| Complaint number |
NTB Type
|
Date of incident |
Location |
Reporting country or region (additional) |
Status |
Actions |
|
NTB-001-221 |
3. Technical barriers to trade (TBT)
B8: Conformity assessment related to TBT |
2024-03-10 |
Kenya: |
Tanzania |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
The Neelkant Tanzania company that exports its salt product to East African countries has experience difficulty to import its salt product in Kenya, because Kenya does not recognize the standard certificate issued by TBS claiming that it does not qualify, for that case, KBS have been charging six thousand shillings for each shipment from Tanzania. TBS and KBS have harmonized their standards and have been implemented for some period of time till recently |
|
|
NTB-001-220 |
2.3. Issues related to the rules of origin |
2024-07-01 |
Uganda: Uganda Revenue Authorities |
Kenya |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
(ii) NTB-001-205: Denial of Preferential Market Access (Issues of DRS)
Denial of market access of biscuits manufactured by Kenya and transferred into Uganda on
grounds that wheat flour material supplied by Kenblest Ltd benefitted from imported wheat under
DRS (Duty Remission Scheme).
The meeting noted that the Republic of Uganda has written to the Republic of Kenya requesting for
some information that would guide them to make an informed decision, but the letter had not been
responded to. The Republic of Kenya committed to respond to URA on the information requested.
The Republic of Kenya committed to respond to Uganda by 30th October 2024.
(iii) Certificate of Origin Declined (Issues of RoO)
Uganda has declined to recognize the Certificate of Origin for chewing gum manufactured by
Kenafric Industries transferred to M/S Glorre International Limited on concern that the
manufacturing process does not exceed the provisions in Rule 7 of the EAC Rules of Origin, 2015.
Kenya NMC suggests that the process involves the use of machinery and technical expertise.
Therefore, the process of manufacturing chewing gum exceeds the provisions under Rule 7 of the
EAC rules of origin.
The Republic of Kenya informed the meeting that chewing gum manufactured by Kenafric qualifies
to be granted preferential tariff treatment by Uganda Revenue Authority and reiterated that the
manufacturing process is substantial and qualifies to be granted tariff treatment.
The meeting noted that the Republic of Uganda has written to the Republic of Kenya requesting for
some information that would guide them to make an informed decision but the letter had not been
responded to. The Republic of Kenya committed to respond to URA on the information requested.
The Republic of Kenya responded to the Republic of Uganda on 18th October 2024. |
|
|
NTB-001-219 |
2.3. Issues related to the rules of origin |
2024-07-01 |
Uganda: Uganda Revenue Authorities |
Kenya |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
(ii) NTB-001-205: Denial of Preferential Market Access (Issues of DRS)
Denial of market access of biscuits manufactured by Kenya and transferred into Uganda on
grounds that wheat flour material supplied by Kenblest Ltd benefitted from imported wheat under
DRS (Duty Remission Scheme).
The meeting noted that the Republic of Uganda has written to the Republic of Kenya requesting for
some information that would guide them to make an informed decision, but the letter had not been
responded to. The Republic of Kenya committed to respond to URA on the information requested.
The Republic of Kenya committed to respond to Uganda by 30th October 2024.
(iii) Certificate of Origin Declined (Issues of RoO)
Uganda has declined to recognize the Certificate of Origin for chewing gum manufactured by
Kenafric Industries transferred to M/S Glorre International Limited on concern that the
manufacturing process does not exceed the provisions in Rule 7 of the EAC Rules of Origin, 2015.
Kenya NMC suggests that the process involves the use of machinery and technical expertise.
Therefore, the process of manufacturing chewing gum exceeds the provisions under Rule 7 of the
EAC rules of origin.
The Republic of Kenya informed the meeting that chewing gum manufactured by Kenafric qualifies
to be granted preferential tariff treatment by Uganda Revenue Authority and reiterated that the
manufacturing process is substantial and qualifies to be granted tariff treatment.
The meeting noted that the Republic of Uganda has written to the Republic of Kenya requesting for
some information that would guide them to make an informed decision but the letter had not been
responded to. The Republic of Kenya committed to respond to URA on the information requested.
The Republic of Kenya responded to the Republic of Uganda on 18th October 2024. |
|
|
NTB-001-218 |
2.6. Additional taxes and other charges |
2024-10-29 |
Tanzania: Dar es Salaam |
|
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Tanzania's Finance Act 2024 introduced an excise duty for ‘’imported’’ products under HS Code 32.08 (Paints and varnishes including enamels and lacquers) of T Shs. 500 per kilo. However, this excise duty has NOT been imposed on any local manufacturers of the same products.
We intend to import items under this heading made in Kenya. Under the spirit of the EAC Trade protocols, which allows for free movement of goods, no duties, taxes or other non-tariff barriers should be imposed on any goods from a EAC partner country that a local manufacturer does not pay.
Therefore we believe this excise duty represents a huge disincentive to Kenyan manufacturers and hindrance to free trade within the EAC.
After writing to the TRA for assistance in the above issue, we were told that the Excise duty is chargeable to all goods falling under that heading even if it is of Kenyan origin (see our letter and their response)
We therefore request your assistance on way forward for us to import items under the HS codes mentioned from Kenya without being subject to this new excise duty of 500 T Shs. Per kilo. |
|
|
NTB-001-217 |
1.1. Export subsidies |
2024-09-24 |
Tanzania: Kabanga |
Burundi |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
URT IS IMPOSING TO BURUNDI A TAX FOR SALUBRITY FOR TRANSIT TRUCKS imposed by port health on borders. This case is for 2 borders : Kabanga and Mutukula with different dates: 24 September 2024 and 02 October 2024. |
|
|
NTB-001-216 |
6.2. Administrative fees |
2024-10-06 |
Kenya: Mombasa sea port |
Rwanda |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Mombasa county charges: At Mombasa Port they charge county fees where they pay 700 KEShs but these fees are never communicated to the truck driver in any way. Consequently, after some months you get a message that you have parking fees arrears with fines for late payment which can reach 7,000 KEShs.
|
|
|
Progress:
|
The Republic of Kenya committed to consult and revert during the 38th RMC |
|
|
NTB-001-215 |
7.1. Arbitrariness |
2024-10-03 |
Kenya: Traffic Police |
Rwanda |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Arbitrary fines charged to drivers in Kenya not commensurate to the fines specified in Kenya Traffic Control Act 2015
For instance, the driver was fined 25,000 Kenyan shillings where he was supposed to pay only 10,000 Kenyan shillings (Section 53 (1) and 67). Also, Kenya Traffic Control Act (2015) prohibits someone from driving a commercial vehicle for more than a total of eight hours in any 24-hour period (section 66A). This should not apply to transit trucks since the international best practice for maximum driving time for truck drivers is between 11 and 14 hours a day.
|
|
|
Progress:
|
The Republic of Kenya committed to consult and revert during the Sectoral Committee on Trade. |
|
|
NTB-001-214 |
6.6. Border taxes |
2024-10-01 |
Tanzania: Rusumo, Mutukula, Kabanga |
Rwanda
(Burundi) |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Through Port Health at Rusumo, Kobero / Kabanga and Mutukula/Mutukula, the United Republic of Tanzania charges the Republic of Rwanda and the Republic of Burundi Trucks 5 USD or the equivalent in Tshs as Free Pratique which is not in the EAC legal framework for free movement of cross-border trade. |
|
|
Progress:
|
The United Republic of Tanzania submitted that Free Pratique is an internal health practice for taking samples, inspections, maintenance, vaccination, and sanitising at points of entry and exit. The fee which is charged once per vehicle per journey, is charged based on the Tanzania Public Health Act 2009 http://elibrary.osg.go.tz/bitstream/handle/123456789/1006/01-2009%20The%20Public%20Health%20Act%2c%202009%20.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y and International Health Regulations 2005.
Free Pratique in the Tanzania Public Health Act 2009
Definition:
"free pratique" means permission for a ship or an aircraft to enter a port embark or disembark, discharge or load cargo or stores;
When is it granted:
Section 40 (3) Where the Port Health Officer is satisfied that -
a) a communicable or infectious disease is not on board;
b) The Responses on the Maritime Declaration of Health Form are negative:
c) the Ship Sanitation Control Certificate or Ship Sanitation Control Exemption Certificate is valid; and
d) there is no other reason for the ship to be further inspected he shall grant a certificate for free pratique and allow the ship to enter the port as prescribed in the Seventh Schedule to this Act,
Section 43. Except in the case of danger, the Master of a vessel arriving at any port or place in the country and a person on board the vessel, shall not communicate or attempt to communicate with the shore or any other vessel, other than by signal, until a certificate for free pratique has been granted to that vessel in accordance with the provisions of this Act and any other relevant laws.
Partner States expressed their concern on the discriminatory fee charged at Rusumo, Kabanga and Mutukula OSBPs only and is demanded on truck drivers without any service being provided to them. |
|
|
NTB-001-213 |
5.14. Restrictive licenses
Policy/Regulatory |
2021-01-01 |
Rwanda: Rwanda FDA |
Kenya |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Rwanda requires manufacturers in Kenya to register their cosmetic products with FDA. The process of pproduct registration is cumbersome, not clear and it takes long, sample of evidence attached shows payment was done in 2021 for 63 products but up to date only 37 products have been registered.
The registration and payment are demanded despite the products having the Kenya recognized quality marks (SMark) with harminised standard. This is a violation of the SQMT Act. In addition, Rwanda FDA had committed that they are not going to retest nor charge the same fees to products that have been certified with recognised SMark.
Invoice number $14,150 and invoice $1,600 FDA. Rwanda use these FDA registration to restrict our cosmetics products and food into Rwanda as Rwanda has not issued licenses for cosmetics since 2021. Additionally, these has reduced shipments of goods to Rwanda and the charges charged to products has made the prices rising. |
|
|
NTB-001-212 |
2.10. Inadequate or unreasonable customs procedures and charges |
2024-10-01 |
Uganda: URA |
Kenya |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Kenya is experiencing unfair treatment by URA. Where the institution refuses to recognize the weights of export documents of the sealed goods, C2 and road consignment notes. Uganda usually issues notice of seizure for mis appropriation of weight across items. Unfortunately, efforts to engage with border officials have not been fruitful because the officers demand for 100% verification for all the consignments every time at the cost of the manufacturer. This is regardless the products being fragile and without good equipment to offload and load. At times the items brake causing loses to paid products.
All shipments to Uganda are subjected to 100% verification by URA, This has huge cost implications and delay in delivery of the goods. Some of the products affected include ceramic products - Close Couple Toilet, Basin and Pedestal. |
|
|
NTB-001-211 |
2.13. Issues related to Pre-Shipment Inspections |
2024-10-01 |
Uganda: UNBS |
Kenya |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Kenya is experiencing unfair treatment by UNBS. Where the institution refused to recognize PERMITS Issued by KEBS. Unfortunately, efforts to engage with border and Headquarters UNBS officials have not been fruitful because the manufacturer didn't receive any help insisting that Kenya manufacturers pay the destination Inspection fee despite products having standardization marks with harmonized standards.
UNBS demand that payments for destination must be done without any other documents issued by UNBS.
Additionally, it’s been a challenge getting sample receipts when UNBS pick samples for every consignment. Manufacturers would demand drivers to pay for lack of evidence of the huge samples taken by UNBS. Also clients receive less paid items due to samples collected by UNBS. This is unfair and has raised concerns to Kenya manufacturers and clients in Uganda.
Affected products include cosmetics products |
|
|
NTB-001-210 |
2.9. Issues related to transit fees |
2023-05-02 |
Kenya: Mombasa County |
Uganda |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Agricultural Produce Cess on tea into Mombasa County
Mombasa county charges charges Cess on tea in transit to the auction market. Mombasa County is charging the cess on all tea destined for Mombasa at the rate Kshs 7000, for a truck of seven tonnes and above.Charging the cess on tea being trucked into Mombasa Countyincreases the cost of doing business. This tea is dstined outside Kenya. |
|
|
Progress:
|
During the RMC of 17th October 2024 the Republic of Kenya committed to consult and revert during the 38th RMC. |
|
|
NTB-001-209 |
2.9. Issues related to transit fees |
2024-10-13 |
Kenya: Ministry of Forestry and Wildlife |
Uganda |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Additional fees charged on timber in transit.
Kenya charges charges Ksh 48000 on transit vehicles carrying forest and timber products from Uganda transit through Kenya to destinations outside the EAC. Transit vehicles are charged fees for a transit license in addition to payment of road user fees. The timber products are extracted from forests in Uganda and not Kenya. This additional fee is wrongly charged and causes additional costs to trade in forest products from Uganda. |
|
|
Progress:
|
During the RMC of 17th October 2024, the Republic of Kenya committed to consult and revert during the 38th RMC. |
|
|
NTB-001-208 |
5.15. Other |
2024-05-01 |
Uganda: Fish protection unit |
Kenya |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Uganda is intercepting fish export from Kenya which is in transit to DRC on grounds that Kenya is transferring immature fish that is not accepted in Uganda.
The fish protection unit in Uganda opens the goods on transit in the sealed containers which is against the provisions of goods in transit. |
|
|
Progress:
|
The RMC of 17th October 2024, noted that this act is against Trade Facilitation Laws on goods in Transit and urged the Republic of Uganda to respect the free movement of transit cargo and allow transit fish from RSS, Kenya and Tanzania to transit freely to DRC. Transit goods should not be subjected to TBT regulations under the WTO Agreement of Trade Facilitation and EAC Instruments.
The Republic of Uganda committed to follow up with relevant institutions to allow transit trucks carrying fish to go through Ugandan territory without any restrictions or interceptions in the Uganda territory. |
|
|
NTB-001-206 |
2.7. International taxes and charges levied on imports and other tariff measures |
2024-08-31 |
Kenya: Kenya Revenue Authority |
Uganda |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Kenya granted a lower tariff rate of 25% on alcohol imports from the United Kingdom under their Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA), a move that contravenes the spirit of the East African Community (EAC) and the Common External Tariff (CET) framework. The CET for alcohol within the EAC region is set at 35%, and this preferential treatment for UK imports creates a significant inconsistency in the application of regional trade policies.
This action undermines the principles of the EAC Customs Union, which promotes uniformity in tariff application to enhance regional integration and fair trade among partner states. The granting of preferential tariffs to non-EAC countries could distort competition and negatively impact regional businesses, highlighting the need for adherence to the established CET structure within the EAC.
It is crucial for this issue to be addressed to uphold the integrity of the EAC trade framework and ensure equal treatment for all partner states in line with the objectives of the community. |
|
|
Progress:
|
On 20 October 2024, the EAC NTB Unit reported that the meeting noted that while it was true that Kenya signed an EPA with the EU. The Partner State was yet to commence trade under that agreement. The meeting was informed that there are modalities under which such goods shall be treated once they are imported into the Community and hence it shall become an NTB once trade starts and affects East African Partner States. There is no proof of an NTB as yet. |
|
|
NTB-001-205 |
2.3. Issues related to the rules of origin |
2024-07-01 |
Uganda: Busia |
Kenya |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Uganda's denial of market access of biscuit and wafers manufactured and transferred into Uganda by Sunveat Industries of Kenya. Reason being that wheat flour materials supplied by Kenblest LTD benefited from imported wheat under Duty Remission Scheme (DRS) |
|
|
Progress:
|
The RMC of 17th OCTOBER 2024 noted that the Republic of Uganda had written to the Republic of Kenya requesting some information that would guide them to make an informed decision but the letter had not been responded to. The Republic of Kenya committed to respond to URA on the information requested. |
|
|
NTB-001-204 |
2.9. Issues related to transit fees |
2024-10-01 |
Rwanda: Gatuna |
Uganda |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Republic of Rwanda is charging un harmonized flat rates for vehicles transiting through the Rwanda borders. This is against the agreed principle of distance x weight for transit vehicles.
Uganda is upholding the principle of distance*weight.
|
|
|
Progress:
|
The RMC of 17th October 2024 was informed that the NTB on discriminatory road user charges was considered by the 45th Council of Ministers which noted the following submission from Partner States:
The Republic of Rwanda informed the Council that:
a) The decision of TCM to calculate the Road User Charges based on weight and distance is discriminatory in nature. It favours big states and discriminates against smaller ones. In view of the above, Rwanda being a small state and landlocked as well cannot accept being punished based on its size.
b) The EAC Partner States had gone beyond this level by harmonizing fees and charges. The harmonization of charges, Levies and fees is ongoing. From 1 7 to 21 June 2024 in Entebbe - Uganda, the Community convened a regional meeting to identify and compile Fees, Levies and charges in Agriculture and Transport Sectors. The Republic of Rwanda proposes to continue in the same spirit of harmonizing charges and fees by putting in place flat rates.
c) That Road User Charges which are calculated based on axle load and distance should only apply to cargo trucks which originate from non-EAC Partner States i.e. SADC & COMESA Countries. EAC Partner States should enjoy equal benefits of regional integration by removing anything identified as barriers
d) That high transportation costs, including levies, fees, and charges, result in higher final prices, impacting businesses, trade, and end consumers, particularly in landlocked countries.
e) There is a need for the EAC to agree on fair and fact-based Road User Charges, not only focusing on micro-level factors like axle load/weight and distance but also considering other factors that favour all of us as a region
f) There is a need to do a study to determine the impact of the Road User Charges on the EAC economies.
The Republic of Burundi informed the Council that:
a) The bilateral meeting between the Republic of Burundi and the United Republic of Tanzania as directed by the TCM has not yet been convened by the Secretariat; and
b) They were still consulting on the matter.
The Council therefore observed that:
a) Road User Charges are intended for infrastructural development and maintenance, end-to-end facilitation of transportation, and not revenue; and
b) All the Partner States participated in the meeting of the SC TCM that adopted the proposals and recommendations of SC TCM on harmonisation of Road User Charges.
The Sectoral Council (TCM) Directed:
a) Partner States to apply the distance + weight (axles) charging principle;
b) Partner States that use flat rates to abolish them and adopt distance + weight (axles) charging principle.
c) Partner States to charge Road User Charges based on the following three categories of vehicles:
• Buses;
• Trucks of three or less axles; and
• Heavy Goods Vehicles of more than three axles (truck with a drawbar trailer or articulated vehicles/semi-trailers);
d) Partner States applying COMESA harmonised rates between themselves to continue doing so;
e) Partner States to reciprocate the distance + weight (axles) rates charged by counterpart states;
f) The Secretariat to prepare Terms of Reference for a study to review the existing Road User Charges and develop harmonised charging formulas to be applicable in the EAC;
g) Secretariat to mobilise funds for the study in (vi) above;
h) Foreign registered vehicles to be charged RUCs on the basis of a round trip from the point of entry to the destination and back provided the destination is within the country of entry;
i) Partner States to always display the gazetted RUC rates at all points of entry; and
j) Partner States to prepare a schedule of distances and their respective computed charges from their point of entry to various destinations within their respective territories and display them at all points of entry.
The Council directed the Secretariat to refer the Harmonization of Road User Charges in the Community back to the Sectoral Council on Transport Communication and Meteorology (TCM) for consideration and report back to the 46th meeting of Council (EAC/CM 45/ Directive 56).
As per the directives of TCM, there are two Road User Charges adopted in the Community.
(i) distance + weight (axles) rates
(ii) COMESA harmonised rates of USD 10 per 100 KM
The Republic of Rwanda committed to consult and revert during the 38th RMC. |
|
|
NTB-001-203 |
5.3. Export taxes
Policy/Regulatory |
2023-04-12 |
Malawi: Malawi Revenue Authority |
Zambia |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Malawi Laundry & confectionary imports into Zambia are levied MK20,000 to MK25,000 per invoice, where
Zambian products going to Malawi are charged with 13-27% (MBS, Surcharge, Excise duty). |
|
|
Progress:
|
NFPs for the two countries to hold bilateral meeting by August 2024. This issue was also discussed during bilateral meeting held in Addis Ababa at the 4th NTBs Forum . Malawi to report progress from internal consultations. |
|
|
NTB-001-202 |
8.8. Issues related to transit |
2024-09-16 |
Uganda: Elegu |
Tanzania
(Kenya) |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Uganda through the Fisheries Protection Unit intercepted fish from South Sudan at Pakwach Check Point and Elegu One Stop Border Post, breaking seals and inspecting fish which is in transit to DRC, on the grounds that RSS is transferring immature fish that are not accepted in Uganda. |
|
|
Progress:
|
The RMC of 17th October 2024, noted that this act is against Trade Facilitation Laws on goods in Transit and urged the Republic of Uganda to respect the free movement of transit cargo and allow transit fish from RSS, Kenya and Tanzania to transit freely to DRC. Transit goods should not be subjected to TBT regulations under the WTO Agreement of Trade Facilitation and EAC Instruments.
The Republic of Uganda committed to follow up with relevant institutions to allow transit trucks carrying fish to go through Ugandan territory without any restrictions or interceptions in the Uganda territory. |
|
|
NTB-001-201 |
2.4. Import licensing |
2024-07-16 |
Zimbabwe: Ministry of Trade |
Malawi |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
In June 2024, a member of Malawi Confederation of Chambers of Commerce and Industry, Nuline Textiles Blanket Manufacturers Limited, entered into an agreement with a Zimbabwean company, Middlefield Investment Pvt. Ltd, to supply them with blankets.
Starting on July 11, 2024, Nuline Textiles Blanket Manufacturers Limited completed all the necessary procedures in Malawi to facilitate the export of blankets to Zimbabwe under the COMESA trade agreement to ensure they would receive preferential treatment. On July 16, 2024, the Export Bill of Entry No. E 3645 (dated July 15, 2024) was released by Customs in Malawi, and the consignment was loaded onto Truck No. NE 10666 / NE 10702.
However, on the same day, just as the truck driver was about to depart, Nuline Textiles received a call from their client in Zimbabwe, instructing them to hold off on the shipment. The following day, the client, Middlefield Investment Pvt. Ltd, informed Nuline Textiles that the blankets required an import permit or license, which the client had not yet obtained. They assured Nuline Textiles that they were working to secure the permit as quickly as possible.
On July 18, 2024, Middlefield Investment Pvt. Ltd requested additional time to work on obtaining the import license and asked Nuline Textiles to offload the truck and return the blankets to their warehouse.
As of today, the import license has still not been secured. We request the Ministry of Trade in Zimbabwe to assist on this.
|
|
English
Français
