Ninety days of work: the section 11(2) visa and project mobility

Every year, engineers, technicians, trainers and specialists fly into South Africa to commission equipment, repair a turbine, train a team or rescue a project that has fallen behind. Most stay for weeks rather than years. The legal instrument that allows them to do so is not a work visa at all. It is a visitor's visa with an authorisation to work, issued under section 11(2) of the Immigration Act. It is one of the most heavily used and least understood instruments in South African immigration practice. This commentary explains what it permits, where its limits lie, and why it is so often used for work it was not designed to cover.

The provision

Section 11(2) begins with a prohibition: the holder of a visitor's visa may not conduct work. A proviso then allows the Director-General to authorise the holder of a visitor's visa under section 11(1)(a), or of certain longer visitor's visas, to conduct work in the prescribed manner and on prescribed conditions.¹ The definition of "work" in section 1 is wide. It includes activity normally associated with running a business, or consistent with employment or a profession, whether or not the person is paid.² A visit that involves productive activity therefore needs authorisation, even where the visitor is paid entirely abroad.

The detail is in regulation 11(7) of the Immigration Regulations, 2014. The applicant must explain the purpose or necessity of the work, its nature, the qualifications and skills required, its duration and place, the length of the visit and the remuneration, and must give the employer's or host's details. Conditions may be imposed, and the authorisation is endorsed on the visa. It cannot extend beyond the validity of the underlying visitor's visa.³

How long, and how often

Section 11(1)(a) limits a visitor's visa to three months, which the Director-General may renew once for up to a further three months. South African missions issue section 11(2) authorisations for up to 90 days. They permit one in-country extension of up to three months per calendar year, and do not accept back-to-back applications.⁴ These limits derive largely from a 2019 Department of Home Affairs directive. When an extension is considered, the Department checks that the person will not spend more than 180 days in South Africa in the calendar year.⁵

Mission guidance is not entirely consistent. At least one mission describes the annual limit as 90 days, while others refer to 180 days.⁶ The 180-day reading has the stronger support. What is consistent across all of them is the purpose: the authorisation is for short-term or urgent work, not for regular, ongoing activity.

Section 11(2) is a bridge for urgent work, not a substitute for a work visa.

The authorisation must come before travel

Two practical points catch employers out. First, the authorisation must generally be obtained from a South African mission before travel. Mission guidance states that it cannot be granted at a port of entry without a letter from the Director-General.⁷ Second, this applies to nationals of visa-exempt countries too. A British or German engineer who may enter South Africa as a tourist without a visa still needs a section 11(2) visa before arriving to work.⁸ In practice the Department requires the first authorisation to be obtained from a mission abroad; only extensions are accepted in South Africa.

What counts as work

The Act does not draw a line between business activity and work. Commentators generally treat meetings, conferences, site visits and signing contracts as ordinary business activity that does not need authorisation, but treat training, auditing, consulting and hands-on technical work as work.⁹ That guidance is sensible, but it is commentary, not law.

The contrast with other systems is instructive. The United Kingdom's immigration rules contain a detailed list of activities that business visitors may carry out, including some intra-group advice, consulting and training.¹⁰ In the United States, the B-1 business visitor may negotiate contracts, consult associates and attend conferences, and may install or repair equipment only in limited circumstances and without a US salary.¹¹ South Africa has no equivalent list. The breadth of the definition of "work", combined with the absence of a list, means that many visits fall into a grey area where the safest course is to obtain authorisation.

Mission guidance also excludes some categories from the visa. One mission lists freelancers, contract workers, project managers and seasonal workers among those who cannot use it.¹² That sits uneasily with the common practice of using section 11(2) for project rotations, and it shows how much depends on the mission and the way the work is described.

Remuneration and tax

The regulation requires proof of remuneration from the employer. It does not say that the worker must be paid from abroad, although most missions expect evidence of remuneration from the foreign employer.¹³ Tax is a separate question. A non-resident who works in South Africa is generally taxable on that income unless a double tax agreement applies. Under most treaties, relief requires all three conditions to be met: no more than 183 days in South Africa in the relevant 12-month period or tax year, an employer that is not resident in South Africa, and remuneration not borne by a South African permanent establishment.¹⁴ Repeated rotations, or costs recharged to the South African host, can remove that relief even where the immigration position is in order.

Enforcement and risk

The consequences of getting it wrong fall on both sides. Section 38 of the Act prohibits employing a foreigner whose status does not authorise the work, or on terms outside that status. Under section 49(3), knowingly employing an illegal foreigner or a foreigner in breach of their status is an offence, with penalties that rise for repeat convictions to imprisonment of up to five years without the option of a fine.¹⁵ The individual who overstays, or breaches the conditions of the visa, risks being declared undesirable and barred from returning for a period.

The High Court has described section 11(2) as conferring a discretion on the Director-General. In RP Africa Fleet Services (Pty) Ltd v Minister of Home Affairs [2022] ZAGPPHC 430, a full bench noted that foreign truck drivers on visitor's visas had been arrested for working without section 11(2) authorisation, a reminder that enforcement is real.¹⁶

How it differs from the remote work visa

Since October 2024 South Africa has offered a remote work visa for people employed by a foreign employer, with an income threshold of about R650,976 a year.¹⁷ It is sometimes confused with section 11(2), but the two serve different purposes. The remote work visa is for people who continue to work for a foreign employer while living in South Africa. Section 11(2) is for work delivered in South Africa, usually to a South African host or client. The remote work visa does not authorise local project work.

Practical guidance for employers

• Apply before travel, even for visa-exempt nationals. Build mission processing time into the project plan.
• Describe the work accurately. The host and employer letters define the authorisation. Work outside their scope can breach the visa's conditions.
• Plan for the annual limits. Rotations that keep the same person in the country for most of the year are likely to be refused or challenged. Use a work visa for long-running roles.
• Check tax alongside immigration. Track days in South Africa and how costs are charged. Immigration compliance does not guarantee tax relief.
• Keep records. Employers must make good-faith checks of a foreign worker's status and keep records.

Conclusion

Section 11(2) is a valuable instrument. It allows skilled people to be in South Africa for the short periods when they are most needed, without the time and cost of a full work visa. Its weakness is that it rests on a broad definition of work, a thin set of regulations and mission guidance that varies from one embassy to the next. A short list of permitted business activities, and clear published rules on duration and repeat visits, would give employers the certainty that other systems already offer. Until then, the safest assumption is that anything resembling productive work needs authorisation, and that the authorisation is for urgent, time-limited work only.