South African Airways (SAA) is once again under the microscope, with the Auditor-General of South Africa (AGSA) warning that the national carrier could become insolvent within the next 12 months if it fails to fix its liquidity position. The warning, delivered on 21 April 2026 during a briefing to the Portfolio Committee on Transport, has sharpened concern around the airline’s fragile financial footing and the broader state of its turnaround.
AGSA senior audit manager Thato Kunene told MPs that SAA remains a going concern with significant material uncertainties, which is auditor language for a business whose ability to keep trading is under real pressure. For ordinary South Africans, that is not just a technical accounting concern. It means the airline still has to convince the market, creditors and government that it can pay its bills and keep aircraft in the sky without stumbling into a deeper crisis.
The latest warning lands after SAA and its subsidiary, SAA Technical, both received a disclaimer audit opinion for the 2024/25 financial year. In audit terms, that is the most severe opinion a public entity can receive. It means AGSA could not obtain enough reliable evidence to confirm that the financial statements were accurate, complete or trustworthy. Put simply, the auditors could not sign off on the numbers.
Even more troubling is that this was the seventh consecutive year SAA has been handed a disclaimer. That kind of pattern does not suggest a short-term accounting glitch. It points to persistent weaknesses in financial controls, reporting systems and governance. In a country where state-owned enterprises are already under intense scrutiny, the repetition alone will raise eyebrows in Parliament and among taxpayers.
There was, however, one small bright spot in the broader SAA group. Air Chefs, the airline’s catering arm, reportedly improved its audit outcome. According to AGSA, that improvement followed the implementation of an action plan and the appointment of stronger leadership. It is a reminder that parts of the group can improve when management is tightened and accountability is taken seriously.
Still, that progress is not enough to offset the pressure elsewhere in the business. Transport Minister Barbara Creecy told the Portfolio Committee that although SAA posted a profit in its latest financial results, that was largely driven by the sale of Heathrow Airport slots. Those are valuable take-off and landing rights, and selling them can bolster the balance sheet in the short term. But it is not the same as earning sustainable operating profit from the airline’s core business.
“While there was some improvement in passenger numbers and passenger revenue, I think we are still a long way from being a profitable entity,” Creecy said. That remark cuts to the heart of the issue. More passengers and more ticket sales help, but if costs continue to outstrip income, the airline remains stuck in a dangerous cycle.
AGSA also flagged a rise in irregular, fruitless and wasteful expenditure, worsened by what it described as weak consequence management. In plain language, the warning suggests that people are still able to make poor or improper decisions without serious disciplinary action following them. That is exactly the kind of environment that undermines public confidence and keeps state companies trapped in decline.
SAA insolvency warning deepens pressure on the airline’s leadership
The SAA insolvency warning comes at a moment when leadership turbulence at the airline is already making headlines. In April 2026, chief executive John Lamola announced that he would resign at the end of the month, citing personal reasons. His departure followed the resignation of three SAA board members, a development that has fuelled speculation about internal strain at the group.
Corporate governance specialist Khaya Sithole, director at Cors Consulting, said the resignations suggest more than routine churn. He argued that the departures point to deeper structural problems inside the airline, especially at a time when the outlook appears especially grim. As we reported earlier, leadership exits at state-owned companies often signal not just personal decisions, but mounting frustration over the scale of the challenge.
Sithole said that when a situation is as bleak as this, it is natural to suspect there have been casualties behind the scenes, even if those involved do not say so publicly. His view reflects a broader concern: that some leaders may have decided the institution’s problems were too severe to stay on and manage.
Lamola’s resignation came soon after the unexpected retirement of acting chief financial officer Lindsay Olitzki in late March, just two days before the financial year-end. Lamola maintained that Olitzki had reached the airline’s mandatory retirement age, but aviation analyst Guy Leitch argued that the timing only adds to the impression of instability at the top. When senior executives exit in quick succession, confidence in the company’s direction can quickly erode.
That uncertainty is not happening in a vacuum. SAA has spent years trying to rebuild after repeated crises, restructuring efforts and government-backed interventions. In February, the airline released results showing a net profit of R155 million and revenue of nearly R9 billion. On paper, that sounded like a step in the right direction.
But Leitch questioned whether the figures told the full story, arguing that operating costs were still likely higher than revenue, which would imply that the business was not truly profitable. He also highlighted that more than R1 billion in shares had been issued to the airline’s sole shareholder, the South African government, even though government insisted this did not amount to a bailout.
That debate matters because SAA’s financial narrative is still being tested by the public, the media and Parliament. A profitable headline number does not necessarily mean the business model has been fixed. If the airline is relying on asset sales, shareholder support or accounting adjustments to stay afloat, the underlying challenge remains unresolved.
The collapse of the proposed Takatso Consortium public-private partnership in 2024 left the state with 100% ownership of the airline, a position that has once again placed full responsibility for the carrier’s future on government. With that deal now off the table, the pressure is squarely on SAA’s current leadership and the state to prove that the airline can stand on its own.
For now, the message from AGSA is blunt: without a meaningful improvement in liquidity, South African Airways could be in serious danger within a year. For a national carrier that has already survived years of intervention, restructuring and controversy, that is a warning no one in Pretoria can afford to ignore.