Who will win the US election?

PJ Botha • November 4, 2024

2024 will be remembered as election year, with more people than ever before casting ballots worldwide.
The US elections on November 5th will be the most significant election.
It is the most significant since it will influence not just the future of the nation but also that of the entire world.

The following topics were covered in one of the fascinating discussions we had at the Ninety One Advisor Forum with Kevin Lings, Stanlib's economist as one of the speakers.

Who is going to win the election?
Although it depends on the poll you use, you can't always trust them because they are somewhat biased towards the reader demographic.
The website fivethirtyeight.com, which aggregates all the data, is a poll of polls.
According to this website the difference between Trump and Harris was as much as 3% in September which shrank to 0.9% on November 4.
Trump's side is gaining ground.
Harris has a slight advantage according to the polls, but momentum is on Trump’s side.

According to the polls, Clinton would have won the Trump vs. Clinton election. The explanation that was later offered was that there were many Trump fans who were also closet backers. 

You will have to support Trump if you are a betting man, and you look at the election odds.
Trump has a 53.3% chance of winning, while Harris has a 46.3% chance, according to electionbettingodds.com.

In the end, the most important question is whether the election outcome will matter.
The answer is a simple “ yes”. Most things will remain the same if Harris prevails, but if Trump wins there will be significant policy changes.
One of Trump's main campaign pledges, raising import tariffs, will have to be fulfilled if he wins.
He pledged that all Chinese imports would be subject to a 60% import tax on most goods and 100% on Chinese-imported electric vehicles. It now become clear why Elon Musk has suddenly become so interested in the campaign.
Increased import taxes of 10–20% will be applied to all other countries commodities and products, which will hurt South African exports.
Another possibility is that SA will be excluded from AGOA trade, which will have a negative impact on our exports. But it only accounts for 2.7% of total exports. The overall BRICS commerce in SA is seven times that of AGOA.
If this tariff hikes occur, how will China react?
They and all other countries will begin to take care of themselves. There will be more buzz surrounding BRICS and a new currency.

If the tariffs are implemented, everything will ultimately become more costly in the USA, which may lead to a second wave of inflation concerns. To counteract this, interest rates in the USA will need to be raised once more.

The US dollar and US stocks will likely rise if Trump wins, while US bonds will likely fall.
His policies, particularly those pertaining to immigration and imports, will benefit the US economy and job opportunities in the near future.
However, given the rising cost of goods and the reactions of other nations, we will have to wait and see whether it doesn't have a detrimental effect on them in the medium to long run.

Whoever wins will have an impact on the rest of the planet.

Jongmense wat Suid-Afrika verlaat

July 1, 2026
Dit is nou reeds etlike jare wat gesinne in Suid-Afrika blootgestel word aan emigrasie, (tydelik of permanent) na die buiteland. Daar is vele redes hiervoor: veiligheidskwessies, werkloosheid, beperkte beroepsgeleenthede en beter salarisse en lewensomstandighede elders. Hierdie tendens het verreikende implikasies vir die Suid-Afrikaanse ekonomie en vir die gesinne wat agterbly. Die statistieke oor emigrasie uit Suid-Afrika is nie altyd betroubaar nie. Ramings dui wel daarop dat miljoene Suid-Afrikaners in lande soos die Verenigde Koninkryk, Nieu-Seeland, Australië, Kanada en die VSA woon en werk. Die migrasie is nie net slegs meer deur professionele mense nie, maar ook ambagslui, landbouwerkers, tegnici en universiteitsgegradueerdes. Die grootste dryfveer is natuurlik die werkloosheidsvlakke in Suid-Afrika. Vir die ekonomie het hierdie uitvloei beide voordele en nadele. Die grootste nadeel is natuurlik die sogenaamde ‘breindrein’. Opgeleide jongmense verlaat die land en sodoende verloor ons waardevolle vaardighede, belasting betalers en toekomstige entrepreneurs en dit kan sodoende ekonomiese groei vertraag. Daarteenoor stuur baie emigrante geld terug na hul families in Suid-Afrika. Dit help met die finansies van plaaslike huishoudings. Ander keer terug met nuwe vaardighede, internasionale kontakte en kapitaal wat weer tot ekonomiese ontwikkeling kan bydra. Jong Suid-Afrikaanse mans wat in die VSA se landbousektor jaarliks gaan werk is ‘n interessante tendens. Hier is daar weerens nie betroubare statistieke nie, hoewel die ramings wel indrukke weergee. ‘n Artikel in die Landbouweekblad dui aan dat jong Suid-Afrikaanse boere reeds só gewild is dat hulle naas Mexico, die tweede grootste groep van seisoenale landbou-arbeid in die VSA verteenwoordig – en dit neem jaarliks toe. In 2023 was daar na raming reeds meer as 9,000 Suid-Afrikaanse boere werksaam in die VSA. Ramings oor verdienste is nie betroubaar nie, maar dui tog aan dat hierdie werkers jaarliks R1,2 miljard en selfs soveel as R5 miljard uit verdienste na Suid-Afrika terugbring. Die sosio-emosionele implikasies van hierdie migrasie is dikwels minder sigbaar, maar nie minder belangrik nie. Daar onstaan fisiese afstand tussen famililede en ouers sien hulle kinders minder gereeld. In baie gevalle ook tydelike afstand tussen huwelikmaats. Grootouers mis die geleentheid om by kleinkinders se lewens betrokke te wees en gesinsbyeenkomste word skaars. Vir baie jong emigrante bring die verhuising ook gevoelens van eensaamheid, kultuurskok en identiteitsverwarring mee.  Die uitdaging vir Suid-Afrika is om ‘n ekonomiese en sosiale omgewing te skep waarin jongmense nie noodwendig hoef te kies tussen professionele sukses en hulle verbondenheid aan hulle vaderland nie. Geksryf deur Koos van die Waterberge vir Bovest

Living Annuities and Divorce

By Ruvan J Grobler • June 30, 2026
A living annuity is a post-retirement income product available to South Africans who've exited a retirement fund — typically a pension, provident, preservation, or retirement annuity fund. Instead of taking the full benefit as a cash lump sum (subject to the usual tax-free and taxable limits), a retiring member can use some or all of the remaining capital to buy a living annuity from a registered long-term insurer. A traditional life annuity pays a guaranteed income for life in exchange for handing over the capital permanently. A living annuity works differently — more like a structured drawdown account. The contract sits with the insurer, not a fund, so once the policy is in place the member is no longer part of a retirement fund at all; the relationship becomes a contractual one between annuitant and insurer. The underlying investments also belong to the insurer rather than the annuitant, even though the annuitant chooses how the money is invested, usually from a range of unit trusts or similar portfolios on offer. Income is flexible, within limits — annuitants must draw between 2.5% and 17.5% of the remaining capital each year, reviewable annually. That flexibility is useful, but it cuts both ways: there's no pooling of longevity risk the way there is with a life annuity, so drawdowns that are too high, poor investment returns, or simply living longer than expected can deplete the capital. Whatever's left on the annuitant's death goes to the nominated beneficiaries on the policy. It doesn't form part of the deceased estate, and it isn't divided under intestate succession unless no beneficiary was nominated. It's this combination — contractual rather than fund-based, insurer-owned assets, flexible but unguaranteed income — that creates particular complications when a marriage ends in divorce. Living annuities vs "pension interest" It's worth separating a living annuity from "pension interest" as defined in the Pension Funds Act 24 of 1956. Since 1 September 2024, pension interest has meant a member's individual account or minimum individual reserve, calculated under the fund's own rules as at the date of the divorce order — this replaced the older definition that used to sit in the Divorce Act 70 of 1979. Timing is the key issue. Pension interest only exists while someone remains a member of a retirement fund. Once they retire and use the benefit to buy a living annuity, fund membership ends, and what they're left holding is a contractual right to annuity income — not a fund interest. A divorce order simply can't divide or assign a living annuity to a non-member spouse the way it can an active retirement fund benefit. What the Courts Have Said The Supreme Court of Appeal has dealt with this directly, in ST v CT 2018 (5) SA 479 (SCA) and again in Montanari v Montanari [2020] ZASCA 48. Both confirm that a living annuity is fundamentally contractual: the insurer owns the underlying assets, and the annuitant's entitlement is limited to drawing income within the permitted range, with anything left over going to nominated beneficiaries on death. That means a living annuity doesn't form part of the annuitant's estate for accrual purposes the way a share portfolio or property would, and because it isn't pension interest, it can't be divided through a divorce order either. Montanari did add a useful nuance, though: while the capital itself stays out of reach, the right to future annuity income can still count as an asset for accrual purposes. So the annuity can't be split, but its existence — and the income stream it represents — can still shape the overall settlement. That income is also relevant when maintenance is being worked out, which is reason enough to factor it into broader divorce planning. Why Valuation is Tricky The legal principles are reasonably settled at this point, but putting a number on the right to future annuity income is a different problem altogether — the courts haven't prescribed a methodology for it. The value depends on drawdown choices, investment performance, life expectancy, and inflation, none of which are fixed. Different actuaries working off the same annuity can land on meaningfully different figures, which makes negotiations harder and can leave clients with mismatched expectations going into a settlement. Conclusion The annuity itself can't be split or transferred, full stop — this is probably the most common misconception clients arrive with. That doesn't make it irrelevant, though: the right to future income can feed into the accrual calculation and into maintenance discussions. Valuation itself sits outside the scope of financial advice, so where a number is genuinely needed, referral to an independent actuary or other suitably qualified expert must be done. This article is for general informational purposes and does not constitute legal, financial, or actuarial advice. Ruvan J Grobler RFP™ (PGDip Financial Planning)