Withholding of employees’ tax during liquidation proceedings

In CSARS v Pieters and others, the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) was tasked with deciding whether liquidators were required to withhold employees’ tax from payments made to employees under section 98A of the Insolvency Act. The company in question was an insolvent transport company which had employed approximately 700 people. Forty-five days after the appointment of the liquidators, the employment contracts for these employees were terminated under section 38(9) of the Insolvency Act.

During the liquidation process, the employees accrued salary entitlements, leave pay and severance pay. The liquidators determined the quantum hereof and paid amounts owing to them in terms of the provisions of the Insolvency Act.

SARS objected to the liquidation and distribution (L&D) account lodged by the liquidators, on the basis that no provision had been made for the payment of employees’ tax (PAYE) in respect of the payments made by the liquidators. The Master of the High Court accepted SARS’ objection and ordered the liquidators to amend the L&D Account to reflect the employees’ tax as administration costs and deduct the actual employees’ tax payable from their liquidators’ fee.

As stated above, the key issue that the SCA had to decide was whether the liquidators were obliged to withhold employees’ tax on payments made in terms of section 98A of the Insolvency Act.

SARS argued that the liquidators fell within the definition of “employer” where they made these payments. The Master of the High Court agreed and ordered the liquidator to amend the liquidation and distribution account.

The SCA held that the provisions in the Insolvency Act were clearly social justice provisions aimed at alleviating the plight of being unpaid as an employee as a result of the financial woes of an employer. The court held that the provisions in the Fourth Schedule to the Income Tax Act do therefore not apply to payments made under section 98A of the Insolvency Act. To categorise PAYE as costs of administration would have the effect that income tax, attributable to the company’s trade before liquidation and which thus becomes payable before the liquidation, would also be a cost of administration. That is plainly untenable. On this basis, SARS’ appeal was dismissed.

This article is a general information sheet and should not be used or relied upon as professional advice. No liability can be accepted for any errors or omissions nor for any loss or damage arising from reliance upon any information herein. Always contact your financial adviser for specific and detailed advice. Errors and omissions excepted. (E&OE)

Turnover tax deregistration

The Sixth Schedule of the Income Tax Act[1] details the workings of the turnover tax system applicable to micro-businesses. Turnover tax is an optional system (with preferential tax rates) and is essentially a simplified tax system that is available for micro-businesses (businesses with a qualifying turnover of R1 million or less). The Sixth Schedule deals with persons that qualify as micro-businesses (which does include natural persons), the permissible shares and interests that the micro-businesses may own, what constitutes taxable turnover and exclusions therefrom. Although the system has been widely used, there is an increasing number of taxpayers for who the system is no longer optimal, and who wish to deregister and be subject to the “normal tax system”.

In terms of paragraph 9 of the Sixth Schedule, there are two bases on which a person can be deregistered for turnover tax:

  1. Voluntary deregistration

Voluntary deregistration occurs when the owner of a registered micro-business prefers to be taxed under the “normal tax system” and elects to deregister from the turnover tax system. A voluntary deregistration is permissible if the taxpayer submits a written notification to the Commissioner on or before the end of a year of assessment (28 or 29 February). Deregistration will be effective from the beginning of the following year of assessment. For example, a registered micro-business electing to be deregistered from the turnover tax system by submitting a notification to the Commissioner on 21 January 2019 will be deregistered with effect from 1 March 2019 (i.e. the 2020 tax year). There is currently no prescribed form that the notification should take on, and it is advised that taxpayers should visit their nearest SARS branch and submit a formal request to be deregistered (or approach your tax practitioner to assist).

  1. Compulsory deregistration

Compulsory deregistration will take place if a registered micro-business no longer qualifies to be registered as such. Two factors may necessitate a compulsory deregistration, namely –

  1. the qualifying turnover derived by the micro-business from carrying on business activities during a year of assessment exceeds or is likely to exceed the R1 million threshold and the business cannot demonstrate that this will be a nominal and temporary event; or
  2. the person is disqualified based on the source of its turnover (for example professional services) or the investments that it holds.

A registered micro-business which is subject to compulsory deregistration must notify SARS within 21 days from the date on which it no longer qualifies as a micro-business. A failure to notify SARS may result in penalties being levied against the taxpayer.

Taxpayers must also remember that deregistration for turnover tax may have other administrative requirements that should be attended to, for example re-considering its VAT position, income tax position, provisional taxes and other compliance.

[1] No. 58 of 1962

This article is a general information sheet and should not be used or relied upon as professional advice. No liability can be accepted for any errors or omissions nor for any loss or damage arising from reliance upon any information herein. Always contact your financial adviser for specific and detailed advice. Errors and omissions excepted (E&OE)

Bad debts and VAT

While there is currently a focus on the income tax considerations of bad and doubtful debts (given that National Treasury has proposed changes to section 11(j) of the Income Tax Act[1] to allow for an allowance of 25% of impairments in respect of doubtful debts), the Value Added Tax (VAT) aspect of bad debts is often overlooked.

Section 22 of the Value Added Tax Act[2] determines that a VAT vendor who accounts for VAT on the invoice basis may deduct input tax in respect of debts which have become irrecoverable and written off. To be able to claim the input tax deduction, three requirements should be met:

  1. There must have been a taxable supply for a consideration in money;
  2. The vendor must have already properly accounted for the output VAT on that supply; and
  3. The vendor must have written off the amount of the consideration that has become irrecoverable.

The first two requirements should be relatively easy to meet since they generally occur in the ordinary course of business. The final requirement may potentially be more difficult to substantiate.

The VAT Act does not provide any further guidance on what constitutes “irrecoverable” or “written off”. A similar hurdle is present in the Income Tax Act, that does not elaborate on what the meaning is of debt that has become “doubtful” and debt that has “become bad”. Arguably, the requirements in the VAT Act stating that the debt must be “written off”, goes a step further than debt that is merely “doubtful” or that has “become bad”. It is also not certain to what extent the South African Revenue Service could draw comparisons between how a taxpayer treated the same debt for income tax and VAT purposes. Taxpayers should, therefore, exercise caution when they attempt to claim the allowable input tax and ensure that the facts support a case for a debt that has been written off. The input tax that can be claimed is equal to the tax fraction (15/115) applied to the amount actually written off.

Importantly though, if a vendor has success in recovering a portion of the debt previously written off, this must again be accounted for as output tax. Taxpayers that form part of a group of companies should also note that if the debt has been written off between wholly-owned members, the additional input tax is not allowed.

  • [1] 58 of 1962 (the Income Tax Act)
  • [2] 89 of 1991 (the VAT Act)

This article is a general information sheet and should not be used or relied upon as professional advice. No liability can be accepted for any errors or omissions nor for any loss or damage arising from reliance upon any information herein. Always contact your financial adviser for specific and detailed advice. Errors and omissions excepted (E&OE)

Debt reduction rules: New taxpayer friendly amendments expected

The South African Income Tax Act contains a number of rules which give rise to onerous tax consequences where a taxpayer’s debts owing is forgiven. These rules were in recent years the subject of comprehensive legislative amendments.

During the 2018 budget process, National Treasury indicated that it was aware of unintended tax consequences that arise from these new debt relief rules in the Income Tax Act that became effective for years of assessment beginning on or after 1 January 2018. On 31 May 2018, the South African Institute of Chartered Accountants (SAICA) published a feedback summary report from a recent National Treasury workshop to consider proposals for amendments to these rules.

The proposal from that workshop is that the scope of the debt forgiveness rules will be changed through an amendment to the definition of the term ‘concession or compromise’ to focus on rationalisation events. A number of transactions that were previously subject to the onerous rules will from now on fall outside of its scope in future, such as where changes to the terms and conditions of a debt are made only.

One of the most significant proposed changes is the degree to which the conversion of debts to shares (debt capitalisation) are subject to the debt forgiveness rules. Currently, capitalisation of all debts is subject to the rules. A new definition for ‘interest-bearing debt’ will be introduced, to make only interest-bearing debt that is capitalised subject to the rules. This proposal is commercially friendly and provides taxpayer-companies in distress with more options for debt restructures without the fear of triggering adverse tax consequences in the process. Group companies will also have the benefit of its interest-bearing debt excluded from the rules; however, interest thereon may be recouped on capitalisation.

Very significantly, changes will be made to the valuation requirements of the debt forgiveness rules. It will no longer be required to consider the valuation of debt, only that of the shares issued in consideration. Determining the value of debt is currently one of the more contentious matters in the debt reduction regime, given that there are often constraints in obtaining an objective valuation for debt if it is not traded publically. This is a welcome proposal. The concepts of ‘market value’ and ‘face value’ which are used to determine whether any debt benefit arises because of a forgiveness of debt will also be clarified.

National Treasury also indicated that it will provide clarity on certain anti-avoidance matters relating to debt forgiveness, as well as indicating that the donations tax exclusion currently in place, will be removed.

Although feedback from the workshop is at a high level, initial indications are that many of the uncertainties and unintended consequences in the debt forgiveness rules will be addressed when the draft Taxation Laws Amendment Bill is published early in July 2018. No invitation has been made for public comment on the proposals, since this will be dealt with during the 2018 legislative amendment cycle. The effective date of the proposals will be 1 January 2018.

This article is a general information sheet and should not be used or relied upon as professional advice. No liability can be accepted for any errors or omissions nor for any loss or damage arising from reliance upon any information herein. Always contact your financial adviser for specific and detailed advice. Errors and omissions excepted (E&OE)

Deductibility of interest for non-trading individuals

SARS Practice Note 31.2 (PN31.2) provides for a person to be able to deduct interest paid, even where that person is not a moneylender or doesn’t carry on any other trade, where that interest expense is incurred in the production of other interest earned to the extent that it does not exceed the interest income. Strictly, in terms of prevailing income tax legislation, this practice (which favours taxpayers) is not supported by the Income Tax Act, 58 of 1962.

Reliance on this practice by a taxpayer was recently considered in the Western Cape High Court.[1] Due to the unique structure of the taxpayer’s employment contract as a partner at a law firm, a portion of his profit share was withheld as an obligatory interest-bearing loan to the employer, to fund ongoing working capital requirements (‘director’s loan’). While periodic distributions of interest that accrued on the director’s loan was paid to him and treated as taxable income, he was not allowed to claim repayment of the capital for as long as he was in employment. At the same time, the taxpayer would incur interest on a bank loan used to purchase an immovable property (‘bank loan’).

The court had to consider whether there is a sufficiently close link between the interest incurred by the taxpayer on the bank loan, and the interest earned by him on the outstanding balance of the director’s loan. In other words, whether the bank interest can be said to have been incurred in the production of the interest income on the director’s loan.

The taxpayer contended that it did since he would have used the proceeds of the director’s loan to repay the bank loan had it not been for the strict repayment terms, and in the process reducing the capital and interest incurred on the bank loan. He considered the portion of the bank loan equal to the director’s loan as a loan payable on which an interest deduction should be allowed. This was supported by evidence of deposits into the bank loan from distributions of profit share which could also be matched.

The court found that even assuming the funds standing in credit of the director’s loan are ‘capital’ or ‘surplus’ funds as required by PN31.2, any distributions he receives thereon are entirely in the discretion of his employer. As a result, he was not solely reliant on the distributions to maintain the bank loan and the fact that he made deposits into the bank loan from profit distributions does not distract from this fact. To have access to the bank loan, he had to maintain it from sources other than distributions on the director’s loan. Accordingly, the purpose of the bank loan was to provide him with a facility, and not to maintain the director’s loan. It cannot be said that interest paid on the bank loan brought about interest earned on the director’s loan. He would have received interest on the director’s loan, irrespective of the existence of the bank loan. Accordingly, the court disallowed the taxpayer’s appeal for deduction of the interest incurred.

An important takeaway from the judgment is the distinction the court made between the two scenarios dealt with in PN31. Firstly, PN31.1 deals with a scenario where an interest expense was incurred in the carrying on of a trade, while PN31.2 deals with a scenario where a taxpayer does not carry on a trade. The requirements of the two paragraphs should be considered separately and not treated as a single principle. It is therefore important for taxpayers that want to claim interest deductions and rely on PN31 to consider both scenarios, especially if they are not in the business of lending money.

[1] L Taxpayer vs The Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service (Case A124/2017, on appeal from the Tax Court).

This article is a general information sheet and should not be used or relied upon as professional advice. No liability can be accepted for any errors or omissions nor for any loss or damage arising from reliance upon any information herein. Always contact your financial adviser for specific and detailed advice. Errors and omissions excepted (E&OE)

Tax allowances against assets used for purposes of trade

The Income Tax Act[1] allows for various income tax allowances to be claimed in respect of moveable assets used for purposes of a taxpayer’s trade.

Most commonly, section 11(e) provides for a deduction equal to the amount by which the value of any machinery, plant, implements, utensils and articles have diminished by reason of wear and tear during the tax year. Typically, these assets must be owned by the taxpayer, or must be in the process of being acquired. Where an asset was acquired during the year, the allowance provided for in section 11(e) is proportionally reduced according to the period of use during the year.

There are however various other specific asset allowances which may rather regulate whether a wear and tear allowance is available for tax purposes, depending on the nature of the specific asset or which specific industry the taxpayer operates in. Should the relevant requirements for these provisions rather be applicable, the section 11(e) allowance will not apply.

For example, section 12B provides for an accelerated allowance (generally split over three years on a 50/30/20 ratio) for certain plant, equipment and machinery used for farming purposes, the production of renewable energy such as bio-diesel or bio-ethanol products or the generation of electricity from wind, sunlight, etc. Section 12C again provides for a tax allowance in respect of assets used for manufacturing, co-operatives, hotels, ships and aircraft. Section 12E allows for a 100% write off of the cost of plant and machinery brought into use by a “small business corporation” in certain circumstances. Other (maybe lesser known) tax allowances include section 12F (providing for an allowance for qualifying airport and port assets) and section 12I (an additional investment and training allowance in respect of industrial policy projects). There are also various provisions in the Income Tax Act providing specifically for an allowance against which the value of buildings owned by a taxpayer and used for purposes of trade can be written down for tax purposes.

It is important to note that each of these provisions has very specific requirements regarding the type of qualifying assets that could potentially qualify for the allowance. This includes whether or not the specific asset is new and unused and if any improvements to the qualifying assets may also be taken into account. Other important considerations include who the relevant taxpayer is, when the asset was brought into use by that taxpayer for the first time and the costs to be taken into account in calculating the relevant allowance.

The take away is that taxpayers must continuously evaluate their asset registers to confirm that all assets are correctly classified for income tax purposes and that the correct tax allowances are claimed in respect of these assets. The most important consideration of all though is to ensure that available allowances provided for in the Income Tax Act are utilised where appropriate to do so.

[1] No. 58 of 1962

This article is a general information sheet and should not be used or relied upon as professional advice. No liability can be accepted for any errors or omissions nor for any loss or damage arising from reliance upon any information herein. Always contact your financial adviser for specific and detailed advice. Errors and omissions excepted (E&OE)

Tax deductions against salary earnings

Our clients who earn only a salary will know that very few tax deductions are available against salary income for income tax purposes and whereby they may reduce the taxable income derived ultimately from such remunerations. Section 23(m) of the Income Tax Act[1] provides that none of the deductions ordinarily available to taxpayers in terms of section 11 are allowed against salary income, other than for a limited few. We set out these deductions which are available below:

  1. Contributions made by taxpayers to a pension fund, provident fund or retirement annuity fund may be deducted against salary income in accordance with the provisions of section 11F;
  2. To the extent that an individual incurs legal fees, wear and tear-related costs or bad or doubtful debts as part of his/her employment, such expenditure will be deductible.[2] (Although it is possible that a wear and tear-related allowance may be available against a laptop or textbooks acquired as example, it is in our experience practically highly unlikely for legal fees, bad debts and doubtful debts to arise from an employment trade);
  3. Where amounts received, either as a restraint of trade payment or as ordinary remuneration for employment services rendered, are refunded by the employee, those amounts refunded may be legitimately claimed as an income tax deduction;[3] and
  4. Expenses incurred towards rent of, cost of repairs[4] of or expenses in connection with any dwelling, house or domestic premises, those costs may be claimed as deductions, to the extent that it is incurred as part of the individual’s employment and on condition that it does not offend the provisions of section 23(b) which deal with “home office” expenses.

Other than for the above, very few other deductions are available for individual taxpayers earning only a salary. Outside the ambit of section 11, the only other deductions which we typically encounter are medical aid contributions incurred, amounts claimed against travel allowances received or donations made to qualifying public benefit organisations. Of late, investments in section 12J “venture capital companies” may also be claimed as income tax deductions against salary income.

The above limitations only apply to salaried income received from employment though. Where an individual is also engaged in another trade (such as the renting out of an apartment), the above limitations do not apply to that separate trade. In such case, section 23(m) will not make the deductions in section 11 unavailable, although this is only as relates to the separate (rental) trade.

[1] No. 58 of 1962.

[2] Sections 11(a), (c), (i) and (j) respectively.

[3] Sections 11(nA) and (nB) respectively.

[4] In terms of section 11(d).

This article is a general information sheet and should not be used or relied upon as professional advice. No liability can be accepted for any errors or omissions nor for any loss or damage arising from reliance upon any information herein. Always contact your financial adviser for specific and detailed advice. Errors and omissions excepted (E&OE)

Fringe benefits provided to employees

The Seventh Schedule to the Income Tax Act[1] lists various benefits that employers may grant to employees which will attract income tax for the employee,[2] and require the employer to also withhold PAYE on the amount of the benefit granted.[3] These provisions act as anti-avoidance measures to avoid employees receiving “masked” remuneration in formats other than cash in order to avoid a liability for income tax.

The Seventh Schedule identifies a number of such taxable fringe benefits, and further quantifies the cash flow equivalent of that benefit for purposes of inclusion ultimately in the employee’s taxable income. These taxable benefits provided by employers to employees include:[4]

  1. The acquisition by the employee of assets from the employer at less than its value;
  2. The right to use an asset for free or without the employee paying adequate consideration for the use thereof;
  3. Free meals, refreshments or vouchers to that effect;
  4. Free or cheap residential accommodation;
  5. Free or cheap services provided or sourced by the employer for the benefit of the employee;
  6. Where the employer provides an interest-free or low-interest loan to an employee;
  7. Where the employer pays all of, or a portion of, the employee’s debt owed to another person, with no recourse to the employee;
  8. The employer settles any direct or indirect medical costs incurred by the employee and to the benefit of the employee him/herself, as well as any other dependents;
  9. Contributions made by the employer to any insurance policy which will benefit the employee; and
  10. Contributions by the employer to any retirement type fund on behalf of the employee.

Fringe benefits further also extend to where the above benefits are granted to family members of the employee, or any other person where those benefits are extended by virtue of an arrangement between the employer and the employee and which is granted as a result of the existence of the employment relationship.[5]

Given the very wide definition afforded to the word “employee” for purposes of the fringe benefit regime,[6] we often find that clients are surprised at the very wide potential application of the above benefits, be it to the employee directly or not. Given that the PAYE regime, affected by the above mentioned, carries a potential penalty of imprisonment for up to twelve months in instances of wilful contravention or contravention without just cause,[7] it is of the utmost importance that employers too are completely up to date with and aware of the obligations that they may have towards SARS and arising from fringe benefits provided to employees.

[1] 58 of 1962.

[2] See paragraph (i) of the specific inclusions in the “gross income” definition in section 1 of the Income Tax Act.

[3] Paragraph 2 of the Fourth Schedule to the Income Tax Act.

[4] Paragraph 2 of the Seventh Schedule to the Income Tax Act.

[5] Paragraph 16 of the Seventh Schedule to the Income Tax Act.

[6] Paragraph 1 of the Fourth Schedule read with paragraph 1 of the Seventh Schedule to the Income Tax Act.

[7] Paragraph 30(1) of the Fourth Schedule to the Income Tax Act.

This article is a general information sheet and should not be used or relied upon as professional advice. No liability can be accepted for any errors or omissions nor for any loss or damage arising from reliance upon any information herein. Always contact your financial adviser for specific and detailed advice. Errors and omissions excepted (E&OE)

Changes to income tax returns for companies

The South African Revenue Service (“SARS”) implemented several changes to the annual income tax returns for companies (the ITR14) on 26 February 2018 as part of SARS’ ongoing efforts to promote efficiency and compliance.

Two new schedules were added to the ITR14. Firstly, companies that wish to claim the learnership allowance in terms of section 12H of the Income Tax Act[1] will now need to disclose details of its registered learnerships in a separate schedule. In terms of this schedule, separate disclosure is required for learners with a disability and learners without a disability for both NQF levels 1 to 6 and NQF levels 7 to 10. Also, the number of learners and the allowance amount for each of these fields must be completed.

The second schedule relates to controlled foreign companies (“CFCs”). In terms of section 72A of the Income Tax Act, resident companies that hold at least 10 percent of the participation rights in any CFC (otherwise than indirectly through a company which is a resident), must submit a return to SARS. The “old” IT10B Adobe PDF schedule has been replaced with a simplified MS Excel IT10B schedule, which enables companies to declare all CFC information in one consolidated schedule that can be uploaded to eFiling as a supporting document, regardless of the number of interests held in CFCs. The new IT10B schedule must be used and uploaded on eFiling for all ITR14s submitted from 1 June 2018 onwards. This is to accommodate taxpayers that already completed CFC information based on the old format.

Additional disclosure requirements were also introduced for groups of companies that prepare consolidated financial statements. In future, companies with subsidiaries are required to submit a complete group structure together with the ITR14. New questions with regards to the country-by-country reporting regulations have also been added.  Companies that are subject to these regulations will have to specify the tax jurisdiction of the reporting entity for the multinational entity group as well as the name of the reporting entity. A number of additional line items have furthermore been added to the tax computation portion of the ITR14 to take other legislative amendments into account.

An example of this new ITR14 is available on SARS’ website for further consideration. Tax compliance officers of companies should carefully consider these new requirements in order to ensure that the relevant ITR14 is completed correctly and that all the required supporting documentation is submitted together with the ITR14. Companies that have already created new tax returns on eFiling but which have not yet been submitted should furthermore consider to what extent these changes will affect such returns.

[1] No. 58 of 1962

This article is a general information sheet and should not be used or relied upon as professional advice. No liability can be accepted for any errors or omissions nor for any loss or damage arising from reliance upon any information herein. Always contact your financial adviser for specific and detailed advice. Errors and omissions excepted (E&OE)

Provisional tax when you sell your property

The provisional tax regime operates as a continuous cash flow mechanism in favour of Government whereby tax on income earned is paid over provisionally in anticipation of the final tax liability to be calculated when a person is finally assessed to income tax. Where a person is required to be registered for provisional tax, estimates of taxable income are required to be submitted to SARS bi-annually (and provisional taxes paid accordingly), being after the first 6 months of the start of the person’s tax year, and again on the last day of that tax year.

Quite a number of our clients are not registered for provisional tax, nor are they required to be so registered. Typically, provisional tax registration is required only to the extent that income will be earned that is not in the form of remuneration (and which will therefore already be subject to pay-as-you-earn, whereby tax is already “pre-paid” on the taxpayer’s behalf on a monthly basis). Individuals therefore only earning a salary (and perhaps other immaterial taxable receipts) during a year, will not be required to register as provisional taxpayers.

What happens quite often in practice though is that these non-provisional taxpayer individuals may sell a significant asset during a tax year (typically in the form of immovable property), and thereby realising significant taxable capital gains. In such a scenario, these individuals too would need to register for and pay provisional tax for the tax year under consideration. Unfortunately though, many taxpayers are completely unaware of this requirement, thereby exposing themselves to onerous penalties as relates to the underestimation of provisional tax for failure to submit the requisite returns. Where no provisional tax return has been entered by the individual concerned, SARS may deem a Rnil estimate to have been returned by the taxpayer for provisional tax purposes.[1] As a result, SARS will consider the taxpayer to have underestimated its taxable income for the relevant year of assessment, and impose a penalty of 20% on the underestimation of the taxable income for the relevant year of assessment in terms of current tax legislation. Considering that this once-off event will likely involve a substantial asset having been realised (with a significant attendant tax cost), the penalty involved may also be quite substantial.

It is possible to request SARS to remit the penalty levied on underestimation, either in terms of the relevant provisions of the Tax Administration Act,[2] or in terms of the Fourth Schedule to the Income Tax Act.[3] In our experience though, SARS is reluctant to provide relief to taxpayers, and any remittance request often amounts to an involved and drawn out process. It is therefore preferable for taxpayers to be aware of the potential provisional tax consequences linked to a disposal of significant assets, and to discuss this with their tax practitioners before entering into significant transactions so that the necessary tax filing obligations can be observed in time.

[1] Paragraph 20(2C) of the Fourth Schedule to the Income Tax Act, 58 of 1962

[2] Paragraph 217(3) of Act 28 of 2011

[3] Paragraph 20(2)

This article is a general information sheet and should not be used or relied upon as professional advice. No liability can be accepted for any errors or omissions nor for any loss or damage arising from reliance upon any information herein. Always contact your financial adviser for specific and detailed advice. Errors and omissions excepted (E&OE)