Free education in S.A, fact or fallacy
South Africa's National Treasury recently committed an additional R16 billion towards higher education in the next three years. This was a step towards making education accessible for more pupils. But ultimately, someone will have to foot the bill.
Fri, 11 Nov 2016 07:45:34 GMT
Disclaimer: The following content is generated automatically by a GPT AI and may not be accurate. To verify the details, please watch the video
AI Generated Summary
- Georg proposed a tax-funded model to finance free education in South Africa, suggesting an additional 30 billion rand sourced from increased personal income tax, a slight raise in VAT, and a nominal increase in corporate tax or education levy.
- The challenges in the cost-sharing structure, particularly the underfunding of NSFAS, have hindered efforts to provide free education. Georg highlighted the flaws in a loan-based system, emphasizing the exclusion of students from disadvantaged backgrounds.
- To address concerns about increased personal income tax, Georg emphasized the necessity of tackling inequality and supporting free education as a means to empower youth, break the cycle of poverty, and address the skills deficit in South Africa.
South Africa's National Treasury recently committed an additional R16 billion towards higher education in the next three years, aiming to make education more accessible. However, the question of who will ultimately bear the financial burden remains a critical issue. In a recent interview with CNBC Africa, Co-Pierre Georg, Senior Lecturer at the African Institute of Financial Markets and Risk Management, provided insights into the payment framework for free education in South Africa.
Georg highlighted that currently, universities in South Africa cost the country between 50 and 60 billion rand annually. These costs are primarily covered by government subsidies, fee revenue from students, and some income from third-party donors. The declining government subsidies have led to universities relying more heavily on fee revenue, exacerbating the financial pressure on students. This financial strain has sparked protests across campuses, underscoring the urgent need for a sustainable funding model.
Georg proposed a tax-funded model to finance free higher education in South Africa. With the country's annual tax revenue at around a trillion rand, he suggested allocating an additional 30 billion rand for education. This funding could be sourced from a combination of increased personal income tax, a slight raise in value-added tax (VAT) to align with international standards, and a nominal increase in either corporate tax or an education levy.
One of the key challenges in achieving free education is the cost-sharing structure, particularly the National Student Financial Aid System (NSFAS). Georg pointed out that NSFAS has been underfunded due to the growing number of students seeking assistance, leading to a backlog in financing. He expressed skepticism about the effectiveness of a loan-based system like NSFAS, highlighting its inherent flaws in excluding students from disadvantaged backgrounds due to credit risk screening.
Moreover, Georg addressed concerns about a potential backlash from affluent individuals regarding increased personal income tax. He emphasized the importance of addressing inequality in South Africa and the need for a moderate tax increase to support free education. By investing in education, Georg argues, the country can empower young South Africans to break the cycle of poverty and bridge the existing skills gap, ultimately fostering economic growth.
In conclusion, Georg underscored the importance of reevaluating the existing financial framework for education in South Africa to ensure equitable access to quality higher education. By implementing a tax-funded model and addressing the limitations of NSFAS, the country can strive towards a more inclusive and sustainable educational system.