- Earlier figures (from a September 2026 parliamentary reply by Transport Minister Barbara Creecy to ActionSA MP Alan Beesley) indicated 16 employees on suspension with pay, at a cumulative cost of roughly R28.5–R29.1 million. Monthly salaries ranged from about R48,800 to R333,900 (before tax). Some suspensions dated back to 2024, with three lasting more than a year. Disciplinary processes and forensic investigations were ongoing for several cases.
- The specific headline figures of 23 suspended staff costing taxpayers around R26 million a year appear to reflect updated or differently calculated data (likely annualised costs or a later tally). Prolonged paid suspensions have been a recurring criticism: earlier periods saw higher numbers (e.g., dozens suspended for years in some cases), with associated legal defence costs also running into tens or hundreds of millions historically. Critics, including ActionSA, have described this as wasteful expenditure funded by the fuel levy while thousands of finalised claims remain unpaid.
Labour law generally requires paid suspensions pending disciplinary outcomes, which contributes to the expense when processes drag on.
Broader financial and operational woes
The RAF (South Africa’s state insurer for road accident victims, funded primarily by a dedicated fuel levy) faces structural insolvency-level pressures:
- Liabilities and unpaid/outstanding claims have ballooned (reports cite figures in the hundreds of billions of rand in some accounting views, with significant backlogs of finalised but unpaid claims—tens of thousands of victims affected).
- Annual revenue from the fuel levy is in the region of R45–50 billion, yet payouts, legal costs, administration, and contingent liabilities consistently outstrip this.
- Governance problems, high staff turnover/suspensions in key areas (including past mass suspensions of claims officers), legal representation shortfalls (after earlier changes to attorney panels), and procurement/HR issues have been repeatedly scrutinised by SCOPA and others. New leadership (including a recent CEO appointment) is attempting turnaround efforts, but the core funding gap remains.
These issues mean legitimate claimants often wait years, while the fund continues to incur costs on non-productive staff and litigation.
The proposed R3/litre levy
The current RAF fuel levy sits at approximately R2.25–R2.27 per litre (it was increased modestly in the 2026 Budget cycle from prior levels around R2.18). This is a dedicated levy on petrol and diesel, collected via the fuel price and paid over to the RAF (distinct from the larger general fuel levy that goes to the fiscus).
- Raising it toward R3 per litre would represent a substantial hike (roughly 30%+), aimed at closing the funding gap without (or alongside) other reforms.
- This sits in tension with parallel government discussions: Deputy Transport Minister Mkhuleko Hlengwa and others have indicated consideration of reducing or scrapping the RAF levy in favour of a hybrid model. Options floated include mandatory third-party vehicle insurance (linked to licensing), private-sector participation, and requiring foreign visitors to carry travel insurance. Proponents of reduction argue the current levy adds to the high cost of living/fuel prices and that better management could lower the required rate. Critics of the status quo (including OUTA) often stress that fixing mismanagement should come before revenue changes.
Any increase would be determined by National Treasury (typically announced in the Budget) and would directly raise pump prices for motorists, compounding existing pressures from oil prices, the rand, and other levies/taxes.
Implications and context
- For motorists and the economy: Higher fuel costs flow through to transport, food, and general inflation. South Africa already has high effective fuel taxation relative to many peers.
- For claimants: More revenue could theoretically speed payouts, but history shows levy increases alone have not resolved backlogs or governance failures.
- Reform pressures: The situation underscores long-standing calls for structural change—whether via the long-delayed Road Accident Benefit Scheme (RABS) reforms, better claims administration, reduced legal/admin waste, alternative funding, or a shift away from a pure fuel-levy model (especially as electric vehicles grow).
- Edge cases include the impact on diesel users (freight/logistics), potential for further contingent liability growth if claims processes remain inefficient, and political sensitivity around any tax/levy increase amid cost-of-living concerns.
In short, the reported push for a near-R3/litre levy reflects the RAF’s acute cash and sustainability pressures, occurring against a backdrop of documented waste (including suspended staff costs) and competing policy signals about possibly lightening the fuel-levy burden. Official confirmation of any specific R3 proposal, exact staff numbers/costs, or timeline would come from the RAF, Department of Transport, or Treasury. The fund’s trajectory continues to be closely watched by Parliament, oversight bodies, and the public.
