- The controversial businessman claims he paid Jacob Zuma millions for the education and upkeep of his children
- Shaik claims the former president did not put any pressure on him, adding the money was not for Zuma’s personal use
- The DA has requested an investigation into whether Zuma paid tax for the funds or not
The money controversial South African businessman, Schabir Shaik, allegedly paid millions to Jacob Zuma for "his children's education and upkeep".
In a confidential KPMG report compiled in 2006, which relates to Zuma’s corruption trial at the time, it was revealed Zuma accepted R4-million from Shaik. It’s believed Zuma received a total of R7-million from several backers.
Judge Hilary Squires, in his judgment in 2005, found Shaik intended to corrupt Zuma, but Shaik's version was rejected by every court up to, and including, the Constitutional Court.
According to a Mail & Guardian report, Shaik denied the relationship was corrupt. He also denied his support for Zuma translated into commercial benefits for Nkobi Holdings, his company.
Briefly.co.za gathered that Shaik said Zuma did not pressurise him, adding the funding was not for the former president’s personal use, but for his children's education and upkeep, so that he would not have this financial burden so that he could focus on the issues at hand".
At the same time, Shaik said despite Zuma being president of South Africa at the time, his company had many unsuccessful tenders, which include projects such as King Shaka International Airport and a casino.
Meanwhile, the DA wrote to the SA Revenue Service to request an -investigation into whether Zuma and his sponsors paid taxes on these donations.
Tim Harris, a DA MP, claimed the benefits could be classified as donations under tax legislation.
Harris said: "According to section 60(1) of the Act, if a donor fails to pay donations tax within a prescribed three-month period, the donor and the donee will be jointly liable to pay the outstanding amount of donations tax.”
He added the assumption can then be made that Zuma did not submit services in exchange for the transfers. According to Harris, this money could otherwise form part of the president's gross income and could then be subjected to normal income tax.
It’s believed the ANC told journalists it could not comment on Zuma's private financial affairs.
Do you have a story to share with us? Inbox us on our Facebook page and we could feature your story.