President Cyril Ramaphosa has signed into law amendments to the Companies Act that force South Africa’s largest employers to publish how wide the gap runs between their best-paid executives and ordinary workers (News24). The presidential proclamation took immediate effect on 22 May 2026, activating remuneration rules that Parliament passed in 2024 but had not yet brought into force (Bowmans).

For a Hartbeespoort seamstress, a weekend market baker, or a one-person online reseller, the headline can sound alarming. It should not. The new regime targets public companies—including JSE-listed firms—and state-owned entities, not typical micro-enterprises or sole proprietors. What does travel down the high street is the culture behind the law: shoppers and clients increasingly expect businesses of every size to show who stands behind the counter, how to reach them, and what happens when something goes wrong.

What the new rules require—in plain language

Under sections 30A and 30B of the Companies Act, affected companies must prepare a forward-looking remuneration policy and an annual remuneration report (Bowmans). Shareholders vote on the policy at annual general meetings, and that vote is now binding rather than advisory for listed firms that already published similar reports under JSE listing rules (Bowmans).

The implementation report must spell out total remuneration for each director and prescribed officer, plus workforce-wide averages and medians, and a pay gap expressed as the ratio between the total remuneration of the top 5% of highest-paid employees and the bottom 5% of lowest-paid employees (Bowmans). Audited companies must also name individual directors and prescribed officers in remuneration disclosures within annual financial statements—a practice auditors and the Companies and Intellectual Property Commission had already pushed, but which is now explicit in statute (Bowmans).

If shareholders reject a remuneration report at two consecutive AGMs, non-executive directors on the remuneration committee may remain on the board but are barred from that committee for two years—a “two-strike” consequence designed to sharpen accountability (Bowmans).

Advocates for the change argue that South Africa—often described as among the world’s most unequal economies—needs visible pay data so the public can judge whether executive packages are reasonable (Labour Research Service). Independent researchers who tracked JSE top-40 chief executives before the law took effect found pay ratios running into the hundreds or thousands to one when measured against minimum-wage benchmarks, illustrating why disclosure became a political priority (Labour Research Service). News24 noted that South Africa has ranked among the world’s most economically unequal countries for more than three decades—a context in which pay-gap reporting is framed as a governance reform rather than a paperwork exercise (News24).

None of that obliges a neighbourhood tuck shop to publish a CEO-to-staffer ratio. The compliance burden sits with entities already subject to public-company governance, audited accounts, and shareholder scrutiny.

What independents can publish voluntarily—and why it matters

Transparency culture does not stop at the JSE. Customers who read about corporate pay gaps in the news still buy bread, book alterations, and order custom signage from people who are not listed anywhere. What they look for on a business website or social profile is practical honesty:

Who runs the shop. A named owner or accountable contact—on an About page or in the site footer—signals that a real person answers for the business. That is the micro-retail equivalent of naming directors in an annual report, without mimicking corporate disclosure schedules.

Where they operate. A physical address, service area, or registered office that matches the pin on a map listing reduces the “ghost business” anxiety that grows whenever big institutions look opaque.

How to escalate a complaint. A short note on who to email or call, expected response times, and whether disputes can go to an industry ombud or consumer body gives web buyers a path when something fails—similar in spirit to the grievance channels large firms must document for shareholders.

Pricing logic for custom work. For made-to-order goods—curtains, cakes, engraved gifts—a plain paragraph explaining deposits, measurement visits, revision limits, and final invoicing prevents the mistrust that secrecy breeds. You are not publishing salary tables; you are showing how a quote becomes a bill.

South African online sellers already face baseline disclosure duties under the Electronic Communications and Transactions Act, which requires suppliers to publish contact details and terms when transacting electronically (ECT Act section 43). Voluntary clarity above that minimum is a competitive choice, not a copy of listed-company remuneration reporting.

A POPIA reminder: transparency is not oversharing

Openness has limits. The Protection of Personal Information Act requires businesses that collect personal data—names, phone numbers, ID copies for credit checks—to tell customers what they collect, why, and who is responsible, typically before or when the information is gathered (POPIA section 18). A privacy notice belongs on the site; dumping staff ID numbers, home addresses, or customer files into public view would breach the same law transparency is meant to respect.

The practical rule for small traders: publish business contact paths and trading identity; keep personal identifiers of employees, suppliers, and customers on secure systems with consent-based processing. Transparency builds trust; careless data exposure destroys it.

The bar moves upward—even for firms outside the regime

Big-company pay disclosure will fill news pages and annual-report PDFs for seasons to come. Independent retailers will never file remuneration implementation reports—but their customers live in the same information climate. When listed firms must justify pay gaps to shareholders, shoppers quietly apply a related test to every invoice they pay online: Do I know who this is, and can I reach them if it goes wrong?

The shops that answer that question clearly on a simple website footer—owner name, registration hint where relevant, email that rings—are not complying with the Companies Act amendments. They are meeting a standard the headlines just made more visible.

References

• Pay gaps laid bare: Ramaphosa signs into law new rules for listed, state firms — News24
• South Africa: Companies Act amendments now in force — Remuneration disclosure and approval requirements — Bowmans
• New law will reveal South Africa's huge pay gaps — Labour Research Service
• ECT Act section 43: Information to be provided — Acts Online
• Protection of Personal Information Act 2013 section 18 — LawLibrary