PowerBall draw jackpot at R71 million on Tuesday, 15 July
An estimated R71 million is up for grabs in the PowerBall draw, while the PowerBall Plus jackpot is sitting at approximately R9 million.
The company reminded hopeful entrants: 'To win, you need to play.'
Tickets can be purchased at authorised retailers or via digital platforms.
The draw offers not only the thrill of the game, but also the possibility of turning ordinary South Africans into instant millionaires.
Good luck!
Buy your tickets now at your nearest participating retailer, on our website by visiting national lottery.co.za using your computer or mobile site, via the National Lottery Mobile App, or participating banks, namely FNB, ABSA, Nedbank, Standard Bank, Capitec, TymeBank and African Bank otherwise dial 120 7529# for USSD.
Winners who win R50 000 and above receive free trauma counselling from professional psychologists and financial advice from accredited financial advisors absolutely free. At the same time, winnings are paid tax-free directly into the winner's accounts.
The next PowerBall and PowerBall Plus draws will take place on Tuesday, 15 July from 20:58.
The PowerBall jackpot draw required players to pick five main numbers from 1 to 50 and one 'PowerBall' number from 1 to 20 for an entry fee of R5.00 per board.
Draws take place every Tuesday and Friday.
The record prize for any lottery game in South Africa came in the PowerBall when one winner scooped an incredible R232 131 750.69 in the draw held on 19 February 2019.
PowerBall Plus is exactly the same as PowerBall but gives players a second chance to win.
When buying a PowerBall ticket, players can pay an extra R2.50 per board to enter the PowerBall Plus draw.
Odds are the same, while prizes are usually slightly lower.
It was introduced on 28 November 2015 by the National Lottery of South Africa.
If you are buying tickets from a lottery outlet, they close at 20:30 on the day of a draw.
Players must be 18 years old.
Monday: Daily Lotto
Tuesday: Daily Lotto + PowerBall and PowerBall Plus
Wednesday: Daily Lotto + Lotto, Lotto Plus 1 and Lotto Plus 2
Thursday: Daily Lotto
Friday: Daily Lotto + PowerBall and PowerBall Plus
Saturday: Daily Lotto + Lotto, Lotto Plus 1 and Lotto Plus 2
Sunday: Daily Lotto
For more details and to verify the winning PowerBall and PowerBall Plus numbers, visit the National Lottery website.
You must always confirm the official winning numbers on the National Lottery website. We do our best to post the results as accurately as possible, but the National Lottery is the only source you can use to 100% verify the results.
Let us know by leaving a comment below, or send a WhatsApp to 060 011 021 1
Subscribe to The South African website's newsletters and follow us on WhatsApp, Facebook, X and Bluesky for the latest news.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Star
8 hours ago
- The Star
Ramaphosa slams infrastructure budget underspending as 'treason' against South Africans
Mayibongwe Maqhina | Published 2 weeks ago The failure by provinces and municipalities to spend infrastructure budgets has been described by President Cyril Ramaphosa as treason against South Africans. "The issue of underspending is quite an important issue, particularly when it comes to spending on infrastructure allocations such as housing, education, water, and roads. "I actually often characterise it as treason against the people of South Africa when monies that had been allocated are not spent and are returned to the National Treasury," Ramaphosa said. He was responding during a question-and-answer session in the National Council of Provinces in Cape Town, on Wednesday. ANC MP Kenny Mmoiemaang had enquired about whether the government has assessed the impact of inadequate spending by provinces and municipalities on their commitments to deliver quality and essential services to communities, particularly crucial infrastructure such as housing, schools, and roads. Mmoiemang also wanted to know whether the government has been engaging provinces and municipalities that continue to underspend and fail to adequately utilise their allocated service delivery budgets. In his response, Ramaphosa said inadequate or slow capital expenditure has, in many ways, hampered the delivery of services that are due to the people. "This results in delays in housing delivery, stalled infrastructure projects such as schools, water, as well as sanitation and waste management infrastructure projects." He blamed the inability of municipalities to spend their capital projects on poor management, poor planning, weak implementation capacity, and inadequate financial and supply chain management. Ramaphosa said there were interventions in place, such as the budget monitoring forums coordinated by the National Treasury to track in-year spending and detect low expenditure patterns at an early stage, and support programmes by the Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs ( Cogta) Ministry. There were also capacity-building programmes that were organised by the Municipal Infrastructure Support Agency, and the Cabinet has appointed an inter-ministerial committee to support distressed municipalities. Ramaphosa added that Operation Vulindlela is implementing reforms to strengthen local government, and dedicated groups have been established in eThekwini and the City of Johannesburg to address challenges with water and electricity infrastructure. "This innovative initiative is going to see great changes being introduced. These measures will help address the root causes of underspending and ensure infrastructure is maintained and expanded to improve service delivery." Asked about mechanisms to ensure consequence management for failure to spend on infrastructure allocations, Ramaphosa said the Auditor-General has highlighted the lack of consequence management when both elected and employed officials were unable to meet their obligations. "It is a matter we are addressing, particularly as we now move to professionalise the public service. That does not absolve the elected officials or representatives," he said. Cape Argus
IOL News
9 hours ago
- IOL News
Ethics in the grey zone: governing conflicts of interest with courage
Though the award process to Sizekhaya Holdings may have complied with legal requirements, the absence of visible and transparent disclosures around these relationships undermined trust. In governance, perception matters. Poor or absent disclosure damages legitimacy, even without legal fault. Image: Cape Argus By Nqobani Mzizi In governance, few terms provoke as much unease as "conflict of interest". It conjures images of overt corruption, self-dealing and backroom deals. Yet in many boardrooms, the more dangerous form is covert and subtle. It emerges not through criminality but convenience, not through law-breaking but ethical lapses that thrive in silence and passivity. These are the conflicts that live in the grey zone. We often associate conflicts of interest with clear-cut wrongdoing: a director awarding a tender to their own company, a regulator sitting on a board they're meant to oversee. But many conflicts are more nuanced. They live in assumptions we don't question, relationships we don't declare, and benefits we don't probe. Often, they hide in plain sight: in annual declaration forms submitted as routine or meeting registers listing interests without discussion or follow-up. These processes, meant to enable transparency, become hollow rituals without meaningful engagement and ethical reflection. Grey-zone conflicts are not always compliance failures; they are ethical blind spots where governance falters under silence, ambiguity, or convenience. They are technically compliant but ethically compromised. They flourish where disclosure is absent, recusal is performative, and boards look the other way, not because they condone wrongdoing, but because they've normalised ambiguity. It is here, in the comfort of procedure without principle, that governance erodes. King IV recognises this risk. South African law requires declaration of personal financial interests and sets fiduciary duties, but King IV Principles 1 and 5 go further, calling for ethical and effective leadership beyond legal minimalism. A director may comply with the law but betray governance's spirit by failing to disclose a relationship or by participating in decisions blurred by personal gain. When Sizekhaya Holdings was awarded the fourth National Lottery licence in 2025, public concern quickly surfaced over the perceived political connections of its leadership, including ties to relatives of senior government officials. Though the award process may have complied with legal requirements, the absence of visible and transparent disclosures around these relationships undermined trust. In governance, perception matters. Poor or absent disclosure damages legitimacy, even without legal fault. At the Airports Company South Africa (Acsa), CEO Mpumi Mpofu came under fire for alleged misrepresentation of academic qualifications and awarding bonuses to executives during financial strain. With service providers unpaid and operational performance under scrutiny, the optics of bonuses raised ethical questions. Although no formal charges were brought, the board's failure to address these concerns reflected a worrying tolerance for ethical ambiguity: a grey zone where silence replaced scrutiny. The Steinhoff International scandal, known for accounting fraud, also revealed subtle but corrosive conflicts of interest. Executives linked to related-party transactions personally benefited from inflated financial results. Despite this, the board did not act urgently. It failed to question transactions, investigate relationships, or push for disclosure. The board's deference to executive authority, whether out of loyalty, deference, or inertia, allowed personal interest to override fiduciary duty, shifting oversight to complicity. These cases show governance failures need not involve overt misconduct. Sometimes, it is the cumulative effect of quiet compromises: undisclosed affiliations, soft recusal, where directors nominally step aside without meaningful disengagement, and silence under pressure that unravels institutional integrity. The Steinhoff scandal, like the cases of Sizekhaya and Acsa, reveals a pattern: grey-zone conflicts thrive where boards privilege process over principle. They are not isolated failures but systemic symptoms of a governance culture that rewards silence over scrutiny. To break this cycle, boards must reframe conflicts of interest as strategic governance moments, not bureaucratic disclosures to file away. They must take an uncompromising stance on ethical ambiguity, recognising that every potential conflict is an opportunity to demonstrate ethical clarity and transparent leadership. This mindset demands more than compliance; it requires courage. Disclosure practices must be strengthened. Too often, boards limit declarations to statutory interests or ownership stakes, ignoring broader context. Personal, familial, or political affiliations that may create perceived bias must be declared and discussed openly. Some argue excessive scrutiny risks paralysing decision-making. Yet the greater danger lies in inaction disguised as pragmatism. Boards that tolerate grey-zone conflicts to avoid 'overcomplication' ultimately erode the very currency of governance: trust. Boards must create environments where over-disclosure is encouraged, not penalised. Oversight mechanisms must be more robust and independent. Conflict reviews should not be managed by internal structures reporting to those under scrutiny. Independent ethics committees with external expertise can depoliticise assessments. But structures alone are insufficient without cultural change. Boards must adopt zero tolerance toward grey-zone conflicts, where even perceived compromised judgment triggers recusal, not just legal violations. Ethical behaviour must be incentivised, not incidental. Executive performance metrics often focus on profitability, growth, or shareholder value. But ethical governance should be tied to performance evaluations and bonus structures. Stakeholder trust, reputational stewardship and ethical conduct must carry weight in boardroom remuneration decisions. Finally, governance culture must prioritise values over vagueness. It is not enough to have conflict of interest policies on paper. Boards must actively pose ethical questions, encourage critical reflection and normalise discomfort. A culture that rewards candour, curiosity and dissent is one that builds long-term resilience and trust. Ethical governance lives in the gap between law and leadership. Conflict of interest is not merely a legal risk; it is a test of character. It demands more than checklists and compliance registers. It demands boards and executives who are willing to declare their interests fully, recuse themselves meaningfully and interrogate decisions with integrity. As directors, we must ask ourselves: Are we fostering a boardroom culture that prioritises disclosure over defensiveness? Are we willing to challenge colleagues when grey-zone decisions arise? Do we understand the reputational cost of passive complicity? Are we prepared to act with courage when conflict surfaces, or will we hide behind process? In an era of rising public scrutiny and stakeholder activism, governance legitimacy will not be earned by technical compliance. It will be earned by ethical clarity. And that clarity is forged in the grey zones, where the law is silent, but leadership must speak. Nqobani Mzizi is a Professional Accountant (SA), (IoDSA) and an Academic. Image: Supplied * Nqobani Mzizi is a Professional Accountant (SA), (IoDSA) and an Academic. ** The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of IOL or Independent Media. BUSINESS REPORT
Daily Maverick
10 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
Choosing the right online trading platform for you
Technology has transformed how South Africans engage with financial markets. Once the preserve of seasoned brokers and large institutions, online trading is now becoming more accessible to anyone with a smartphone and internet connection. The result? A rapid expansion of digital investing, with South Africa's digital investment market projected to reach $8.49 billion in 2025 – neobrokers expected to account for $5.36 billion of that, according to industry statistics. This democratisation of online trading is a win for accessibility, but it brings a new challenge: with so many options, how do you choose the right platform for your needs? In fact, the key isn't simply about gaining access – it's about choosing the right partner for your financial journey. Traders today typically fall into one of three categories: Those just getting started and eager to learn. Those who closely monitor the markets and manage their portfolio regularly. Those who are focused on growing wealth steadily over time. Recognising what type of trader you are is key to finding the right fit. It helps you identify the tools, guidance, and information that will support your confidence and decision-making. A strong platform should meet you at your level, offering meaningful, easy-to-understand insights without drowning you in jargon or diluting the complexity of the market. What's more, a great online trading platform does far more than just execute trades. It should empower users with: Clarity: A transparent, user-friendly interface that promotes confidence rather than confusion. Intelligence: Access to expert analysis, market explainers, and personalised insights that aid better decision-making. Education: Continuous learning through tools like investing and trading tips, how-to guides, and integrated financial literacy resources. Trust: Above all, when selecting an online trading platform, the importance of trust and the credibility of the institution cannot be overstated. A reputable platform not only adheres to regulatory standards but also prioritises the security of user data through advanced encryption and robust security measures. By choosing a platform backed by a respected institution, investors can engage with the markets confidently, knowing they have a trustworthy partner by their side. The most progressive platforms see education as central to their value proposition. They foster growth by offering content that simplifies complexity without diluting meaning, helping users become more informed and capable traders. Take, for example, the JSE Investment Challenge, a long-running initiative that engages high school and university students in simulated trading. Participants gain hands-on experience in real-time market conditions, learning key trading principles in a low-risk environment. Initiatives like these don't just grow skills – they build trust in the system and broaden financial literacy for future generations. As digital trading platforms evolve, they're not just opening up access – they're reshaping the way South Africans approach and interact with their finances. The future of trading goes beyond speed and sleek interfaces; it lies in creating platforms that blend simplicity with smart insights, where trust, performance, and a clear sense of purpose come together to empower better financial decisions. In a world where information is abundant, but insight is rare, the ability to make informed, intentional choices has never been more important. The right platform won't just help you trade – it will help you trade wisely. DM
