Open letter to the taxman hits a nerve, confirming systemic flaws in tax administration.
A candid letter from a seasoned tax practitioner who worked for the South African Revenue Service (Sars) for 38 years has struck a nerve across the industry, laying bare the mounting strain of inconsistent processes at the tax agency.
In her letter, Charné van der Walt – widely known as the ‘Lemon Lady’ – recognises Sars’s responsibility for collecting tax, but argues that the way it is carried out is “sometimes unfair, often frustrating, and, more often than not, inconsistent”.
In the letter, published over the weekend by Netwerk24, she notes that she spends a third of each working day on “unproductive administration”.
She says her clients are losing respect for her and other tax practitioners because they wait longer for tax matters to be finalised, despite better technology.
ALSO READ: It can be exhausting to do battle with Sars
Questions ‘that must be asked’
Van der Walt poses a long list of questions, describing them as “questions that must be asked”.
Among the questions:
- Why are we asked not to submit too much information, and when we comply, amendments are brought to the return by Sars because we submitted “too little” information?
- Why are stops placed on refunds so that people cannot get their money, despite Sars having access to all South African bank accounts and being able to easily confirm the information?
- Why are people who have tax debt released from verifications, but as soon as someone gets a refund they go through a verification process? Must all taxpayers not be treated the same?
Several taxpayers and tax practitioners reacted to the letter, throwing their weight behind Van der Walt.
ALSO READ: Timekeeping seems to be Sars’s Achilles’ heel
Lack of respect
One practitioner who has been in the industry for 30 years says it is “utterly frustrating” and “inhumanely stressful” because of the increased administration imposed on tax practitioners even with all the advances in technology.
“Despite the large contribution that we make in terms of collections and compliance there is no respect or appreciation for this profession, mainly in how Sars treats us and our clients losing respect for us because of Sars’s mistakes.”
The commentator believes there will be a shortage of practitioners in the next 10 years.
Another notes that personnel in tax practices are resigning because they can no longer deal with the stress of “senseless requests and assessments”.
“The profession is buckling under Sars’s ludicrousness,” the say.
“Sars does not adhere to timelines, and our clients think we are incompetent. I try my best for my clients, but they do not always understand the frustration.”
A taxpayer says the letter probably articulates thousands of loyal taxpayers’ experience with this “so called successful state entity”. The taxpayer says the way Sars deals with taxpayers’ matters is nothing short of being “inaccessible bullies”.
Over the past year, more tax practitioners dealing with medium to very large and multinational companies have been expressing their frustration with the fact that it is becoming increasingly difficult to deal with Sars.
Charles de Wet, tax executive at ENS, says all the issues raised by Van der Walt are valid.
As has been pointed out on various occasions in the public domain, Sars does not stick to its own timelines.
“One gets the impression that because Sars has in most instances 21 days to respond that they wait until day 20 and then ask for more information. Then the clock starts ticking again.”
This is quite unreasonable, he says.
ALSO READ: Waiting for Sars to answer? Taxman apologises for hours-long call centre delays
Sars responds …
In its response to Van der Walt’s letter and long list of questions, Sars says it unfortunately cannot discuss individual matters in public fora.
“However, we would welcome structured engagement on the themes you have raised.”
It says it is open to considering “process pain points and potential improvements”.
Sars has invited Van der Walt to submit summaries or case references (eFiling case numbers) for quality-assurance review by Sars. This will enable it to examine the cases within the “applicable legislative framework”.
ALSO READ: Sars incorrectly recalls refund from a taxpayer’s bank account
Strategic intent vs real-world realities
Stiaan Klue, executive dean and CEO of The Tax Faculty, says that as an academic institution working closely with the tax industry, it does not view the open letter in isolation.
“Rather, we treat it as a critical piece of qualitative evidence that triangulates with the quantitative data that emerged from our 2025 tax practice survey.”
He says Van der Walt’s letter constitutes a qualitative validation of systemic dysfunction.
“It confirms that the administrative friction we observe in the [practice survey] data is not anecdotal, but structural.”
It also validates the so-called digital divide. This theoretical framework describes the widening divergence between Sars’s strategic intent (Modernisation 3.0) and the operational (real-world) realities of tax administration.
“Sars projects a vision of an AI-enabled future. However, market adoption metrics indicate a rejection of this vision.”
He quotes from the PwC Taxing Times survey, which reveals that 95% of corporate taxpayers have abstained from using Sars’s AI chatbot, and trust indices have plateaued, with 51% of respondents reporting no improvement in trust year-on-year.
Tax morality is predicated on a social contract – the taxpayer discloses fully in exchange for fair and predictable treatment.
This contract, says Klue, is fraying.
This article was republished from Moneyweb. Read the original here.
