Non-Tariff Barriers :: Complaints

Active complaints

Showing items 61 to 80 of 87

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) Category 4. Sanitary & phyto-sanitary (SPS) measures 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 Eswatini Ethiopia Kenya Libya Madagascar Malawi Mauritius Rwanda Seychelles Somalia Sudan Tunisia Uganda Zambia Zimbabwe EAC Burundi Democratic Republic of the Congo Kenya Rwanda Somalia South Sudan Tanzania Uganda SADC Angola Botswana Comoros Democratic Republic of the Congo Eswatini Lesotho Madagascar Malawi Mauritius Mozambique Namibia Seychelles South Africa Tanzania Zambia Zimbabwe COMESA EAC SADC	Reporting country or region (additional) COMESA Burundi Comoros Democratic Republic of the Congo Djibouti Egypt Eritrea Eswatini Ethiopia Kenya Libya Madagascar Malawi Mauritius Rwanda Seychelles Somalia Sudan Tunisia Uganda Zambia Zimbabwe EAC Burundi Democratic Republic of the Congo Kenya Rwanda Somalia South Sudan Tanzania Uganda SADC Angola Botswana Comoros Democratic Republic of the Congo Eswatini Lesotho Madagascar Malawi Mauritius Mozambique Namibia Seychelles South Africa Tanzania Zambia Zimbabwe COMESA EAC SADC	Status New Complaint registered with REC In process Resolved Non-actionable	Actions
NTB-001-358	8.8. Issues related to transit	2026-02-02	South Africa:	Botswana	In process	View
Complaint:	Business Botswana member -Flo-Tek has highlighted challenges relating to road transit bonds and cabotage restrictions. The company noted that South African authorities shifted responsibility for road transit bonds from transporters to the importer or owner of the goods. As a result, Flo-Tek is now directly responsible for administering and carrying the liability associated with transit bonds for shipments passing through South Africa. The company argues that this arrangement places an unfair financial and administrative burden on exporters, despite the transporter being in physical control of the cargo during transit. Flo-Tek also raised concerns about South Africa’s cabotage regulations, which prevent Botswana-registered trucks from completing deliveries in situations where the South African entity is the invoice holder or where goods are destined for onward export to neighbouring countries such as Lesotho. Consequently, cargo must be transferred to South African trucks before final delivery, resulting in additional transport arrangements, delays, cargo handling risks, and increased logistics costs. Flo-Tek believes these restrictions are largely protectionist in nature and hinder regional trade integration. Flo-Tek maintains that the NTBs imposed by these South Africa undermine Botswana’s export competitiveness, increase the cost of cross-border trade, and contradict the broader objectives of SADC regional integration and trade facilitation.
NTB-001-359	5.5. Import licensing requirements	2026-02-17	Zimbabwe:	Botswana	In process	View
Complaint:	Business Botswana member - Flotek has reported that In Zimbabwe, imports exceeding USD 5,000 require an import licence issued through the Zimbabwe Revenue Authority (ZIMRA). These licences are generally valid for only three months and must be secured before goods can enter the market. The company indicated that most of its consignments exceed the threshold, meaning nearly all exports to Zimbabwe are affected by the licensing requirement. Delays in obtaining or renewing licences can disrupt deliveries, delay customer projects, and create financial losses. In addition, Zimbabwe requires mandatory Bureau Veritas (BV) pre-shipment inspections for trucks entering the country, with inspection fees charged on a per-invoice basis rather than per shipment. Flo-Tek stated that the fees range between USD 250 and USD 300 per invoice, resulting in significant cumulative costs for shipments containing multiple invoices. According to the company, this creates unnecessary inefficiencies and increases the cost of exporting into Zimbabwe. Flo-Tek maintains that the NTBs imposed by these countries undermine Botswana’s export competitiveness, increase the cost of cross-border trade, and contradict the broader objectives of SADC regional integration and trade facilitation. The company therefore requested that relevant mechanisms be triggered to resolve this NTB.
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-001-382	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-001-369		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-001-239	6.6. Border taxes Policy/Regulatory	2024-03-01	Kenya: KAJIADO COUNTY	Burundi	In process	View
Complaint:	THE COUNTY OF KAJIADO CHARGES TRANSIT FEES OF 2000 KSH PER FOREIGN TRANSIT TRUCKS
Progress:	1. Kenya informed the SCTIFI that the Amendments to be effected in the 2025 / 2026 Financial year by 1st July 2025 2.During the 39th RMC , Kenya committed to continue engaging internally to resolve the matter and report to the next RMC. 3. During the 40th RMC Kenya informed the meeting that by 30th June the Tax Law will have been reviewed to resolve the NTB. 4.During the 48th SCTIFI, the meeting was informed that Kenya is implementing SCFEA Directives and is reviewing tax law to resolve the NTB by 30th June 2026. 5. During the 41st RMC, Burundi reported that,her traders are still being charged when transiting at Kajiado County. Kenya reported that, following the Summit Directive, the National Government engaged the Kajiado county on amendment of the Finance Act to remove transit fee and settled on a positive commitment. The National government would undertake a follow up meeting to the County Government on the matter.
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
NTB-001-361		2026-01-14	Ethiopia: Dilla Customs Office	Ethiopia	In process	View
Complaint:	The Dilla Customs Office has repeatedly delayed the clearance of export goods destined for the Moyale Border for extended periods, despite all required documents and formalities having been duly completed. These products were issued permits with specific validity periods, yet the delays persist, causing unnecessary disruptions. This issue has occurred several times at the same government institution.
Progress:	During the NMC meeting held on 26th May 2026, Ethiopia Customs explained that there is a standard operating procedures. Dilla is a customs check point , sometimes the delay at Dilla occurred until the customs officers verify the goods are for export , for some traders sometimes they moved the goods to Moyale and illegally export it
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-001-245	6.2. Administrative fees	2025-04-01	Democratic Republic of the Congo: From Goli through Mahagi to Kisangani on the DRC side	Uganda	In process	View
Complaint:	A review of the route from Goli through Mahagi to Kisangani on the DRC side revealed 24 Roadblocks. The traders reported that they pay 300 dollars per roadblock; we wouldn't pick evidence of this payment because its illegal
Progress:	1. During the 38th RMC, DRC reported that they would consult and revert 2.During the 39th RMC, DRC requested 2 weeks to resolve the NTB. 3.During the 40th RMC DRC informed the meeting that the Zone between Golli, Mahagi and Kisangani is a war zone and security is very tight, nevertheless, the central government's interior Minister instructed the governor to reduce the number of barriers and stop these payments because they are not official and illegal. DRC is organizing a consultation in June 2026 with the Ministry of Interior, Trade and Security organs to deliberate on the matter. The NTB also affects DRC as it makes goods more expensive in DRC. Furthermore, it was reported that on 7th - 10th May, 2026 the Republic of Uganda and DRC will hold a bilateral meeting on the same. The meeting urged DRC to adhere to the Summit Directive to resolve the NTB by 30th June 2026. 4. During the 48th SCTIFI, DRC informed the meeting that Consultations are ongoing in order to reduce roadblocks and resolve the NTB by 30th June 2026
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-001-347	7.3. Corruption	2026-03-17	Zimbabwe:	Zambia	In process	View
Complaint:	Informal traders carrying small quantities of goods, such as fresh produce, cooking oil, rice, sugar and pasta cross the Victoria Falls border post by bike or foot.Over 50 traders cross the border per day,. When entering Zimbabwe from Zambia, they get stopped by Customs and face arbitrary restrictions on quantities of goods that can enter (which change on a daily basis and depending on the specific officer on duty). When these arbitrary quantities are exceeded, the officers often confiscate all of the goods or demand bribes to release the traders. They also face threats when questioning the behaviour of the officer. When returning after selling goods on the market in Zimbabwe, and after clearing the Zimbabwe Customs, they often get stopped by police or soldiers in the no-man's-land between the borders who demand further bribes from the proceeds of their sales. If bringing merchandise from Zimbabwe back to Zambia, depending on the officers at the border and despite the small quantities carried, they will be asked to obtain an export license from Harare. Or to pay another bribe to be released.
NTB-001-251	2.3. Issues related to the rules of origin	2024-07-05	Tanzania: TRA	Kenya	In process	View
Complaint:	URT is subjecting full CET of 35% on ZESTA JAM manufactured in Kenya by Trufoods. The Zesta Jam is manufactured using locally sourced sugar. We request Tanzania and Kenya to conduct on spot verification on June 2025 to ascertain origin as the jam transferred is using locally manufactured sugar and qualify under the EAC Preferential treatment. Kenya communicated to TRA vide letter ref: C&BC/HQ/8 Dated 24/9/2024 requesting Tanzania for application for Zesta Jam to be granted preferential treatment.
Progress:	1. During 47th SCTIFI, noted that the matter is administrative and referred to Customs Committee where the two Partner States agreed to conduct bilateral verification to ascertain the origin criteria by end of February 2026 2.The 40th RMC was informed that the United Republic of Tanzania and the Republic of Kenya have convened a verification mission to be undertaken by 11th May 2026 to ascertain the origin of the product. 3. During the 48th SCTIFI, The meeting was informed that a verification has been commissioned to facilitate resolution of the matter. 4. During the 41st RMC the meeting noted that the verification was undertaken and the report will be presented to SCTIFI through Customs Committee for consideration.
NTB-001-345	3. Technical barriers to trade (TBT) B42: TBT regulations on transport and storage	2025-06-26	Djibouti: Djibouti sea port	Ethiopia	In process	View
Complaint:	A procedural inconsistency exists in the handling of export shipments from Ethiopia to the Djibouti Free Zone, whereby the acceptance of tarpaulin-covered trucks is applied inconsistently in comparison to containerized cargo. In practice, some shipments transported in tarpaulin-covered trucks are permitted entry into the Free Zone, while others are denied access and required to be containerized without clear justification or prior notice. This inconsistent enforcement creates uncertainty among traders and transport operators, leading to delays, additional handling and transportation costs, and operational inefficiencies. As a result, exporters particularly small-scale traders face difficulties in planning their logistics and complying with requirements, which ultimately reduces their competitiveness and limits smooth market access along the corridor.
Progress:	As at 10 Jily 2026, there was no response form the National Focal Points. This NTB is awaiting processing by Ethiopia and Djibouti Focal Points
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-001-374	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-001-380	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.
Progress:	1. On 21 September 2026, the Secretariat sent reminder to Zambia Focal Point to indicate timeframes regarding undertaking internal consultations on to resolve the matter. 2. On 23 September 2026, Zambia Focal Point reported that internal consultations and meetings with concerned stakeholders were being undertaken during the weeks 25 September - 02 August 2026 after which way forward on the matter would be communicated to the Secretariat .
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.
Progress:	During the 41st RMC, Rwanda reported that the matter arises from public health concerns and market surveillance findings. • Certain products were found to have regulatory compliance concerns. • Temporary measures were introduced to protect public health while investigations continue. • Public health measures are permitted under WTO and EAC frameworks when scientifically justified. • Any restrictions should be supported by scientific evidence Furthermore, Rwanda clarified that the measures taken were in line with main objective No 1 of the EAC Standardization, Quality Assurance, Metrology and Testing (SQMT) Act, 2006, which is “protect and improve the health and safety of consumers and the public in general”, and this agrees with Article 22(1)(c) of the EAC Customs Union Protocol. Where urgent safety or health problems arise or threaten to arise. This decision was an emergency and temporary measure to protect public health and consumer safety following serious health concerns, including prevention of further potential harm to consumers after reported cases of illness and death associated with the consumption/use of the alcoholic spirits. The measures undertaken by Rwanda cannot be classified as an NTB as Rwanda “like products” were affected by the same measures. • Rwanda informed the RMC meeting that there are ongoing regional discussions regarding this matter. On 20 August 2026, the EAC Secretariat convened a consultative meeting attended by representatives from Rwanda, Burundi, Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania and the EAC Secretariat. They agreed on a couple of actions and way forward including Rwanda to submit scientific analysis as evidence. • Rwanda Therefore updated the meeting that the investigation is still ongoing and requested enough time due to the complexity of this issue on public health and that the scientific analysis as evidence will be shared to the Secretariat before the Next RMC meeting. The matter should continue to be addressed through relevant EAC technical and standards committees alongside NTB discussions.
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-001-384	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.
Progress:	1. On 22nd September 2026, the Secretariat reported that ; during the 41st RMC, Rwanda reported that the matter arises from public health concerns and market surveillance findings. • Certain products were found to have regulatory compliance concerns. • Temporary measures were introduced to protect public health while investigations continue. • Public health measures are permitted under WTO and EAC frameworks when scientifically justified. • Any restrictions should be supported by scientific evidence Furthermore, Rwanda clarified that the measures taken were in line with main objective No 1 of the EAC Standardization, Quality Assurance, Metrology and Testing (SQMT) Act, 2006, which is “protect and improve the health and safety of consumers and the public in general”, and this agrees with Article 22(1)(c) of the EAC Customs Union Protocol. Where urgent safety or health problems arise or threaten to arise. This decision was an emergency and temporary measure to protect public health and consumer safety following serious health concerns, including prevention of further potential harm to consumers after reported cases of illness and death associated with the consumption/use of the alcoholic spirits. The measures undertaken by Rwanda cannot be classified as an NTB as Rwanda “like products” were affected by the same measures. • Rwanda informed the RMC meeting that there are ongoing regional discussions regarding this matter. On 20 August 2026, the EAC Secretariat convened a consultative meeting attended by representatives from Rwanda, Burundi, Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania and the EAC Secretariat. They agreed on a couple of actions and way forward including Rwanda to submit scientific analysis as evidence. • Rwanda Therefore updated the meeting that the investigation is still ongoing and requested enough time due to the complexity of this issue on public health and that the scientific analysis as evidence will be shared to the Secretariat before the Next RMC meeting. The matter should continue to be addressed through relevant EAC technical and standards committees alongside NTB discussions. 2. On 24 September 2026, Rwanda Focal Point reported that Rwanda does not consider this measure to constitute an NTB. The suspension was introduced as a public health measure and was applied equally to the affected products produced domestically and those imported from partner states and globally. The measure was therefore not targeting any country or product in specific. However, Rwanda also suspended the manufacture and distribution of the affected products by local manufacturers due to the same public health concerns. Accordingly, the measure should not be considered discriminatory, as it applied equally to locally manufactured and imported products. Rwanda therefore requests that NTB-001-384 be removed from the NTB Regional Online Reporting System.

<< Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next >>

Display:

Non-Tariff Barriers

Reporting, Monitoring and Eliminating Mechanism

Active complaints