Had the Australian consultant's report been accepted it would have seen a massive re-distribution of customs revenue away from Botswana Namibia and Swaziland to South Africa. Botswana would, based on 2011/12 projections lose Rand 8 billion and Namibia would lose Rand 6 billion. Fortunately cooler heads have prevailed for the moment in Pretoria and the opportunity to tear up the SACU agreement has not yet been taken. However, while SACU is still breathing it remains in intensive care. Treasury and DTI officials in Pretoria make no secret of their desire to tear up SACU and collect what would be at least 13 billion rand in revenue. The reason not to do this was political because the so-called BLNS (Botswna, Lesotho Namibia and Swaziland) states are so dependent upon the revenue flows that if it is torn up then Lesotho and Swaziland which depend for 60-70% of their revenue would almost certainly become politically unstable. Even Botswana and Namibia the two richest and most resilient of the BLNS would have suffered a massive loss if the recommendation from the report would have been accepted.
Based on the current SACU RSF 2011/12 figures Botswana would obtain Rand 9.7 billion, Namibia 8.1 billion and South Africa 4.5 billion , Swaziland 3.3 billion and Lesotho 3.1 billion of teh customs revenue. How is it that a country like South Africa which accounts for over 90% of the SACU GDP only gets 15.6% of customs revenue and Botswana which accounts for 4% of SACU GDP gets 34%. To say the least this fact irks South African treasury and trade officials. They argue 'why should South African taxpayers subsidise richer Batswana when our own people don't have public services'. But treasury officials are never fussed about historical facts. The reason why this is the case is that SACU customs revenue sharing is not based on the share of GDP but on the share of intra-SACU imports. South Africa imports very little from the other BLNS but the BLNS are completely dependent on South African imports. As result South Africa gets very little of the customs revenue and the BLNS together got over 70% of customs revenue.
Why, you might ask, would Pretoria, have ever agreed to a formula like this one which is so heavily stacked against its revenue? No other customs union in the world uses a formula anything like it.
