| Complaint number |
NTB Type
|
Date of incident |
Location |
Reporting country or region (additional) |
Status |
Actions |
|
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-001-388 |
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-001-389 |
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-001-390 |
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-001-396 |
2.6. Additional taxes and other charges |
2026-07-21 |
Tanzania: TRA |
Kenya |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Tanzania is subjecting a discriminative excise duty on Margarine - HS 1517.10.00 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 does not import. We urge URT to remove these discriminative charges and treat Kenya Margarine products as locally produced not IMPORTED. |
|
|
Products:
|
1517.10: Margarine (excl. liquid) |
|
|
NTB-001-400 |
4. Sanitary & phyto-sanitary (SPS) measures
A9: SPS measures n.e.s. |
2026-09-25 |
Namibia: all borders |
Namibia |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Following the FMD outbreak in Namibia, Veterinary Public Notification No. 15 of 2026, announced the “Suspension of imports, exports and in-transit of all cloven-hoofed animals and their raw products.” Despite this notification specifically referring to raw products, Namibian exporters of fully tanned&processed leather are currently prohibited from exporting unless they provide written confirmation from the competent authorities of each importing country that finished leather from Namibia remains permissible. This restriction has already caused economic losses for Namibian leather exporters, resulting in short-time arrangements, layoffs and an increasing risk of permanently losing established international customers to alternative suppliers. Unless resolved urgently, the continued disruption threatens to cause irreversible damage to the Namibian leather industry, undermining years of market development, export competitiveness and employment. Although Section 13(7) of the Animal Health Act provides that a veterinary health certificate is not required where the competent authority of the importing country does not require one, subject to the exporter providing written proof thereof, a more fundamental question remains: On what legal basis is finished leather subjected to vet. export controls intended for animal products particularly when the importing country itself does not impose equivalent veterinary requirements? The responsibility for obtaining these government-to-government confirmations has effectively been placed on the private sector, requiring the Namibian leather industry to approach the authorities of every country to which it exports. On what legal basis is fully tanned and chemically processed leather being classified as a "raw product" under the current FMD restrictions, particularly when it has undergone extensive industrial processing and is fundamentally distinct from untreated hides and skins? |
|
|
Products:
|
4107.1: -Whole hides and skins : |
|
|
NTB-001-401 |
2.6. Additional taxes and other charges |
2025-07-01 |
Kenya: Kenya Revenue Authority |
Uganda |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
The Government of Kenya imposed a number of excise duty measures and other trade-related requirements affecting selected products originating from Uganda. The measures are considered discriminatory where they result in differential treatment of products from Uganda compared to domestic or other comparable products, and may constitute barriers to intra-EAC trade.
This hinders facilitation of free movement of goods among Partner States. It also increase the cost of accessing the Kenyan market and adversely affect the competitiveness of Ugandan products.
The affected products and measures include:
1. Ceramic tiles – Excise duty of 5% of the customs value or KSh 200 per square metre.
2. Ceramic sinks, bathtubs, sinks and cisterns – Excise duty of 5% of the customs value or KSh 50 per kilogram.
3. Sugar confectionery – Excise duty of KSh 85.82 per kilogram.
4. White chocolate – Excise duty of KSh 257.55 per kilogram.
5. LPG gas cylinders – Excise duty of 35%.
6. Eggs, excluding fertilized eggs for incubation – Excise duty of 25%.
7. Onions – Excise duty of 25%.
8. Potatoes and potato chips – Excise duty of 25%.
9. Fish – Excise duty of 10%.
10. Brown table sugar – Excise duty of KSh 40 per kilogram.
11. Cement – Excise duty of 10% of the value or KSh 1.50 per kilogram.
12. Furniture – Excise duty of 30%.
13. Cellular/mobile phones – Excise duty of 10%.
14. Paints and varnishes – Excise duty of 15%.
15. Cartons, boxes and cases of corrugated paper or paperboard, and imported folding cartons, boxes and cases Excise duty of 25%.
16. Virgin test liner paper – Excise duty of 25%.
17. Aluminium profiles – Excise duty of 25%.
18. Non-virgin fluting medium – Excise duty of 25%.
19. Wooden products – An inspection fee of US$250 per truck carrying wooden products from Uganda.
20. Sugar – Restrictions on import quotas and delays in the issuance of import permits.
21. Black tea (fermented and partly fermented) – A transit fee of KSh 7,000. |
|
English
Français
