Van Huyssteens Commercial Attorneys

26/02/2026

An exciting opportunity has opened to join the team at Van Huyssteens Commercial Attorneys.
We are looking for talented tax attorneys who are passionate about complex transactions, strategic structuring, and delivering commercially sound solutions. This is an opportunity to work on high-value matters alongside a dynamic team that values technical excellence, collaboration, and professional growth.

If you thrive in a fast-paced environment and want to be part of a firm that sits at the intersection of law, tax, and business — we would love to hear from you.

Role Description

Full-time, on-site position located in Pretoria for a Tax Attorney. The role involves, inter alia, advising clients on tax planning, structuring share acquisitions, asset-for-share transactions, asset disposals, amalgamations, and intra-group reorganisations. Responsibilities include handling tax law matters, representing clients in negotiations, preparing agreements, and staying up-to-date on developments in tax legislation. Collaboration with clients to structure solutions that meet commercial and legal goals will also be integral to this role.

Qualifications

3 – 5 years post-admission experience
Proficiency in Tax Law and Corporate and Commercial Law.
Strong knowledge of Tax Planning, Corporate Rules, different share classes / Preference Shares.
In-depth understanding and application of Tax Law and legal frameworks.
Excellent communication, analytical, and negotiation skills.
Bachelor's degree in Law (LLB) and advanced tax qualifications.
Registered Tax Practitioner, advantageous.
Admittance as an attorney of the High Court of South Africa.
Prior experience in a tax-focused legal role is preferred.
Strong attention to detail and ability to manage complex legal matters effectively.

CV / Resume should be emailed to [email protected]

12/02/2026

In almost every commercial transaction — whether advising a purchaser or a seller — tax is never merely an afterthought. It is often one of the key value drivers that can determine whether a deal succeeds or stalls.

Traditionally, sellers priced tax leakage into the purchase consideration, with buyers simply “grossing up” the price to ensure the seller’s after-tax outcome remained commercially acceptable. Increasingly, however, we are seeing a shift in approach.

Purchasers are now proactively structuring acquisitions to achieve tax efficiencies for sellers as a negotiation tool or deal sweetener. Instead of increasing the headline price, the transaction itself is designed to deliver a more favourable tax outcome. When implemented correctly, this can create a genuine win–win:
• Sellers retain more value post-tax
• Buyers preserve cash and pricing discipline
• Deals close faster with fewer pricing disputes

But these benefits do not come without risk.

From a tax perspective, any structure that produces a material tax benefit must be supported by real commercial substance. Where the primary objective appears to be tax avoidance rather than business efficacy, the arrangement may fall foul of the General Anti-Avoidance Rules (GAAR). This is particularly relevant in the current environment of heightened scrutiny by revenue authorities.

Good structuring, therefore, is not about engineering tax outcomes at all costs. It is about aligning legal form, commercial purpose, and tax consequences in a manner that is defensible, sustainable, and commercially rational.

At Van Huyssteens Commercial Attorneys, we believe that effective M&A structuring sits at the intersection of law, tax, and commercial reality. The best outcomes are achieved when these elements are considered holistically from the outset — not retrofitted at the end of the process.

Tax efficiency should support the deal, not define it.

03/02/2026

South African Revenue Service Binding Private Ruling 418 – a notable shift in the asset-for-share framework.

Binding Private Ruling 418 represents an interesting departure from the orthodox mechanics of an asset-for-share transaction under section 42 of the Income Tax Act.

Under the conventional section 42 framework, a taxpayer disposes of an asset to a company and, as consideration, that company must issue equity shares to the transferor. The issue of equity shares is a fundamental requirement for rollover relief.

From a definitional perspective, this creates a technical limitation. Section 1(1) defines an “equity share” with reference to a “company”, while “company” expressly excludes a closed corporation. On a strict reading, a closed corporation cannot issue equity shares and therefore should not be capable of participating in an asset-for-share transaction as contemplated in section 42 of the Income Tax Act.

Despite this, BPR 418 concluded that the transfer of an asset to a closed corporation could still qualify as an “asset-for-share” transaction under section 42(1) of the Income Tax Act. SARS ruled that the recording of the member’s contribution, arising from the asset transfer, constituted an “additional member’s contribution” for purposes of section 42(2)(a)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, effectively treating the member’s interest as the functional equivalent of equity shares.

However, the ruling leaves an important open question. While it reflects a more substance-based interpretation in this specific fact pattern, it does not necessarily establish that closed corporations generally fall within the corporate rollover regime.

As with all private rulings, its application is confined to the applicant’s circumstances. Accordingly, uncertainty remains as to whether SARS has meaningfully opened the door for closed corporations to access the corporate rollover relief provisions more broadly, or whether this outcome is confined to a narrow, fact-specific exception.

For now, caution — and ideally advance engagement with SARS — remains prudent when attempting to replicate similar structures. For any restructuring queries feel free to reach out to us at [email protected]

Call now to connect with business.

26/01/2026

SARS has finally published Interpretation Note 142, dealing with the meaning of “similar finance charges”.

This interpretation note does not create certainty for taxpayers, particularly around the treatment of loan-raising fees and comparable funding costs.

We previously explored this issue in detail in the following article:
https://www.vanhuyssteens.co.za/newsroom/item/175-similar-finance-charges-sars-view-on-loan-raising-fees-refuted

What is interesting is that SARS still considers “similar finance charges” to be charges that are similar to interest in the sense that they are of the same kind or nature as interest. SARS also expressly records its disagreement with a recent Tax Court judgment that adopted a wider interpretation of the phrase.

In essence, SARS appears to be arguing that the provision should only ever apply to interest, or to amounts that are so close to interest in character that they should be treated as interest, even if they do not strictly meet the common-law definition.

Conceptually, this is difficult to reconcile. An amount is either interest or it is not. If it is not interest, it is hard to see how it can be “similar” to interest without, in substance, being interest. Notably, Interpretation Note 142 does not provide a single concrete example of a charge that is “similar to interest” but not interest itself.

The practical result is that taxpayers are left in an untenable position:
either rely on the recent Tax Court judgment and claim loan-raising fees (which, at best, has persuasive value), or follow Interpretation Note 142, which is not binding unless agreed with SARS.

If you are structuring funding arrangements or claiming finance-related deductions, this is an area that warrants careful review, arrange a consultation at [email protected]

It is common for a borrower to pay raising fees to the lender or arranger of a loan in consideration of providing the loan to the borrower or arranging the loan.

26/01/2026

Congratulations to Jaco de Klerk on an incredible milestone – A decade at Van Huyssteens Commercial Attorneys !

A decade of dedication in Mergers and Acquisitions is no small achievement. Jaco’s expertise, professionalism and commitment to delivering practical, commercial solutions have no doubt made a lasting impact on clients, colleagues and the firm alike.

His contributions over the years reflect not only deep technical skill but also a genuine passion for his craft.

Wishing you continued success and many more milestones ahead, Jaco. Here’s to the next chapter!

11/06/2024

Our firm was featured in MoneyWeb's latest article, where we discussed the implications for taxpayers if their eFiling profile falls victim to digital fraud.

The article can be accessed below:

You can be held liable for whatever a hacker manages to siphon from Sars in your name.

27/05/2024

When does termination constitutes repudiation?

Johann Botha in his latest article navigates the stormy sea of termination and repudiation.

https://www.vanhuyssteens.co.za/newsroom/item/166-navigating-termination-and-repudiation-of-contracts

01/02/2024

Solar Panels and Income Tax - Section 6C of the Income Tax Act affords a natural person a tax credit on the cost that has been actually incurred in respect of the acquisition of qualifying solar photovoltaic panels.

In our latest article Jean-Louis Nel discusses the requirements of Section 6C and the nuanced record keeping required to claim the Section 6C tax credit.

https://www.vanhuyssteens.co.za/newsroom/item/162-solar-panel-tax-credit-take-action-before-sunset

13/03/2023

Die Finaal en Gala Aand van die Van Huyssteens Oratorsfees 2023 is hier!!

Sterkte aan elke leerder wat vanaand deelneem by Hoërskool Waterkloof en mag die skerpste tong wen.

08/03/2023

Tax Compliance & Criminal Proceedings - As promised by the Commissioner, the South African Revenue Service will continue to focus on enforcement to increase collection, including initiating proceedings against non-compliant taxpayers.

Our tax directors discussed the compliance drive of SARS as featured on Moneyweb: https://lnkd.in/daREXinn

President and companies associated with him are tax-compliant, says Sars.