All you need to know about South Africa’s land expropriation law

Last week, US President Donald Trump signed an executive order blocking aid to South Africa. This is a big problem as the US funds the world’s largest HIV treatment programme in South Africa, where more than eight million people suffer from AIDS.

The US fund 20 percent of South Africa’s $2.3 billion annual HIV-AIDS programme that help provide life-saving antiretroviral treatment to 5.5 million people every day.

But why has Trump done this?

This is the result of an escalation of a rift between his administration and the South Africans over a legislation passed last month.

According to Trump, the law showed a shocking disregard for citizens’ rights.

Taking to his social media platform, Truth Social, Trump said: “South Africa is confiscating land, and treating certain classes of people VERY BADLY. It is a bad situation that the Radical Left Media doesn’t want to so much as mention. A massive Human Rights VIOLATION is happening, for all to see. The United States won’t stand for it - We will act. Also, because of this, I will be cutting off all aid to South Africa until further notice!”

So what is this law?

The Expropriation Bill 2024 gives the South African government the authority to seize privately owned property against the owners' wishes, ostensibly to benefit the general public.

The law, which was passed on January 23, 2025 after five years of debate, is intended to address historical land inequalities in the country. A 2017 audit found that 72 percent of farmland was still owned by white South Africans. However, critics argue that the policy could deter foreign investment and harm property rights.

During the colonial and apartheid eras, laws such as the Natives Land Act of 1913 severely restricted Black South Africans from owning or leasing land. The result was widespread dispossession that concentrated land ownership in the hands of the white minority.

Three decades after the end of the apartheid system, most private farmland in South Africa is still owned by white South Africans, something that Ramaphosa and the ruling African National Congress (ANC) have sought to address. The new law, the government has emphasised, is a way to right historic wrongs.

South African President Cyril Ramaphosa took to X and explained: “The South African government has not confiscated any land. The recently adopted Expropriation Act is not a confiscation instrument, but a constitutionally mandated legal process that ensures public access to land in an equitable and just manner as guided by the constitution.”

“South Africa, like the United States of America and other countries, has always had expropriation laws that balance the need for public usage of land and the protection of rights of property owners. We look forward to engaging with the Trump administration over our land reform policy and issues of bilateral interest. We are certain that out of those engagements, we will share a better and common understanding over these matters.”

Deputy Public Works and Infrastructure Minister Sihle Zikalala described the bill as the culmination of a long struggle against land dispossession.

In an article titled 'Land seizure and South Africa’s new expropriation law: scholar weighs up the act', law professor Zsa-Zsa Temmers Boggenpoel explained that the new law governs the compulsory acquisition of private property by the state for public purposes or in the public interest. It aims to align expropriation procedures with the Constitution and provide clear guidelines on compensation.

She said “expropriation of property is a potential tool to reduce land inequality. This has become a matter of increasing urgency. South Africans have expressed impatience with the slow pace of land reform.”

So far, she said, expropriation has not been used effectively to redistribute land more equitably, as part of land reform. “I am not convinced that the act, in its current form, is the silver bullet to effect large-scale land reform – at least not the type of radical land reform that South Africa urgently needs,” said the law professor.

“Understandably, the act will have a severe impact on property rights. But it still substantially protects landowners affected by expropriation. Only in very limited cases would they not be compensated,” she said.

Section 12 of the legislation which deals with compensation, she said, is the most controversial as it has a provision on nil compensation.

Trump's narrative

Back in 2018, Trump claimed that South Africa had witnessed “large-scale killings” of white farmers. His administration even considered investigating these claims, despite statistics showing that such killings account for only a small fraction of South Africa’s annual murder rate.

The narrative of white genocide has been widely circulated in far-right circles but lacks factual basis. Overtime, Trump’s attacks on South Africa are in keeping with the narrative of white victimhood – something that his political movement has long relied on.

Members of his administration, also support him.

Tech mogul Elon Musk, who was born and raised in South Africa took to X and claimed that South African farmers were in "grave danger" following the bill’s approval. He also accused South African President Cyril Ramaphosa of implementing “openly racist ownership laws.”

The South African government has rejected Trump’s criticism of the new law, which it said is essentially aimed at addressing the disparities created by decades of apartheid and white minority rule in South Africa that was ended in 1994.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said he won’t be attending the G20 Summit in Johannesburg because of the law. Taking to X, he said: South Africa is doing very bad things. Expropriating private property. Using G20 to promote “solidarity, equality, & sustainability.” In other words: DEI and climate change. My job is to advance America’s national interests, not waste taxpayer money or coddle anti-Americanism.

South Africa, which holds the rotating presidency of the G20 bloc of 20 large economies, is hosting a meeting of the foreign ministers of the group on February 20-21.

US-South Africa relations

Beyond the land reform issue, Trump’s latest remarks on South Africa also stem from broader geopolitical tensions. South Africa has distanced itself from US foreign policy on several fronts, including its stance on Russia’s war in Ukraine and its genocide case against Israel at the International Court of Justice.

These moves have upset Washington, and Trump’s comments could be seen as part of a broader pressure campaign against South Africa's current government.

Economically, South Africa relies on US trade benefits under the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA), which gives preferential access to the US market for its exports. If Trump were to impose sanctions or remove South Africa from AGOA, it could significantly impact the country’s economy.