The accuracy of the official employment data provided by Stats SA has generated considerable debate in recent months. In this note, we highlight some anomalies in the official statistics and explore alternative proxy measures to estimate the extent of actual employment in South Africa.
We find an expanding gap between the credit-active consumer population and the official employment data. In March 2025, the credit-active consumer base exceeded the employed base by 12.1m, which should be worrisome as it could result in higher defaults. Yet, we note that credit quality has actually improved, which suggests that consumers have the means to service their rising appetite for debt.
We argue that the National Credit Regulator’s (NCR) credit data may be more accurate as it measures the whole market (compared to Stats SA’s sample of 30 000 households). Moreover, as credit providers are exposed to bad debt risk, their verification of credit applicants’ incomes may be more rigorous than the unverified responses of participants in the Stats SA QLFS survey. We think the social grant system may motivate under-reporting of employment by lower-income respondents in the QLFS surveys.
We offer estimates of likely employment using the credit data as a proxy. Our analysis suggests employment could be 4m to 6m higher than the official employed base of 16.8m. This would mean that the unemployment rate could be around 10-17%, depending on the level of non-economically active credit consumers.
Stats SA has announced that it will make some enhancements to its QLFS from 3Q25, but these are not expected to result in significant changes in the unemployment rates.
We conclude that the SA consumer may have enjoyed higher economic growth than reflected in the official employment statistics and additional measures could shed more light on consumer income. Banks could provide disclosure regarding their customers’ income activity, similar to how credit institutions report their customers’ credit activity to the NCR. This could provide valuable insights into household income, including the contribution of wages, grants, and informal sources.