Non-Tariff Barriers :: Complaints

Active complaints

108 in total

Complaint number	NTB Type Category 1. Government participation in trade & restrictive practices tolerated by governments 1.1. Export subsidies 1.2. Government monopoly in export/import 1.3. State subsidies, procurement, trading, state ownership 1.4. Preference given to domestic bidders/suppliers 1.5. Requirement for counter trade 1.6. Domestic assistance programmes for companies 1.7. Discriminatory or flawed government procurement policies 1.8. Import bans 1.9. Determination of eligibility of an exporting country by the importing country 1.10. Determination of eligibility of an exporting establishment (firm, company) by the importing country 1.11. Occupational safety and health regulation 1.12. Multiplicity and Controls of Foreign exchange market 1.13. "Buy national" policy 1.14. Lack of coordination between government institutions 1.15. Other Category 2. Customs and administrative entry procedures 2.1. Government imposing antidumping duties 2.2. Arbitrary customs classification 2.3. Issues related to the rules of origin 2.4. Import licensing 2.5. Decreed customs surcharges 2.6. Additional taxes and other charges 2.7. International taxes and charges levied on imports and other tariff measures 2.8. Lengthy and costly customs clearance procedures 2.9. Issues related to transit fees 2.10. Inadequate or unreasonable customs procedures and charges 2.11. Lack of control in Customs infrastructure 2.12. Lack of capacity of Customs officers 2.13. Issues related to Pre-Shipment Inspections 2.14. Other Category 3. Technical barriers to trade (TBT) 3.1. Restrictive technical regulations and standards not based on international standards 3.2. Inadequate or unreasonable testing and certification arrangements 3.3. Standards disparities 3.4. Intergovernmental acceptance of testing methods and standards 3.5. Issues related to packaging, labeling and marking 3.6. Conformity assessment related to TBT 3.7. Inadequate infrastructure 3.8. Other Category 4. Sanitary & phyto-sanitary (SPS) measures 4.1. Issues related to sanitary and phyto-sanitary measures 4.2. Conformity assessment related to SPS 4.3. Other Category 5. Specific limitations 5.1. Quantitative restrictions 5.2. Exchange controls 5.3. Export taxes 5.4. Quotas 5.5. Import licensing requirements 5.6. Proportion restrictions of foreign to domestic goods (local content requirement) 5.7. Minimum import price limits 5.8. Embargoes 5.9. Non-automatic licensing 5.10. Prohibitions 5.11. Quantitative safeguard measures 5.12. Export restraint arrangements 5.13. Other quantity control measures 5.14. Restrictive licenses 5.15. Other Category 6. Charges on imports 6.1. Prior import deposits and subsidies 6.2. Administrative fees 6.3. Special supplementary duties 6.4. Import credit discriminations 6.5. Variable levies 6.6. Border taxes 6.7. Other Category 7. Other procedural problems 7.1. Arbitrariness 7.2. Discrimination 7.3. Corruption 7.4. Costly procedures 7.5. Lengthy procedures 7.6. Lack of information on procedures (or changes thereof) 7.7. Complex variety of documentation required 7.8. Consular and Immigration Issues 7.9. Inadequate trade related infrastructure 7.10. Other Category 8. Transport, Clearing and Forwarding 8.1. Government Policy and regulations 8.2. Administrative (Border Operating Hours, delays at border posts, etc.) 8.3. Immigration requirements (Visa, travel permit) 8.4. Transport related corruption 8.5. Infrastructure (Air, Port, Rail, Road, Border Posts,) 8.6. Vehicle standards 8.7. Costly Road user charges /fees 8.8. Issues related to transit Other Policy or Regulatory NTB Not a policy or regulatory NTB Check allUncheck all	Date of incident	Location COMESA Burundi Comoros Democratic Republic of the Congo Djibouti Egypt Eritrea Ethiopia Kenya Libya Madagascar Malawi Mauritius Rwanda Seychelles Sudan Swaziland Uganda Zambia Zimbabwe EAC Burundi Kenya Rwanda Tanzania Uganda SADC Angola Botswana Democratic Republic of the Congo Lesotho Madagascar Malawi Mauritius Mozambique Namibia Seychelles South Africa Swaziland Tanzania Zambia Zimbabwe COMESA EAC SADC	Reporting country COMESA Burundi Comoros Democratic Republic of the Congo Djibouti Egypt Eritrea Ethiopia Kenya Libya Madagascar Malawi Mauritius Rwanda Seychelles Sudan Swaziland Uganda Zambia Zimbabwe EAC Burundi Kenya Rwanda Tanzania Uganda SADC Angola Botswana Democratic Republic of the Congo Lesotho Madagascar Malawi Mauritius Mozambique Namibia Seychelles South Africa Swaziland Tanzania Zambia Zimbabwe	Status New Complaint registered with REC In process Resolved Non-actionable	Actions
NTB-000-518	8.8. Issues related to transit	2012-07-09	South Africa: Durban sea Port	South Africa	In process	View
Complaint:	This complaint is registered by FESARTA. The South African Cross-Border Road Transport Agency is wanting to fine trucks for not having road transport permits for the complete trip from Durban to the DRC. In terms of the bi-lateral transport agreement between Zimbabwe and South Africa, Zimbabwe had issued a permit to a transporter for the Durban-Zimbabwe leg of the trip. Zimbabwe could not issue a bi-lateral permit all the way to DRC because there is no bi-lateral transport agreement between Zimbabwe and DRC. Both Zimbabwe and DRC are members of COMESA and therefore Zimbabwe was able to issue a COMESA PTA Carriers Licence to the transporter, to operate between Zimbabwe and the DRC. Thus, effectively, the transporter had permits to cover the complete trip from Durban to DRC. The fact that neither the CBRTA nor Zimbabwe could issue a single permit for the full trip, was not the fault of the transporter. The CBRTA should be facilitating trade between the three countries and not be trying to find any opportunity to fine transporters.
Progress:	On 25 September 2012, SADC Secretariat confirmed that COMESA, EAC and SADC,are developing a multilateral cross border road transport agreement that will interalia, resolve the third country rule restrictions. This will take time as it involves three RECs. However in the interim there is nothing to stop DRC, Zambia, Zimbabwe and RSA from developing an interim corridor based arrangement to facilitate the movement of truckers. The SADC Transport Protocol allows for this and SADC Secretariat will be happy to facilitate such a move. Please refer to SADC TCM Articles 5.3 (6); (7 b) and 5.4 (f).
NTB-000-519	8.8. Issues related to transit	2012-06-20	Tanzania: Dar-es-Salaam Port	Burundi	In process	View
Complaint:	Payment of double handling charges at the ICDs and at the Dar es Salaam port.
Progress:	At the Tripartite NTBs Online Reporting, Monitoring and Eliminating Mechanism Meeting to Launch the SMS Reporting Tool held from 9-10 April in Lusaka Zambia, Tanzania and Burundi reported that Burundi would supply additional informationthe to enable the two Partner States to hold bilateral consultations and report back depending at the EAC NTBs forum scheduled for June 2013.
NTB-000-561	8.8. Issues related to transit	2012-10-24	South Africa: On the main transport routes in Gauteng, South Africa	Zimbabwe	In process	View
Complaint:	This complaint is registered by FESARTA. The managing director of Cross Country Containers in Zimbabwe, has reported that there had been four incidences of hijacking his vehicles in the Gauteng area. The first was in October 2011, the second in June 2012, the third in September 2012 and the fourth in October 2012. All the vehicles hijacked, were carrying copper, from the copper mines in Zambia. A meeting was held between the road transport industry and the SAPS Hawks, in Pretoria, on the 24th October 2012. A report of the meeting is attached. These hijackings have had such a negative impact on Cross Country Containers, that it has stopped operating into South Africa. The road transport industry, under the guidance of FESARTA, is to send a proposal on the way forward, to the Hawks.
Progress:	At the Tripartite NTB SMS Launch meeting held on 9-10 April 2013 in Lusaka, Zambia, South Africa and Zimbabwe agreed that this complaint be removed from the online system as it is not a NTB but a security issue which is being handled by the relavant authorities. 2. On 16 April 2013, FESRATA argued that inadequate or lack of security along transit routes is a barrier to trade and similar issues have been handled as NTBs and adressed in the Tripartite. FESARTA therefore requests the countries concerned to advise if measures are being taken to facilitae security on the route.
NTB-000-585	8.8. Issues related to transit Policy/Regulatory	2013-04-29	Mozambique: Delegação Aduaneira de Zobwe	Malawi	In process	View
Complaint:	New transit procedures are causing a lot of delays in the clearance of transit cargo through Mozambique Ports. According to the new transit procedures, Malawian transporters /clearing agents are requested to make cash deposits bond requirements to the Mozambican customs at the borders or prior to transit clearance at the Port of discharge to Malawi and other neighbouring countries like Zimbabwe, Zambia, among others. According to Mozambique, the requirement is made because transit goods end up disappearing within Mozambique and their Government lose a lot of revenue. In addition to that, customs clearing and Forwarding Agents need to undergo re-registration formalities. The major problem about these issues is that most Malawian businesses were not aware and there is a crisis at the borders with a lot of Malawian trucks that cannot clear. Even on the part of Mozambican customs they are also learning the new system.
Progress:	On 12 May 2013, the President of the Federation of Clearing and Forwarding Associations of Southern Africa (FCFASA) gave a latest first hand update on the situation following his visit to Nyamapanda/Cuchamano border where he held discussions with both Zimbabwean and Mozambican clearing agents at the border. He submitted his report confirming that: 1.The new system that Mozambican Customs is using DOES NOT have any technical problem at all. The problem is that a draw-down transit bond guarantee system that was introduced is not being supported by adequate bonds. At Cuchimano, for example, ONLY ONE clearing agent is licensed to clear transit cargo. This agent's bond is not big enough to cover the duty on all the transit traffic that passes through the border. As a result, The agent is only processing consignments of less than USD10 000 using the new system. Mozambican authorities are allowing higher value consignments to be processed using the old system. Even the smaller value consignments of less than USD 10000 are sometimes experiencing delays pending acquittal of others that would have been cleared before them. 2. Only four (4) clearing agents are licensed under the new single window system at Forbes/Machipanda border. 3. In addition to toll fees that are of varying amounts depending on the distance, a total of USD 119 is payable to Mozambican authorities for each transit truck. The breakdown of the charges is as follows: USD20 is a transit tax due to Customs, USD24 is for MCNet the system provider, USD25 is the clearing agent fee and USD50 is a fee that is due to the Bond Guaranting company. The USD50 due to the Bond company is for contractual clients only. If one does not have a contract with the company, this fee increases to USD100 (increasing the total payable from USD119 to USD169). There is also an insurance fee of USD45 that is valid for 30 days to cover both the hoarse and trailer of a truck. On 10th May 2013, Mozambique Revenue Authority reported that: 1.Mozambique Revenue Authority would like to emphasize that the Mozambique Single Window does not have any technical difficulties and does not have any problems as many would like to portray. 2. The Mozambique Single Window introduces transparency to the process of transit of goods and NOT new customs regulations. Single window only serves to implement the existing requirements, which ensure that ALL TRANSPORTERS are registered and approved by Mozambique Customs and that they have adequate customs guarantee bonds in place. The measures are fully in line with SADC procedures and contain no additional requirements. 3. Mozambique Revenue Authority also sought to clarify that THERE ARE NO DELAYS experienced by registered transporters or those agents WITH ENOUGH GUARANTEE BONDS LODGED WITH Mozambique CUSTOMS. 4. In Mozambique, a bond/guarantee is registered with Customs for a fixed amount, and based on this amount any transaction falling within this value may proceed in transit/bond to its destination. For example, say a bond of 1,000,000,00 MT is registered with Customs this will entitle the trader to remove as many consignments as long as the value for total consignment in transit do not exceed 1,000,000 MT. The acquittal of bond/guarantee is done automatically as soon the goods exit the country. In this way the trader can move goods expeditiously without being worried that his/her bond limit has been reinstated. 5. The Mozambique Single Window has good infrastructure and the service is available at all borders. MRA is not clear about the allegations of non-availability of the system at the borders because it keeps monitoring very closely and knowing if border offices service is down. The complainant is requested to provide more information. 6. The Government of Mozambique expresses concern about the current level of false transit declarations whereby some transporters indicate goods as being detained for transit through Mozambique, when they actually intend to sell them into local consumption within the country. This practice has become extremely widespread and has resulted in considerable loss of revenue to the state as well as created unfair trade for local companies who pay their full import duties and taxes. 7. As part of ongoing sensitization programme, MRA to make sure that operators are fully sensitized about the introduction of the Single Window well in advance, Mozambique has trained about 5000 stakeholders. 8. Mozambique requests the SADC Secretariat to assist by advising Member States to sensitize all transporters and transit operators to get registered with Mozambique customs and have an adequate customs guarantee bond in place in order to avoid possible constraints for transit goods. Mozambique Revenue Authority are very pleased to assist all complainants to ensure the fast transit of goods from Mozambique and are always available for further clarifications, where needed.
NTB-000-501	2.9. Issues related to transit fees	2012-03-14	Kenya: Busia	Uganda	In process	View
Complaint:	Delays in issuing bonds at Kenya border with Uganda for tea meant for auction in Mombasa
Progress:	Awaiting response from imposing Member/Partner State
NTB-000-516	2.9. Issues related to transit fees	2012-07-01	Swaziland: Ngwenya	Mozambique	In process	View
Complaint:	My family and I were requested to pay an "alledged" import duty for groceries valued at around 800 Rands even though we clearly stated that we were in transit travelling from South Africa to Mozambique. The customs official kept insisting that we would be given a receipt and to our amazement the receipt had my husband's name but instead of his addressing being Maputo it was registered Manzini. Would the Swazi focal point(s) please clarify if this is the usual procedure for goods transiting Swazilang, whether commercial or for personal consumption
Progress:	On 5th September 2012, Swaziland Focal point reported that the Swaziland Revenue Authority advised that taxable personal goods (for domestic use only) imported by a person residing in Swaziland are granted an allowance of E250.00 per declaration in terms of the VAT Act, 2011 and the balance thereof is taxable at the standard rate of 14%. • On another note, according to the Customs & Excise Act 21, of 1971, goods in transit through Swaziland to another country shall be covered by a provisional payment equivalent to the potential revenue due on those goods had they been imported for consumption in Swaziland. The provisional payment shall be claimed and refunded upon production of proof of export of the same goods from Swaziland. • Stakeholders should note that, to enable the Department of Customs and Excise establish whether goods are in transit or are imported into Swaziland, the onus is upon the importer or declarant to truthfully and honestly provide this information to the Department of Customs and Excise.
NTB-000-539	2.12. Lack of capacity of Customs officers	2012-07-01	Madagascar: Toamasina Port Ã gestion autonome ( sea port)	Madagascar	New	View
Complaint:	During the inspection of goods, customs officers could not recognize the type of product exported en masse in a 20" container. Customs official cannot make the difference between rose wood and bamboo. Even if the company is certified to European standardswith all compliant papers, customs formalities for verification of cargo seemed more inadequate because the company has 20 years experience in the same export. Customs officers should have a higher level of recognition of goodsand common sense ro recognize a company that trades honestly"
Products:	460211: Basketwork, wickerwork & other articles, made directly to shape from bamboo
NTB-000-450	2.11. Lack of control in Customs infrastructure	2011-09-03	EAC	Uganda	In process	View
Complaint:	There is lack of verification sheds and parking yards at most border posts in the EAC partner states.
Progress:	At the Tripartite NTBs Online Reporting, Monitoring and Eliminating Mechanism Meeting to Launch the SMS Reporting Tool, Uganda reported that negotiations were ongoing between the Government and the World Bank to build the infrastructure. Uganda would update on progress in due course.
NTB-000-334	1.14. Lack of coordination between government institutions	2009-09-09	Swaziland: Ministry of Trade	Uganda	In process	View
Complaint:	Permits are issued by diffrent authorities in diffrent cities. Agricultural import permits are issued by NAMBOARD in Manzini.; Dairy products imports are issued by Dairy Board in Manzini. Other miscellaneous goods import permits issued by Ministry of Finance in Mbabane.
Progress:	At the 27th COMESA Trade and Customs Commitee meeting held in Swaziland from 15-18 August 2011, Swaziland reported that issuance of permits in Swaziland is done by different authorities that for the moment may be located in different cities. However, internal consultations are on-going to explore the possibility of issuing the permits from one location
NTB-000-533	7.6. Lack of information on procedures (or changes thereof)	2012-09-24	Zimbabwe: Victoria Falls	Zimbabwe	In process	View
Complaint:	We are importing fuel tankers from South Africa to Zambia. The trailers are SA Registered (Valid licence and Registration Plates - deregistered once in Zambia). The Truck Tractors are from our Zambian Fleet. On arrival at Beit Bridge, the documents are accepted by ZIMRA as trailers being exported to Zambia, drawn on their own wheels, in transit across Zimbabwe to Victoria Falls. The act of exporting the trailers on their own wheels is thus condoned by ZIMRA at Beit Bridge. When we get to Victoria Falls, we are then told by ZIMRA that exported motorised vehicles must be carried on the back of a flat deck trailer. A statutory instrument is eluded to, but we have yet to see this. Our arguement is as follows. The trailers have valid registrations and licences (not to mention all the Police Clearances for export), they are not motorised (self propelled), ZIMRA Beit Bridge has condoned the export on wheels and we are actually presenting ourselves at Vic Falls and have not disappeared with the units illegally into Zimbabwe. Placing these units on flat decks is prohibitively expensive. We are not transporting imported cars from overseas that are deregistered and for which we understand the need to be transported whilst in transit across Zimbabwe on a flat deck etc. There is no clear statutory instrument that we have seen on exports of this nature eg licenced trailers
Progress:	On 6 December 2012, Zimbabwe Focal Point reported that the complaint had been fowarded to the Ministry of Transport and ZIMRA on 10 October 2012 to investigate and provide comments. The response is still being awaited.
NTB-000-172	2.8. Lengthy and costly customs clearance procedures	2009-07-27	Malawi: Dedza	Malawi	In process	View
Complaint:	cumbersome and bureaucratic delays encountered in the processing of documentation and clearing of goods at the border posts.
Progress:	At the Tripartite NTBs Online Reporting, Monitoring and Eliminating Mechanism Meeting to Launch the SMS Reporting Tool from 9-10 April 2013 in Lusaka, Zambia, Malawi reported that the Malawi revenue authority had started a programme on improving the border posts operations. Malawi will submit progress report to the 10th SADC Sub Cimmittee on Trade facilitation ( SCTF)
NTB-000-374	2.8. Lengthy and costly customs clearance procedures	2010-02-10	SADC	Zimbabwe	In process	View
Complaint:	Lack of a SADC simplified trading regime hampers small traders from doing business with their SADC counterparts.
Progress:	1. SADC secretariat reported that , a SADC simplified trading regime could represent a trade facilitation tool and SADC Secretariat is working with a view to present a proposal by the next meeting of the Sub-Committee on Customs Cooperation. 2. At the 10th meetin gof SADC Suibcommittee on Trade Facilitation held on 14-15 June 2012, it was recalled that the matter had already been presented to TNF during its April 2010 meeting with a view to facilitating participation of small traders in the SADC FTA. During that meeting it was agreed that Member States were going to consult and that the document submitted thenrequired further input. The SCTF further noted that a study was going to be undertaken to develop a draft STR.
NTB-000-256	2.8. Lengthy and costly customs clearance procedures	2009-09-08	Democratic Republic of the Congo: Kasumbalesa	Namibia	In process	View
Complaint:	DRC customs, cause problems on road transport through delaying trucks to depart on time to Lubumbashi
Progress:	At the Tripartite NTBs Online Reporting, Monitoring and Eliminating Mechanism Meeting to Launch the SMS Reporting Tool from 9-10 April 2013 in Lusaka, Zambia, DRC reported that internal consultations would be made with relevant authorities.
NTB-000-358	2.8. Lengthy and costly customs clearance procedures	2010-02-10	Democratic Republic of the Congo: Ministry of Trade	Tanzania	In process	View
Complaint:	The process of obtaining DRC Ogeframe certificate delays cargo at the port and increases costs. Procedure is too long as it involves exporter paying fees at Tanzania Revenue Authority in DAr es Salaam Office and then take the document for endorsement by DRC. This is applicable only to transit goods to DRC.
Progress:	At the Tripartite NTBs Online Reporting, Monitoring and Eliminating Mechanism Meeting to Launch the SMS Reporting Tool from 9-10 April 2013 in Lusaka, Zambia, DRC reported that internal consultations would be made with relevant authorities.
NTB-000-447	2.8. Lengthy and costly customs clearance procedures	2011-09-03	EAC	Rwanda	In process	View
Complaint:	Customs working hours are not harmonized
Progress:	On 03 December 2012, Kenya Focal Point reported that, during the Ministerial meeting on march 2012; Ministers decided that: (i) border entry points along the main transport corridors should operate 24 hrs for purposes of clearance of goods; and (ii) Partner States submit the names of the border entry points to start with by end of March 2012 The Partner States have submitted the border posts that are expected to operate 24hrs and these are: UGANDA Malaba; Busia; Katuna and Mutukula KENYA: Mombasa Port; Malaba ; Busia and, Namanga United Republic of Tanzania Dar Es Salaam Port; Namaga and Rusumu BURUNDI Kobero ; Kanyaru and Gasenyi RWANDA: Nemba and Kanyaru The Business Community is requested to update on the status for the region to consider the way forward in fully implementing the decisions of the ministers
NTB-000-587	2.8. Lengthy and costly customs clearance procedures Policy/Regulatory	2013-04-01	Mozambique: Beira Port	Zimbabwe	In process	View
Complaint:	Various exporter/importers in Zambia , Zimbabwe , Malawi are facing current challenges with Mozambique customs Authorities , whom I believe are part of the SADC grouping . We request SADC secretariat intervention as SADC to salvage the situation which has seriously affected clearance of goods at the following border posts/ports Machipanda , Nyamapanda , Mwanza and Beira Port The Complaint : Zimbabwe German Graphite , Samrec Vermiculite ,Zimbabwe Alloys , William Over , Carnaud Metal Box, Zam Beeef , Unicef Containers have stayed in Beira port for a full month , Cornelder the port authorities are charging huge storage bills which in some cases would out weight the value of the cargo . We have had stakeholders meetings with both customs & Cornelder in Beira but Customs have not accepted any responsibility whilst Cornelder insists on collection of storage. Shipping lines have also placed Freight Forwarders and transit agents on notice for line demurrage as the empties have exceeded their free period but still full inside the port Some cargo has expiry dates / short life span like photographic material – will get damaged still in port as the documents are still a mission to be processed by customs Ships / Vessels are going back empty as the cargo ( exports ) can not be loaded before clearance is done – most minerals from Zambia , Zimbabwe and tobacco from Malawi has been affected as the sailing dates are now one month behind and risk order cancellations Zimbabwe , Zambia and Malawi are now at the verge of losing millions of dollars on these shipments currently stuck in Mozambique some of which are seasonal goods Mozambique This problem arose because Mozambique customs introduced an electronic clearing system the single window electronic concept – to migrate from manual processing of entries from 01.04.2013 Coupled to it they also introduced the transit bonds registration and the bonds were to be managed electronically like the Zimbabwe/ Zambia situation The bonds were requested for all of a sudden and the processes are quite long takes at least ….. (number of )weeks during which cargo was coming into Beira and got stuck and at Machipanda , Nyamapanda & Mwanza land borders to Mozambique ? The Single window concept itself has serious setbacks like it relies on network for connectivity which failed daily and could be own for days at outside ports like Machipanda , Nyamapanda , Mwanza , trucks pile at for weeks before any solution has been in sight ? Customs staff at Machipanda , Nyamapanda & Mwanza border post appear inadequately trained to use the new system as a result smaller queries take one to two days to be resolved , Machipanda & Nyamapanda seems to have have inadequate equipment All the Despachantes were only given one access code per organization which affected the entry processing badly with documents piling as vessels arrived inland and that even for imports from other regional countries , are initiated from Customs in Beira to give reference numbers called Contra Marcas in order to proceed with the clearances Alfandega had no fall back method in place as they refused to use the manual method to clear the backlog Request to Mozambique, 1. Mozambique Ministry of Finance is requested to get customs to consider a parallel system to run with the electronic single window programme to clear the backlog in Beira port now and also consider providing release against Report orders to reduce further downtime in port . This will be a stop gap measure until the customs staff are well versed , fully trained and that the new system can work well 2. Mozambique authorities to facilitate arrangements with Cornelder to consider waiving storage for this special situation or at least offer 75% credit on the bills due which I must say are now astronomical based on the days the cargo has stayed in port both imports and exports 3. Mozambique authorities to facilitate arrangements with shipping lines to consider waiving completely the demurrage due on the empty containers or at least give say 15-21 more days grace period before demurrage starts accruing 4. Mozambique authorities to facilitate arrangements that Mozambique customs get technical assistance to assist roll this new programme out without causing huge catastrophies like this We trust that our request make sense and look forward to getting your valuable assistance
Progress:	On 15 May 2013, A stakeholder from Zimbabwe reported as follows: Some of the current challenges experienced at the Beira Port on the Ground are: i. Albeit the manual system is in operation it has bottle necks as only one or two senior officers are authorised to sign off release of processed entries. ii. Cornelder is insisting on charging storage for all containers that remained uncleared in the port during the period the new system was operational. The storage bills are huge such that some importers may be forced to abandon their containers. iii. Shipping lines are insisting on line demurrage. iv. Most containers including all break-bulk cargo is subject to customs escort. Trucks are batched in lots of three and only escorted end of day for a fee of MT 2 500. v. The process of registering clearing agents and raising bonds is still ongoing. Smaller agents will disappear because it would appear the bonds are currently obtainable from banks and most are failing to raise bonds. vi. As long as few agents are registered, the inadequacy of penal sums of bond will remain a challenge. It is common cause that their bonds will not be able to support the regional volumes passing through the port of Beira as exports and imports. On 12 May 2013, the President of the Federation of Clearing and Forwarding Associations of Southern Africa (FCFASA) gave a latest first hand update on the situation following his visit to Nyamapanda/Cuchamano border where he held discussions with both Zimbabwean and Mozambican clearing agents at the border. He submitted his report confirming that: 1.The new system that Mozambican Customs is using DOES NOT have any technical problem at all. The problem is that a draw-down transit bond guarantee system that was introduced is not being supported by adequate bonds. At Cuchimano, for example, ONLY ONE clearing agent is licensed to clear transit cargo. This agent's bond is not big enough to cover the duty on all the transit traffic that passes through the border. As a result, The agent is only processing consignments of less than USD10 000 using the new system. Mozambican authorities are allowing higher value consignments to be processed using the old system. Even the smaller value consignments of less than USD 10000 are sometimes experiencing delays pending acquittal of others that would have been cleared before them. 2. Only four (4) clearing agents are licensed under the new single window system at Forbes/Machipanda border. 3. In addition to toll fees that are of varying amounts depending on the distance, a total of USD 119 is payable to Mozambican authorities for each transit truck. The breakdown of the charges is as follows: USD20 is a transit tax due to Customs, USD24 is for MCNet the system provider, USD25 is the clearing agent fee and USD50 is a fee that is due to the Bond Guaranting company. The USD50 due to the Bond company is for contractual clients only. If one does not have a contract with the company, this fee increases to USD100 (increasing the total payable from USD119 to USD169). There is also an insurance fee of USD45 that is valid for 30 days to cover both the hoarse and trailer of a truck. On 10th May 2013, Mozambique Revenue Authority reported that: 1.Mozambique Revenue Authority would like to emphasize that the Mozambique Single Window does not have any technical difficulties and does not have any problems as many would like to portray. 2. The Mozambique Single Window introduces transparency to the process of transit of goods and NOT new customs regulations. Single window only serves to implement the existing requirements, which ensure that ALL TRANSPORTERS are registered and approved by Mozambique Customs and that they have adequate customs guarantee bonds in place. The measures are fully in line with SADC procedures and contain no additional requirements. 3. Mozambique Revenue Authority also sought to clarify that THERE ARE NO DELAYS experienced by registered transporters or those agents WITH ENOUGH GUARANTEE BONDS LODGED WITH Mozambique CUSTOMS. 4. In Mozambique, a bond/guarantee is registered with Customs for a fixed amount, and based on this amount any transaction falling within this value may proceed in transit/bond to its destination. For example, say a bond of 1,000,000,00 MT is registered with Customs this will entitle the trader to remove as many consignments as long as the value for total consignment in transit do not exceed 1,000,000 MT. The acquittal of bond/guarantee is done automatically as soon the goods exit the country. In this way the trader can move goods expeditiously without being worried that his/her bond limit has been reinstated. 5. The Mozambique Single Window has good infrastructure and the service is available at all borders. MRA is not clear about the allegations of non-availability of the system at the borders because it keeps monitoring very closely and knowing if border offices service is down. The complainant is requested to provide more information. 6. The Government of Mozambique expresses concern about the current level of false transit declarations whereby some transporters indicate goods as being detained for transit through Mozambique, when they actually intend to sell them into local consumption within the country. This practice has become extremely widespread and has resulted in considerable loss of revenue to the state as well as created unfair trade for local companies who pay their full import duties and taxes. 7. As part of ongoing sensitization programme, MRA to make sure that operators are fully sensitized about the introduction of the Single Window well in advance, Mozambique has trained about 5000 stakeholders. 8. Mozambique requests the SADC Secretariat to assist by advising Member States to sensitize all transporters and transit operators to get registered with Mozambique customs and have an adequate customs guarantee bond in place in order to avoid possible constraints for transit goods. Mozambique Revenue Authority are very pleased to assist all complainants to ensure the fast transit of goods from Mozambique and are always available for further clarifications, where needed.
NTB-000-492	7.5. Lengthy procedures	2012-03-01	South Africa: transit in south Africa	Zambia	In process	View
Complaint:	A private show company has made a complaint regarding the custom stoppages in South Africa. The Company imports products from Durban and transit through South Africa, the company has been informed that their trucks will be undergoing a tunnel for physical inspections of goods in transit. The company however, feel that this exercise is detrimental to their business as it is slow and will delay the arrival of goods and attract extra charges. The Company wonders why the good in transit should be stopped by customs/ police for inspections.
Progress:	On 28th June 2012, South Africa focal point responded that this NTB is subjective and make it difficult for SARS to solve it. The NTB has to be specific (e.g. time, which border, route etc). SARS therefore request the client or trader to rephrase the NTB so that we can be able to attend to it.
NTB-000-435	2.14. Other	2010-09-16	EAC	Kenya	In process	View
Complaint:	Lack of implementation of EAC harmonized documents by partner states.
Progress:	The 6th EAC Regional Forum on NTbs recommended that the EAC secretariat cross check and report wether the Partner States are implementing EACharmonised documents. 1. Burundi , Kenya, and Rwanda submitted documents used by revenue authorities to the secretariat 2. The Ministers decided that other Partner States submit by end of March 2012.
NTB-000-436	2.14. Other	2009-04-16	EAC	Kenya	In process	View
Complaint:	There is lack of harmonized procedures manual for the EAC partner states.
Progress:	1. At the 6th EAC regional forum on NTBs held from 12-13 March 2012, EAC secretariat reported that the EAC directorate of Customs is in the process of finalising the EAC procedures manual and that the document will be forwarded to the SCTIFI by April 2012. The meeting directed that the private sector be involved during the adoption process of the procedures manual. 2. The EAC Dedicated Ministerial Meeting on Non-Tariff Barriers in the East African Community held on 14 March 2012,decided that port procedures manuals should be harmonized by June 2012. 3. The private sector practitioners are urged to comments on the level of harmonized procedures manuals to date before the next ministerial meeting for the partner states to seek responses from the trade facilitation agencies on the complains from the business community prior to the next meeting.
NTB-000-543	3.8. Other	2012-01-01	Zambia: Chirundu	Zimbabwe	In process	View
Complaint:	Traders are being forced to pay $20 each by the Immigration side of Chirundu if they bear same address of where they are going in Zambia yet they will just going for a day to buy whatever goods for trade, this kind of behaviour of immigration officers is disturbing out traders different from Zimbabwe side what they do to Zambians trading in Zimbabwe
Progress:	At the Tripartite NTBs Online Reporting, Monitoring and Eliminating Mechanism Meeting to Launch the SMS Reporting Tool held from 9-10 April in Lusaka Zambia, Zambia reported that the the Focal Point would consult with the relevant authprity and provide feedback in due course.

<< Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next >>

Display:

Non-Tariff Barriers

Reporting, Monitoring and Eliminating Mechanism

Active complaints