Bikini model says SARS ruined her life

Knyro

Knyro

PhD in Everything
Joined
Jul 5, 2010
Messages
29,491
Craig said:
Are you sure that's the same person? She looks very good in this pic, that other one I won't even do with Zuma's spear.
Click to expand...

Cray said:
Yup, here is another - before she went for the cheap Angelina Jolie botox lips effect.... :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Y'all must be tapping some knockouts. I wouldn't kick her out of bed even after the surgery.

I blame @Chuckmyster and @Ninja'd's influence for my "low standards" ways. :crying:
 
A

Arthur

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 7, 2003
Messages
26,879
Swa said:
If Sars have a different scenario they must prove it in court as we're still under innocent until proven guilty.
Click to expand...
Not so. Tax assessment is not a matter of innocent or guilty but of liability to pay tax. The common law presumption of innocence does not apply. One is not found "guilty" or "innocent" of having to pay a tax. The Act explicitly places on the taxpayer the burden of proving tax is not payable.
 
Swa

Swa

Honorary Master
Joined
May 4, 2012
Messages
31,217
Vrotappel said:
You struggle to read tax law?

If SARS tax you on any amount the burden is on you to prove it is not taxable.

That is very simple to understand. I've quoted the law to you. If you still struggle to understand you can research some case law.

For example - CIR v First National Bank of South Africa Ltd 62 SATC 253

Tax law is based on statute not common law.
Click to expand...
That's not how it works. What you've quoted refers to scenarios where the origin of transactions are known. In essence your burden of proof is to show the nature of a transaction. Once Sars alleges a different scenario they're alleging tax fraud which is a criminal offence and the burden of proof rests on them to provide records that prove their stance. That's why they're initiating legal action to prove their case, but they don't seem to be doing a good job so far.
 
Swa

Swa

Honorary Master
Joined
May 4, 2012
Messages
31,217
Knyro said:
Y'all must be tapping some knockouts. I wouldn't kick her out of bed even after the surgery.

I blame @Chuckmyster and @Ninja'd's influence for my "low standards" ways. :crying:
Click to expand...
She's not bad looking, but she's also not as good looking as she was 5 years ago which logically shouldn't be the case. When it comes down to it fake and unnatural puts me off more.
 
Urist

Urist

Expert Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2015
Messages
3,656
sars ruins everyoune;s life... don`t feel special, what you think is yours is not yours. half of it goes to the people who pretend to protect your stuff, while they themselves are getting robbed, while the people who are their bosses are getting robbed. while the bosses of the bosses are building nkandlas without reprimand. **** taxes
Rule of law and by extention taxes will not be paid by myself until ace, supra, and zuma sees jail time... in the same kind of prison that we would expect if we committed the same crimes. Otherwise it;s all a farce.
 
K

krycor

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
18,546
I reckon she needs to show a receipt or other evidence else who knows where the funds came from. At this point there is no way of really knowing if it came from the dad or stupid guy with a boner lol.

Since there isn’t any evidence I suspect dad.

Ps. That’s the risk you take with funds like this..
 
Vrotappel

Vrotappel

Bulls fan
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Messages
25,982
Swa said:
That's not how it works. What you've quoted refers to scenarios where the origin of transactions are known. In essence your burden of proof is to show the nature of a transaction. Once Sars alleges a different scenario they're alleging tax fraud which is a criminal offence and the burden of proof rests on them to provide records that prove their stance. That's why they're initiating legal action to prove their case, but they don't seem to be doing a good job so far.
Click to expand...
The onus is reversed when SARS imposes an understatement penalty (USP) but it only applies to the USP. I've quoted the Act to to you and have given you a court case. Why not return the favour?
 
A

Ancalagon

Honorary Master
Joined
Feb 23, 2010
Messages
18,140
Besides being a literal prostitute, she is also extremely entitled. R150 million not good enough for you? Did you do an honest day's work on your back and/or knees - yes or no? Sounds like you did so pay the tax. Also, if you hadn't whined about it, nobody would have known. Now the entire world knows that you are the most expensive prostitute.

For some reason I have Borat's voice echoing in my head, "She is number one prostitute in all South Africa."
 
mercurial

mercurial

MyBB Legend
Joined
Jun 12, 2007
Messages
40,902
Ancalagon said:
Besides being a literal prostitute, she is also extremely entitled. R150 million not good enough for you? Did you do an honest day's work on your back and/or knees - yes or no? Sounds like you did so pay the tax. Also, if you hadn't whined about it, nobody would have known. Now the entire world knows that you are the most expensive prostitute.

For some reason I have Borat's voice echoing in my head, "She is number one prostitute in all South Africa."
Click to expand...
Borat :D High 5!
 
M

MEIOT

Expert Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2018
Messages
2,847
ShaunSA said:
Tbh there's little I wouldn't do for that kind of money

I'd wager the same goes for most of us on here
Click to expand...

I'm straight as fark but yeah I see your point - I'd suck a dick for that money - one time though :ROFL:
 
V

Verde

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2006
Messages
1,592
Swa said:
That's not how it works. What you've quoted refers to scenarios where the origin of transactions are known. In essence your burden of proof is to show the nature of a transaction. Once Sars alleges a different scenario they're alleging tax fraud which is a criminal offence and the burden of proof rests on them to provide records that prove their stance. That's why they're initiating legal action to prove their case, but they don't seem to be doing a good job so far.
Click to expand...

The legal action was not instituted by SARS, but by Van Der Merwe. SARS seems to be doing a pretty good job sitting with R44m in income tax from this transaction.

www.iol.co.za

Candice van der Merwe in court fight to get R44m back from Sars

According to court documents filed in the Tax Court, the Finance Minister is the first defendant, and the second defendant is the Sars Commissioner.
www.iol.co.za www.iol.co.za
Model Candice van der Merwe is headed to court on August 30 to reclaim R44 million tax from the SA Revenue Service (Sars), which she said the taxman claimed on money that was legally not taxable income.
Click to expand...

“Sars, however, proceeded to allege that the money received by Candice was income, not a donation, and raised an income tax assessment of more than R44m, which she was forced to pay in order to have the preservation order uplifted over her assets.

“She made payment in terms of the ‘pay now, argue later’ rule, a controversial but constitutionally approved mechanism that compels taxpayers to pay money claimed from them by Sars, on the condition that they can later challenge the basis for making the payment in court,” Van der Merwe said.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top