SARS Interpretation Note 110 Issue 2: Leasehold improvements (source: https://www.sars.gov.za/legal-intr-in-110-leasehold-improvements/)
INTERPRETATION NOTE 110 (Issue 2)
DATE: 16 August 2023
ACT : INCOME TAX ACT 58 OF 1962
SECTION : PARAGRAPH (h) OF THE DEFINITION OF “GROSS INCOME” AND
SECTION 11(g) AND (h)
SUBJECT : LEASEHOLD IMPROVEMENTS
Contents
Preamble ................................................................................................................................. 2
1. Purpose ....................................................................................................................... 2
2. Background ................................................................................................................. 2
3. The law and its application .......................................................................................... 2
3.1 The lessor’s position – section 1(1) paragraph (h) of the definition of “gross
income” ....................................................................................................................... 2
3.1.1 The right to have improvements effected under the agreement granting the right
of use or occupation .................................................................................................... 3
3.1.2 The amount to be included in gross income ............................................................... 4
(a) Amount stipulated in the agreement ............................................................................ 4
(b) Amount not stipulated in the agreement ...................................................................... 6
3.1.3 Date of accrual ............................................................................................................ 6
3.1.4 Variation of the lease agreement ................................................................................ 6
3.2 The lessee’s position [section 11(g)] ........................................................................... 7
3.2.1 Obligation to effect improvements under the agreement granting the right of use
or occupation ............................................................................................................... 8
3.2.2 The amount allowed as a deduction ........................................................................... 8
(a) Amount stipulated in the agreement ............................................................................ 9
(b) Amount not stipulated in the agreement ...................................................................... 9
3.2.3 Calculation of the allowance permitted in a year of assessment................................. 9
3.2.4 Limitation on the deduction ....................................................................................... 12
3.2.5 Exclusion from deduction .......................................................................................... 13
3.2.6 Termination of the lease before the expiry date of the lease agreement .................. 13
3.2.7 Variation of the lease agreement .............................................................................. 13
3.2.8 Recoupment of the allowances granted .................................................................... 14
3.3 A lessor’s special allowance [section 11(h)] .............................................................. 14
3.3.1 Special circumstances .............................................................................................. 14
3.3.2 Calculation of the allowance in respect of leasehold improvements included under
paragraph (h) ............................................................................................................ 15
3.3.3 Exclusion from the allowance .................................................................................... 15
3.3.4 Recoupment of the allowances granted .................................................................... 16
4. Conclusion ................................................................................................................ 18
Preamble
In this Note unless the context indicates otherwise –
• “paragraph” means a paragraph of the definition of “gross income” in
section 1(1);
• “section” means a section of the Act;
• “the Act” means the Income Tax Act 58 of 1962; and
• any other word or expression bears the meaning ascribed to it in the Act.
All guides and interpretation notes referred to in this Note are available on the SARS
documents should be consulted.
1. Purpose
This Note provides guidance on the application of paragraph (h) and the related
deductions under section 11(g) and (h).
The capital gains tax consequences of leasehold improvements are not dealt with in
this Note. See the Comprehensive Guide to Capital Gains Tax for detail in this regard.
2. Background
A lessee that incurred rent as an expense for the use of an asset will be entitled to
claim a deduction for income tax purposes under section 11(a) provided the
expenditure meets the requirements of that section. The lessor, on the other hand,
who receives the rent or to whom it accrues, must declare the rent as gross income.
The lease agreement may stipulate that the lessee is obliged to effect improvements
to the lessor’s land or buildings. This expense, in the case of the lessee, and receipt
or accrual, in the case of the lessor, are subject to specific provisions in the Act which
are considered in this Note.
3. The law and its application
3.1 The lessor’s position – section 1(1) paragraph (h) of the definition of “gross
income”
Paragraph (h) of the definition of “gross income” reads as follows:
(h) in the case of any person to whom, in terms of any agreement relating to the
grant to any other person of the right of use or occupation of land or buildings,
or by virtue of the cession of any rights under any such agreement, there has
accrued in any such year or period the right to have improvements effected on
the land or to the buildings by any other person—
(i) the amount stipulated in the agreement as the value of the improvements
or as the amount to be expended on the improvements; or
(ii) if no amount is so stipulated, an amount representing the fair and
reasonable value of the improvements;
3.1.1 The right to have improvements effected under the agreement granting the right
of use or occupation
Paragraph (h) applies when a right to have improvements effected on land or to
buildings by a lessee accrues to the lessor under an agreement granting the right of
use or occupation of such land or buildings. It also applies if a person obtains such a
right under such agreement through the cession of the right. It does not apply if the
right to have such improvements effected does not accrue to the lessor. For example,
paragraph (h) does not apply if the lessee pays the lessor an amount of cash towards
improvements that the lessor will effect to the property.
The question whether the lessee has a legal and enforceable obligation to effect the
improvements under an agreement granting the right of use or occupation, and
therefore whether the lessor has a right to have the improvements effected, is a
question of fact. Generally, the obligation to effect leasehold improvements is specified
in the lease agreement which is the same document that records the granting of the
right of use or occupation of the land and buildings. However, there may be cases in
which the right of use or occupation is recorded in one document, namely, the lease
agreement, and the obligation to effect improvements is recorded in another
document, but the facts clearly indicate that the lessor and lessee had only one
transaction and that the two documents must be read together to determine what was
agreed in that transaction. In a case like this the court will consider the true intention
of the parties rather than just the form of two separate documents. 1 The onus is on the
parties to the agreement to prove that an agreement granting the right of use or
occupation exists and that the obligation to effect improvements is contained in that
agreement. In Relier (Pty) Ltd v CIR 2 the parties entered into a series of agreements
under which the right to have improvements effected prima facie accrued to the sub-
lessor, a tax exempt entity, and not the lessor. However, on the facts of that case the
court held that the agreements did not reflect the parties’ true intentions, that the
arrangement contained simulated elements or unexpressed terms and that the lessor
had an enforceable right to have the improvements effected. 3 In most cases the
obligation to effect improvements will be documented clearly and unambiguously in
the lease agreement.
Improvements effected voluntarily by a lessee do not result in a right to have
improvements effected which will accrue to the lessor and are not included in the
lessor’s gross income under paragraph (h). An agreement which gives a lessee the
right but not the obligation to effect improvements does not fall within the ambit of
paragraph (h) even if those improvements are subject to the lessee obtaining the
lessor’s approval or both parties anticipate that improvements will be effected.
CIR v Carletonville Motors (Pty) Ltd 1964 (3) SA 581 (A), 26 SATC 195.
[1998] 1 All SA 183 (A), 60 SATC 1.
See also Erf 3183/1 Ladysmith (Pty) Ltd and Another v CIR 1996(3) SA 942 (A), 58 SATC 229.
The word “improvement” is not defined in the Act for purposes of paragraph (h) or
section 11(g). 4 The Concise Oxford English Dictionary 5 defines “improvement” as –
“[a]n addition or alteration which increases the quality or value of something”.
In general, leasehold improvements include the construction of a building on vacant
land, the construction of a new part of an existing building or the alteration of an existing
building, if they result in an increase in the quality or value of the land or existing
building. In preparing land or buildings for the conduct of a lessee’s business, any
improvements to such land or buildings are normally made in accordance with the
lessee’s requirements after obtaining the lessor’s approval. Leasehold improvements
may include, for example, items such as shop fronts, doors, partitioning, carpets, tiles
and light fittings. Reference must be made to the facts of each case in determining
whether something constitutes an improvement. An improvement must be
distinguished from a repair. 6 Parties that agree to specific improvements should attach
the specifications or approved plans to the lease agreement (see 3.1.2).
3.1.2 The amount to be included in gross income
The amount which must be included in the lessor’s gross income depends on whether
an amount for the value or the cost of the improvements to be effected has been
stipulated in the agreement.
The lessor is not entitled to spread the accrual over the period of the lease agreement.
The full amount must be included in the lessor’s gross income (see 3.1.3 for the timing
of the inclusion), subject to a possible deduction referred to in 3.3.
(a) Amount stipulated in the agreement
If the value of the improvements or the amount to be expended on the improvements
is stipulated in the agreement, the amount stipulated is the amount which must be
included in the lessor’s gross income.
The amount included in the lessor’s gross income is limited to the amount stipulated
in the agreement and is not increased if a lessee spends more than the stipulated
amount. The excess above the stipulated amount is voluntary expenditure which is not
part of the right to have improvements effected that accrued to the lessor under
paragraph (h). 7
If the lessee spends less than the amount stipulated in the agreement, the stipulated
amount must still be included in the lessor's gross income under paragraph (h).
The lessor may be able to sue the lessee for non-performance under the agreement.
The courts have been called upon to consider whether an amount expressed in the
form of a minimum amount, for example, a building of not less than R50 million, is an
The word “improvements” is defined in section 13(9) for the purposes of section 13 only. It is not
defined under section 11(g) nor under section 1(1).
11ed (2006) Oxford University Press.
See Interpretation Note 74 “Deduction and Recoupment of Expenditure on Repairs” for the
distinction between repairs and improvements.
ITC 456 (1939) 11 SATC 171 (U). Although this case dealt with the inclusion of lease premiums
under a previous Income Tax Act, the principle is similar because in that case the voluntary
expenditure was not held to be part of the premium or consideration in the nature of a premium
which accrued to the lessor for the use or right of occupation of premises, and, in the context of
leasehold improvements, voluntary expenditure is not part of the right which accrues to the lessor.
amount stipulated in the agreement 8 and whether the lessee qualifies for a deduction
of a leasehold improvement for any excess above that amount. 9 The general principles
which can be extracted from those cases 10 are as follows:
• If the obligation on the lessee is to effect improvements equal to a stipulated
minimum amount and no more, 11 an amount which is expressed in the format
of a stipulated minimum amount constitutes an amount stipulated in an
agreement. In this situation, the stipulated minimum amount is the amount
which must be included in the lessor’s gross income as a leasehold
improvement under paragraph (h) and is also the amount which potentially
qualifies for a deduction under section 11(g) in calculating the lessee’s taxable
income. Any expenditure in excess of the stipulated minimum amount is
voluntary expenditure which is not included in the lessor’s gross income and
does not qualify for a deduction from the lessee’s perspective.
• If the obligation on the lessee is to effect specific improvements even if that
requires the lessee to incur costs which exceed the stipulated minimum
amount, the stipulated minimum amount will not be considered to be an amount
which has been stipulated in an agreement and the fair and reasonable value
of the specific improvements to be effected under the agreement (see 3.1.2(b))
must be included in the lessor’s gross income. The reason is that the lessee’s
obligation is to deliver specific improvements, not a specific cost or value of
improvements, and the lessor has a contractual right to demand those specific
improvements even if it means the lessee’s costs will exceed the stipulated
minimum amount. The expenditure incurred by the lessee in effecting the
specific improvements will potentially qualify for a deduction under
section 11(g) to a maximum equal to the fair and reasonable value of the
specific improvements required under the agreement. Depending on the facts,
the fair and reasonable value of the specific improvements required under the
agreement could be less than or greater than the actual costs incurred by the
lessee and different to the fair and reasonable value of the improvements
actually effected.
Whether a lessee is required to effect improvements equal to the minimum stipulated
amount or to effect specific improvements, even if the stipulated minimum amount is
exceeded, depends on the facts of each case. The determination of a lessee’s
obligations and a lessor’s rights will include a detailed analysis of all the clauses and
schedules to a lease agreement.
The taxpayer bears the onus of proving the value of the improvements agreed to under
the lease agreement.
The alternative is that the amount is not stipulated in the agreement which means the fair and
reasonable value of the improvements is relevant – see 3.1.2(b).
The cases considered the amount in respect of which the lessee qualified for a deduction. However,
the principle applies equally when considering the amount which must be included in the lessor’s
gross income because in order to qualify for a deduction under section 11(g) the amount must be
included in the lessor’s income.
ITC 456 (1939) 11 SATC 171(U); Professional Suites Ltd v COT 24 SATC 573, 1960 (NR); COT v
Ridgeway Hotel Ltd 24 SATC 616, 1961 (FC) and ITC 1036 (1963) 26 SATC 84 (N). See also
BPR 135.
“[E]qual to a stipulated minimum and no more” means there is no obligation on the lessee to effect
improvements in excess of that amount. If the stipulated minimum is exceeded, it is done so
voluntarily and not in terms of an obligation.
(b) Amount not stipulated in the agreement
An amount representing the fair and reasonable value of the improvements must be
included in the lessor’s gross income if no amount is stipulated in the agreement for
the value of or the amount to be spent on the improvements.
The fair and reasonable value of improvements must be objectively determined having
regard to all the relevant facts and circumstances of the case. 12 Although the
determination depends on the facts and circumstances of the particular case, in a
number of cases the fair and reasonable value of the improvements may be equal to
the cost of the improvements.
3.1.3 Date of accrual
Leasehold improvements must be included in the lessor’s gross income on the date of
accrual. The right to have improvements effected generally accrues when the lessor
acquires the right to have the improvements effected. The date of accrual is normally
the date on which the lease agreement is signed by all the parties to the lease
agreement. Therefore, if the amount of the improvement is stipulated in the lease
agreement, the amount is generally included in the lessor’s gross income in the year
of assessment when the lease agreement is signed by all the parties. However, if the
amount of the improvements is not stipulated in the lease agreement, the date of
completion of the improvement is generally regarded as the date of accrual because
the amount can only be determined at this point in time.
3.1.4 Variation of the lease agreement
The effect of a variation to the amount to be incurred in respect of leasehold
improvements will depend on the facts of each case. Generally, if the variation is
limited to increasing only the amount of the obligation it will be regarded as part of the
obligation under the agreement in terms of which the right of use or occupation was
granted and not as a new obligation under a new agreement.
In the context of paragraph (h) the issue, as noted above, is whether the lessor has a
right to demand performance and, correspondingly, whether the lessee has an
obligation to perform under the agreement. Therefore, it is submitted that a variation
to the amount of the improvement before the expenditure is incurred by the lessee will
impact on the lessee’s obligation to effect the improvement and the lessor’s right to
demand performance. 13 As a result it will impact on the amount to be included in the
lessor’s gross income. In circumstances in which the amount is increased in a year of
assessment after that in which the right accrued to the lessor and was originally
included in gross income but before the expenditure was incurred by the lessee, the
amount of the increase will be viewed as the accrual of an additional right and included
in the lessor’s gross income in the year of the increase.
In contrast, if the agreement is altered only after the improvement is completed, and
hence after the expenditure was incurred by the lessee, it will not impact on the
lessee’s obligation and the lessor’s rights under the agreement and, therefore, will not
be included in the lessor’s gross income. In Professional Suites Ltd v COT, 14 the lessor
and the lessee agreed to amend the agreement and increase the minimum value
D Davis et al Juta’s Tax Library [online] (Jutastat e-publications: June 2023) in Commentary on
Income Tax – ‘gross income’ paragraph (h).
COT v Ridgeway Hotel (Pty) Ltd 24 SATC 616, 1961 (FC).
24 SATC 573, 1960 (NR).
stipulated for the specified improvements after the building had been completed. On
the facts of that case the court held that the obligation was to erect a specified building
irrespective of the fact that the agreement included a minimum value, and therefore
the reasonable value of the improvements and not the stipulated minimum amount was
relevant. The court, however, noted that the expenditure was not incurred in pursuance
of an obligation under the agreement granting the right of use because the agreement
was varied only afterwards. As a result, the lessee did not qualify for a deduction under
the equivalent of section 11(g) and, it is submitted, the lessor would not have been
required to include the amount of the increase in gross income under paragraph (h).
3.2 The lessee’s position [section 11(g)]
Section 11(g) reads as follows:
(g) an allowance in respect of any expenditure actually incurred by the taxpayer,
in pursuance of an obligation to effect improvements on land or to buildings,
incurred under an agreement whereby the right of use or occupation of the land
or buildings is granted by any other person, where the land or buildings are
used or occupied for the production of income or income is derived therefrom:
Provided that—
(i) the aggregate of the allowances under this paragraph shall not exceed the
amount stipulated in the agreement as the value of the improvements or as
the amount to be expended on the improvements or, if no amount is so
stipulated, an amount representing the fair and reasonable value of the
improvements;
(ii) any such allowance shall not exceed for any one year such portion of the
aggregate of the allowances under this paragraph as is equal to the said
aggregate divided by the number of years (calculated from the date on
which the improvements are completed, but not more than 25 years) for
which the taxpayer is entitled to the use or occupation;
(iii) if—
(aa) the taxpayer is entitled to such use or occupation for an indefinite
period; or
(bb) the taxpayer or the person by whom such right of use or occupation
was granted holds a right or option to extend or renew the original
period of such use or occupation,
the taxpayer shall for the purposes of this paragraph be deemed to be
entitled to such use or occupation for such period as represents the
probable duration of such use or occupation;
(iv) the aggregate of the allowances under this paragraph in respect of any
building or improvements referred to in section 13(1) or 27(2)(b) shall not
exceed the cost (after the deduction of any amount which has been set off
against the cost of such building or improvements under section 13 (3) or
section 27 (4)) to the taxpayer of such building or improvements less the
aggregate of the allowances in respect of such building or improvements
made to the taxpayer under the said section 13(1) or 27(2)(b) or the
corresponding provisions of any previous Income Tax Act;
(v) . . . . . .
(vi) the provisions of this paragraph shall not apply in relation to any such
expenditure incurred if the value of such improvements or the amount to
be expended on such improvements, as contemplated in paragraph (h) of
the definition of “gross income” in section 1, does not for the purposes of
this Act constitute income of the person to whom the right to have such
improvements effected has accrued;
(vii) if during any year of assessment the agreement whereby the right of use
or occupation of the land or buildings is granted is terminated before expiry
of the period to which that taxpayer was entitled to the use or occupation,
as contemplated in paragraph (ii) or (iii), so much of the allowance which
may be allowed under this paragraph, which has not yet been allowed in
that year or any previous year of assessment, shall be allowable as a
deduction in that year of assessment;
3.2.1 Obligation to effect improvements under the agreement granting the right of use
or occupation
Paragraph (h) and section 11(g) are complementary to each other. Section 11(g)
provides for the deduction of an allowance for the expenditure actually incurred by the
lessee in meeting an obligation under an agreement, which grants the right of use or
occupation of the land or buildings, to effect improvements on such land or to such
buildings used or occupied for the production of income or from which income is
derived.
A lessee who voluntarily effects improvements to a leased property will not be allowed
to deduct any of the expenses incurred under section 11(g). 15 Section 11(g) requires
that the lessee must have an obligation under the agreement granting the right of use
or occupation to effect improvements to potentially qualify for an allowance. This
requirement also means the lessor must have a legally enforceable right to demand
the improvements. It should be apparent from the lease agreement that there is a clear
and unambiguous obligation on the lessee. In ITC 1188 16 there was no enforceable
obligation to build and the court held that the fact that the lessor was entitled to
terminate the right of occupation if the building was not erected did not create a legally
enforceable obligation to erect the building. The lessee was not therefore entitled to
an allowance under section 11(g).
See 3.1.1 for a consideration of the right and obligation to have improvements effected
under the agreement granting the right of use or occupation.
3.2.2 The amount allowed as a deduction
The amount of the allowance is based on the expenditure actually incurred by the
lessee. However, if that expenditure incurred exceeds, as appropriate, the amount
stipulated in the agreement or the fair and reasonable value of the improvements [see
(a) and (b) below], the amount of the allowance will be limited.
The lessee may qualify for a deduction under another section - see Example 2.
(1972) 35 SATC 150 (T).
(a) Amount stipulated in the agreement
As noted above, the lessee may claim an allowance based on the amount of
expenditure actually incurred.
If an amount is stipulated in the agreement granting the right of use or occupation as
the value of the improvements to be effected or as the amount to be expended on the
improvements, the aggregate of the allowances under section 11(g) may not exceed
the amount stipulated in the lease agreement. 17 The amount stipulated in the
agreement is the same as the amount included in the lessor’s gross income under
paragraph (h) – see 3.1.2(a). 18 If the expenditure actually incurred is less than the
amount stipulated in the agreement the lessee may claim an allowance based only on
the expenditure actually incurred.
The amount stipulated in the lease agreement may be in the form of a minimum
amount. Depending on the facts of the particular case [see the consideration in
3.1.2(a)], the amount may be treated as an amount stipulated in the agreement or as
an amount not stipulated in an agreement. In the former case, 3.2.2(a) is relevant and
in the latter case, see 3.2.2(b).
See the examples in 3.2.3.
(b) Amount not stipulated in the agreement
As noted above, the lessee may claim an allowance based on the amount of
expenditure actually incurred.
If no amount is stipulated in the agreement as considered in 3.2.2(a), the aggregate of
the allowances under section 11(g) may not exceed an amount representing the fair
and reasonable value of the improvements effected. The fair and reasonable value of
the improvements must be objectively determined having regard to all the relevant
facts and circumstances of the case. Although the determination will depend on the
facts and circumstances of the particular case, in a number of cases the fair and
reasonable value of the improvements will be equal to the actual cost of the
improvements. The fair and reasonable value of the improvements is the same as the
amount included in the lessor’s gross income under paragraph (h) – see 3.1.2(b). 19
3.2.3 Calculation of the allowance permitted in a year of assessment
The expenditure incurred is not deductible in full in the year of assessment in which it
is incurred or in which the improvements are completed. The allowance is spread over
the number of years for which the taxpayer is entitled to the use or occupation of the
land or building, starting on the date on which the improvements are completed but
limited to a maximum period of 25 years. 20 The number of years may include a portion
of a year, for example, if the improvements are completed when the lessee has
2½ years of use remaining, the period over which the allowance must be spread is
2½ years.
Section 11(g) proviso (i).
Section 11(g) proviso (i) and (vi).
Section 11(g) proviso (i) and (vi).
Section 11(g) proviso (ii).
In order to qualify for the allowance the lessee must use or occupy the land or buildings
for the production of income or derive income from it. 21 The lessee will not be entitled
to a full deduction in the year of assessment during which the improvements are
completed; the allowance must be proportionately reduced in that year to take into
account only the period from the date of completion until the end of the year of
assessment. In addition, if this requirement is met for only part of any year of
assessment, for example because the lessee terminates the lease or stops using the
land or buildings, the allowance available for that year of assessment must be
proportionately reduced. 22
The lessee is deemed to be entitled to the use or occupation for a period that
represents the probable duration of use or occupation if – 23
• the lessee or lessor has a right or option to extend or renew the original period
of use or occupation; or
• the lessee is entitled to the use or occupation for an indefinite period.
The probable duration of a lease is determined on a case-by-case basis. Factors such
as the initial period of use or occupation, the period of possible renewal or extension,
commercial circumstances and any other aspects which may affect the duration of the
lease must be taken into account. The probable duration of use or occupation is also
subject to the maximum of 25 years referred to above.
Example 1 – Leasehold improvements if costs are less than the stipulated
amount
Facts:
Taxpayer A is obliged under a lease agreement to erect a building to a value of
R600 000 within a period of 18 months from the date of commencement of the lease
on 1 March year 1. The lease is for a period of 20 years. The building was completed
on 28 February Year 2 at a cost of R550 000 and is used in the production of income.
Taxpayer A’s year of assessment ends on 28 or 29 February, as appropriate.
Result:
Year of assessment ended 28 February year 2
Taxpayer A is not entitled to an allowance under section 11(g) because the building
was completed only on the last day of the year of assessment.
Section 11(g) includes “where the land or buildings are used or occupied for the production of
income or income is derived therefrom”.
ITC 971 (1962) 24 SATC 791 (F). See also 3.2.6 for detail on the additional deduction which is
available if the lease is terminated early.
Section 11(g) proviso (iii).
Year of assessment ended 29 February year 3 to year 21
The building was completed on the last day of the previous year of assessment and
Taxpayer A is therefore entitled to an allowance under section 11(g) for the first time
in year 3. The allowance is calculated and deducted over the remaining period of the
lease after the completion of the improvements which is 19 years. The allowance is
based on expenditure of R550 000. Although allowances under section 11(g) are
limited to the amount stipulated in the agreement of R600 000, the limitation does not
apply as it exceeds the expenditure incurred.
The amount of the allowance is equal to R28 947 (R550 000 / 19 years) per year.
Note: The allowance would no longer be available if Taxpayer A stopped using the
land and buildings in the production of income.
Example 2 – Leasehold improvements if costs are greater than the stipulated
amount
Facts:
Taxpayer A is obliged under a lease agreement to erect a building to a value of
R600 000 within a period of 18 months from the date of commencement of the lease
on 1 March year 1. The lease is for a period of 20 years. The building was completed
on 31 August year 2 at a cost of R650 000 and is used in the production of income.
Taxpayer A’s year of assessment ends on 28 or 29 February, as appropriate.
Result:
Year of assessment ended 28 February year 2
Taxpayer A is not entitled to an allowance under section 11(g) because the building
was not completed during the year of assessment.
Year of assessment ended 29 February year 3
The building was completed during the year of assessment and Taxpayer A is
therefore entitled to an allowance under section 11(g). The allowance is calculated and
deducted over the remaining period of the lease after the completion of the
improvements which is 18 years and 6 months. The allowance must be proportionately
reduced as the improvements were completed during the year of assessment.
Although actual expenditure totalled R650 000, the aggregate of allowances under
section 11(g) is limited to the amount of R600 000 stipulated in the lease agreement.
The allowance is therefore calculated on a base of R600 000, not R650 000.
The amount of the allowance is equal to R16 216 (R600 000 / 18½ years × 6 / 12).
Years of assessment ended February year 4 to February Year 20
The amount of the allowance under section 11(g) in each of the above years of
assessment is R32 432 (R600 000 / 18½ years).
Year of assessment ended 28 February year 21
The allowance allowable as a deduction during this year of assessment amounts to
the remaining balance of R32 440, calculated as R600 000 – [R16 216
+ (17 × R32 432)].
Note: The allowance would no longer be available if Taxpayer A stopped using the
land and buildings in the production of income. The excess of R50 000 may qualify for
a deduction under another section if the requirements of that section are met, for
example, section 13 or section 13bis.
3.2.4 Limitation on the deduction
The aggregate of the allowances under section 11(g) in respect of any building or
improvements referred to in section 13(1) 24 or 27(2)(b) 25 may not exceed the cost [after
the deduction of any amount which has been set off against the cost of such building
or improvements under section 13(3) or 27(4)] to the lessee of such building or
improvement less the aggregate of the allowances in respect of such building or
improvements made to the lessee under section 13(1) or 27(2)(b) or the corresponding
provisions of any previous Income Tax Act. 26
In addition, for agreements entered into before 2 November 2010, the aggregate of the
allowance under section 11(g) for the cost of improvements (excluding improvements
qualifying for a deduction under sections 13(1), 27(2)(b), 13bis (hotel buildings) or any
residential units referred to in section 13ter) may not exceed the net of – 27
• the amount stipulated in the agreement as the value of the improvement or the
cost to be expended, or, if not so stipulated, the fair and reasonable value of
the improvements; and
• the aggregate of any amounts that qualified or may qualify for deduction from
the lessee’s income under any other provision of the Act.
The reference to “qualified or may qualify” means it is not necessary that these
deductions must have been claimed by the lessee. This limitation applies if the
expenditure qualified for a deduction in the current, preceding or any subsequent year
of assessment.
To the extent the above limitations do not apply to prevent a deduction in excess of
expenditure actually incurred, section 23B contains a general prohibition against
double deductions.
Deductions in respect of buildings used in a process of manufacture.
Buildings and improvements to buildings used by a co-operative as storage buildings.
Section 11(g) proviso (iv). See section 13(1) and section 27 for detail on the allowances permitted
under those sections and when not permitted because of section 11(g).
Section 11(g) proviso (v). Note that this proviso does not apply to agreements entered into on or
after 2 November 2010.
3.2.5 Exclusion from deduction
Section 11(g) does not apply to expenditure incurred if the value of such improvements
or the amount to be expended on such improvements, as contemplated in
paragraph (h), does not constitute income for the lessor. For example, the lessee will
not be entitled to an allowance under section 11(g) if the lessor is a tax-exempt entity.
Exceptions to this exclusion apply for agreements entered into before 2 November
2010 if the expenditure was incurred under an obligation to effect improvements on
the land or the building in terms of – 28
• a Public Private Partnership, or
• an agreement in terms of which the right of use or occupation of land or a
building had a duration of 20 years or more and was owned by –
the Government of the Republic in the national, provincial or local
sphere, or
any entity, the receipts and accruals of which are exempt under
section 10(1)(cA) or 10(1)(t).
3.2.6 Termination of the lease before the expiry date of the lease agreement
The lessee may deduct the balance of the expenditure that qualifies for the allowance
and which was not previously deducted if the agreement granting the right of use is
terminated before the period of use or occupation to which the lessee is entitled has
expired. 29 This ensures that the lessee may fully write off the remaining expenditure
not yet deducted in the year of assessment in which the lease agreement is terminated.
If a lessee cedes a lease agreement to another party, the agreement granting the right
of use is generally transferred but not terminated. In this case, proviso (vii) of
section 11(g) will not apply and the lessee will be entitled to only a proportion of the
annual allowance up to the date of the cession 30 and not in respect of the period
covered by future years of assessment.
3.2.7 Variation of the lease agreement
The effect of a variation to the amount to be incurred in respect of leasehold
improvements will depend on the facts of each case. Generally, if a lease agreement
stipulates that improvements of a specified value or amount are to be effected and the
amount is subsequently varied before the expenditure is incurred, it will impact on the
lessee’s obligation to effect the improvements and, as a result, may impact on the
amount that the lessee may claim as a deduction.
If the amount is varied after the lessee has incurred the expenditure, it will generally
not impact on the amount which the lessee may claim as a deduction.
See 3.1.4 for a detailed consideration.
Section 11(g) proviso (vi) as it was before amendment by the Taxation Laws Amendment Act 7 of
2010. This Act also introduced section 12N to deal with, amongst others, the situations no longer
covered as a result of the deletion of these exceptions. See Interpretation Note 119 “Deductions in
respect of Improvements to Land or Buildings not owned by a Taxpayer”.
Section 11(g) proviso (vii).
Assuming the land or building was used in the production of income or income was derived from it
up until this date.
3.2.8 Recoupment of the allowances granted
Under section 8(4)(a), a lessee must include in income any amount received or
accrued to the extent to which such amount represents a recovery or recoupment of
allowances previously granted under, amongst others, section 11(g). For example,
depending on the facts, an amount received from a third party in respect of a cession
of the lessee’s rights under a lease or a reimbursement from the lessor for some of the
expenditure incurred may constitute a recoupment.
3.3 A lessor’s special allowance [section 11(h)]
Section 11(h) reads as follows:
(h) such allowance in respect of amounts included in the taxpayer’s gross income
under paragraph (g) or paragraph (h) of the definition of “gross income” in
section 1 as the Commissioner may deem reasonable having regard to any
special circumstances of the case and, in the case of an amount so included
under the said paragraph (h), to the original period for which the right of use or
occupation was granted or, in the case of any amount so included under the
said paragraph (h) in consequence of an agreement concluded on or after
1 July 1983, to the number of years taken into account in the determination of
the relevant allowance granted to any other person under the provisions of
paragraph (g) of this section: Provided that where there has on or after the
twenty-ninth day of March, 1972, accrued to the taxpayer the right to have
improvements effected on land or to buildings by any other person and an
amount is required to be included in the taxpayer’s gross income under the said
paragraph (h) with respect to such improvements, no allowance shall be made
to the taxpayer under this paragraph in respect of such amount, if—
(i) the taxpayer or such other person is a company and such other person or
the taxpayer, as the case may be, is interested in more than 50 per cent of
any class of shares issued by such company, whether directly as a holder
of shares in that company or indirectly as a holder of shares in any other
company; or
(ii) both the taxpayer and such other person are companies and any third
person is interested in more than 50 per cent of any class of shares issued
by one of those companies and in more than 50 per cent of any class of
shares issued by the other company, whether directly as a holder of shares
in the company by which the shares in question were issued or indirectly
as a holder of shares in any other company;
Section 11(h) provides for the deduction of an allowance in respect of amounts
included in the taxpayer’s gross income under paragraph (g) or paragraph (h) as the
Commissioner may deem reasonable having regard to any special circumstances of
the case. The exercise of this discretion is not subject to objection and appeal. 31
3.3.1 Special circumstances
No hard and fast rules can be laid down as to what constitutes special circumstances.
It is a factual issue which depends on the circumstances of each case. In this regard
the onus is on the taxpayer to satisfy the Commissioner that there are special
circumstances which justify an allowance.
See section 3(4)
Paragraph (g)
The application of section 11(h) in the context of paragraph (g) is considered in the
Interpretation Note 109 “Lease Premiums”.
Paragraph (h)
In the case of leasehold improvements a long delay between the time when the value
or cost of the improvements is included in the lessor’s gross income under
paragraph (h) and when the lessor receives the benefit of the improvements at the
expiry of the lease agreement, if there is any benefit at all, will generally constitute a
special circumstance entitling a lessor to the deduction of an allowance under
section 11(h). See, for example, Example 3 and Example 4 under 3.3.4.
The following factors are examples of special circumstances which are relevant when
determining the quantum of the allowance:
• The period of the lease and the period between the inclusion in gross income
and when the lessor receives the benefit.
• Whether the lessee has to leave the property in the condition it was at the
commencement of the lease upon termination of the lease.
• If applicable, the value of the compensation to which the lessee is entitled at
the termination of the lease.
• The value of the building or improvements to the lessor at the end of the lease.
3.3.2 Calculation of the allowance in respect of leasehold improvements included
under paragraph (h)
The allowance is generally calculated as being equal to the difference between the
amount included in gross income under paragraph (h) and the present value of that
amount. The present value of the amount included in the lessor’s gross income is
generally determined by discounting that amount 32 to its present value at 6% over the
original period for which the right of use or occupation was granted or, in the case of
an agreement concluded on or after 1 July 1983, the same period as that in which the
lessee is granted a deduction under section 11(g) (see 3.2.3). This period would
include renewal periods. In addition, the special factors mentioned in 3.3.1 must be
appropriately taken into account. Therefore, although the maximum period for a
deduction under section 11(g) is 25 years, there could be special circumstances which
justify determining the present value over a longer period. For example, in the case of
a 99 year lease it may be appropriate to use a longer discounting period.
The Commissioner’s decision is not subject to objection and appeal. 33
3.3.3 Exclusion from the allowance
No allowance is permitted under section 11(h) when the right to have improvements
effected accrued to the lessor on or after 29 March 1972 and –
• either the lessor or lessee is a company and the lessee or the lessor, as
appropriate, has an interest in more than 50% of any class of shares issued by
that company, whether directly as a holder of shares in that company or
indirectly as a holder of shares in any other company; or
See 3.1.2(a) and 3.1.2(b) – in some cases the amount included in gross income will be the fair and
reasonable value of the improvements and that may equate to the cost of the improvements.
Section 3(4).
• both the lessor and lessee are companies and any third person has an interest
in more than 50% of any class of shares issued by one of these companies and
in more than 50% of any class of shares issued by the other company, whether
directly as a holder of shares in the company by which the shares were issued
or indirectly as a holder of shares in any other company.
An indirect holding is determined by ascertaining the effective interest of the holder of
shares, namely, by multiplying the respective percentage holdings in the chain of
companies. For example, if Individual X owns 90% of Company A and Company A
owns 65% of Company B, Individual X has an indirect interest of 90% × 65% = 58,54%
in Company B. There is no limitation on the number of companies through which the
shareholding must be traced.
3.3.4 Recoupment of the allowances granted
Under section 8(4)(a), a lessor must include in income any amount received or accrued
to the extent to which such amount represents a recovery or recoupment of allowances
previously granted under, amongst others, section 11(h).
Example 3 – Recoupment
Facts:
Property B cost Lessor A R100 000. Under the lease agreement between Lessor A
and Lessee B, Lessee B was required to erect improvements to the value of R400 000
over the 99-year period of the lease.
Lessor A was previously required to include R400 000 in gross income and was
granted an allowance of R325 000 under section 11(h).
During the current year of assessment Lessor A sold Property B subject to the lease
to C for R375 000, R100 000 related to the purchased portion of Property B and
R275 000 related to the leasehold improvement.
Result:
Lessor A must include R200 000 [R375 000* – {(Purchased Property B: R100 000
– Rnil) + (Leasehold improvement: R400 000 – R325 000*)})] in income under
section 8(4)(a).
* Section 8(4)(a) is a section which recoups allowances or set-offs previously
deducted under the specified sections. Although not specified in the Act, the
following formula calculates the amount of the recoupment that can arise under
section 8(4)(a): Selling price (up to a maximum of original cost) less tax value. In
the context of a recoupment of an allowance granted under section 11(h), the same
principles are applicable even if the terminology is not accurate, “original cost” is
equivalent to the amount included in the lessor’s gross income and “tax value” is
equivalent to the amount included in the lessor’s gross income less any deduction
claimed by the lessor. The sale of Property B includes the purchased Property B
and the leasehold improvement and both of these components must be taken into
account when calculating the recoupment. The calculations in this example include
both components; separate calculations would yield the same result. For example,
the full selling price of R375 000 is included in the formula because it does not
exceed “original cost” of R500 000 (R100 000 purchased building B + R400 000
amount included in the lessor’s gross income).
Lessor A’s capital gain is calculated as follows:
• Proceeds = R375 000 – R200 000 under paragraph 35(3)(a) of the Eighth
Schedule (Note 1) = R175 000
• Base Cost = (R100 000 Property B under paragraph 20(1)(a) of the Eighth
Schedule (Note 2) + R75 000 under paragraph 20(1)(h)(ii)(cc) of the Eighth
Schedule (Note 3)) = R175 000
• Capital gain = Proceeds of R175 000 – Base cost of R175 000 = Rnil
Note:
1) Under paragraph 35(3)(a) of the Eighth Schedule to the Act, the proceeds of
Property B in the hands of Lessor A will be reduced by any amount that had been
included in Lessor A’s gross income namely, the section 8(4)(a) recoupment.
2) Under paragraph 20(1)(a) the base cost of Property B will be the expenditure
actually incurred in acquiring the asset.
3) Under paragraph 20(1)(h)(ii)(cc), the base cost of Property B in the hands of
Lessor A will include the excess of the amount that had been included in Lessor
A’s gross income under paragraph (h) in respect of obligatory improvements
affected by the lessee over the special allowance granted to Lessor A in terms of
section 11(h).
Example 4 – Recoupment
Facts:
Property B cost Lessor A R100 000. Under the lease agreement between Lessor A
and Lessee B, Lessee B was required to erect improvements to the value of R400 000
over the 99-year period of the lease.
Lessor A was previously required to include R400 000 in gross income and was
granted an allowance of R325 000 under section 11(h).
During the current year of assessment Lessor A sold Property B subject to the lease
to C for R600 000, R100 000 related to the purchased portion of Property B and
R500 000 related to the leasehold improvement.
Result:
Lessor A must include R325 000 [R500 000* – {(Purchased Property B: R100 000
– Rnil) + (Leasehold improvement: R400 000 – R325 000*)})] in income under
section 8(4)(a).
* Section 8(4)(a) is a section which recoups allowances or set-offs previously
deducted under the specified sections. Although not specified in the Act, the
following formula calculates the amount of the recoupment that can arise under
section 8(4)(a): Selling price (up to a maximum of original cost) less tax value. In
the context of a recoupment of an allowance granted under section 11(h), the same
principles are applicable even if the terminology is not accurate, “original cost” is
equivalent to the amount included in the lessor’s gross income and “tax value” is
equivalent to the amount included in the lessor’s gross income less any deduction
claimed by the lessor. The sale of Property B includes the purchased Property B
and the leasehold improvement and both of these components must be taken into
account when calculating the recoupment. The calculations in this example include
both components; separate calculations would yield the same result. For example,
selling price is limited to R500 000 (R100 000 purchased building B + R400 000
amount included in the lessor’s gross income).
Lessor A’s capital gain is calculated as follows:
• Proceeds = R600 000 – R325 000 under paragraph 35(3)(a) of the Eighth
Schedule (Note 1) = R275 000
• Base Cost = (R100 000 Property B under paragraph 20(1)(a) of the Eighth
Schedule (Note 2) + R75 000 under paragraph 20(1)(h)(ii)(cc) of the Eighth
Schedule (Note 3)) = R175 000
• Capital gain = Proceeds of R275 000 – Base cost of R175 000 = R100 000
Note:
1) Under paragraph 35(3)(a) of the Eighth Schedule to the Act, the proceeds of
Property B in the hands of Lessor A will be reduced by any amount that had been
included in Lessor A’s gross income namely, the section 8(4)(a) recoupment.
2) Under paragraph 20(1)(a) the base cost of Property B will be the expenditure
actually incurred in acquiring the asset.
3) Under paragraph 20(1)(h)(ii)(cc), the base cost of Property B in the hands of
Lessor A will include the excess of the amount that had been included in Lessor A’s
gross income under paragraph (h) in respect of obligatory improvements effected
by the lessee over the special allowance granted to Lessor A in terms of
section 11(h).
4. Conclusion
Paragraph (h) applies when a right to have improvements effected on land or to
buildings by a lessee accrues to the lessor under an agreement. Depending on the
facts, the amount included in the agreement as the value or cost of the improvements
or the fair and reasonable value of the improvements will be included in the lessor’s
gross income in the year the right to have the improvements effected accrues to the
lessor. Under section 11(g) the lessee, who is obliged to effect improvements under
the lease agreement, may, subject to certain limitations, deduct the expenditure
actually incurred over the remaining period of the lease calculated from the date of
completion of the improvements.
In limited circumstances a lessor may be entitled to a special allowance under
section 11(h) in respect of leasehold improvements included in gross income under
paragraph (h). The amount of the allowance, if it applies, is equal to such amount as
the Commissioner deems reasonable, taking into account the special circumstances
of the case and the length of the lease. For example, an allowance may be granted
when there is a significant delay for the lessor between the time of accrual of the
leasehold improvement under paragraph (h) and the time when the lessor physically
receives the benefit of the improvement.
Depending on the facts, an allowance granted under sections 11(g) and 11(h) that has
been recouped or recovered must be included in income under section 8(4)(a).
Leveraged Legal Products
SOUTH AFRICAN REVENUE SERVICE
Date of 1st issue : 7 February 2019