| Complaint number |
NTB Type
|
Date of incident |
Location |
Reporting country or region (additional) |
Status |
Actions |
|
NTB-001-396 |
2.7. International taxes and charges levied on imports and other tariff measures |
2026-07-21 |
Tanzania: TRA |
Kenya |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Tanzania is subjecting a discriminative excise duty on Margarine - HS 1517.10.00 on the Kenya chocolate transferred to Tanzania, it charges an IMPORT Excise duty of Tsh. 540. This measure is in contravention of the East African Community (EAC) Common Market Protocol, which seeks to promote the free movement of goods among member states. The imposition of this duty not only disrupts intra- regional trade and delays business operations but also undermines the spirit of regional and economical cooperation within the EAC. Additionally, this goes against SCFEA and Summit directive directing Partner States to remove all discriminative charges and treat EAC goods as transfer not import. We urge URT to remove these discriminative charges and treat Kenya products as locally produced not IMPORTED. |
|
|
Products:
|
1517.10: Margarine (excl. liquid) |
|
|
NTB-001-390 |
3. Technical barriers to trade (TBT)
B81: Product registration/approval requirements |
2026-06-29 |
Rwanda: Rwanda FDA |
Kenya |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
RFDA Mandatory Product Registration Requirements on 44 medicated cosmetics, 6 household chemical and 13 liquid detergent.
The Rwanda Food and Drugs Authority (RFDA) has made it mandatory for all such products to undergo product registration and obtain approval before they can be marketed, distributed, or advertised in Rwanda. The registration process is lengthy, taking between 6 and 12 months, and requires submission of product samples, test reports, labels, and other technical documentation. In addition, Kenyan products that have already undergone conformity assessment, testing, and certification by competent authorities in Kenya are subjected to
duplicate testing, inspections, and additional charges in Rwanda. This increases the cost of doing business, delays market entry, and undermines the competitiveness of Kenyan manufacturers.
This requirement is inconsistent with the spirit of the EAC Standardization, Quality Assurance, Metrology and Testing (SQMT) which promotes mutual recognition of conformity assessment results and the EAC Regulatory Framework to facilitate cross-border trade of pre-packaged food and cosmetic products. The duplicative requirements also constitute a significant Non-Tariff Barrier (NTB) that restricts the free movement of goods within the region and increases the cost of Kenya products which has valid standardization marks (SMarks) thus making the Kenya and regional goods to be uncompetitive. |
|
|
NTB-001-389 |
2.6. Additional taxes and other charges |
2026-09-04 |
South Sudan: State Revenue Authority |
Uganda |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
South Sudan – Reintroduction of Stamp Duty and Fire Safety Fees
The Government of the Republic of South Sudan, through the State Revenue Authority, has resumed the collection of stamp duty and fire safety fees from traders.
The reintroduction of these charges has increased the cost of conducting cross-border trade and may adversely affect traders engaged in commercial activities between Uganda and South Sudan.
The measure raises concerns regarding its consistency with the EAC integration framework, particularly the commitment to facilitate trade and promote free movement of goods among Partner States. The imposition of additional charges on traders has the potential to restrict market access, increase the cost of doing business and impede the development of intra-EAC trade. |
|
|
Progress:
|
Upon submission of the complaint, Uganda requested that the matter be raised through the appropriate EAC NTB and bilateral mechanisms to seek clarification on the basis of the charges and assess their conformity with applicable EAC commitments, with a view to securing their removal or harmonisation where appropriate. |
|
|
NTB-001-388 |
2.6. Additional taxes and other charges |
2026-07-01 |
Kenya: Kenya Sugar Board |
Uganda |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Kenya – Excise Duty on Ugandan Sugar
Kenya, through the Kenya Sugar Board, increased the excise duty applicable to sugar imported from Uganda from KES 7.50 per kilogram (KES 7,500 per tonne) to KES 40 per kilogram (KES 40,000 per tonne), as provided under Part IV – Excise Duty, Section 36(a)(vi) of the Kenya Gazette Supplement.
The substantial increase in the excise duty has significantly raised the cost of Ugandan sugar in the Kenyan market, thereby reducing its competitiveness and negatively affecting market access for Ugandan sugar exporters.
The measure also has the potential to disrupt the long-standing trade relationship between Uganda and Kenya, which has been facilitated under the EAC integration framework. The increased duty may constitute a Non-Tariff Barrier (NTB) and raises concerns regarding compliance with the EAC principles of free movement of goods, fair competition and non-discrimination among Partner States.
|
|
|
NTB-001-387 |
6.3. Special supplementary duties |
2026-07-01 |
Kenya: Kenya Revenue Authority |
Tanzania |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Kenya has recently imposed excise duty on float glass originating from Tanzania under HS Code 7005, following the removal of the excise duty exemption previously applicable to float glass originating from EAC Partner States.
According to Kenya Gazette Supplement No. 157 (Acts No. 19) dated 26 June 2026, float glass imported into Kenya under HS Code 7005 is now subject to excise duty at the rate of 35% of the excisable value or KES 500 per square metre, whichever is higher, including float glass originating from Tanzania and other EAC Partner States.
This policy change has already had a direct and measurable impact on Tanzanian exports. Customs Entry Documents for recent shipments of Tanzanian-origin float glass to Kenya show that excise duty has been assessed and charged. For example, one shipment of 1,186.42 square metres was charged KES 593,208 in excise duty at KES 500 per square metre, while another shipment of 2,450.25 square metres was charged KES 1,225,125 in excise duty.
The measure significantly increases the cost of Tanzanian float glass entering the Kenyan market and creates an additional tax burden on goods traded within the East African Community. Kenya is currently the largest export market for Tanzanian float glass, and continued access to this market is essential for sustaining production, employment, export earnings and industrial investment in Tanzania.
Kenya currently does not have domestic float glass production, while Kenyan glass processors and secondary manufacturers rely on imported float glass as a key raw material. The imposition of excise duty therefore not only restricts market access for Tanzanian manufacturers, but also increases production costs for Kenyan downstream industries.
We therefore request the EAC Secretariat and relevant EAC organs to review this measure and facilitate its resolution, including the reinstatement of the excise duty exemption for float glass originating from EAC Partner States. |
|
|
Products:
|
7005.10.90: -- Other, 7005.21.13: --- Of a thickness not exceeding 2 mm (excluding optical glass), 7005.21.15: --- Of a thickness exceeding 2 mm but not exceeding 2,5 mm (excluding optical glass), 7005.21.17: --- Of a thickness exceeding 2,5 mm but not exceeding 3 mm (excluding optical glass), 7005.29.13: --- Of a thickness not exceeding 2 mm (excluding solar glass and optical glass), 7005.29.15: --- Of a thickness exceeding 2 mm but not exceeding 2,5 mm (excluding solar glass and optical glass), 7005.29.17: --- Of a thickness exceeding 2,5 mm but not exceeding 3 mm (excluding solar glass and optical glass) and 7005.30: Float glass and surface ground and polished glass, in sheets, whether or not having an absorbent, reflecting or non-reflecting layer, wired, but not otherwise worked |
|
|
NTB-001-386 |
2.3. Issues related to the rules of origin |
2026-07-22 |
Tanzania: Weights and Measures Agency |
Uganda |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
The United Republic of Tanzania, through the Weights and Measures Agency, is undertaking the impounding and re-verification of Ugandan-manufactured roofing sheets, particularly ordinary corrugated AZED G32 (0.20mm) × 3m roofing sheets.
This matter requires urgent intervention, as it has the potential to establish a precedent whereby products manufactured in Uganda are subjected to additional verification, inspection, detention and associated charges upon entry into another EAC Partner State, notwithstanding their conformity with applicable standards and certification by the Uganda National Bureau of Standards (UNBS).
The measure may constitute a Non-Tariff Barrier (NTB) and is inconsistent with the EAC framework aimed at facilitating and promoting free and fair trade among Partner States.
Conclusion:
The continued impounding and re-verification of Ugandan roofing sheets may hinder intra-EAC trade by imposing additional regulatory requirements and costs on Ugandan products. The matter therefore warrants urgent engagement with the Tanzanian authorities to establish the basis for the additional verification and seek an amicable resolution in accordance with the EAC trade framework.
|
|
|
NTB-001-384 |
1.8. Import bans |
2026-08-05 |
Rwanda: Rwanda Food and Drug Authority |
Uganda |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
SUSPENSION OF IMPORTATION OF SELECTED ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES BY RWANDA
On 5 August 2026, the Government of Rwanda, through the Rwanda Food and Drugs Authority (FDA), announced a temporary suspension of the importation of selected alcoholic beverages.
The suspension has disrupted the normal flow of trade and trade-related activities between Rwanda and its trading partners, thereby creating a potential Non-Tariff Barrier (NTB) to trade.
The measure is also inconsistent with the principles and objectives of the East African Community (EAC) Customs Union and Common Market, particularly the commitment of Partner States to facilitate and promote the free movement of goods and enhance intra-EAC trade.
The Government of Rwanda is therefore requested to provide clarification on the basis and duration of the suspension and to consider appropriate measures to ensure that any regulatory interventions are implemented in a manner consistent with EAC obligations and do not unnecessarily impede legitimate trade among Partner States.
|
|
|
NTB-001-383 |
2.6. Additional taxes and other charges |
2026-08-07 |
Burundi: Burundi Customs |
Uganda |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
The Republic of Burundi, through the Surtaxe sur le Fer à Béton (SFB), is imposing a 10% surtax on imports from Uganda, particularly steel reinforcement bars with diameters ranging from 8mm to 32mm.
The measure appears to be inconsistent with the provisions of the EAC Customs Union Protocol, particularly the following:
• EAC Customs Union: Under Article 2(4)(a) and (b) of the Protocol on the Establishment of the EAC Customs Union, Customs duties and other charges of equivalent effect imposed on imports within the Customs Union are to be eliminated, while Non-Tariff Barriers (NTBs) to trade among Partner States are to be removed.
• National Treatment and Non-Discrimination against EAC Goods: The measure is also inconsistent with Article 15 of the EAC Customs Union Protocol on National Treatment, which prohibits Partner States from applying legislation or administrative measures that directly or indirectly discriminate against like products originating from another Partner State. It further prohibits the application of internal taxation measures that impose a higher tax burden on products from another Partner State than that imposed on similar domestic products.
Conclusion:
The imposition of the 10% surtax may constitute a Non-Tariff Barrier to intra-EAC trade and appears to undermine the principles of the EAC Customs Union, particularly the principles of free movement of goods, national treatment and non-discrimination among Partner States.
|
|
|
NTB-001-382 |
2.9. Issues related to transit fees |
2026-08-24 |
South Africa: Maseru Bridge |
Lesotho |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Members of CBW-Africa Lesotho Chapter, a group of Women are travelling to Botswana to participate in an Expo each one carrying different products - ranging from cosmetics to herbs and spices, for exhibiting at the expo, and give out as samples as necessary. We have faced a challenge whereby the clearing agent informed the group that we will need to pay R5000 as what she referred to as 'security bond', in addition to the 15% VAT we would have to pay at the Botswana border. As micro enterprises, we don't have these kind of funds, as we are already bootstrapping. This requirement for a M5000 security bond at the SA border therefore represents a barrier to us for accessing the potential intra-Africa trade benefits we are anticipating from our attendance of the Otshwereng Expo. We stand to lose immediate revenue from the Expo and future revenue-earning potential and trade linkages because we are not going to be able to raise this R5000 required by South Africa from us to transit to Botswana through their country. We are therefore requesting for a speedy resolution of our plight. |
|
|
Progress:
|
On 25th August 2026, Botswana Focal Point advised that the reported VAT and R5,000 security bond are South African customs requirements and are therefore not charges imposed by Botswana.
For goods being brought into Botswana for exhibition purposes, there is a provision for a temporary admission of qualifying goods, including commercial samples owned abroad and imported for the purposes of being shown or demonstrated at an exhibition in Botswana.
To benefit from the applicable exemption/temporary admission facility, the exhibitors should write to the Director, Department of Trade Development in advance, providing details of the products and clearly stating that the products are being brought into Botswana solely for exhibition, display or demonstration purposes.
The exhibitors should ensure that the goods are not intended for commercial sale and comply with the applicable temporary admission requirements. Please note that Botswana’s standard VAT rate is 14%. |
|
|
Products:
|
0910.9: - Other spices :, 1901.90.90: -- Other, 3304.9: - Other :, 0902.10: Green tea in immediate packings of <= 3 kg and 2007.99: Jams, jellies, marmalades, purées or pastes of fruit, obtained by cooking, whether or not containing added sugar or other sweetening matter (excl. citrus fruit and homogenised preparations of subheading 2007.10) |
|
|
NTB-001-381 |
1.8. Import bans
Policy/Regulatory |
2026-08-05 |
Rwanda: Rwanda Food and Drugs Authority (RFDA) |
Tanzania |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
On 5 August 2026, the Rwanda Food and Drugs Authority (RFDA) suspended imports and ordered the recall of certain spirit products from several East African Community (EAC) Partner States, including Tanzania. This action appears inconsistent with the EAC Standardization, Quality Assurance, Metrology and Testing (SQMT) Act, 2006, which allows products certified to harmonized EAC standards and bearing the EAC Quality Mark to circulate freely within the Community.
The affected products have been certified by the Tanzania Bureau of Standards (TBS) and comply with the applicable EAC standards. If RFDA had concerns regarding their quality or safety, it should have followed the SQMT notification procedures before taking unilateral action. Tanzania therefore requests Rwanda to remove this non-tariff barrier and allow trade in the affected products to resume. |
|
|
NTB-001-380 |
8.7. Costly Road user charges /fees |
2026-07-31 |
Zambia: Ministry Of Commerce |
Botswana |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
BW transporters expected to pay combines border/road/toll fees in excess of $900 whilst other vehicles from neighbouring regions pay approximately $300. We are an exporter of Steel from Selebi Phikwe to Zambia at a rate of 1000+ tons that is 30+ trucks with planned demand increasing to 4000+ tons, this emplies cost differences up to $18,000 currently. This greatly inhibits Botswana transporters from uplifting our product significantly affecting our sales to Zambia. |
|
|
NTB-001-374 |
1.1. Export subsidies |
2026-07-25 |
Botswana: Tlokweng Gate |
Botswana |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Customs officials dispute the invoice issued,saying the goods I bought are underprice and as a result my goods are detained. |
|
|
NTB-001-373 |
2.6. Additional taxes and other charges |
2026-02-27 |
Malawi: Malawi Revenue Authority |
Kenya |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
The Malawi Revenue Authority, through the New Customs and Excise Tax Measures for the 2026/2027 Financial year effective 27 February 2026, introduced import surcharges on various products including refined edible oils (10%), cane sugar (15%), sweets (20%), biscuits (20%), crisps (20%), vegetables (40%), chilli sauce (15%), beverages (15%), cement (30%), plastic household articles (20%), blankets (25%), polypropylene bags (20%), aluminium pots (15%), plastic furniture (20%), ballpoint pens (15%), among others, ostensibly to protect local industries.
The additional import surcharges increase the cost of Kenyan products entering Malawi, thereby eroding the Kenya COMESA preferential market access, reducing competitiveness of Kenyan exports.
Kenya and Malawi are both COMESA Member States. Kenyan products that meet COMESA Rules of Origin should enjoy preferential treatment. The imposition of protective import surcharges on products originating from COMESA Member States has the effect of nullifying or impairing tariff preferences and constitutes a measure equivalent to a non-tariff barrier, contrary to the principles of trade liberalisation and non-discrimination under the COMESA Treaty.
Kenya requests Malawi to:
1. Consider removing the import surcharges on COMESA-originating products
2. Restore full preferential treatment for eligible Kenyan products.
3. Engage Member States through COMESA before introducing trade-restrictive measures.
4. Ensure industrial protection measures are implemented in a manner consistent with COMESA obligations and do not undermine regional integration. |
|
|
Progress:
|
1. On 1st September 2026, Kenya Requested the Secretariat to facilitate bilateral consultations to resolve the issue. |
|
|
NTB-001-370 |
8.8. Issues related to transit |
2026-03-17 |
South Africa: City of Ekurhuleni |
Zambia |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
FLAMMABLE SUBSTANCE TRANSPORT PERMIT
Regarding the permit, the issue is our trucks were instructed to obtain Fire Certificates from municipal authorities as a precondition for loading. This requirement was introduced for the first time, despite our longstanding operations transporting the same product without such a condition. We were required to apply for a permit that we already have through the Zambian government.
The responses received from those responsible was that the Certification from the Chief Inspector of Explosives (CIE) in South Africa authorising the transportation of explosives and hazardous materials is sufficient. Furthermore, it is not a requirement from CIE for our trucks to obtain Fire certificates, however the client we were loading for insisted that it is a requirement for them to load the trucks.
The duplication of regulatory oversight resulted in delays and inefficiencies as the trucks had to wait almost 4 weeks for the certificates to be issued. |
|
|
NTB-001-369 |
|
2026-02-16 |
Kenya: |
Ethiopia |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Under the East African Community (EAC) Vehicle Load Control Act, 2016, Kenya applies permissible maximum axle load limit of 28-ton along the Moyale–Nairobi (A2) corridor. In contrast, Ethiopian trucks are permitted to carry loads of up to 40 tons up to the Moyale One-Stop Border Post (OSBP). Due to this regulatory mismatch, Ethiopian trucks cannot proceed further into Kenya and must offload their cargo at the border.
This process is further delayed by the limited availability of Kenyan trucks to take over the cargo, as well as a shortage of warehouse facilities at the border, which forces vehicles to wait longer with their goods. Conversely, Kenyan trucks are generally able to transport goods into Ethiopia without similar restrictions. |
|
|
NTB-001-368 |
|
2026-03-06 |
Djibouti: Galafi |
Ethiopia |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
The movement of goods through the Galafi border corridor is significantly constrained by poor road infrastructure between Ethiopian border and Djibouti, particularly around the Dikil town corridor, which stretches approximately 80 kilometers. Traders and transporters said that traveling within this route can take up to 19 hours for a relatively short distance compared to the same distance takes 4 hours in normal road infrastructure, mainly due to the poor condition of the road.
The prolonged travel time has several direct and indirect impacts on traders. First, delays in transportation often result in late arrival at the border post, which in turn leads to additional costs such as extended storage/container fees, and missed clearance schedules. These delays also significantly affect perishable goods, including agricultural products and livestock trade. Traders indicated that animals transported along this route sometimes suffer from stress, illness, or death due to the long and difficult journey, resulting in financial losses.
Another major concern is the health and safety of drivers. Spending nearly a full day to cover only 80 km exposes drivers to extreme fatigue, poor working conditions, and limited access to medical or emergency services along the route. The difficult road conditions also increase the likelihood of vehicle accidents and mechanical failures.
In cases of vehicle breakdown or accidents, transporters face additional burdens such as expensive car towing services, which further increase operational costs. Moreover, traders highlighted that insurance coverage for goods in transit is either unavailable or extremely expensive for this route. Because of the high risk associated with the road condition, many transporters are unable to afford insurance, leaving them financially vulnerable in the event of accidents, cargo or container damage, or loss.
Traders also emphasized that these challenges persist despite the existence of an alternative road that has already been constructed but is not yet operational. If this alternative route were opened and fully functional, it could significantly reduce travel time, lower transport costs, improve driver safety, and minimize losses related to perishable goods and livestock.
Overall, the poor infrastructure along the Galafi–Dikil corridor represents a substantial non-tariff barrier to trade, creating delays, increasing costs, and exposing traders and transporters to significant financial and safety risks. |
|
|
NTB-001-367 |
2.8. Lengthy and costly customs clearance procedures |
2026-02-02 |
Djibouti: Djibouti sea port |
Ethiopia |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
The importer experienced significant challenges during the customs clearance process at the Port of Djibouti. Upon arrival of the shipments (both containerized cargo and vehicles), they were informed of multiple documentation-request by customs authorities. These issues included minor discrepancies such as spelling errors in the Bill of Lading, as well as requirements to provide additional supporting documents that had not been communicated to them prior to the arrival of the cargo.
Importantly, these documentation requirement were not raised in advance, which prevented them from making the necessary corrections before the shipment has reached to the port. As a result, they were required to repeatedly amend and resubmit documents under a time pressure leading to delays in the clearance process.
Due to these combined challenges, the cargo remained at the port beyond the allowed free storage period. Consequently, the importers has incurred significant unplanned costs, including demurrage charges and other related port fees. |
|
|
Progress:
|
Awaiting feedback from National Focal Point |
|
|
NTB-001-366 |
3. Technical barriers to trade (TBT)
B82: Testing requirement |
2026-01-08 |
Ethiopia: |
Ethiopia |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Imported tyres are subject to duplicated conformity assessment at destination, despite having undergone identical testing procedures in the country of origin. The absence of recognition of prior test results leads to unnecessary duplication and additional testing cost. |
|
|
Progress:
|
Following the meeting with NMC, further discussions were held with the Ethiopian Conformity Assessment Enterprise and the Import and Export Quality Control Department regarding the reported NTB.
The consultations confirmed that, under the previous regulatory framework, tyres were included in the category of products subject to Pre-Export Verification of Conformity (PVoC) conducted in the country of origin. However, pursuant to a circular that came into effect in December 2025, tyres were removed from the list of products requiring PVoC.
According to the revised procedure, imported tyres are now subject to conformity assessment and inspection upon arrival by the Ethiopian Conformity Assessment Enterprise. It was established that the trader encountered the reported barrier due to delays and gaps in the immediate implementation and operationalization of the new circular during the transition period. |
|
|
NTB-001-365 |
3. Technical barriers to trade (TBT)
B82: Testing requirement |
2025-12-10 |
Ethiopia: Moyale |
Ethiopia |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
There were delays in obtaining approval or certification for goods imported through the Moyale border. Samples are required to be tested in Addis Ababa before clearance can take place. As a result, importers are expected to obtain the necessary approval before the goods are shipped to Ethiopia. Otherwise, if the approval is sought after the goods arrive and undergo document verification, significant delays may occur.
Following the complaint received, a visit was conducted to the Moyale One-Stop Border Post (OSBP), where these issues were confirmed. For instance, a Vaseline product with all the required specifications (five types) intended for import into Ethiopia was required to obtain prior approval. However, the process took up to two months. This approval or certification is essential for clearance.
If importers fail to secure the approval before the goods arrive at the border, they may face extended waiting periods to obtain the necessary authorization before clearance can proceed. This situation was observed at the Moyale OSBP and confirmed by officers responsible for document verification. |
|
|
NTB-001-363 |
7.9. Inadequate trade related infrastructure |
2025-11-18 |
Ethiopia: Government Institutions at One Stop Border Post |
Kenya |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
There is a lack of coordination arising from the fragmented structure of the offices and the limited number of officers assigned to support operations. Offices are located in different buildings that are not interrelated, and staffing constraints further reduce efficiency. For example, only one officer is responsible for conducting standard inspections for both export and import goods, creating a bottleneck.
In addition, each institution operates independently under its own supervision, with limited cross-agency integration. While some services, such as agriculture-related offices, still rely on manual processes, others, such as customs, have fully adopted digital systems for clearing goods. However, customs procedures still depend on confirmations from these other agencies before goods can be cleared, leading to delays and inefficiencies.
Overall, these structural and operational challenges contribute significantly to the lack of coordination. |
|
|
Progress:
|
Awaiting feedback from National Focal Points |
|
English
Français
