Sorrow, rather than anger, about the country's poor tax collection rate has crept into the final Client Charter by the SA Revenue Services (SARS).
The draft Client Charter was published in the 1997 Budget Review in March but the final version, released last week, has added a few points.
The draft said only that you are entitled to expect SARS to help you by being courteous, understanding your rights and obligations, and upgrading its services continuously. The final version has added that it should also help you "by being accessible".
Accessibility relates not only to the fact that you should be able to speak to SARS officials during reasonable working hours but that they should also have an approachable manner.
Certainly, as far as working hours are concerned, SARS has shown itself to be flexible. Many local offices of the Receivers of Revenue extended their hours of operation around the time that tax forms were due.
And as far as manner is concerned, I have heard good reports in general that the officials at SARS are more helpful and informed than they used to be.
In the draft version, the Charter said you can expect SARS to be fair by expecting you to pay only what is due under the law and by treating everyone equally. Now it has added: "by ensuring everyone pays their fair share".
I would have thought that paying "your fair share" should be the same as "paying what is due under the law".
Actually I find the association of the two a bit objectionable because it has political overtones, which have no place in a client charter. It assumes that the tax rate is fair, yet tax rates are determined by the prevailing government.
Some governments have a more redistributive agenda than others, for example under the ANC the top income tax rate has gone to 45 percent whereas under Maggie Thatcher's Conservative government in Britain during the 1980s there were tax cuts.
But perhaps it is more that SARS wants everyone, particularly those who feel they are unfairly shouldering the tax burden, to be reassured that everyone else is shouldering it too.
Where the draft Client Charter really attracted amendment, though, was in the section telling you your obligations in return for SARS' helpfulness, fairness, and concern for your Constitutional rights.
As well as being honest and submitting full and accurate information, SARS has added that you should do so "timeously".
In fact, SARS has its ways of punishing you if you don't it charges you interest on overdue tax.
SARS requires you to pay your tax on time and has added "in full" going back to the "fair share", it seems, by implying that some taxpayers are not paying all they are supposed to.
But what is "in full", anyway? If tax experts find a loophole in the Income Tax Act, should they exploit it to save their clients taxes or should they sit back and say "I'm sure the regulators didn't mean to leave this loophole so I won't exploit it"?
The only final solution to the practice of giving advice to minimise taxes, which the government obviously finds annoying, is to ban the profession of tax adviser.
But the final addition to the Client Charter is the most idealistic.
You are obliged "to encourage others to pay their tax". (That means you, Mr Tax Adviser.)
If people were to pay taxes voluntarily they would pay a lot less than they are paying now. The only reason we all pay the prevailing rates is fear of penalty taxes and prosecution. The effectiveness with which those are wielded is entirely up to SARS.