The staggering cost of BEE: Billions lost, opportunities squandered

Key topics:BEE may deter investment, jobs, and economic growth.Starlink exit highlights rigid and costly BEE rules.Critics call for reform based on impact, not race..Sign up for your early morning brew of the BizNews Insider to keep you up to speed with the content that matters. The newsletter will land in your inbox at 5:30am weekdays. Register here.Support South Africa’s bastion of independent journalism, offering balanced insights on investments, business, and the political economy, by joining BizNews Premium. Register here.If you prefer WhatsApp for updates, sign up to the BizNews channel here..By Kerry Lanaghan.In recent parliamentary and civil society discussions, Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) has come under renewed scrutiny—not merely as a policy of redress but increasingly as a potential economic burden. A series of exchanges between the Democratic Alliance’s (DA) Toby Chance, MP, and the South African Institute of Race Relations (IRR) sheds light on mounting concerns over BEE compliance’s financial and employment costs. These conversations paint a stark picture: that far from fostering broad-based empowerment, current BEE frameworks may be hindering foreign investment, job creation, and economic growth.The IRR’s letter, dated 19 March 2025, emphatically condemns BEE’s outcomes, citing the Starlink case as a cautionary tale. Elon Musk, the tech giant interested in launching high-speed satellite internet in South Africa, withdrew from the market due to ICASA’s BEE-related licensing conditions – specifically, the requirement to hand over 30% equity to black investors. According to the IRR, this case emulates a broader trend: potentially thousands of missed opportunities and untold investments lost to rigid compliance requirements.The Institute’s questions to MP Chance aim to quantify these costs. How many jobs have been lost? How much Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) has been turned away? Is there a government-held database of businesses that walked away due to BEE restrictions? Although Chance could not supply complex data – something he suggests should be the purview of the Department of Trade, Industry and Competition (DTIC) – his response was equally critical of BEE’s structure and implications.In his reply dated 2 April 2025, Chance reaffirms that South Africa needs policies promoting growth and job creation over redistribution. He argues that the ANC’s transformation model is a “zero-sum game” that redistributes limited existing wealth rather than fostering new economic opportunities. From his perspective, BEE perpetuates inequality by enriching a politically connected elite while stifling broader entrepreneurial participation.Chance accuses big businesses of complicity, having “gone along with BBBEE from the beginning,” enabling an environment where corporate compliance is prioritised over market competitiveness and innovation. He points to initiatives like the Black Industrialists Programme and proposals such as the Transformation Fund Concept – which asks multinationals to contribute 25% of their South African operations to fund black-owned businesses – as mechanisms that deter rather than attract FDI.This tension between compliance and competitiveness is a recurring theme in the debate. While some foreign firms, like Microsoft, have opted to make “equity equivalent” contributions to meet BEE requirements – committing over R1 billion to black-owned enterprises over a decade – Chance suggests such concessions resemble a form of economic expropriation and are unlikely to inspire confidence in potential investors.Moreover, both Chance and the IRR challenge the moral foundation of current race-based policies. They criticise the apartheid-era racial classifications embedded in BEE laws, particularly under new legislation such as the Public Procurement Act and the Employment Equity Amendment Act, which they argue impose additional financial burdens and bureaucratic overheads on business. These laws require companies to meet demographic targets and set-asides that they say do not reflect a liberal democratic ideal and, more importantly, fail to uplift the majority of disadvantaged South Africans.Both parties also lament the absence of comprehensive data tracking the policy’s economic impact. Without transparent records of missed investment opportunities or job losses attributable to BEE, it becomes challenging to weigh its actual cost, though anecdotal evidence and high-profile cases like Starlink suggest the losses are significant.In conclusion, while BEE was conceived as a tool for justice and inclusion, critics argue that its implementation has yielded exclusionary and economically damaging outcomes. The IRR and MP Chance exchange underscores a growing demand for policy reform grounded in measurable impact and inclusive economic participation – not just racial redress. For many, the time has come to ask not only what BEE aims to achieve but also at what cost it is being pursued.Read also:Leaked DA document exposes rift in GNU over Budget 2025, VAT hike and ANC power-sharing🔒 When Nixon courted China, he used diplomacy. Trump just throws tantrums: RW JohnsonFeeling rattled by the markets? Here’s what not to do

The staggering cost of BEE: Billions lost, opportunities squandered

Related Stories