<DOCUMENT>
<TYPE>CORRESP
<SEQUENCE>1
<FILENAME>filename1.txt
<TEXT>



Ms Jill S. Davis
Branch Chief
Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20549


July 21, 2006


         Sasol Limited Form 20-F for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2005
                             Filed October 26, 2005
                                File No. 1-31615


Dear Ms Davis

We refer to the Staff's comment letter dated June 6, 2006, relating to the Form
20-F of Sasol Limited (the "Company") for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2005
and our response letter dated April 13, 2006. Set forth below in detail are the
responses to the Staff's comments, which have been provided in each case
following the text of the comment in the Staff's letter. The Staff is referred
to the definitions contained in the Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended June 30,
2005.

General

1.   We have reviewed your response letter dated April 13, 2006. We note your
     discussion of your contract for the purchase of Iranian crude, and your
     conclusion as to the materiality of your purchases of Iranian crude. It
     appears, from publicly available information, that Naftiran is owned by the
     Iranian government. Please discuss for us whether your payments of
     approximately $220 million per annum to an entity controlled by the Iranian
     government may negatively impact your reputation and share value because
     they may be deemed to enhance Iran's financial ability to support terrorist
     activity and weapons development programs.

     Response
     --------
     We are not aware of any formal or informal prohibition or restraint placed
     internationally or by the South African government on the Company on the
     procurement of oil from Iran. The procurement of oil from Iran is not
     considered to pose a material risk to the Company. We are not aware of any
     negative impact that our activities in Iran have had on our reputation or
     share value. We are also not in a position to judge or conclude that the
     financial benefit to Iran from our activities, including our annual
     purchases of crude oil, in any way enhances or is utilized to support
     terrorist activity or weapons development programs.




Sasol Limited  1979/003231/06
1 Sturdee Avenue Rosebank 2196 PO Box 5486 Johannesburg 2000 South Africa
Telephone +27 (0)11 441 3111 Facsimile +27 (0)11 788 5092 www.sasol.com

Directors: PV Cox (Chairman) LPA Davies (Chief Executive) TS Munday (Deputy
Chief Executive) E le R Bradley WAM Clewlow BP Connellan VN Fakude (Executive)
MSV Gantsho A Jain (Indian) IN Mkhize A M Mokaba (Executive) S Montsi K C Ramon
(Executive) JE Schrempp (German) Company Secretary: NL Joubert


<PAGE>


page 2 of 12



     The Company has disclosed on page 45 of the Form 20-F that 50% of our crude
     oil requirements for our Natref refinery is obtained from the Middle East.
     The Company will expand this disclosure in future filings by providing the
     amount of crude oil procured from Iran.

2.   We remain of the view that it would be appropriate for future filings to
     indicate the bases for the sanctions programs discussed in your own risk
     factor headed "There is a possible risk that sanctions may be imposed by
     the US Government as a result of our Iran-related activities." In our view,
     such disclosure would provide context for, and additional clarity to, the
     existing disclosure under that heading.

     Response
     --------
     The Company still believes that as a South African company, we are unable
     to comment on the political issues influencing US legislation. The Company
     will, however, include the following sentence in the risk factor headed
     "There is a possible risk that sanctions may be imposed by the US
     Government as a result of our Iran-related activities" in future filings:

     "ILSA was adopted by the US Government with the objective of denying Iran
     and Libya the ability to support acts of international terrorism and fund
     the development or acquisition of weapons of mass destruction."

     In addition we confirm that in future filings we will disclose the fact
     that the Iranian Transaction Regulations prohibit or restrict most
     transactions between US persons and Iran and that the Iran and Libya
     Sanctions Act is now applicable only to Iran as noted in our previous
     response.

Accounting
1.   We note you have requested confidential treatment with respect to Appendix
     A as attached to your response letter dated April 13, 2006, although all
     pages include the confidential treatment requested here. Please remove the
     "Confidential Treatment Requested by Sasol Limited, File No. 1-31615"
     header from all pages, other than Appendix A for which confidential
     treatment has been requested, and resubmit your response letter dated April
     13, 2006, to EDGAR.

     Response
     --------
     The "Confidential Treatment Requested by Sasol Limited, File No. 1-31615"
     header was removed and the response letter dated April 13, 2006 was
     resubmitted to EDGAR on July 18, 2006.

2.   We note that you have proposed to expand or revise your disclosure in
     response to prior comments 5, 6, 12, 13, 16, 18, 20 and 21, which you have
     indicated will be incorporated into future filings. We are considering your
     proposal for prospective revision and will not be in a position to conclude
     on your proposal until such time that all of your pending comments are
     resolved.




Sasol Limited  1979/003231/06
1 Sturdee Avenue Rosebank 2196 PO Box 5486 Johannesburg 2000 South Africa
Telephone +27 (0)11 441 3111 Facsimile +27 (0)11 788 5092 www.sasol.com

Directors: PV Cox (Chairman) LPA Davies (Chief Executive) TS Munday (Deputy
Chief Executive) E le R Bradley WAM Clewlow BP Connellan VN Fakude (Executive)
MSV Gantsho A Jain (Indian) IN Mkhize A M Mokaba (Executive) S Montsi K C Ramon
(Executive) JE Schrempp (German) Company Secretary: NL Joubert


<PAGE>


page 3 of 12



     Response
     --------
     The Company expects to file its annual report on Form 20-F for the fiscal
     year ended June 30, 2006 during October 2006 when the proposed amendments
     and additions to our disclosure will be provided. We respectfully propose
     that, due to the short period of time before the filing of our next Form
     20-F and the fact that we are not currently raising capital, the request to
     make these amendments prospectively in future filings receives favorable
     consideration.

3.   We note your response to prior comment four indicating that it is
     reasonably possible that a liability may be incurred in connection with the
     explosion at the Secunda West ethylene production facilities. Because it
     appears you were unable to determine an estimated liability or range of
     loss related to this matter, please expand your disclosures under your
     commitments and contingencies to specifically describe this potential loss
     and the reasons you are unable to currently estimate the liability or
     possible range of loss. Refer to paragraph 10 of SFAS 5.

     Response
     --------
     At the time of filing the Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2005
     no claims were brought against the Company. While it was reasonable
     possible that a liability may be incurred, the Company was unable to
     estimate a range of loss due to the fact that no claims were asserted
     against the Company and the Company was at an early stage of discussions
     with various trade unions and legal representatives.

     As the Company expects to file its Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended June
     30, 2006 during October 2006 the Company proposes to include additional
     disclosure under the commitments and contingencies note in the Form 20-F
     for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2006 which will take into account
     developments in this regard since the filing of our previous Form 20-F.

     The relevant facts subsequent to the filing of our Form 20-F for the fiscal
     year ended June 30, 2005 are as follows:

     The Company, trade unions Solidarity and the Chemical, Energy, Paper,
     Printing, Wood and Allied Workers' Union ("CEPPWAWU"), and legal
     representative Richard Spoor agreed to establish an independent trust, the
     September 2004 Accident Trust, to expeditiously make ex gratia grants to
     persons who were injured in the September 1, 2004 explosion at our Secunda
     West ethylene production facilities and to the dependants of persons who
     died in the accident.

     The September 2004 Accident Trust was registered in June 2006. Qualifying
     victims of the accident have been invited to submit applications for
     compensation.

     Since January 2006, the Company, CEPPWAWU, Solidarity and Richard Spoor
     have been in negotiations to find a mechanism to pay compensation to the
     dependants of people that died or were injured in the accident to the
     extent that they had not been previously compensated.

     The September 2004 Accident Trust, will make ex gratia grants to compensate
     persons injured or dependants of persons who died in the accident. These
     grants will be




Sasol Limited  1979/003231/06
1 Sturdee Avenue Rosebank 2196 PO Box 5486 Johannesburg 2000 South Africa
Telephone +27 (0)11 441 3111 Facsimile +27 (0)11 788 5092 www.sasol.com


<PAGE>


page 4 of 12



     calculated in accordance with the applicable South African legal principles
     for the harm and loss suffered by them as a result of the accident to the
     extent that they have not been compensated previously.

     The Company will fund the September 2004 Accident Trust to pay the ex
     gratia grants. Whilst accepting social responsibility, the Company is not
     acknowledging legal liability in creating the trust. Future payments are
     dependent on the number of applications submitted to the Trust, the
     independent findings of each application and the calculation of the grants
     based on the applicable South African legal principles.

4.   We note your response to prior comment six indicating that you amortize
     your life-of-mine assets over the total proven and probable reserves
     assigned to each specific mine. With respect to mine development costs,
     please explain why you believe it is more appropriate to amortize
     life-of-mine assets over the total proven and probable reserves rather than
     those reserves benefited by development costs in the immediate and relevant
     producing area. Clarify what assets you deem to be life-of-mine assets.

     Response
     --------
     The following assets are classified as life-of-mine assets:
         o    Previously capitalized exploration cost on which development has
              occurred and mining activities commenced;
         o    Surface infrastructure (e.g. shaft systems including fans and
              hoists and sub-stations);
         o    Underground infrastructure (e.g. underground workshops);
         o    Surface equipment (e.g. the screening plant);
         o    Plants (e.g. beneficiation plant and water treatment plant); and
         o    Coal handling facilities.

     Underground mine development costs are capitalized until the main asset,
     for example a new shaft, is ready for use. Any further underground mine
     development costs incurred after this date are expensed through the income
     statement.

     The proven and probable reserves of a specific mine is used in calculating
     amortization of the life-of-mine assets that are deployed to extract or
     beneficiate that reserve base (i.e. the reserve base which benefits from
     the utilization of the asset). If a specific asset (e.g. the coal handling
     facility) is used for the benefit of a specific mining complex, the proven
     and probable reserves of that complex are used in the calculation of
     amortization of the asset.

     The Company will clarify our disclosure in future filings to include the
     following information.

     "Proven and probable reserves used for the amortization of life-of-mine
     assets are the total proven and probable reserves assigned to that specific
     mine (accessible reserves) or complex which benefit from the utilisation of
     those assets. Inaccessible reserves are excluded from the calculation."




Sasol Limited  1979/003231/06
1 Sturdee Avenue Rosebank 2196 PO Box 5486 Johannesburg 2000 South Africa
Telephone +27 (0)11 441 3111 Facsimile +27 (0)11 788 5092 www.sasol.com


<PAGE>


page 5 of 12



5.   We note your response to prior comment seven indicating you capitalize
     costs only after a feasibility study has determined proven and probable
     reserves. We also note your response suggesting that costs associated with
     around-mine exploration are capitalized, although around mine reserves have
     not been ascertained. It is unclear how you have concluded that
     capitalization of around-mine exploration costs are appropriately
     capitalized for U.S. GAAP purposes. In this regard it appears the future
     economic benefit of such costs remains uncertain because proven and
     probable reserves underlying those costs have not been established at the
     time the costs were incurred. Accordingly, please reconcile your response
     with your accounting policy disclosure. Please quantify the accumulated
     capitalized around-mine exploration costs for all periods presented and
     provide us a materiality analysis of the financial statement effect had you
     expensed these costs for all periods presented. Your materiality analysis
     should apply the principles in SAB Topic 1:M.

     Response
     --------
     The Company noted in our previous comment that coal mining exploration
     expenditure is only capitalized once a feasibility study has determined
     that there are proved and probable reserves within a specific area.

     The Company's accounting policy as disclosed in the Form 20-F for the
     fiscal year ended June 30, 2006 is as follows:

     "Mining exploration expenditure is expensed as incurred until completion of
     a final feasibility study supporting proved and probable reserves. Mining
     exploration costs incurred subsequent to proved and probable reserves being
     identified are capitalized.

     Exploration and development expenditure in respect of producing mines or
     development properties is capitalized only when excavation or drilling has
     occurred to extend reserves or further delineate existing proved and
     probable reserves."

     Based on our response to the previous comment and the accounting policy the
     Company believes that the capitalization of around-mine exploration is
     appropriate only when proved and probable reserves have previously been
     identified in that area. No exploration expenditure incurred in areas where
     a feasibility study has not been performed was capitalized by the Company.

     Included below are the details of the coal mining exploration costs
     capitalized and expensed for the periods presented:

                                        2005       2004      2003
                                            (Rand in millions)
     Expensed to income statement(1)       -          2         -
     Capitalized (2)                      17         23        31

     (1) The exploration costs expensed to the income statement relate to
     exploration activity from which proved and probable reserves were not
     identified.
     (2) The total capitalized exploration costs relate to around-mine
     exploration activity from which proved reserves were identified.




Sasol Limited  1979/003231/06
1 Sturdee Avenue Rosebank 2196 PO Box 5486 Johannesburg 2000 South Africa
Telephone +27 (0)11 441 3111 Facsimile +27 (0)11 788 5092 www.sasol.com


<PAGE>


page 6 of 12



     The Company believes that the accounting treatment applied to exploration
     costs is appropriate under US GAAP. The company has not capitalized any
     exploration costs for which proved and probable reserves have not been
     identified and therefore no materiality analysis has been provided in
     future filings.

6.   We note your response to prior comment nine in which you have included your
     amortization policy disclosure associated with development costs of your
     oil and gas properties within your "Mining" accounting policy. Please
     relocate your amortization policy regarding your oil and gas properties
     with "Oil and Gas" accounting policy so as not to be confused with your
     mining activities.

     Response
     --------
     We will provide the additional disclosure regarding the depletion,
     depreciation and amortization for both acquisition costs and development
     costs under the heading "Oil and gas" as disclosed on page F-11.

7.   We note your proposed disclosure and response to prior comment 10
     indicating that you do not believe our industry letter applies to your
     circumstances regarding your buy/sell arrangements. Although the net effect
     of buy/sell arrangements may not be significant, the disclosure
     requirements set-forth in our letter should be considered to the extent
     these arrangements are material on a gross volume or dollar basis. To the
     extent these arrangements are material on a gross basis, please disclose
     how you account for these arrangements; the characteristics of these
     arrangements; the circumstances under which they are used; and quantify the
     gross proceeds and the related costs. In the event you believe these
     arrangements are not material please provide us with your qualitative and
     quantitative materiality analysis.

     Response
     --------
     The Company believes that the industry letter is applicable to our buy/sell
     arrangements. However, our previous response noted that the Company
     currently accounts for these types of transactions in terms of the guidance
     provided in EITF 04-13. The Company does not follow industry practice by
     reporting activities related to buy/sell arrangements at fair value on a
     gross basis in our income statement.

     The turnover for Sasol Liquid Business for 2005 amounted to R18,554
     million. Sales of liquid fuel products for the 2005 financial year amounted
     to 9.6 million m(3). The gross amount of liquid fuel products exchanged
     under buy/sell arrangements during the 2005 financial year amounted to
     approximately 1.0 million m(3) or R2,350 million (based on the average
     Basic Fuel Price achieved for the 2005 financial year). These transactions
     were recognized at book value.

     Because the Company has not accounted for the buy/sell arrangements on a
     gross basis and the amounts recorded net, at book value, constituted 1.41%
     and 0.50% of segment and consolidated revenue, respectively, the Company
     proposes not to show disclosure on the face of the income statement as
     required by the industry letter.

     The following disclosure will be included under our accounting policies in
     our Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2006:




Sasol Limited  1979/003231/06
1 Sturdee Avenue Rosebank 2196 PO Box 5486 Johannesburg 2000 South Africa
Telephone +27 (0)11 441 3111 Facsimile +27 (0)11 788 5092 www.sasol.com


<PAGE>


page 7 of 12



     "The Emerging Issues Task Force ("EITF") reached consensus on Issue No.
     04-13, "Accounting for Purchases and Sales of Inventory with the Same
     Counterparty", at its September 2005 meeting. This issue addresses when it
     is appropriate to measure purchases and sales of inventory at fair value
     and record the effect of this transaction in cost of sales and turnover and
     when these transactions should be recorded as exchanges measured at book
     value of the item sold. The EITF concluded that purchases and sales of
     inventory with the same counterparty that are entered into in contemplation
     of one another should be combined and recorded as exchanges measured at
     book value of the items sold.

     The EITF is effective for all new arrangements beginning in the first
     reporting period after March 15, 2006. The Company currently accounts for
     these transactions in the manner described in the EITF consensus. It is
     believed that the adoption of the EITF will not have a material effect on
     our financial position and results of operations under US GAAP."

     In addition to the above disclosure the Company will provide the following
     details regarding the accounting policy for these exchange transactions:

     "The Company enters into exchange agreements with the same counterparties
     for the purchase and sales of inventory that are entered into in
     contemplation of one another. These transactions are combined and accounted
     for as a single exchange transaction. The exchange is recognized at the
     carrying amount of the inventory transferred."

8.   We note your proposed expanded disclosure in response to prior comment 13
     regarding your revenue recognition policy applied to your dealer-owned
     supply agreements for liquefied fuel sales, indicating that you retain
     title to product to secure payment while recognizing revenue associated
     with the delivery of the product. Please address the following:
         o    Explain how you have concluded that collection of revenue is
              reasonably assured since it appears requisite for you to retain
              title in order to ensure collection.
         o    Explain how the risks of your product have passed to the customer
              upon delivery since you retain title and clarify when title
              passes.
         o    Explain to us why these sales are not recognized as revenue on a
              consignment basis.

     Response
     --------
     Legally, in terms of the dealer-owned supply agreements title is retained
     to enable recovery of the goods in the event of customer default on
     payment. It was further noted that the title to the goods does not enable
     the Company to dispose of the product or rescind the transaction, and
     cannot prevent the customer from selling the product. However, in practice
     the supply of products to these customers is strictly "cash on delivery" or
     "cash before" delivery. Title of the product is transferred either on the
     date of delivery or prior to this date. Therefore, it is concluded that the
     collection is assured prior to delivery of the product. Based on this
     practice the Company recognizes the revenue once the product is delivered
     to the customer, which is the date when all the revenue recognition
     criteria have been met.




Sasol Limited  1979/003231/06
1 Sturdee Avenue Rosebank 2196 PO Box 5486 Johannesburg 2000 South Africa
Telephone +27 (0)11 441 3111 Facsimile +27 (0)11 788 5092 www.sasol.com


<PAGE>


page 8 of 12



     Based on the above information the Company believes that the revenue
     recognition principles applied to our dealer-owned supply arrangements are
     consistent with the requirements of SAB Topic 13.A, in particular when
     considering Question 3 under the persuasive evidence of the arrangement
     section. Therefore, it is believed that the treatment of the sales on a
     consignment basis would be inappropriate as all the requirements of the SAB
     Topic 13.A have been met upon delivery of the product.

9.   We note your response to prior comment 15 and remain unclear as to the
     nature of your capitalized exploration expenditures. Please describe in
     further detail these exploration expenditures by indicating the specific
     types of costs you are capitalizing.

     Response
     --------
     The Company capitalizes the following exploration expenditure in the Form
     20-F relating to our oil and gas activities:
     -   Costs associated with exploration drilling, including equipment rental,
         materials, labor, consultants and contractors up to final determination
         of proven reserves; and
     -   Property acquisition costs.

     Certain development costs incurred to obtain access to proved reserves
     relating to our Mozambican gas activities were inadvertently included under
     capitalized exploration expenditure in the Form 20-F. The development costs
     have been amortized using proved developed reserves. The Company believes
     that the classification is not significant to an investors' understanding
     of the financial statements and will therefore reclassify the development
     for all periods presented in the financial statements included in the Form
     20-F for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2006.

     All these capitalized costs are supported by proven gas reserves.

     As noted in our previous response the Company will appropriately reclassify
     these costs as tangible assets in future filings. Further the Company will
     provide the required disclosure of SFAS 69 for the disclosure of
     capitalized costs relating to oil and gas producing activities as was
     provided in the Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2005.

10.  We note your response to prior comment 16 indicating that you will expand
     your disclosures to include the after-tax effect of the change in estimated
     useful lives of your assets. Please provide us a sample of your proposed
     disclosure.

     Response
     --------
     The Company will amend the disclosure provided on page F-57 in future
     filings by providing the after-tax effect of the change in the financial
     statements in its Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2006. The
     following disclosure will be made:

     "During the year ended June 30, 2005, the group reviewed the useful life of
     its assets. This resulted in a reduction in the depreciation charge when
     compared to the expected charge had no review been performed of R1,547
     million before tax. The tax effect amounted to R494 million with a
     resulting increase in net income of R1,053 million or 169 cents per share."




Sasol Limited  1979/003231/06
1 Sturdee Avenue Rosebank 2196 PO Box 5486 Johannesburg 2000 South Africa
Telephone +27 (0)11 441 3111 Facsimile +27 (0)11 788 5092 www.sasol.com


<PAGE>


page 9 of 12



11.  We note your response and proposed disclosure to prior comment 18 regarding
     your assessment of likelihood by matter. However, in some matters which you
     have noted as reasonably possible or probable you have not disclosed the
     possible range of loss or stated that such an estimate cannot be made. For
     example, but without limitation, you disclosure the historical costs of the
     EDC pipeline litigation, which you indicate is reimbursable by RWE-DEA.
     However your disclosure does not provide an explicit quantification of the
     possible range of loss or indicate that no loss is expected, or state that
     an estimate cannot be made. Additionally you have assessed the sulfur
     dioxide litigation as probable without discretely disclosing the amount
     accrued or the possible estimated range of loss related to this matter.
     Refer to paragraph 10 of SFAS 5.

     Response
     --------
     To the extent not currently disclosed, the range of loss or the fact that
     we are unable to resonably estimate the range of loss for the litigation
     assessed as reasonably possible or probable at the time of our filing of
     the Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2005, will be disclosed in
     future filings:

         EDC pipeline litigation

         Although a loss resulting from a settlement or judgment in the pending
         round of EDC pipeline litigation is reasonably possible, the range of
         loss cannot be reliably estimated at this early discovery stage of the
         litigation.

         Sulfur dioxide litigation

         Sasol North America's liability was contractually limited by written
         agreement with the other primary defendant which assumed the defense of
         both companies. Since the full amount of Sasol North America's limited
         share was paid in December 2004, Sasol North America has no further
         liability for settlement, judgment or defense costs of the litigation
         regardless of outcome.

     Subsequent to the filing of the Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended June
     30, 2005 the complaints of alleged anti-competitive conduct in the
     nitrogen-based fertilizer market has been referred by the South African
     Competition Commission to the Competition Tribunal.

         Nutri-Flo

         On the basis of the pleadings in their current form, we believe the
         likelihood of a finding of unlawful conduct is remote. In the event
         that the Competition Commission amends the referral, our current
         assessment may require review. For this reason, it is currently not
         possible to make a reasonable estimate of the contingency.

         Profert

         On the basis of the pleadings in their current form, we believe the
         likelihood of the Competition Tribunal imposing a penalty is remote. In
         the event that the Competition Commission amends the referral, our
         current assessment may require review. For this reason, it is currently
         not possible to make a reasonable estimate of the contingency.




Sasol Limited  1979/003231/06
1 Sturdee Avenue Rosebank 2196 PO Box 5486 Johannesburg 2000 South Africa
Telephone +27 (0)11 441 3111 Facsimile +27 (0)11 788 5092 www.sasol.com


<PAGE>


page 10 of 12



12.  We note your response to prior comment 19 indicating that you are unable to
     determine the exact costs of your liability related to environmental soil
     and ground water contamination, although you have accrued an amount which
     is included as a component of your asset retirement obligation. Please
     quantify the amount accrued within your commitment and contingencies note
     and disclose the possible range of loss currently estimated. Refer to
     paragraph 10 of SFAS 5.

     Response
     --------
     Our rehabilitation obligation includes an estimated cost for the
     rehabilitation of soil and groundwater contamination. At June 30, 2005, the
     total rehabilitation obligation amounted to R2,161 million. Included in
     this balance is an amount accrued of approximately R408 million in respect
     of the costs of remediation of such contamination and similar environmental
     costs. The rehabilitation is usually only required when the site is vacated
     unless the contamination is likely to threaten the surrounding areas. In
     this case, any rehabilitation required to prevent such a threat to the
     surrounding area is initiated in collaboration with the relevant
     authorities. It is not possible to separately determine the amount of the
     obligation specifically attributable to soil and groundwater contamination
     from the requirements to rehabilitate similar environmental costs.

     We will amend our future filings to indicate the recognized obligation.
     Where it is expected that the loss contingency exceeds the amount accrued
     we will discretely disclose the range of loss if a reasonable estimate can
     be made. As at June 30, 2005, due to the nature of the work that is to be
     undertaken in these areas, we used our best estimate of the loss to accrue
     for the obligation and therefore a range of loss was not disclosed.

13.  Regarding response number 25, please provide the authoritative accounting
     literature that you believe allows you to account for an increase in
     reserves based on language in a production sharing contract concerning tax
     allocation.

     Response
     --------
     The revenue arrangements and tax arrangements under production sharing
     agreements are unique in each country and can vary within a country. The
     Company is not aware of any specific authoritative accounting literature
     under US GAAP for production sharing arrangements. The accounting treatment
     followed by the Company is based on guidance included in SFAS 109, EITF
     99-19 and literature available (although not authoritative) which provides
     information regarding the industry practice when accounting for these
     contracts.

     In terms of our production sharing agreement for our operations in Gabon,
     current taxes are payable to the Government of Gabon. The Government of
     Gabon has an established tax regime and tax is computed on a measure of
     profits. The company acts as primary obligor in the supply of the oil to
     customers and has concluded that gross revenue recognition is appropriate
     in terms of guidance provided in EITF 99-19.The Company believes that the
     taxes payable in terms of the agreement are within the scope of SFAS 109.
     The standard requires the recognition and disclosure of current tax expense
     separately in the income statement. The payment of the current taxes is
     settled through the delivery of oil. Under the arrangement the Company has
     concluded that it has effectively "sold" the oil and used the proceeds to
     settle the tax liability. This is not a tax assessed on revenue producing
     activities and as such the guidance included in EITF





Sasol Limited  1979/003231/06
1 Sturdee Avenue Rosebank 2196 PO Box 5486 Johannesburg 2000 South Africa
Telephone +27 (0)11 441 3111 Facsimile +27 (0)11 788 5092 www.sasol.com


<PAGE>


page 11 of 12



     06-3 is not applicable. These amounts are appropriately included in gross
     revenue and expense. This is based on the substance of the agreement.

14.  Tables 1, 2 and 3 were received and address the coal quality issues as
     requested. Please amend the filing to include these tables and incorporate
     the other proposed changes. This disclosure is still missing coal quality
     information for the Sasolburg Probable Reserve estimate. These reserves
     include the remainder of the Mooikraal, Block 13 South, and the North West
     mining areas. Please include the geological discount, mine layout and
     estimate the extraction percentage, in addition to the requested coal
     quality information.

     Response
     --------
     42.4Mt of the 46.5Mt of coal sales made during the fiscal year ended June
     30, 2005 were sold to Sasol Infrachem and Sasol Synfuels for use in their
     production of synthetic products. The additional data requested by the
     Staff is understood to be limited to the mining activities undertaken for
     the external market. The Company will provide the requested disclosure in
     future filings.

     The gross in situ coal resources for the three areas mentioned were
     estimated. The tonnage, densities, shape, physical characteristics and coal
     qualities can be estimated with the required level of confidence, based on
     the detailed and reliable exploration information gathered by means of
     vertical core recovery exploration drilling. The locations are spaced
     closely enough to confirm the physical continuity and coal quality
     continuity. The assessments demonstrated at the time of reporting, that
     extraction is reasonably justifiable. It is therefore possible to report
     the gross in situ coal resource. The Company has no mining authorization
     for the North West reserves. These reserves were stated inadvertently in
     the Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2005.

     Included in Table 1 is the additional disclosure regarding coal quality
     information for the Sasolburg probable reserve estimate. Table 2 indicates
     the required losses on a factorized basis.

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
TABLE 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            Heat                     Heat Value       Sulfur
                           Gross in        Average        Average           Value        Sulfur         (As            (As
                           situ coal      inherent      superficial       (Air dry      (Air dry      received       received
Reserve Area               resource       moisture        moisture         basis)         basis)        basis)         basis)
                             (Mt)            (%)            (%)             MJ/Kg           %             %              %
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<S>                          <C>               <C>              <C>           <C>           <C>            <C>           <C>
Remainder Mooikraal           18.906           5.5              3.2           19.6          0.42           18.9          0.41

Block 13, South              109.900           2.9              3.2           20.4          0.37           19.7          0.36
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
</TABLE>




Sasol Limited  1979/003231/06
1 Sturdee Avenue Rosebank 2196 PO Box 5486 Johannesburg 2000 South Africa
Telephone +27 (0)11 441 3111 Facsimile +27 (0)11 788 5092 www.sasol.com


<PAGE>


page 12 of 12



<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
TABLE 2
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        Gross in                         Mine                         Recoverable
                            Coal        situ Coal       Geological      layout      Extraction           coal          Proved/
Reserve Area                seam        resource         discount       losses         rate            reserves        Probable
                                          (Mt)             (Mt)          (Mt)           (%)              (Mt)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<C>                           <C>         <C>             <C>           <C>                <C>           <C>
Remainder Mooikraal           3B           18.906          3.364*       1.399*             40*            5.865        Probable

Block 13 South                3B          109.900         19.551*       8.132*             40*           34.098        Probable
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
</TABLE>

* The geological discount, the mine layout losses and the extraction rate were
factorized, using known mining parameters from current mining.


                                    * * * * *


We appreciate the Staff's review of the Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended June
30, 2005. Should the Staff have any questions or require any additional
information, please telephone the undersigned at +27-11-441-3841. My e-mail
address is trevor.munday@sasol.com.

Very truly yours,







Trevor Munday
Deputy Chief Executive







Sasol Limited  1979/003231/06
1 Sturdee Avenue Rosebank 2196 PO Box 5486 Johannesburg 2000 South Africa
Telephone +27 (0)11 441 3111 Facsimile +27 (0)11 788 5092 www.sasol.com

</TEXT>
</DOCUMENT>
