 417039 – ident: 417062 – ident: 417018 – ident: 417020 – ident: 417041 – ident: 417014 – ident: 417010 – ident: 417049 – ident: 417066 – ident: 417002 – ident: 417029 – ident: 417054 – ident: 417006 – ident: 417031 – ident: 417025 – ident: 417045 doi: 10.1136/bmj.3.5932.693 – ident: 417050 – ident: 416999 – ident: 417058 – ident: 417019 – ident: 417035 – ident: 417017 doi: 10.2307/1283494 – ident: 417015 – ident: 417040 – ident: 417038 – ident: 417063 – ident: 417011 – ident: 417021 – ident: 417044 – ident: 417047 doi: 10.1071/PVv1999n79 – ident: 417067 – ident: 417048 doi: 10.3928/0147-7447-19800601-14 – ident: 417026 – ident: 417053 – ident: 416998 – ident: 417032 – ident: 417005 – ident: 417022 – ident: 417057 – ident: 417001 doi: 10.1093/he/9780199672684.001.0001 – ident: 417064 – ident: 417037 – ident: 417012 – ident: 417043 – ident: 417016 – ident: 417009 – ident: 417060 – ident: 417068 |
SSID | ssj0000331844 |
Score | 2.3237505 |
Snippet | This article analyses how South African courts have decided the applicability of the de minimis non curat lex maxim and, more broadly, considered the de... |
SourceID | doaj crossref |
SourceType | Open Website Aggregation Database |
SubjectTerms | De minimis non curat lex interpretation of statutes judicial discretion tax law trifling trivial |
Title | How Have the Courts Decided What De Minimis is in Tax Law? |
URI | https://doaj.org/article/db17268d6aa040a790da1d964c79f556 |
Volume | 27 |
hasFullText | 1 |
inHoldings | 1 |
isFullTextHit | |
isPrint | |
link | http://sdu.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwrV1NS8QwEA3uHsSL-InrFwG9lk3bpEm8iLq79KBeXMFbmTQJ9NIV98ufb6Zdl968CL20kDJ5M817gfQNIbfKsjTRFiKROhHxxMsIEm4irrwvreYgE_x3OH-Trx9qNEabnG2rLzwT1toDt8ANrQkUmymbAYR6A6mZhdjqjJdSeyFas22mO5upZg1OQ61yvktucFWQgbOHyNThc1Ix7vf5cJXIikHQ42gI2aGkjnN_QzGTA7K_0Yb0oY3pkOyAPyK9Z1gfk7t8tqY5rBwNgo1io7nFnI5cWVlnKdpvhxv6UtVVSBvFq6ZT-KZh7P0JeZ-Mp095tGl7EJUhUhaBEsIbpnyG5ySl4XGYttM-KY0RCbM6haB5lOY2E7JkYDItUw7caVF6w9P0lPTrWe3OCFVGqDIIkKB5PE8cU9ZIZuLYoFAUAAPCf2defLbuFgXuChCwAgErELACASs6gA3II6K0HYIW1c2DkLhik7jir8Sd_8dLLsgeBteSySXpL76W7or05nZ53RTED8hFsm0 |
link.rule.ids | 315,783,787,867,2109,27936,27937 |
linkProvider | Directory of Open Access Journals |
openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=How+Have+the+Courts+Decided+What+De+Minimis+is+in+Tax+Law%3F&rft.jtitle=Potchefstroom+electronic+law+journal&rft.au=Silke+De+Lange&rft.au=Monique+Tessa+Malan&rft.date=2024-10-31&rft.pub=North-West+University&rft.eissn=1727-3781&rft.volume=27&rft_id=info:doi/10.17159%2F1727-3781%2F2024%2Fv27i0a17480&rft.externalDBID=DOA&rft.externalDocID=oai_doaj_org_article_db17268d6aa040a790da1d964c79f556 |
thumbnail_l | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=1727-3781&client=summon |
thumbnail_m | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=1727-3781&client=summon |
thumbnail_s | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=1727-3781&client=summon |