DA hails court ruling suspending VAT increase
The high court has now officially set aside the VAT reversal, just a few days after Finance Minister Enoch Godongwana’s statement and legislation to suspend the 0.5 percentage point VAT increase.
Democratic Alliance officials and supporters outside the Western Cape High Court on 22 April 2025 for the party's legal challenge against the VAT increase. Picture: @Our_DA/X
CAPE TOWN - The Democratic Alliance (DA) has hailed the Western Cape High Court ruling officially suspending the value-added tax (VAT) increase as a victory for all South Africans.
The high court has now officially set aside the VAT reversal, just a few days after Finance Minister Enoch Godongwana's statement and legislation to suspend the 0.5 percentage point VAT increase.
The DA and Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) had approached the court to have the VAT increase announcement by the minister as well the adoption of the finance committees report by both houses set aside.
The National Treasury was dealt another blow by the court in the contentious VAT saga after a full bench set aside Parliament's adoption of the fiscal framework and revenue proposals.
READ: High Court issues draft order suspending VAT increase
The court order states that Godongwana's announcement on 12 March on the VAT rate adjustment is "suspended pending the passing of the legislation regulating the VAT rate or the final determination of part b of the DA's case”, or whichever comes first.
The court has also set aside the resolutions of Parliament's two houses to accept the report of the Standing Committee on Finance and the Select Committee on Finance on the Fiscal Framework.
"The passing of the fiscal framework through Parliament was unlawful and the court has found that and that has also been made an order of court. So now the VAT increase won't come into play on 1 May and we can get on with redoing the fiscal framework," said DA Federal Council Chairperson, Helen Zille.
Godongwana said he welcomes the court order but maintains that his initial budget proposal in March "was constitutional and appropriate", given the limited options at his disposal to find the money.