A spokesman from the fiscus this morning declared that the DWT is very much in line with international trends, stating that 15% is measured against the "average" from abroad. He failed to say which countries were part of the averageing calculation. (No one on the discussion panel questioned him on that either!) This is such an unfulfilling point of reference - like: the petrol price in Indonesia has gone up by 12%, the RSA settles in on 11,5% - be happy! Fact is that the tax has increased by 50%. If companies play a fair game, they would now declare the full cost of the former dividend dispensation to shareholders, (110) and after the DWT a shareholder will be worse off by 6,5%, IF the dividend is maintained unaltered at the former 100. Those with calculaters in the brain would be in a better position to extrapolate at which rate a company should develop its dividend policy to remain attractive in the field. Another perpective: the normal reaction to an increase in taxes is to say: now the gross figure must be increased (= salaries should go up to cover for the increased onslaught from this and that.) Sometimes the fiscus NEEDS to decrease the money in the hands of those blessed with earnings of some variety and pass it on to all those sacred projects. Now, what realistic justification exists to just increase the individual's income to counter the effect taxes have on disposable income?