South Africa's Information Regulator has compelled the South African Revenue Service to disclose former president Jacob Zuma's tax records, criticizing the agency's lenient handling of his non-compliance. This decision follows a seven-year battle under the Promotion of Access to Information Act. The ruling highlights the public interest in transparency regarding Zuma's tax affairs and potential SARS misconduct.
In February 2019, investigative outlet amaBhungane and journalist Warren Thompson filed requests under the Promotion of Access to Information Act (Paia) for access to Jacob Zuma's tax records. They suspected Zuma had not declared all income and that SARS was treating him leniently. After initial refusals, the matter escalated to the Constitutional Court, which in May 2023 ruled that tax legislation and Paia were unconstitutional to the extent they barred public interest disclosures of taxpayer information.
Following this victory, amaBhungane resubmitted requests in December 2023 for Zuma's tax returns and related documents. SARS again denied access, claiming no evidence of legal contravention. The case then reached the Information Regulator, where chairperson Advocate Pansy Tlakula issued an enforcement notice on Wednesday, ordering full disclosure.
The regulator affirmed Paia's public interest override, which requires disclosure if it reveals substantial legal non-compliance and public benefits outweigh harms. It found Zuma filed returns late every year during his presidency, only after final demands, under-declared taxes in 2017 and 2018 with penalties, faced criminal charges for false statements, and omitted gross income or material facts. These repeated offenses, each punishable by imprisonment, constituted substantial contraventions, especially from a president.
The regulator also noted potential SARS misconduct, describing its 'soft approach' as a failure to enforce tax laws diligently, raising questions about fairness in handling Zuma's affairs. Disclosure, the notice stated, promotes transparency, accountability, and trust in institutions, deterring tax evasion by officials. While acknowledging privacy concerns, it deemed the information commercial, limiting any intrusion. This ruling underscores the regulator's role in upholding constitutional obligations amid weakening state institutions.