Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items

Demystifying the two-pot retirement system

20 August 2025 | Story Dr Annelize Oosthuizen | Photo Supplied

Opinion article by Dr Annelize Oosthuizen, Subject Head of Taxation in the School of Accountancy, University of the Free State

With the two-pot retirement system having been effective from 1 September 2024, it is important to demystify certain aspects to prevent an unpleasant surprise when you retire. Although there are other complex rules, this article was simplified and does not deal with exceptions. It also does not deal with members of a provident fund who were 55 years of age or older on 1 March 2021. Furthermore, reference to retirement funds is to a pension fund, provident fund or a retirement annuity fund (a discussion on preservation funds is therefore excluded).

Three, not two pots

Firstly, there are effectively three pots and not two.

The first pot is referred to as the vested component. You will only have this component if you were a member of a retirement fund prior to 1 September 2024. This component consists of the member’s interest (balance) in the retirement fund on 31 August 2024 (the day before the implementation of the two-pot system) after being reduced with the amount of the seed capital that was transferred to the savings pot (see below). This seed capital amount was calculated as the lesser of 10% of the value of the member’s interest in the fund on 31 August 2024 or R30 000. No further contributions will be allocated to this component from 1 September 2024. Upon retirement, one-third of the funds in this component can be taken in the form of a lump sum. The balance will be transferred to the retirement component below and will be paid out in the form of monthly annuities.
The second pot is the savings component. The opening balance of the savings component is the seed capital that was transferred from the vested component above. Thereafter, from 1 September 2024, one third of your monthly contributions to the retirement fund are allocated to this component.
The third pot is the retirement component. From 1 September 2024, two-thirds of your monthly contributions to the retirement fund are allocated to this component. The funds in this component can only be accessed upon retirement (i.e. after reaching your retirement age, which is stipulated in the fund rules). Furthermore, upon retirement, the money in this pot is only paid out in the form of monthly annuities (i.e. monthly pensions) and no lump sum can be taken from this pot unless its total value is R165 000 or less.

Withdrawals are taxed unfavourably

Secondly, withdrawing from the savings component before retirement has adverse tax implications.

From 1 September 2024 onwards, one is allowed to make an annual withdrawal (minimum of R2 000) from the savings component even if you have not yet reached your retirement age and although you are still employed. It is, however, important to remember that such withdrawals are taxed very unfavourably since they are taxed by using the normal progressive tax tables that apply to your other income such as salary. If you wait for your retirement and only withdraw from this savings component upon retirement, the first R550 000 will be tax-free and withdrawals above R550 000 will be taxed at rates much lower than the current progressive tax rates applicable to other income.
Upon retirement, only the money in the savings component is allowed to be taken as a lump sum. If you therefore withdraw all the money from this pot annually prior to retirement, you will not have any funds available to access as a lump sum on retirement and will only have access to the monthly annuities payable from your retirement component.

Less funds available

Lastly, for those members who have a vested component (i.e. who became members of the retirement fund before 1 September 2024), the old rules still apply to the funds in that component. Therefore, upon retirement, you will still be able to take one third of the value of your vested component as a lump sum. The balance will be transferred to the retirement pot and will be paid out in the form of monthly annuities.

To summarise, even though it might appear lucrative to withdraw from your savings component annually, it is advised that you refrain from doing it unless you really need the funds to fulfill basic needs. Withdrawing prior to retirement has the following adverse consequences:

Money withdrawn from the savings component is taxed at higher rates than what would have applied had you reached your retirement age and retired. You will therefore not make use of the R550 000 tax-free option.
You will have less funds available to pay out as a lump sum on retirement. As a simple calculation, had you not withdrawn R30 000 in a single year, conservatively calculated at a rate of 5%, this R30 000 would have grown to R79 599 (R139 829 if a rate of 8% is used) calculated over 20 years that can be withdrawn tax-free when utilising the R550 000 tax-free portion on retirement.

News Archive

Reaction by the Rector of the UFS after a meeting with student leaders

2008-02-25

Reaction by the Rector and Vice-Chancellor of the UFS, Prof. Frederick Fourie, on the agreement reached at a meeting with student leaders held on Friday, 22 February 2008

Note: This is meant to be used together with the full joint statement that was issued by the UFS management and student leaders on 22 February 2008.

The memorandum of the primes of the University of the Free State’s (UFS) residences was handed to top management on Wednesday, 20 February 2008. In the memorandum they asked for a meeting with the UFS management by Friday, 22 February 2008. Such a meeting was arranged and took place.

The UFS top management, all the residence primes as well as the house committee member for first years, the executive of the Main Campus Student Representative Council (SRC) and residence heads were present.

In contrast to what is suggested in the Volksblad report of Saturday, the discussion went off very well. There was no consternation or shouting or “emotions that ran high”. It was a civilised, decent meeting as it should be at a good university. Of course, now and again individuals spoke out strongly and very enthusiastically, but it was all decent and orderly. The contribution of the primes was insightful and well formulated.

Because the top management and I wanted to listen very carefully what the problems and frustrations were, we spent nearly five hours in the meeting. The issues in the memorandum were discussed one by one. In some cases I could take a decision immediately and finalise the matter, in other cases, the management provided information that could largely finalise a matter. A number of other matters must be investigated further.

The management undertook to respond comprehensively and in writing to all the issues raised in the memorandum by Monday, 25 February 2008. This will be handed to the primes but will not be handed to the media beforehand.
It is obvious that there are matters at the university that can be better managed and that there are problems with communication within the Student Affairs division. A major change such as the new policy on diversity places huge demands on management and the administration, and problems were to be expected. However, we understand the frustration of the students in residences.

On the other hand, students don’t always make matters easier. The strong opposition of white student leaders last year, and their unwillingness to co-operate in preparation for 2008 is well known. This year it is going better. But often student leaders take positions that are very inflexible. They also see no room for adapting old habits and simply want their own way. Their contributions are then full of statements such as “It cannot be done”. This delays measures such as the full implementation of expert interpreting services, which, for the management, is a very important measure (and which is functioning very well in certain residences). Communication from student leaders to management is also not always what it should be.

At the end of the meeting student leaders and management reached an important agreement and issued a joint statement in which they committed themselves to the integration process and to good co-operation and communication. This was an important step which is a sign of rebuilding trust. Naturally everyone will still have to work hard to build on this and to strengthen mutual trust.

The course and outcome of Friday’s discussions, as requested by the student leaders, show that issues can be addressed and resolved by means of us talking to one another. This is why it is so sad that primes and house committee members went on strike on Wednesday already and stayed in tents in front of the Main Building – leaving their residences without its leadership. This created an opening for what appears to have been well planned and co-ordinated acts of vandalism by inhabitants of residences on the campus on Wednesday.

Such vandalism is unacceptable and no one can justify it.

Fortunately, order could be restored quickly during the night and all academic activities could resume without any disruption on Thursday and Friday.

FCvN Fourie

Media Release
Issued by: Lacea Loader
Assistant Director: Media Liaison
Tel: 051 401 2584
Cell: 083 645 2454
E-mail: loaderl.stg@ufs.ac.za
24 February 2008

Back

Economic and Management Sciences

Education

Health Sciences

The Humanities

Law

Natural and Agricultural Sciences

Theology and Religion

Open Distance Learning

Business School

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept