At the centre of this ecosystem lies the SARS ISV (Independent Software Vendor) system, a tightly controlled framework through which approved entities may submit tax data directly into SARS systems via secure system-to-system integrations.
Currently, only 29 entities in South Africa hold SARS ISV approval. Less well understood, however, is that these 29 are not equal in function, capability, or value to taxpayers.
The ISV Landscape: A Structural Imbalance
Of the 29 SARS-approved ISV entities:
- 23 are software providers only, offering technology platforms but no tax practitioner services.
- 6 are tax practitioner firms that both advise clients and maintain their own direct ISV links.
This distinction is critical — and often misunderstood.
Most tax practitioners in South Africa access SARS electronically either via:
- Manual SARS eFiling, or
- Third-party ISV software supplied by one of the 23 technology-only providers.
In both cases, the practitioner operates within externally imposed constraints— by SARS eFiling functionality in the first instance, or by the commercial software architecture and limits of the third-party ISV in the second.
The Strategic Advantage of Owning the ISV Link
A tax practitioner firm that holds its own SARS ISV link, supported by bespoke, SARS-approved software, occupies a fundamentally different position.
Such firms are not merely “users” of SARS infrastructure — they are integrated participants in it.
Without disclosing proprietary mechanisms, it is sufficient to note that a direct ISV link combined with customised software architecture enables a range of practical, operational and compliance-focused benefits that are not accessible to:
- Practitioners relying solely on SARS eFiling, or
- Practitioners, dependent on off-the-shelf software from third-party ISV vendors.
Where a practitioner uses a third-party ISV platform, their functionality, by definition, is limited to what that provider’s software allows. The rules, workflows, validations, and reporting logic are designed for the general market, not tailored advisory outcomes.
Even ISV Practitioner Firms Are Not the Same
Importantly, even among the 6 tax practitioner firms with their own ISV approval, capabilities are not uniform.
Each firm remains constrained — or empowered — by:
- The depth of its proprietary software development
- The scope of its SARS accreditation
- The internal controls and architecture built around its ISV connection
The Tax Consulting distinction
In other words, an ISV link is not, on its own, the differentiator. What matters is what has been built on top of that link.
Tax Consulting South Africa stands apart in this landscape.
As one of the 6 tax practitioner firms with its own SARS ISV link, Tax Consulting has gone further by developing proprietary ISV-integrated software functionality designed specifically to serve taxpayers with complex, high-compliance needs.
This internally developed system provides:
- Enhanced compliance assurance frameworks
- Deeper, structured insight into a client’s tax profile
- Advanced oversight and monitoring capabilities
- A level of control and visibility not available through generic platforms
Crucially, these advantages do not rely on third-party software roadmaps or external limitations. The system is purpose-built, SARS-approved, and embedded directly into Tax Consulting’s advisory processes.
For clients, this translates into greater certainty, stronger governance, and better-informed decision-making — without requiring them to understand or manage the underlying technical complexity.
Choosing More Than a Practitioner
As SARS continues to expand data analytics, cross-tax integration and automated enforcement, the gap between standard compliance and strategic compliance infrastructure will continue to widen.
Engaging a tax practitioner firm with:
- Its own ISV link
- Customised, proprietary SARS-integrated systems
- And embedded tax advisory expertise,
is no longer a marginal consideration. It is a structural advantage.
In a system where responsibility ultimately rests with the taxpayer, infrastructure matters — and not all ISV access is created equal.
