One SARS eFiling mistake is leading to missed deadlines, penalties and delayed tax refunds

Tax experts warned South Africans that allowing an accountant or former practitioner to control their SARS eFiling profile can delay tax refunds and expose them to missed deadlines and penalties.

With the 2026 filing season now underway, Latita Africa COO Razael Manikus urged taxpayers to treat SARS eFiling access and privacy as a compliance risk rather than an administrative afterthought.

This includes the fact that South Africans must be careful about whom they appoint as their registered representative, public officer, or eFiling profile administrator.

Each year, taxpayers focus on IRP5s, medical certificates, investment certificates, rental schedules, bank statements and supporting records.

“Those documents matter, but they are of limited use if you cannot access your SARS eFiling profile through which the return must be submitted,” Manikus said.

Many individuals, companies and trusts only discover who is controlling their SARS profile when something goes wrong.

This can happen where a return must be filed, SARS requests verification documents, a refund is delayed, a new practitioner is appointed, or a tax type must be transferred.

Taxpayers then discover that authentication prompts and profile access sit with the accountant who set up their profile years earlier. That is when filing season becomes a legal and financial risk.

The problem often starts innocently. An accountant registers the profile, files the tax returns, and receives correspondence from SARS.

They essentially become the person relied on to manage compliance. While the relationship works, no one questions the arrangement.

However, when relationships end, fees are disputed, accountants stop responding, firms restructure, staff leave, and a practitioner may retire, become incapacitated, or pass away.

The taxpayer may then find that practical control over the SARS profile is beyond their control, Manikus said.

However, it is important to note that outstanding fees do not mean the taxpayer loses the right to their SARS profile or tax records.

“An accountant may, depending on the engagement terms and applicable professional rules, have limited rights in relation to internal working papers or unpaid work product,” she explained.

“That is different from withholding eFiling access, SARS correspondence, submitted returns, assessments or taxpayer records.”

The taxpayer remains responsible to SARS and remains exposed to penalties, missed deadlines, adverse assessments, verification risks and refund delays.

Control over the profile used to manage those obligations must therefore remain with the taxpayer, Manikus added.

What companies and trusts should do

For companies and trusts, Manikus stressed that the registered representative role is not a minor profile setting. It is the authority through which SARS may recognise a person as having rights to act on behalf of the taxpayer’s profile.

That person may receive authentication prompts, approve tax type transfers, manage access to returns and assessments, and authorise a new practitioner.

If that authority defaults to an external accountant rather than a director, public officer, trustee, or properly authorised internal representative, the taxpayer has created an avoidable governance risk.

For a company, the registered representative or public officer should generally be someone inside the business, such as a director, managing director, CFO, company secretary or another suitable senior official.

For a trust, that control should generally sit with the main trustee or a properly authorised representative.

Manikus advised that the accountant or tax practitioner should still assist, but through delegated access under a written mandate.

“That mandate should record which taxpayer the practitioner may assist, which tax types may be accessed, what work may be performed and for what period.”

Fortunately, Manikus explained that if an accountant refuses to cooperate, that does not mean the taxpayer is without recourse.

The taxpayer, or the properly appointed registered representative, can approach SARS to regularise the registered representative position and update the contact details linked to the profile.

They can also request that SARS approve the transfer of the relevant tax types to the taxpayer or a newly appointed practitioner.

Manikus stressed that the former accountant should not be treated as the owner of the taxpayer’s SARS profile. “Taxpayers must understand the difference between assistance and control.”

A practitioner can assist with compliance, but the taxpayer should not be locked out of the very profile through which SARS expects them to comply.