A class action against the South African Revenue Service now counts 2 888 signed-up members through the group Lesotho Import Cars Warriors, and it targets a customs requirement that foreign-registered vehicles be declared on Sars’s Traveller Management System. The money at stake sits in a large cross-border second-hand vehicle market: cars imported mostly from Japan sell for as little as R30 000 in neighbouring countries, and the dispute turns on who bears the cost of moving them through South Africa.
The requirement, introduced in June 2026, applies to all foreign-registered vehicles in the country, including those from Southern African Customs Union members Botswana, eSwatini, Lesotho and Namibia. Registration can be done online or at the border, with Sars issuing a temporary import permit valid for six months. For the organised plaintiffs, that six-month renewal cycle is the core economic grievance. Duties have already been paid over to Sacu on first import, and their counsel argues no further levies or declarations should attach as vehicles move within the common customs area.
Mkhosi Radebe of MC Radebe Attorneys, which is organising the class action, says the permit requirement amounts to an unlawful two-tier system for Sacu members. Used vehicles are imported through the Durban container port and shipped straight to Lesotho, where customs duties are paid. “Our view of the law is that if you are driving in the common customs union, there are no duties payable,” says Radebe. “Article 19 of the Sacu agreement generally prohibits levying further duties on goods imported from outside the common customs area when they move from one member state to another, subject to some exceptions.”
The commercial logic of the trade is considerable. Tens of thousands of second-hand foreign vehicles, largely from Japan, are sold each year in countries like Lesotho after being imported from abroad. They cannot be sold in South Africa, a restriction designed to protect the local vehicle manufacturing sector, and it is that protectionist structure which Sars cites as the foundation of its position.
The revenue authority, asked for comment, notes that motorists are adhering to the new requirements and that it continues its enforcement responsibilities in accordance with the law. “South Africa has designed laws aimed at protecting and supporting its domestic motor vehicle manufacturing industry,” Sars says. “South African residents may not unlawfully use vehicles that are registered and owned in another country on South African roads. No country in the world permits that.” The authority adds that vehicles imported into South Africa are subject to applicable import requirements, including duties and taxes where payable, and that the regulatory framework for vehicle importation falls within the mandates of the International Trade Administration Commission and the Department of Trade, Industry and Competition. Sars’s own role, it says, is to administer and enforce customs and tax legislation at the border.
The litigation has deep roots in a single costly dispute. Ficksburg businessman Joaquim Alves had his Lesotho-registered Nissan Serena, then valued at R40 000, impounded by customs officials who claimed he needed an import permit to travel on South African roads. Alves disputed this, retrieved the vehicle from the municipal pound and was later arrested for theft of his own vehicle, detained for a weekend and hospitalised due to an aggravated medical condition. A local magistrates court ordered the vehicle’s release, though Alves says Sars did not comply. He escalated to the Bloemfontein High Court and ultimately the Supreme Court of Appeal, which dismissed Sars’s application for special leave to appeal. Despite the expense of litigating over a R40 000 vehicle, Alves still does not have his car and suspects it has been demolished.
Alves and his legal team argue that Sars is overreaching its powers and misreading the Customs and Excise Act by demanding that foreign-registered vehicles be declared as “imports” at the border. “They force this [import permit] on owners of Lesotho-registered vehicles,” he says. “This declaration is valid for six months and then it has to be renewed. One does not have to comply, yet most people are doing so. In effect they are admitting to importing goods to SA, which they are not.” He adds that Sars warns failure to comply will lead to seizure of the vehicle and penalties, and contends there is no legislation barring South Africans from owning or driving such vehicles. He has reported the case to the South African Human Rights Commission.
Enforcement costs are already being felt on the ground. Some vehicles were impounded and released only when fines were paid; others were destroyed in towns near the SA-Lesotho border crossing, such as Ficksburg in the Free State. Residents of border towns like Ficksburg and Ladybrand with Lesotho-registered plates, who frequently cross into Lesotho, have complained for years of harassment by customs officials on their return. A Ficksburg resident travelling back from Lesotho last week was told by a “cross and mean” customs official that South Africans driving with Lesotho number plates inside South Africa would have their vehicles impounded, leaving her shocked after years of unimpeded travel.
Radebe says the legal team exchanged correspondence with Sars expressing disagreement with its interpretation of Section 15 of the Customs and Excise Act, under which Phase 1 of the declaration was implemented on or about 1 June 2026. After those letters, Sars changed tack and said implementation would happen in two phases. A Sars Frequently Asked Questions document indicates Phase 2 will deal with foreign-registered vehicles already in South Africa before 1 June 2026, used by people not currently crossing the border, while Phase 1 focuses on vehicles entering or leaving the country. “As soon as Phase 2 is announced, we will go to court,” says Radebe. The plaintiffs want the courts to rule on whether Sars has overstepped its powers in demanding import permits for travel on South African roads.