Advertise on podcast: Business Law Focus

South Africa’s exchange control landscape, specifically cross-border crypto asset transactions, regulatory compliance, and the tightening of capital flow frameworks, is changing fast. To help businesses keep pace and avoid pitfalls, Evan Pickworth hosts Bright Tibane, a partner at African law firm Bowmans. This comes at quite a pivotal moment in South Africa. Back in April 2026, the National Treasury published the draft Capital Flow Management Regulations of 2026 (draft CFM Regulations) for public comment. In the interview, Tibane explains that the draft CFM Regulations are really designed to repeal and replace the outdated Exchange Control Regulations of 1961. At their core, these draft regulations seek to do four things. First, they aim to align South Africa’s exchange control framework with international recommendations from the OECD and FATF to combat money laundering, terrorist financing, and illicit financial flows. Second, they bring crypto assets into the exchange control ambit so we have proper oversight of these emerging instruments. Third, they clarify exemptions, permissions, and conditions around restrictions. Finally, they introduce a clear mechanism to impose administrative sanctions for non-compliance. “They work hand-in-hand. The draft Crypto Manual complements the draft Capital Flow Management Regulations published in April. The manual gives us meaningful insight into how National Treasury and the SARB plan to operationalise those crypto provisions. It sets out the proposed framework for cross-border crypto transactions, how Crypto Asset Service Providers (CASPs) will be authorised and regulated, and what reporting obligations will apply. In short, the draft CFM Regulations address existing gaps in our exchange control rules - particularly around cross-border crypto - and they will complement existing regulation by the FSCA and the Financial Intelligence Centre,” says Tibane.

In this edition of Business Law Focus, host Evan Pickworth interviews Clara Hansen, Associate at Baker McKenzie South Africa, on South Africa’s Revised Electricity Pricing Policy and the next phase of electricity market reform.

Business Law Focus host Evan Pickworth interviews Ziyaad Moosa, an expert in business advisory and support at PKF, about the challenges businesses without sophisticated compliance departments face, particularly the risk of deregistration. Mandatory beneficial ownership reporting is a good example of heightened compliance standards: it is no longer simply a Companies Act technicality, but part of the basic governance hygiene of running a South African business, big or small. At its simplest, a beneficial owner is the natural person who ultimately owns or exercises effective control over a company, whether directly or indirectly. That sounds straightforward when one person owns 100% of a small business. It becomes more complicated when shares are held through other companies, trusts or more complex structures, or when effective control does not necessarily align with the obvious shareholding. The important point for entrepreneurs is that this is not just a requirement for large corporates with legal and compliance departments. Companies and close corporations must keep their beneficial ownership information up to date with CIPC. Beneficial ownership declarations are now part of the annual compliance cycle, and since July 2024, CIPC's system has prevented the completion of an annual return if the beneficial ownership information is not up to date. You must also generally report changes to beneficial ownership information within 10 business days. For a busy entrepreneur, this can easily fall between the cracks. You register a company, focus on customers, cash flow, employees and tax, and assume that because SARS returns and CIPC annual returns are handled, the company is compliant. That assumption can now be costly. CIPC has stepped up enforcement against entities that have failed to comply with beneficial ownership requirements. Consequences may include compliance notices and, potentially, court-sanctioned administrative fines. Because beneficial ownership compliance is also linked to the annual-return process, ongoing non-compliance can ultimately put the company on the path to deregistration. Deregistration is much more than an administrative inconvenience. CIPC has warned that the consequences can include frozen company bank accounts, disruption to suppliers and creditors, and potential personal exposure for directors in certain circumstances.

In many cases, by the time business rescue is considered, the business can no longer be rescued. In this edition of Business Law Focus, host Evan Pickworth interviews Dr Eric Levenstein, Director and Head of Insolvency & Business Rescue at Werksmans, about the misuse of the process and practical steps to ensure it is used more appropriately as a mechanism for intervention rather than reaction.

For South African technology businesses, entrepreneurs and companies looking to expand internationally, moving intellectual property (IP) into an offshore structure can seem an obvious next step. Software, platforms, patents, trade marks and other IP can become highly valuable assets, and housing them offshore may be attractive for international expansion, investment or broader corporate structuring. But there is an important catch: South African exchange-control rules regard IP as capital, and capital cannot be moved offshore without regulatory approval. In this edition of Business Law Focus, Sara-Jane Pluke, Head of Intellectual Property at Eversheds-Sutherland, explains to host Evan Pickworth that if the offshore entity IP is being moved into is in any way related to the SA business - same shareholders, common control, part of the same group - the deal is in related-party territory, and that's where the SARB gets genuinely strict. “If the offshore entity you are moving IP into is in any way related to your SA business - same shareholders, common control, part of the same group - you are in related-party territory,” says Pluke. In practice, very few related-party IP transfers are approved. Here's the regulator's concern in a nutshell - if a business sells IP offshore and then licenses it back to use in SA, they are effectively getting the asset out of the country while continuing to pay royalties on it from SA. That's revenue leaving the country twice over: once when the IP itself goes offshore and again every time a royalty payment follows it out. The SARB regards this as “double-dipping,” and it's a hard no. Sale and lease-back arrangements are prohibited even between unrelated parties. Importantly, Pluke also explains in the interview what can be done to achieve approval when there is no related party.

While many have welcomed the Constitutional Court's long-awaited judgment on the Copyright Amendment Bill (CAB) and the Performers' Protection Amendment Bill (PPAB), South Africa's copyright reform journey is far from over. In this edition of Business Law Focus, host Evan Pickworth speaks to Chola Makgamathe, General Manager: Legal at the Southern African Music Rights Organisation (SAMRO), about what the landmark ruling really means for creators, businesses and the future of intellectual property law.

In a world where each regional competition regulator has distinct merger control triggers and thresholds, assessment frameworks, regulatory powers, policy prerogatives and stakeholders to appease, it may become a case of too many cooks spoiling the broth unless a solution is found. In this edition of Business Law Focus, host Evan Pickworth interviews Lesetja Morapi from Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer on the pressing need for the various regional competition regulators to co-ordinate and agree a framework that ensures that transactions with regional effects do not need to be filed with multiple regional regulators with overlapping jurisdiction.

The 22 April 2026 judgment of the Constitutional Court in Absa Bank Limited and Another v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service marks a significant development in South African tax law. For the first time, a higher court has provided authoritative guidance on the interpretation and application of the general anti-avoidance rule (GAAR) in section 80A of the Income Tax Act. In the latest edition of Business Law Focus, host Evan Pickworth speaks to leading tax expert and AJM founder, Dr Albertus Marais, about the implications of the ruling — including why one of the court’s eminent tax specialists issued a dissenting judgment.

The recent withdrawal of South Africa’s Draft National Artificial Intelligence Policy by the minister of communications and digital technologies was an extraordinary and embarrassing saga. The very document meant to govern AI in South Africa had been compiled with the assistance of generative AI, and contained, on the minister’s own account, “various fictitious sources in its reference list”.

In this edition of Business Law Focus, host Evan Pickworth interviews Charles de Wet, a Tax Executive at ENS. Charles has more than three decades of experience advising local and international clients across multiple industries. Notably, he was part of the team at the South African Revenue Service that implemented VAT in 1991. As such, a key question in the interview is whether VAT could again become a barrier after the significant delays last year. De Wet also explores why a wealth tax should be off the table, how smaller businesses could face less red tape, and why excise duties should, in an ideal world, be tempered.

In the first edition of Business Law Focus for 2026, host Evan Pickworth interviews Johan Steyn, a human-centred AI advocate, thought leader, and founder of AIforBusiness.net. While there is plenty of bluster and bravado about AI, there is also genuine concern, especially for lawyers who use it as a shortcut rather than a support tool and do not verify outputs. There are also clear use cases that simply cannot be ignored in 2026. While a National AI Policy Framework is being finalised, there is a need for stricter controls and a better understanding of accepted practical benefits today.

In this edition of Business Law Focus, host Evan Pickworth interviews Avishkar Harriparsad, Partner, PKF Durban, about a new era of tariff turbulence, what businesses can expect, and how to navigate the choppy waters.

On 5 September 2025, the South African Revenue Service (“SARS”) released a media statement reminding social media influencers of their obligation “to declare income earned from brand collaboration, sponsored content, and affiliate marketing, whether they have been paid in cash, products, or services.” In this edition of Business Law Focus, host Evan Pickworth interviews Megan Landers, Senior Manager, at specialist tax firm AJM, to unpack what this means for those getting paid to post.

When introduced in 2009, the R1 million VAT threshold was generous. But inflation has eroded its real value. In this edition of Business Law Focus, host Evan Pickworth speaks to tax expert from AJM, Leonard Willemse, about why the threshold should change and what the ideal level could be.

Employment equity targets published by employment & labour minister Nomakhosazana Meth in April are facing a legal showdown in court. In this edition of Business Law Focus, host Evan Pickworth interviews labour expert from Baker McKenzie, Johan Botes, on what the changes may mean for business once implemented, key timelines and arguments for and against the changes.