1. Setting the Record Straight
On 24 April the National Treasury formally withdrew the 0.5 percentage-point VAT increase scheduled for 1 May, keeping the rate at 15 per cent. The Democratic Alliance (DA) immediately declared the decision a triumph of its courtroom challenge, styling itself the taxpayer’s saviour. Yet the documentary record and parliamentary timelines tell a very different story—one in which ActionSA and Build One South Africa (BOSA) provided the decisive leverage that forced the U-turn, while the DA remained a spectator outside the negotiating room.
2. A Short Chronology of Events
- 12 Mar — National Treasury tables the Budget, proposing a phased VAT rise: 15 → 15.5 % on 1 May 2025 and 16 % on 1 Apr 2026.
- 1 Apr — The Fiscal Framework passes only after ActionSA, BOSA and seven smaller parties insert a binding clause giving Treasury 30 days to find alternative revenue or scrap the hike.
- 2 – 22 Apr — The DA and EFF pursue an urgent interdict in the Western Cape High Court; judgment is still pending.
- 24 Apr 00:05 — Treasury issues a statement confirming “VAT will remain at 15 %.”
- 24 Apr 09:00 — ANC, ActionSA, BOSA, IFP, UDM, Rise Mzansi, PAC, GOOD and PA hold a joint briefing celebrating the reversal; the DA is absent.
3. Debunking the DA narrative
- Court case still pending
The Western Cape High Court has not handed down judgment; therefore the reversal could not have resulted from a legal order. Treasury’s volte-face preceded any ruling. - Negotiated alternative, not litigation, unlocked the stalemate
Treasury insiders acknowledge that “extensive consultations with political parties” produced the climb-down, not court papers. - Exclusion from the victory podium
If the DA’s litigation were decisive, the ANC would logically have shared the stage with its coalition partner. Instead, it invited the very parties that voted for the fiscal framework—ActionSA and BOSA—and conspicuously froze the DA out.
4. Why ActionSA and BOSA deserve the laurels
4.1 Strategic conditionality
When the fiscal framework came before the House on 1 April, it required a simple majority to pass. The GNU lacked the DA’s support, leaving the budget vulnerable. ActionSA MP Alan Beesley drafted the amendment that bought Treasury 30 days to “assess revenue alternatives to a VAT increase.” Without that concession, ActionSA and BOSA would have voted against the framework, sinking the budget and precipitating a fiscal crisis.
4.2 Constructive engagement over grandstanding
During the 30-day window, ActionSA and BOSA submitted detailed proposals—expenditure trims, spectrum-auction accelerations, and clamping down on illicit trade—showing Treasury a feasible path to close the R75 billion gap without regressive taxation. Their approach contrasted sharply with the DA’s “all-or-nothing” litigation strategy, which offered no substitute revenue plan. politicsweb.co.za
4.3 Deliverables versus declarations
At the Sandton briefing, BOSA reminded voters:
“We didn’t run away to the courts… Leadership is not about noise; it’s about responsible calls that deliver results.”
ActionSA’s Michael Beaumont echoed the point, crediting “principled, good-faith negotiations” for the outcome.
5. Why voting for the budget—under protest—was essential
- Preventing a shutdown. Rejecting the fiscal framework would have delayed provincial and municipal transfers, jeopardising social-grant disbursements in May.
- Gaining leverage. By keeping their votes conditional, ActionSA and BOSA secured a seat at the negotiating table—something opposition parties outside the process (including the DA) could not do.
- Protecting the poor in real time. A legal battle that drags out for months offers no relief at the tills; a negotiated climb-down does.
In short, constructive participation coupled with hard deadlines forced the ANC-led Treasury to blink within three weeks.
6. The Takeaway for Voters
The VAT retreat is a triumph of conditional cooperation over courtroom theatrics. ActionSA and BOSA used their parliamentary votes as leverage to:
- Write binding instructions into the fiscal framework;
- Offer concrete fiscal alternatives;
- Hold Treasury accountable on an explicit 30-day timetable.
The DA’s lawsuit may yet clarify constitutional questions around ministerial tax powers, but it was not the catalyst for today’s relief at the supermarket checkout. Voters should reward facts over spin: the credit belongs where the hard negotiating was done—ActionSA and Build One South Africa.