Non-Tariff Barriers :: Complaints

Active complaints

Showing items 21 to 40 of 125

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-001-279	1.7. Discriminatory or flawed government procurement policies	2025-05-19	Tanzania: Tanzania Dairy Board	Kenya	New	View
Complaint:	Tanzania Dairy Board discriminatively charging 1.75% F.O.B value of on Kenya dairy produce on Pasteurized whole Milk, Skimmed, Condensed, Yoghurt, ice cream and Powdered milk. TDB is violating the Article 15 of the EAC Custom Union Protocol on national treatment. Same treatment as Tanzanian products in terms of charges.
NTB-001-276	VAT Refunds	2020-08-03	South Africa: South African Revenue Services	Botswana	New	View
Complaint:	Business Botswana has received from seven (7) of its member companies (see attached list) with concerns regarding delays in claiming VAT refunds from the South African Revenue Service (SARS). These companies have collectively reported that they are owed a total of R51,838,696.82in VAT refunds, dating as far back as 2020 to August 2024. The core issues involve prolonged processing times, document rejections without the ability to resubmit, and tight deadlines for compiling and submitting the required paperwork.
NTB-001-275	2.3. Issues related to the rules of origin	2025-08-18	Tanzania: Namanga	Kenya	New	View
Complaint:	The Tanzania Revenue Authority (TRA) Customs has raised doubts regarding the Certificate of Origin issued by the Kenya Revenue Authority (KRA). However, TRA has failed to provide any written explanation for its objections and has refused to verify the certificate directly with KRA via email. As a result, the goods have been held at the Namanga border, causing delays and financial losses to the consignee. This action by TRA Customs constitutes a violation of the EAC Protocols and Regulations, undermines the rights of the importer, and damages the legitimate business interests of Kenyan enterprises engaged in intra-EAC trade.
NTB-001-274	8.5. Infrastructure (Air, Port, Rail, Road, Border Posts,)	2025-02-07	South Sudan: Nimule	Uganda	In process	View
Complaint:	RSS Charges a USD 40 weighbridge service fee per truck that crosses at Nimule weighbridge station at Jalie, as in the circular attached issued by weighbridge management 2. In the event of having an overload, they negotiate between USD600 and USD2,500 3. Road blocks between Nimule and Juba charge USD100 unreceipted. 4 . Between Juba and Torit, they ask for USD 50 VISA fees We request that South Sudan to immediately remove this NTB
Progress:	1. The Republic of South Sudan informed the meeting that the weighbridge belongs to a private company, which charges money to recoup its capital investment. RSS reported that she had reported the same to the Ministry of Transport for resolution. Partner States noted that they also run investments and are not charged on EAC Citizens. 2. On 4 December 2025, RSS Focal Point advised that the NTB is not discriminating, but it does add cost to doing business, the Minister responsible is not ministry of Transport its the Ministry of Road and Bridges.
NTB-001-246	2.3. Issues related to the rules of origin	2024-11-01	Tanzania: Ministry of Agriculture	Uganda	In process	View
Complaint:	Quantitative restrictions on Ugandan Sugar transfers to Tanzania only up to 20,000 MT, are accepted These Quotas have been subject to bilateral negotiations to allow market access for Uganda Sugar. We request that Tanzania to remove quantitative restrictions.
Progress:	During the RMC Uganda submitted that engagements with URT on the NTB had not achieved results and would seek the issue to be escalated to the Policy level. During the SCoT URT submitted that Uganda requested the quota and was granted through a bilateral agreement and hence discussions to resolve the NTB should be continued bilaterally
NTB-001-110	1.7. Discriminatory or flawed government procurement policies Policy/Regulatory	2022-07-01		Kenya	In process	View
Complaint:	United Republic of Tanzania subject a discriminatory treatment to Kenyan export/transfer on products of animal and animal products despite their commitment in the bilateral meeting to amend the Act to resolve the discriminatory charges on the Kenya animal and animal products by June 2022. Tanzania charges descriminatory meat products an import fees of Tshs 3,000 per kilogram (Kg) for imports consignment. The fees is contained in the animal diseases (animals and animal products movement control) .(amendment) regulations, 2022 of the United Republic of Tanzania that came into operation on 1st July 2022. These charges have rendered Kenyan exports especially milk and milk products, meat and meat products including sausages uncompetitive in the Tanzanian market while Kenya facilitates Tanzania meat and meat products sausages into Kenya without any discrimination. These charges contravene the GATT 1994 Art III on National Treatment, Articles 1 and 75 (6) of the Treaty as well as Articles 1 (1) (definition of imports) and 15 (1) (a) and (2) (National Treatment) of the Customs Union Protocol and Article 6 (1) of the Common Market Protocol of the Community Laws. The charges are also in violation of Article 10 of the Custom Union Protocol that obligates Partner States to remove all internal tariffs and other charges of equivalent effect. Kenya urges:- a)Tanzania to abolish these prohibitive discriminatory charges and treat our animal and animal products as from the local market and accord same rate as their own without discriminating not to call it import as import is from outside EAC. b) URT to abolish the discriminatory charges as per the customs union protocol. d) URT to treat Kenya meat and meat products as local and not as an import. C)URT to stop restricting the quantities to be imported/transfered by the Kenya companies. In addition URT charges xthe following discriminative charges: 1) URT charges import fee of 2% FOB by Tanzania Meat Board 2) 0.4% on FOB by Tanzania Atomic Energy 3) 0.2% FOB by Weight and Measure Agency Kenya request URT to consider abolishing the discriminatory charges which are equivalent import duty prohibited in the EAC Protocal. On the contrary Kenya facilitates Tanzania sausages without any charge. This is really unfair practices where URT is charging import charges to Kenya products despite Kenya being in the EAC Customs union where we transfer products and not import
Progress:	1. Kenya recognized the effort made by URT in reducing the fee from 5,000 Tshs to 3,000 Tshs per kg of meat. The Republic of Kenya indicated that the fee is still very high, discriminative, and amounts to import duty. The Kenyan companies exporting meat products to URT have been negatively affected by a sharp decline in the volume of meat products exported to URT, since the imposition of these charges. A consignment of 25,000 kgs exported from Kenya to URT is charged Kshs 3,750,000. In addition, it is charged an import fee of 2% FOB by the Tanzania Meat Board, 0.4% FOB by the Tanzania Atomic Energy Commission, and 0.2% FOB by Weight and Measures Agency. A similar consignment exported to Kenya from URT is charged Kshs 3,000. Thus, Kenya proposes that the two Partner States engage and harmonize these regulations to either charge per kg or per consignment. Tanzania Meat Board had also denied market access to beef products imported from Kenya and thus Kenya urges URT to address this matter. 2. The 34th RMC noted that the NTB was new. URT reported that they would consult the relevant stakeholders and revert during the 35th RMC 3.During the 36th RMC Kenya reported that the NTB was considered during a bilateral meeting between Republic of Kenya & the United Republic of Tanzania whereby the two Partner States agreed to harmonization of all conditions, levies, fees and charges related to import / exports for holistic consideration by 30th June 2024 4. During the 38th RMC meeting, Kenya agreed to send a formal invitation to URT for the Bilateral Meeting. The two Partner States held their meeting in July 2025. An update shall be provided during the RMC
NTB-001-242	6.5. Variable levies	2024-12-27	Kenya: Ministry of Finance	Tanzania	In process	View
Complaint:	Through, the Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 2024 of Kenya passed on 11 December 2024 and came into force on 27 December 2024, the Government of Kenya, among other things, introduced excise duty on various products such as marble, transformers, float glass, coal imported from outside Kenya including East African Community countries. Also, has increased the valuation rates in calculating tax on tiles when they are sold in the country. These challenges have affected production due to the decline in the market for the products in Kenya caused by competition after the prices of the products in question became high
Progress:	1.On excise duty charged on originating goods from Tanzania, Kenya was urged to refrain from enacting discriminatory laws that treat EAC originating goods as imports. The RMC was informed by Kenya that, through the Supplementary Legal Notice, excise duty was removed from Glass and Transformer. Kenya provided the supplementary gazette removing the two products. (b) On valuation rates on tiles from Tanzania and Uganda when they are sold in the country as per the complaint from Tanzania below, entries as evidence on valuation adjustments examined showed adjustments as noted in the Internal KRA Memo on valuation for tiles from Uganda & Tanzania. The meeting noted that valuation of goods is administrative and operational, hence the valuation matter be referred to the Sectoral Committee on Customs for Commissioners (SCOC) to consider and resolve. The EAC guided that Valuation in EAC is guided by Section 122 and Fourth Schedule of the EAC CMA. The 38th RMC meeting referred the NTB on valuation to SCOC for consideration and resolution and report back to the next RMC
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:	During the 38th RMC, DRC reported that they would consult and revert
NTB-001-247	6.2. Administrative fees	2018-01-03	Tanzania: Diary board,Ministry of Agriculture,Atomic Council	Uganda	In process	View
Complaint:	Multiple requirements and fees upon transfer of milk into Tanzania. These are; (a) Charges of T. Shs. 2,000 per Kg of milk transfers by the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries of Tanzania (b) 1% FOB by Tanzania Dairy Board plus Tsh. 30,000 as application fees (c) The Tanzania Atomic Energy Commission charges 0.4 % FOB
Progress:	The 38th RMC was informed that the NTB was discussed in the bilateral meeting between the two Partner States but was not resolved. Tanzania requested Uganda to provide evidence for her to review and revert on the matter. Uganda indicated that traders are not currently engaging in this business due to the multiple charges
NTB-001-225	5.3. Export taxes	2024-12-28	Kenya: Malaba	Uganda	In process	View
Complaint:	The Kenyan government has violated the East African Community trade agreement and has begun to impose consumption taxes on products from other East African Community countries.
Progress:	During the 46TH SCTIFI Kenya reported that There are ongoing consultations to resolve this issue in the financial year 2025/26
NTB-001-218	2.6. Additional taxes and other charges	2024-10-29	Tanzania: Dar es Salaam	Kenya	In process	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.
Progress:	The SCTIFI of May 2025 noted that, although the Republic of Kenya had not provided transactional evidence on the reported excise duty, broader concerns remain regarding the misapplication of the term “imports” within the EAC context. Partner States were reminded that Article 15 of the Customs Union Protocol on National Treatment prohibits discriminatory treatment of goods originating from other EAC Partner States. The meeting therefore urged all Partner States to harmonize the interpretation and application of the term “imports” in national laws and practices with the EAC legal framework, in order to facilitate intra EAC Trade.
NTB-001-271	2.6. Additional taxes and other charges	2024-12-01	COMESA	Egypt	In process	View
Complaint:	Unipak Nile Ltd., a subsidiary of INDEVCO Group in Egypt, export corrugated boxes to Kenya under the COMESA Agreement. The Kenyan government imposed a 25% excise duty on corrugated boxes imported from Egypt, violating the principles of the COMESA Agreement and creating an unfair competitive environment. This tax favours local Kenyan producers, some of whom do not pay the required taxes, further distorting the market. This unilateral action undermines ability of Egyptian exporter to compete fairly and has halted UNIPAK Nile Ltd export operations and expansion plans in Kenya whose exports to Kenya reached $9–10 million annually, particularly in the agriculture and dairy sectors.
NTB-001-272	2.6. Additional taxes and other charges	2025-07-08	Kenya: Kenya Revenue Authority (KRA)	Uganda	New	View
Complaint:	Kenya has introduced a 25% excise duty on Aluminium products falling under chapter 76 of the Harmonized System, as stipulated in its financial Act of 2025.This measure is in contravention o 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.
NTB-001-270	2.8. Lengthy and costly customs clearance procedures	2025-06-09	Kenya:	Tanzania	New	View
Complaint:	EABC undertook a practical case study on trading cereals and horticulture products under the EAC Simplified Trade Regime. Findings on Trading Consignments of Horticulture under the EAC Simplified Trade Regime at the Holili/Taveta One Stop Border Post (OSBP) from Tanzania to Kenya is as below 1) Procedural Complexity: The 11-step process spans multiple agencies, including the Ministry of Agriculture, Atomic Commission Agency (i.e., TAEC and KNRA), KEPHIS, TPHPA, Port Health, Police, AFA, KRA, and Customs Authorities, contradicting the STR’s promise of streamlined trade. Each step adds time and administrative hurdles. 2)High Costs: Cumulative fees and taxes disproportionately erode profits for small consignments. For example, exporting 1,000 kg of onions incurs of the USD 2,000 threshold. This financial burden negates the STR’s duty-free benefit. approximately USD 682 in inspection fees, excise duties, and road tolls—approximately one-third 3)Redundant Certifications: Phytosanitary requirements overlap unnecessarily. Tanzania’s TPHPA issues a certificate, yet Kenya’s KEPHIS demands its own inspection and certification, duplicating efforts and costs. This is coupled with the requirement for a Radiation certificate for goods traded in EAC. 4)Transparency Gaps: Cash payments for inspections (e.g., police fees of Kshs. 200–500, Port Health’s Kshs. 500) often lack receipts, exposing traders to potential exploitation and undermining accountability. 5)Cross border traders are afraid to report NTB reporting due to risk of retaliation: NTB reporting requires the reporter to submit evidence of the NTB/complaint) with women and youth Small Cross border traders expressing fear of retaliation from regulators as their personal information will be shared when they submit evidence of the complaint..
NTB-001-268	6.2. Administrative fees	2025-03-13	Kenya: Busia	Uganda	In process	View
Complaint:	The EAC Simplified certificate of origin is issued to cross-border traders at a fee charged for a photocopy (10 KES) without giving a receipt. This is to request the Regional Monitoring Committee (RMC) to urge Partner States to issue EAC Simplified Certificates of Origin free of charge to small-scale cross-border traders.
NTB-001-269	6.2. Administrative fees	2025-06-12	Kenya:	Tanzania	New	View
Complaint:	Cross-border traders trading under the EAC simplified trade regime apply for the port health inspection certificate. The cost for the port health inspection certificate is Ksh. 500 (USD 5) per vehicle entering TAVETA. The certificate is issued, but no receipt is provided. We request the EAC Regional Monitoring Committee to urge EAC partner states to waive this fee or have a transparent payment method with charges displayed for cross-border traders of cereals and horticulture trading under the EAC simplified trade regime at all OSBPs.
NTB-001-265	8.8. Issues related to transit	2025-06-03	South Africa: Lebombo	South Africa	New	View
Complaint:	In relation to Complaint NTB-000-632, "Copper Moon Trading, the company that is running the Lebombo dry port at Komatipoort, near the Lebombo/Ressano Garcia border post, is forcing transporters to use and pay for its parking facilities in Komatipoort. Transporters' vehicles are required to visit the SARS customs clearing offices at the Lebombo dry port and so parking should be provided for them, free of charge, by SARS. If parking is not provided, then trucks must be allowed to park along the roadway." The complaint was resolved in 2016, is this still the case? Attached is a receipt.
NTB-001-264	2.6. Additional taxes and other charges	2025-05-24	Zimbabwe: Beitbridge	Eswatini	In process	View
Complaint:	Four (4) trucks with sugar to be delivered in Zimbabwe, was not able to enter because of a 30% surtax that had been introduced while the consignment was en route from Eswatini to Zimbabwe. Given this had come into effect after the dispatch, the consignment was not given a waiver.
Progress:	On 3rd June 2025, The SADC NTB Unit advised that the NTB had been submitted for consideration by the Committee of Ministers of Trade meeting taking place in Harare. The outcome Ministers' meeting would provide further guidance on how to proceed .
Products:	1701.13: Raw cane sugar, in solid form, not containing added flavouring or colouring matter, obtained without centrifugation, with sucrose content 69° to 93°, containing only natural anhedral microcrystals (see subheading note 2.) and 1701.14: Raw cane sugar, in solid form, not containing added flavouring or colouring matter (excl. cane sugar of 1701 13)
NTB-001-253	8.8. Issues related to transit	2025-05-11	Zimbabwe: Nyamapanda	South Africa	New	View
Complaint:	While in transit from BBR to Nyamapanda with a load destined for Malawi, our truck had to divert off the predetermined statutory route through Harare due to roadworks/congestion by no more than 400m. The Zimra tracking seal picked up this diversion and thus, we have been punished with a $2000 fine we which feel is incredibly excessive, especially with proof that the truck was not stationary at all while off-route. This punishment does not seem to fit the crime.
NTB-001-251	2.3. Issues related to the rules of origin	2024-07-05	Tanzania: TRA	Kenya	New	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.

<< Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next >>

Display:

Non-Tariff Barriers

Reporting, Monitoring and Eliminating Mechanism

Active complaints