South Africa's Pandemic-Era Economic Intervention

1. Macroeconomic Context Prior to COVID-19

To rigorously evaluate the efficacy and design of the South African government's fiscal and monetary response to the COVID-19 pandemic, it is imperative to first reconstruct the macroeconomic architecture upon which these interventions were built. Unlike advanced economies (AEs) that entered the pandemic with relatively stable balance sheets, or high-growth emerging markets (EMs) that possessed counter-cyclical buffers, South Africa faced the exogenous shock of SARS-CoV-2 from a position of pronounced structural fragility and fiscal exhaustion. The period from 2009 to 2019 has been retrospectively characterized by economic historians as a "lost decade," defined by stagnant growth, deteriorating state capacity, and rapidly accumulating sovereign debt.¹

1.1 The Fiscal Deterioration (2009–2019)

The trajectory of South Africa’s public finances in the decade preceding the pandemic fundamentally constrained the state's ability to deploy a traditional Keynesian stimulus. Following the Global Financial Crisis (GFC) of 2008/2009, the South African government adopted a counter-cyclical fiscal stance intended to support aggregate demand during a temporary downturn. However, what was conceived as a temporary expansion calcified into a structural deficit.

Between 2008 and 2019, the public debt-to-GDP ratio more than doubled, rising from approximately 26% to 57%.¹ This accumulation was driven not by capital investment in productive infrastructure, which could have enhanced the economy's potential growth rate, but primarily by recurrent expenditure. The public sector wage bill grew significantly faster than inflation and GDP, crowding out other expenditure items. Concurrently, the expansion of the social wage—grants, free basic services, and education—while socially necessary to address South Africa’s extreme inequality, was not matched by a commensurate increase in tax revenue.¹

The revenue side of the fiscal equation was battered by the end of the commodities super-cycle, which had buoyed the fiscus in the early 2000s. As commodity prices moderated and domestic growth slowed to an average of less than 1.5% per annum, tax buoyancy collapsed. By the time the 2020 Budget Review was tabled in February 2020—mere weeks before the national lockdown—the National Treasury was already projecting a gross government debt increase to 71.6% of GDP by 2022/23, even without the pandemic shock.³ The deficit for the 2019/20 fiscal year had already breached 6%, and the primary balance had been in deficit since 2009.¹

1.2 The Sovereign Credit Rating Crisis

The erosion of fiscal sustainability culminated in a crisis of creditworthiness that coincided precisely with the onset of the pandemic. Throughout 2019, rating agencies had flagged the deteriorating debt metrics and the contingent liabilities posed by state-owned enterprises (SOEs), particularly the power utility Eskom, which required repeated fiscal bailouts to service its debt.⁴

On March 27, 2020, the first day of South Africa’s national "hard" lockdown, Moody’s Investors Service downgraded South Africa’s sovereign credit rating from Ba1 to Ba2, maintaining a negative outlook.⁵ This was a decisive moment in South African economic history. Moody’s was the last of the three major rating agencies (following S&P Global and Fitch) to hold South Africa at investment grade. The downgrade to sub-investment grade ("junk") triggered the country’s automatic exclusion from the FTSE World Government Bond Index (WGBI).⁶

The mechanics of this exclusion were brutal. Passive index-tracking funds, mandated to hold only investment-grade debt, were forced to sell South African government bonds (SAGBs) en masse. This resulted in a massive capital outflow at the precise moment global markets were experiencing a "flight to safety" due to the pandemic. The 10-year bond yield spiked from 8.66% in February 2020 to over 12% in March 2020, significantly increasing the cost of government borrowing.⁸

1.3 The Technical Recession

Economically, the country was already contracting before the virus arrived. South Africa entered 2020 in a technical recession, having recorded two consecutive quarters of negative growth in the latter half of 2019.⁹ Business confidence indices were at multi-year lows, and fixed capital formation was contracting. The unemployment rate stood at 30.1% in the first quarter of 2020.¹⁰

This context is essential for evaluating the R500 billion package. Unlike the United States or Germany, which could leverage strong balance sheets to finance massive deficits at near-zero interest rates, South Africa had to finance its relief efforts while paying a significant risk premium to bondholders and facing a contracting tax base. The Treasury’s warning in the 2020 Supplementary Budget was stark: the country was facing a sovereign debt crisis if it did not couple relief measures with immediate fiscal consolidation.³

2. Design of the R500 Billion Initiative

On April 21, 2020, President Cyril Ramaphosa announced a social relief and economic support package valued at R500 billion. The scale of the announcement was optically impressive, representing approximately 10% of GDP, placing it among the largest announced packages in the emerging market universe.¹¹ However, the architectural design of this package was complex, comprising a mix of actual expenditure, reprioritization of existing baselines, tax deferrals, and off-balance-sheet loan guarantees.

2.1 Component Breakdown and Classification

To understand the economic impact, one must disaggregate the headline figure into its functional components. The National Treasury provided a breakdown that distinguished between "new money" and liquidity support.

Table 1: Composition of the R500 Billion Relief Package

Component	Amount (R bn)	Mechanism	Economic Classification
Credit Guarantee Scheme	200.0	Loan guarantees via banks	Contingent Liability / Liquidity
Job Creation/Protection	100.0	Budget allocation	Fiscal Spending
Social Support (Grants)	50.0	Top-ups & SRD Grant	Direct Transfer
Tax Relief	70.0	PAYE & Provisional Tax deferrals	Liquidity (Temporary revenue forgone)
Wage Support (UIF)	40.0	TERS Payouts	Insurance Payout (Off-budget)
Health Response	20.0	PPE, frontline health services	Fiscal Spending
Municipal Support	20.0	Water, sanitation, shelter	Fiscal Spending
Total	500.0
11

2.2 The Mechanism of Reprioritization

A critical, and often misunderstood, aspect of the package was the extent to which it relied on the reprioritization of the existing 2020/21 budget rather than net new borrowing. The National Treasury, cognizant of the fiscal cliff described in Section 1, sought to fund the health and social response by slashing budgets elsewhere.

The 2020 Supplementary Budget revealed that approximately R130 billion of the package was funded by reprioritizing funds from existing departmental baselines.¹⁶ This involved:

• Suspension of Capital Projects: Infrastructure projects that could not be executed during lockdown were deferred, freeing up capital but delaying long-term development.

• Operational Cuts: Budgets for travel, subsistence, venue hire, and catering were slashed across national and provincial departments.¹⁷

• Provincial Conditional Grants: Funds allocated for provincial infrastructure and transport were redirected to the COVID-19 response.

This strategy had a dual macroeconomic effect. While it prevented an immediate explosion in the primary deficit, it dampened the fiscal multiplier. By taking money from one part of the economy (e.g., construction infrastructure) to fund another (e.g., consumption via grants), the net stimulative effect on aggregate demand was lower than if the spending had been entirely additive.¹⁸

2.3 The Loan Guarantee Scheme (LGS) Design

The single largest component of the package was the R200 billion Loan Guarantee Scheme (LGS), aimed at providing working capital to businesses with a turnover of less than R300 million.¹¹ The design was a partnership between the National Treasury, the South African Reserve Bank (SARB), and commercial banks via the Banking Association of South Africa (BASA).

The structure was complex:

1. Lending: Banks would lend to distressed clients at a concessional rate (Repo rate + 3.5%).

2. Guarantee: The government guaranteed the loans, but the risk was tiered. The first loss (up to 6%) was to be absorbed by the banks, with the Treasury covering losses thereafter.¹⁹

3. Limitations: The funds were ring-fenced for operational expenses like salaries and rent; they could not be used to pay dividends, service existing debt, or pay executive bonuses.²¹

This design reflected a "sovereign-bank nexus" approach, attempting to use the private sector's balance sheet to transmit relief. However, as analyzed later in Section 5, the retention of risk by banks (the "first loss" provision) created a misalignment of incentives that would prove fatal to the scheme’s uptake.

2.4 Tax and UIF Measures

The tax measures, valued at R70 billion, were primarily deferrals rather than cuts. Companies were allowed to delay the payment of 35% of their Pay-As-You-Earn (PAYE) liabilities and provisional tax payments.¹⁵ This provided immediate cash-flow relief (liquidity) but created a future liability for firms. Similarly, the Unemployment Insurance Fund (UIF) intervention—the Temporary Employer/Employee Relief Scheme (TERS)—was funded by the UIF's accumulated actuarial surplus, not by tax revenue.¹⁴ This distinction is crucial: TERS was an insurance payout from workers' own past contributions, not a government handout.

3. Monetary Policy and SARB’s Market Interventions

While the fiscal authority was constrained by the need for consolidation, the South African Reserve Bank (SARB) assumed a pivotal role in stabilizing the financial system. The central bank’s response was multipronged, utilizing interest rate instruments, regulatory relaxation, and direct market intervention.

3.1 Aggressive Interest Rate Reduction

The Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) acted with unprecedented speed. Between January and May 2020, the SARB cut the repurchase (repo) rate by a cumulative 275 basis points (bps), bringing the prime lending rate down to 7%, a multi-decade low.⁸

• January 2020: -25 bps.

• March 2020: -100 bps.

• April 2020: -100 bps.

• May 2020: -50 bps.

This aggressive easing was aimed at reducing the cost of capital for households and firms, thereby easing cash flow constraints. The SARB’s forecasting model indicated that the collapse in global demand and oil prices would suppress inflation, creating the space for accommodation despite the currency depreciation.¹⁰

3.2 Managing the Liquidity Crisis

The most critical intervention occurred in the "plumbing" of the financial system. In March 2020, the domestic financial markets froze. The combination of the WGBI exclusion (discussed in Section 1.2) and global risk aversion led to a liquidity crunch. Banks stopped lending to each other, and the market for government bonds became dysfunctional.

The SARB introduced a suite of liquidity management tools ²⁴:

• Standing Facilities: The borrowing rate at the standing facility was lowered to the repo rate less 200 bps (previously repo less 100 bps) to encourage banks to access central bank liquidity.

• Term Funding: The SARB introduced longer-term refinancing operations (LTROs) with maturities of up to 12 months, allowing banks to secure funding for longer periods.

• Basel III Relaxation: In conjunction with the Prudential Authority, the SARB relaxed capital and liquidity coverage ratios (LCR) to free up capital for lending.²⁵

3.3 The Bond Purchase Programme (BPP)

The most controversial and significant intervention was the decision to purchase government bonds (SAGBs) in the secondary market.

• The Trigger: In March 2020, the yield curve steepened dramatically. The 10-year yield surged 345 basis points in weeks.⁸ Bid-ask spreads on benchmark bonds widened from a normal 5-10 bps to over 100 bps, signaling that price discovery had broken down.²⁶

• The Intervention: The SARB began buying bonds across the maturity spectrum. The stated objective was strictly to restore "market functioning" and clear the clearing backlog, not to suppress yields to an artificial level or to finance the government deficit.²⁶

Market Impact: The intervention was highly effective. Analysis of intraday data shows that bond spreads tightened immediately upon the announcement and execution of purchases. By July 2020, bid-ask spreads had returned to near-normal levels of 4-6 bps.²⁶ The 10-year yield retraced approximately 283 basis points from its March peak by the end of June 2020.⁸ Crucially, the SARB managed to stabilize the market with a relatively small balance sheet expansion compared to global peers, purchasing roughly 1-1.5% of GDP in bonds.²⁶

4. Comparison with Quantitative Easing in Advanced Economies

A vigorous policy debate emerged within South African academic and financial circles regarding whether the SARB’s bond purchases constituted "Quantitative Easing" (QE). The distinction is not merely semantic; it holds profound implications for long-term inflation expectations and central bank independence.

4.1 The SARB’s Rejection of QE

The SARB leadership steadfastly rejected the label of QE. In a dedicated working paper and public communications, the central bank delineated the differences between its "Market Functioning" approach and the "Large Scale Asset Purchases" (LSAP) seen in the US, Europe, and Japan.²⁷

Key Distinctions:

1. The Zero Lower Bound (ZLB): In Advanced Economies (AEs), QE is typically deployed when the policy rate has reached 0% (the ZLB) and traditional monetary policy is exhausted. South Africa’s repo rate, even at its low of 3.5%, remained well above zero. The SARB argued that as long as it had room to cut rates, using the balance sheet for stimulus was unnecessary and inefficient.²⁷

2. Sterilization and Exit: QE programs in AEs often involve open-ended commitments to buy assets to expand the monetary base. The SARB’s purchases were discretionary, scaled according to market liquidity conditions, and wound down once spreads normalized. The bank did not target a specific yield level (Yield Curve Control), allowing the market to set the price of risk once liquidity returned.²⁶

3. Inflation Anchoring: The SARB highlighted the risk of "fiscal dominance." In an Emerging Market with a history of inflation volatility, a central bank financing the government deficit (monetization) risks unanchoring inflation expectations. If investors believe the central bank is keeping yields low to help the government borrow cheaply, they will demand a higher inflation risk premium, ironically leading to higher long-term yields.²⁸

4.2 Divergence from Emerging Market Peers

South Africa was not alone in this dilemma. Other EMs like Brazil, Chile, and Poland also launched bond-buying programs. However, the SARB’s approach was notably more conservative.

• Chile: The Central Bank of Chile implemented a program that transitioned from crisis intervention to QE, actively facilitating pension fund withdrawals and maintaining a stock of bonds.²⁶

• South Africa: The SARB maintained a steeper yield curve than pre-crisis levels, signalling to the market that it was not suppressing the term premium. This steepness served as a disciplining mechanism for the fiscal authority, maintaining the signal that long-term fiscal dynamics were unsustainable.²⁶

This conservatism helped preserve the SARB’s credibility. By refusing to engage in open-ended QE, the SARB avoided the currency collapse seen in countries like Turkey, where central bank independence was compromised.

5. Implementation and Execution Challenges

While the design of the R500 billion package was theoretically sound in parts, its implementation exposed significant state capacity deficits and misalignment of incentives between the public and private sectors.

5.1 The Failure of the Loan Guarantee Scheme (LGS)

The LGS was the linchpin of the business support strategy, intended to inject R200 billion of liquidity. Its failure was absolute. By June 2021, banks had disbursed only R18.39 billion—less than 10% of the allocated funds.²¹

Structural Causes of Failure:

1. Risk Aversion and Regulation: The "first loss" mechanism (banks taking the first 6% of losses) proved to be a fatal design flaw. In a deep recession, banks projected default rates well above 6%. Consequently, they applied standard credit criteria to LGS applications. The Prudential Authority explicitly instructed banks to maintain "sound risk management practices," preventing a relaxation of lending standards.¹⁹

2. Demand-Side Constraints: The National Treasury underestimated the "balance sheet recession" effect. Business owners, facing an uncertain future with no revenue, were rational in their refusal to take on more debt. They needed equity or grant support, not loans.¹⁹

3. Bureaucratic Friction: The application process was onerous. Banks, many of which had not fully digitized their SME lending processes, struggled to process applications remotely. By October 2020, only 2% of SMEs had accessed the scheme.³²

5.2 The Unemployment Insurance Fund (UIF) TERS

The TERS scheme was more successful in terms of disbursement volume, paying out over R60 billion to support millions of workers.¹⁴ However, the administrative burden was immense. The UIF’s systems, designed for individual claims, crashed under the volume of employer-side bulk applications.

Inequities in Distribution:

Data from the NIDS-CRAM survey (Waves 1-5) revealed significant gaps in coverage. While TERS protected formal sector jobs effectively, it completely missed the informal sector. Furthermore, payment delays meant that many workers went months without income during the hardest phase of the lockdown. By March 2021, TERS coverage had shrunk significantly due to stricter eligibility criteria, despite ongoing restrictions in sectors like tourism and hospitality.33

5.3 The Social Relief of Distress (SRD) Grant

The standout success of the package was the R350 SRD grant. Despite initial technical glitches (website crashes, verification delays), the grant reached over 6 million beneficiaries within months.¹² This represented the first time the South African state had provided direct income support to unemployed able-bodied adults, closing a massive gap in the social security net.³⁴

6. Corruption and Institutional Failure

The darker side of the R500 billion initiative was the extensive looting of emergency funds. The urgency of the pandemic was weaponized by corrupt networks to bypass procurement controls, leading to a phenomenon colloquially termed "COVID-preneurship."

6.1 Regulatory Enablers: Instruction Note 8

To speed up the acquisition of PPE, the National Treasury issued Instruction Note 8 of 2020. This regulation allowed accounting officers to deviate from competitive bidding processes for emergency procurement.³⁵ While the instruction still required price reasonableness and basic due diligence, in practice, it was interpreted by many officials as a "blank cheque."

The Auditor-General (AGSA) found that basic preventative controls were completely abandoned. Contracts were awarded to companies with no history in the medical sector (e.g., car washes, bakeries, and IT firms supplying masks). Tax compliance checks were ignored, and "local content" requirements were bypassed.¹⁶

6.2 The PPE Procurement Scandal

The Special Investigating Unit (SIU) launched extensive investigations into PPE contracts. By late 2021, the SIU was investigating 5,467 contracts worth R14.3 billion. Of these, 2,803 contracts (51%) were found to be irregular.³⁹

• Mechanism: The primary mechanism was price inflation. The SIU found instances where government entities paid 400% to 500% above the regulated prices for surgical masks and sanitizers.⁴⁰

• Case Study: KwaZulu-Natal Blankets: In the Department of Social Development in KZN, officials procured 48,000 blankets at inflated prices. The SIU found that the specifications were manipulated, and senior officials, including the acting DDG and CFO, were implicated in irregular expenditure of nearly R30 million.⁴²

6.3 The Digital Vibes Scandal

The most high-profile case involved the National Department of Health itself. A R150 million contract for National Health Insurance (NHI) and COVID-19 communications was awarded to Digital Vibes, a company controlled by close associates of the then-Minister of Health, Dr. Zweli Mkhize.⁴⁴

• Findings: The SIU found that the tender process was rigged. Digital Vibes was appointed without a competitive process, and the scope of work was irregularly expanded to include COVID-19 communications.

• Money Flow: The investigation revealed that Digital Vibes laundered the proceeds, purchasing vehicles and making cash payments to the Minister's family members.⁴⁵ This scandal ultimately led to the resignation of the Health Minister, dealing a severe blow to the government’s moral authority during the vaccine rollout.

7. Economic Effectiveness and Outcomes

Assessing the aggregate economic impact of the R500 billion package reveals a divergence between the humanitarian relief (which largely worked) and the economic stimulus (which largely failed).

7.1 GDP Contraction and Sectoral Impact

South Africa’s GDP contracted by 7.0% in 2020, the deepest recession since 1920.⁴⁷ This contraction was significantly deeper than the global average and the emerging market average.

• Sectoral Collapse: The construction, manufacturing, and transport sectors were decimated. Manufacturing contracted by 11.6% and transport by 14.8%.⁴⁸ The reprioritization of infrastructure spending (discussed in Section 2.2) exacerbated the decline in the construction sector, which relies heavily on government tenders.

• Inventory Drawdown: A significant portion of the contraction was driven by a massive drawdown in inventories, as firms sold existing stock to generate cash but did not produce new goods due to lockdown restrictions and demand uncertainty.⁴⁸

7.2 Employment and Insolvencies

The NIDS-CRAM survey provided high-frequency data on the labor market carnage. Between February and April 2020, approximately 3 million South Africans lost their jobs. While there was some recovery by October 2020, net employment remained significantly below pre-pandemic levels well into 2021.⁴⁹

• Inequality: The job losses were not distributed evenly. Women, manual laborers, and those with lower levels of education suffered disproportionately. The "K-shaped" recovery meant that while white-collar professionals worked from home, the working class faced destitution.⁵⁰

• Business Failure: Liquidations increased by 12.1% in the first eight months of 2021 compared to 2020.⁵¹ This lag indicates that while the TERS and tax deferrals kept firms alive on paper during 2020, the lack of genuine stimulus and the failure of the LGS led to their ultimate demise once support was withdrawn.

7.3 Comparative Effectiveness

When compared to global peers, South Africa’s response was constrained. Advanced economies spent an average of 6.6% of GDP in direct fiscal stimulus (excluding guarantees). South Africa’s direct fiscal stimulus was closer to 2-3% of GDP once reprioritization is accounted for.¹³ The Brookings Institution noted that in EMs like South Africa, high initial debt loads (the "fiscal overhang" discussed in Section 1) were the primary determinant of the small size of the response.⁵²

8. Credibility, Trust, and Market Perception

The crisis tested the credibility of South Africa’s key economic institutions. While the fiscal authorities struggled with implementation and corruption, the monetary authority emerged with its reputation enhanced.

8.1 Monetary Credibility

The SARB’s handling of the crisis was widely praised by international investors and multilateral institutions. By refusing to monetize the debt (QE) and maintaining positive real rates where possible, the SARB signaled its commitment to its inflation-targeting mandate.

• Market Signals: The return of the 10-year yield to single digits by 2021 (trading around 9% by mid-2021) and the stabilization of the Rand were attributed to the "credible monetary policy" and the central bank's independence.⁵³

• Foreign Flows: While foreign investors were net sellers of SAGBs in 2020 (foreign ownership dropped from ~37% to ~28%), the orderly functioning of the market prevented a "sudden stop" or balance of payments crisis.⁵⁴

8.2 The Erosion of the Social Compact

In contrast, the Executive’s credibility was severely damaged. The "social compact" between government, business, and labor—essential for the recovery strategy—frayed under the weight of the PPE corruption scandals. The Banking Association (BASA) explicitly cited "business and investor confidence in government and its ability to curb maladministration" as a key reason for the low uptake of the loan scheme.⁵⁵ Business owners did not trust the government’s recovery plans and therefore did not invest or borrow.

9. Long-Term Implications for South African Policy

The R500 billion initiative was not merely a temporary crisis response; it has fundamentally altered the trajectory of South African public policy.

9.1 From SRD to Basic Income Grant (BIG)

The most enduring legacy of the package is the SRD grant. Originally legislated for six months, it has been extended repeatedly and is now a fixture of the social landscape.

• Policy Shift: The successful rollout of the SRD grant proved that the state has the technical capacity to administer a Basic Income Grant. The debate has shifted from "can we do it?" to "how do we fund it?".³⁴

• Political Irreversibility: With over 8 million beneficiaries depending on the grant, removing it has become politically impossible. This has locked in a permanent expansion of the social welfare net, creating long-term pressure on the fiscus to find new revenue sources (e.g., VAT increases or wealth taxes).⁵⁷

9.2 The Limits of Fiscal Stimulus

The crisis underscored the limits of demand-side stimulus in an economy with structural supply-side constraints. The "multiplier" of the R500 billion was low because electricity shortages (load shedding) and logistics failures prevented firms from ramping up production to meet demand. Post-pandemic policy documents, such as the Economic Reconstruction and Recovery Plan (ERRP), increasingly reflect the realization that "new money" cannot solve structural problems. There is a renewed focus on structural reform (e.g., opening the energy grid to private generation) rather than just spending.¹¹

9.3 Procurement Reform

The abuse of the emergency procurement regulations has accelerated the overhaul of the public procurement regime. The Public Procurement Bill, currently under debate, incorporates many of the SIU’s recommendations regarding transparency, the barring of politically exposed persons (PEPs) from tenders, and the automation of supply chain management systems.⁵⁹

10. Conclusion

South Africa’s R500 billion COVID-19 relief package stands as a complex case study in the political economy of crisis management in an emerging market. It was a necessary "shield" that prevented a total humanitarian collapse, but it failed as a "stimulus" to ignite recovery.

The initiative’s successes were found in the expansion of the social safety net and the astute management of financial stability by the Reserve Bank. The SRD grant, in particular, prevented mass starvation and has irreversibly shifted the country toward a universal basic income paradigm. The SARB’s market interventions successfully defused a liquidity bomb without compromising long-term price stability or institutional independence.

However, the package’s failures were equally profound. The reliance on the private banking sector to transmit relief via the Loan Guarantee Scheme failed due to a misalignment of risk incentives, leaving the small business sector to wither. More damagingly, the rampant corruption in health procurement revealed a state apparatus deeply infiltrated by rent-seeking networks, squandering not just fiscal resources but the public trust essential for a unified national effort.

Ultimately, the R500 billion package revealed the stark reality of South Africa’s "fiscal cliff." Without the fiscal space to spend largely, the state relied on guarantees and reprioritization, mechanisms that proved insufficient to counter the depth of the recession. The legacy of 2020 is a country with a permanently higher debt burden, a permanently expanded welfare state, and a renewed, desperate urgency for the structural reforms required to generate the growth to pay for both.

Works cited

1. South Africa's Fiscal Framework: Challenges and Options for Reform; IMF Selected Issues Paper No. 2025/024, accessed January 1, 2026, https://www.imf.org/-/media/files/publications/selected-issues-papers/2025/english/sipea2025024.pdf

2. South Africa's Fiscal Framework – Challenges and Options for Reform in - IMF eLibrary, accessed January 1, 2026, https://www.elibrary.imf.org/view/journals/018/2025/024/article-A001-en.xml

3. Fiscal outlook: taking action to stabilise public debt - National Treasury, accessed January 1, 2026, https://www.treasury.gov.za/documents/national%20budget/2020S/review/Chapter%204.pdf

4. South Africa's credit outlook - PSG Wealth, accessed January 1, 2026, https://download.psg.co.za/files/wealth/special-reports/Moodys-March-2020.pdf

5. MEDIA STATEMENT - National Treasury, accessed January 1, 2026, https://www.treasury.gov.za/comm_media/press/2020/20201121%20Media%20Statement%20-%20Response%20to%20Ratings%20Agencies.pdf

6. Moody's Downgrade - What Does This Mean for South Africa?, accessed January 1, 2026, https://www.nfb.co.za/knowledge/articles/knowledge-detail/2020/03/30/what-the-moody-s-downgrade-means-for-south-africa

7. Monetary and fiscal policy interactions in the wake of the Covid-19 pandemic - Bank for International Settlements, accessed January 1, 2026, https://www.bis.org/publ/bppdf/bispap122_v.pdf

8. 02 Quarterly Economic Review - South African Reserve Bank, accessed January 1, 2026, https://www.resbank.co.za/content/dam/sarb/publications/quarterly-bulletins/quarterly-bulletin-publications/2020/10091/02Quarterly-Economic-Review.pdf

9. 2021 Investment Climate Statements: South Africa - State Department, accessed January 1, 2026, https://www.state.gov/reports/2021-investment-climate-statements/south-africa

10. The R500 Billion Stimulus Package is One of the Largest Economic Response Packages in the Developing World – Tito Mboweni - Parliament of South Africa, accessed January 1, 2026, https://www.parliament.gov.za/news/r500-billion-stimulus-package-one-largest-economic-response-packages-developing-world-tito-mboweni

11. President Cyril Ramaphosa: Additional Coronavirus COVID-19 economic and social relief measures | South African Government, accessed January 1, 2026, https://www.gov.za/news/media-statements/president-cyril-ramaphosa-additional-coronavirus-covid-19-economic-and-social

12. COVID-19: SA announces R500bn stimulus package; about 10% of GDP - CNBC Africa, accessed January 1, 2026, https://www.cnbcafrica.com/2020/covid-19-sa-announces-r500bn-stimulus-package-about-10-of-gdp

13. Fiscal response to the COVID‐19 crisis in advanced and emerging market economies, accessed January 1, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8441804/

14. EXPLANATORY NOTE ON COVID-19 RELATED ... - National Treasury, accessed January 1, 2026, https://www.treasury.gov.za/statistics/Quarterly%20spending%20data/COVID19/Note%20on%20Covid-19%20Spending%202020-21.pdf

15. NATIONAL TREASURY, accessed January 1, 2026, https://www.treasury.gov.za/comm_media/press/2020/20200428_COVID_Economic_Response_final.pdf

16. Auditor-general says the multi-billion rand Covid-19 relief package landed in an environment with many control weaknesses, accessed January 1, 2026, https://www.agsa.co.za/Portals/0/Reports/Special%20Reports/Covid-19%20Special%20report/2020%20Covid-19%20Media%20Release%20FINALISED.pdf

17. Supplementary Budget Review 2020 - National Treasury, accessed January 1, 2026, https://www.treasury.gov.za/documents/national%20budget/2020s/review/fullsbr.pdf

18. A FISCAL STIMULUS FOR SOUTH AFRICA - Institute For Economic Justice, accessed January 1, 2026, https://iej.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/A-fiscal-stimulus-for-South-Africa-Final-IEJ.pdf

19. COVID-19 Loan Guarantee Scheme: Treasury, BASA & SARB Input | PMG, accessed January 1, 2026, https://pmg.org.za/committee-meeting/30954/

20. All That Glitters Is Not Gold: The Slow Uptake of The Covid-19 Loan Guarantee Scheme in South Africa, accessed January 1, 2026, https://www.polity.org.za/article/all-that-glitters-is-not-gold-the-slow-uptake-of-the-covid-19-loan-guarantee-scheme-in-south-africa-2020-09-16

21. CREDIT GUARANTEE SCHEMES: FACILITATING MSME FINANCING IN AFRICA DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC - Alliance for Financial Inclusion (AFI), accessed January 1, 2026, https://www.afi-global.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Credit-Guarantee-Schemes-Facilitating-MSME-Financing-in-Africa-during-the-COVID-19-Pandemic_070322.pdf

22. Covid-19 Loan Guarantee Scheme: bridging the gap or widening the divide? - Moneyweb, accessed January 1, 2026, https://www.moneyweb.co.za/financial-advisor-views/covid-19-loan-guarantee-scheme-bridging-the-gap-or-widening-the-divide/

23. 04 Note on South Africas liquidity measures in response to the COVID 19 pandemic, accessed January 1, 2026, https://www.resbank.co.za/content/dam/sarb/publications/quarterly-bulletins/quarterly-bulletin-publications/2020/10091/04Note-on-South-Africas-liquidity-measures-in-response-to-the-COVID-19-pandemic.pdf

24. 01 Full Quarterly Bulletin June 2020 - South African Reserve Bank, accessed January 1, 2026, https://www.resbank.co.za/content/dam/sarb/publications/quarterly-bulletins/quarterly-bulletin-publications/2020/10091/01Full-Quarterly-Bulletin---June-2020.pdf

25. Lessons from the Covid-19 pandemic in South Africa - South African ..., accessed January 1, 2026, https://www.resbank.co.za/content/dam/sarb/what-we-do/financial-stability/Lessons%20from%20the%20Covid-19%20pandemic%20in%20South%20Africa.pdf

26. EMDE Central Bank Interventions during COVID-19 to Support Market Functioning in - IMF eLibrary, accessed January 1, 2026, https://www.elibrary.imf.org/view/journals/001/2024/101/article-A001-en.xml

27. The bond market impact of the South African Reserve Bank bond purchase programme, accessed January 1, 2026, https://www.resbank.co.za/content/dam/sarb/publications/working-papers/2022/WP%202203.pdf

28. Not so easy: why quantitative easing is inappropriate for South Africa, accessed January 1, 2026, https://www.resbank.co.za/content/dam/sarb/publications/working-papers/2022/WP%202205.pdf

29. The bond market impact of the South African Reserve Bank bond purchase programme, accessed January 1, 2026, https://ideas.repec.org/a/rza/ersawp/vy2022iid38.html

30. FINANCIAL STABILITY REVIEW - South African Reserve Bank, accessed January 1, 2026, https://www.resbank.co.za/content/dam/sarb/publications/reviews/finstab-review/2020/9956/FSRMay2020.pdf

31. Brief on Business Bounce-back Support and the Credit Loan Guarantee Schemes for Small, Micro and Medium Enterprises (SMMEs), accessed January 1, 2026, https://www.parliament.gov.za/storage/app/media/PBO/Analysis_and_Reports/2022/3-june/30-06-2022/PBO_Briefing_Business_Bounce_back_Support_and_the_Credit_Loan_Guarantee_Schemes_SMMEs_1.pdf

32. A credit lifeline: How banks can serve SMEs in South Africa better - McKinsey, accessed January 1, 2026, https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/middle-east-and-africa/a-credit-lifeline-how-banks-can-serve-smes-in-south-africa-better

33. The distribution and dynamics of South Africa's TERS policy: Results from NIDS-CRAM Waves 1 to 5, accessed January 1, 2026, https://cramsurvey.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/7.-Kohler-T-_-Hill-R.-2021.-The-distribution-and-dynamics-of-South-Africa%E2%80%99s-TERS-policy-Results-from-NIDS-CRAM-WAves-1-to-5.pdf

34. Has basic income finally arrived in South Africa? - Institute of Development Studies, accessed January 1, 2026, https://www.ids.ac.uk/opinions/has-basic-income-finally-arrived-in-south-africa/

35. National Treasury Instruction No. 8 of 2019/2020 - SAICA, accessed January 1, 2026, https://www.saica.org.za/resources/85535/

36. MEDIA STATEMENT COVID-19 INSTRUCTION NOTE - Public Procurement International, accessed January 1, 2026, https://publicprocurementinternational.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/20200319-Media-statement-COVID-19-Procurement-Instruction-Note.pdf

37. Emergency procurement in response to National State of Disaster, accessed January 1, 2026, https://www.treasury.gov.za/comm_media/press/2020/Instruction%205.pdf

38. Auditor-general reports significant faults in procurement and contract management processes of covid-19 relief package, accessed January 1, 2026, https://www.agsa.co.za/Portals/0/Reports/Special%20Reports/Covid-19%20Special%20report/2020%202nd%20Covid-19%20Media%20Release%20FINALISEDFN.pdf

39. SIU Annual Report - Parliamentary Monitoring Group, accessed January 1, 2026, https://pmg.org.za/files/SIU_Annual_Report_Tabling.pdf

40. Service providers ordered to pay back profits earned from irregular PPE contracts awarded by KZN Social Development worth R21 million, accessed January 1, 2026, https://www.siu.org.za/service-providers-ordered-to-pay-back-profits-earned-from-irregular-ppe-contracts-awarded-by-kzn-social-development-worth-r21-million/

41. Clear signs of overpricing, unfair processes, potential fraud in PPE tenders - AG report reveals, accessed January 1, 2026, https://www.polity.org.za/article/clear-signs-of-overpricing-unfair-processes-potential-fraud-in-ppe-tenders---ag-report-reveals-2020-09-02

42. Premier Sihle Zikalala: Forensic investigations into alleged irregular procurement of Personal Protective Equipment and blankets | South African Government, accessed January 1, 2026, https://www.gov.za/news/speeches/premier-sihle-zikalala-forensic-investigations-alleged-irregular-procurement-personal

43. Senior KZN government officials suspended over PPE and blanket tenders - YouTube, accessed January 1, 2026, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l5_6Eu7FpnQ

44. Department's Response To Siu Digital Vibes Report; With Minister & Deputy Minister | PMG, accessed January 1, 2026, https://pmg.org.za/page/Department%E2%80%99s%20response%20to%20SIU%20Digital%20Vibes%20Report;%20with%20Minister%20&%20Deputy%20Minister

45. Summary of the SIU's report into the R150 million Digital Vibes Scandal - Ncino KYC Africa, accessed January 1, 2026, https://blog.kycafrica.ncino.com/digital-vibes

46. Anatomy of a 'rigged' contract: Digital Vibes tender deeply flawed, unlawful and invalid, says SIU - Daily Maverick, accessed January 1, 2026, https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2021-07-25-anatomy-of-a-rigged-contract-digital-vibes-tender-deeply-flawed-unlawful-and-invalid-says-siu/

47. GDP: Quantifying SA's economic performance in 2020 | Statistics South Africa, accessed January 1, 2026, https://www.statssa.gov.za/?p=14074

48. Gross domestic product - Statistics South Africa, accessed January 1, 2026, https://www.statssa.gov.za/publications/P0441/P04414thQuarter2020.pdf

49. Labour Market Dynamics in South Africa at the Onset of the COVID‐19 Pandemic - PMC, accessed January 1, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8014306/

50. Reports - Nids-Cram, accessed January 1, 2026, https://cramsurvey.org/reports/

51. P0043 Liquidations and insolvencies July 2021 - Statistics South Africa, accessed January 1, 2026, https://www.statssa.gov.za/publications/P0043/P0043August2021.pdf

52. The fiscal policy response to the pandemic - Brookings Institution, accessed January 1, 2026, https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-fiscal-policy-response-to-the-pandemic/

53. South Africa 10-Year Bond Yield at 2021-Lows - Trading Economics, accessed January 1, 2026, https://tradingeconomics.com/south-africa/government-bond-yield/news/498227

54. Second Edition 2022 Financial Stability Review - South African Reserve Bank, accessed January 1, 2026, https://www.resbank.co.za/content/dam/sarb/publications/reviews/finstab-review/2022/financial-stability-review/second-edition-2022-financial-stability-review-/FSR%20November%202022%202nd%20Edition.pdf

55. BASA Islamic Finance Conference: Opening statement - The Banking Association South Africa, accessed January 1, 2026, https://www.banking.org.za/news/islamic-finance-conference-statement/

56. THE STRUGGLE FOR BASIC INCOME IN SOUTH AFRICA - Institute For Economic Justice, accessed January 1, 2026, https://www.iej.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/BIEN-Congress-The-struggle-for-Basic-Income.pdf

57. Basic Income Grant: What is the debate about? - GroundUp, accessed January 1, 2026, https://groundup.org.za/article/basic-income-grant-what-is-being-said-about-it/

58. UBIC Statement | Uncertainty over SRD Grant's Future as Clock Ticks for Beneficiaries, accessed January 1, 2026, https://iej.org.za/ubic-statement-uncertainty-over-srdgrants-future/

SIU progress report on COVID-19 PPE procurement investigations; Digital Vibes investigation | PMG - Parliamentary Monitoring Group, accessed January 1, 2026, https://pmg.org.za/committee-meeting/34038/