Reply to question on issuing of business visas reveals SA is not a business-friendly or Start-Up Nation

Below is the reply I received to a written question put to Minister of Home Affairs, Malusi Gigaba, which reveals just how anti-business South Africa has become.

Business Day picked up the reply and published a story on it yesterday - see it here.

Apart from the fact that no visas were issued for any type of business, the Minister was unable (or chose not) to answer the question about the sum of investment made into the country resulting from the issuing of visas in the past.

I am going to be pursuing this issue as it pertains directly to South Africa's relative attractiveness as an investment destination. 

Yet again we are presented with concrete evidence that our government speaks with forked tongues - last week opening a one-stop-shop investment hub, this week showing its true colours in its anti-business stance by refusing new and existing businesses to bring in vital skills the country so desperately needs.


What also needs investigating are the so-called fraudulent supporting documents. I wonder if they are actually fraudulent or if the Department is just nitpicking to make it hard for businesses to qualify.

More on this soon!

QUESTION FOR WRITTEN REPLY

QUESTION NO. 572

DATE OF PUBLICATION: Friday, 10 March 2017

INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER 9 OF 2017

572.    Mr R W T Chance (DA) to ask the Minister of Home Affairs:

(1)            (a) What is the total amount of business visas that have been issued annually for (i) start-up and (ii) existing businesses since such visas were introduced, (b) what amount in Rands has been invested in the country annually due to the issuing of these visas, (c) how many applications for business visas have been refused annually and (d) at what resultant lost investment;

(2)            whether his department has tracked the businesses (a) that were started and (b) in which money has been invested as a result of the issuance of such visas to establish whether the specified businesses are still trading; if not, in each case, why not; if so, what are the relevant details in each case?                                                                                                                                                                      NW630E

REPLY:

(1)(a)(i)    No new applications for start-ups were approved within the Republic in the period January 2016 to December 2016.

(1)(a)(ii)   Twenty-five applications for existing businesses were approved and seven were approved for change of condition on an already issued business visa.

(1)(b)       The Immigration Regulations prescribe R 5 million as an amount in cash to be invested in the Republic as determined from time to time by the Minister, after consultation with the Minister of Trade and Industry, by notice in the Gazette. In the year 2016 there were no business visa applications that were approved for investments into new businesses or start-up.

(1)(c)       148 applications were rejected for business visa renewals, and 48 were rejected for new businesses.

(1)(d)       In most cases applications are rejected for fraudulent supporting documents. Most of these are where the applicants have submitted fraudulent Chartered Accountant letters purporting to confirm the availability of funds.

The rejections therefore do not translate to any loss of potential investments as in essence the applicants could not provide proof of the available investment amount.

(2)(a)       All applicants whose permits are rejected are traced and deported by Inspectorate unit.

(2)(b)       Inspectorate unit conducts inspections to ensure that all persons issued with visas comply with the terms and conditions of their permits.