Active complaints

Showing items 21 to 40 of 66
Complaint number NTB Type
Category 1. Government participation in trade & restrictive practices tolerated by governments
Category 2. Customs and administrative entry procedures
Category 5. Specific limitations
Category 6. Charges on imports
Category 7. Other procedural problems
Category 8. Transport, Clearing and Forwarding
Check allUncheck all
Date of incident Location
COMESA
EAC
SADC
Reporting country or region
COMESA
EAC
SADC
Status
Actions
NTB-000-670 8.6. Vehicle standards 2015-05-08 Tanzania: Tunduma South Africa In process View
Complaint: Despite the passing and acceptance of EAC Vehicle Overload Bill of 2012, whereby it states under the Fourth Schedule s.5 (1) (c) - VEHICLE DIMENSIONS, AXLE LOAD CONFIGURATIONS AND VEHICLE COMBINATIONS, that the maximum vehicle combination length permissible is 22 m and which includes and covers the South African designed and developed Interlink combination of 22 m maximum. Tanzania are still insisting on abnormal vehicle permits to be issued to these vehicles on entry into Tanzania at Tunduma Border Post at a cost of US $20 per entry or face heavy penalties including the impounding of vehicles if they are not in posesion of an abnormal permit.

This is in breach of the Bill which has been accepted by all EAC Member Countries including Tanzania and this policy needs to be revoked ASAP.
 
Progress: Awaiting feedback from Focal Points  
NTB-000-676 2.3. Issues related to the rules of origin 2015-07-31 SADC Mauritius In process View
Complaint: The 2 stage transformation needed on clothing is too stringent as it stifles investment in manufacture of clothing due to economic reason and prices. Our company would want to invest in Bio organic fabrics. We invest in stock form India for knitted fabric jersey 100% but with this fabric we have issues to get the SADC certificate of origin as in the rules of origin it does not have 2 value added process. But we are a brand, we produce the garment here in Mauritius we do also the printing at our factory. Therefore there is two process, the cloth is cut here, and then printing.Please can our case be studied as we are a SME factory and for our survival we need to export to Africa. Can this case be study for the rules of origin be modified if the printing process is big part on the value of this product  
Progress: During the 15th meeting of the SADC Subcommittee on Trade facilitation, the Secretariat reported that work is underway to review the Rules of origin. This matter was on the agenda of the next meeting on rules of origin for consideration.  
NTB-000-781 2.6. Additional taxes and other charges 2015-11-19 Mozambique: Delegação Aduaneira de Goba (Road) Eswatini In process View
Complaint: An import surcharge is applie to all imported sugar (i.e. SADC and non-SADC) ased on the difference between Dollar-based reference price (DBRP) and the world marker price quoted on the New York #11 and London no.5 commodity exchanges for brown and white sugars respectively. The current DBRP is US$806 per tonne for brown sugar and US$932 per tonne for white sugar.  
Progress: 1. On 5th November 2017, Mozambique Focal Point updated that Mozambique is still working on the matter and a multisectorial team, which involves Revenue Authority (Customs and International Cooperation Directorate) and Ministry of Industry and Trade has been established to analyse the matter and the answer will be sent as soon as possible..

2. On 1st September 2017, Mozambique and Swaziland Focal Points reported that they are urgently following up with relevant authorities to assist the complainant . All efforts are being made to resolve the matter expeditiously.
 
NTB-000-689 8.6. Vehicle standards 2016-03-23 Botswana: All Border posts or entry points into Botswana by road In process View
Complaint: We have a problem in Botswana regarding the determination of Road User Charges at the border posts into Botswana.

The trailer manufacturers states the GVM to be 36 000 kg per unit (see attached vehicle registration papers)

This is the combined weight of the front and back link. However that is not what is reflected on the disc.

What it should say on the disc, is that the carrying capacity:

a) on the front link is 13000 kg.
b) The rear link is 23000kg.
c) The combined weight is thus 36 000kg.

We all know that it is not possible to carry 36000kgs on the front link and 36000kgs on the rear link. The axle configurations do not permit this to say the very least.

The problem arises on entry into Botswana at the border posts. They charge their road user fees per disc weight on the front and rear trailer.

therefore we end up paying for 36000kgs for the front trailer and 36000kgs for the rear trailer, this is 72 000kgs per unit.

To change the SA disc the following procedure will have to be followed.

1) W/bridge
2) Road worthy
3) Registration certificate
4) Certificate of compliance
5) Certificate model
6) Builders certificate
7) Ten days to change details of GVM per trailer.

a) It is very costly
b) it is very time consuming
c) it is not practical
d) It defeats the object of standardization and harmonization in the SADC region.

In this day and age where we are all trying to tighten our belts in order to survive, we can ill afford such additional costs.

This matter requires the urgent intervention of the focal point group in Botswana to address this matter urgently with the Roads Department in Gaborone, all relevant documentation pertaining to this case has been attached.
 
Progress: This issue was discussed during the Botswana / South Africa Bi-National Commission, which was held in Gaborone in November 2017. As per item 3.2.2.1 bullet point number one (1), the Republic of South Africa was to formerly request for a waiver from Botswana on the matter, while South Africa is still sorting out the system that causes the problem. Botswana is still awaiting correspondence from South Africa to that effect. We kindly advice the South African Focal Point to consult the Department of Transport in South Africa for further clarifications.  
NTB-000-720 2.3. Issues related to the rules of origin
Policy/Regulatory
2016-06-07 Sudan: Sudan Customs Authority Egypt In process View
Complaint: Sudan Customs authority has stopped applying the customs exemption on Egyptian Ceramic tiles products despite the fact that the consignments are accompanied by a COMESA certificate of origin .  
Progress: 1. During the 5th meeting of the COMESA NTBs Focal Points held in Nairobi from 23-25 August 2016 Sudan reported that it had established a committee comprising the relevant stakeholders to analyse the problem and inform the Minister within 30days. The matter will be presented to the next bilateral meeting between Egypt and Sudan scheduled in Cairo in October 2016. Further , COMESA Secretariat reported that communication had been sent to Sudan on this issue and Sudan undertook to respond to the communication from COMESA Secretariat once it is received.

2. During the 33rd Meeting of the COMESA Customs and Trade Committee, the Secretariat reported that response was being awaited to a follow up letter was sent to Sudan in September 2016.
 
NTB-000-721 5.5. Import licensing requirements
Policy/Regulatory
2016-06-17 Zimbabwe: Ministry of Industry & Commerce Zambia In process View
Complaint: Zimbabwe introduced surcharges on certain products in violation of the letter and spirit of the COMESA Free Trade Area. Zimbabwe introduced Statutory Instrument 64 of 2016 , controlling the volumes of imports of products exported by Zambia to Zimbabwe Statutory Instrument (SI 64 of 2016),requires that import licenses be obtained from the Ministry of Industry and Commerce before importation of a wide range of products. The instrument is in force and is being implemented  
Progress: 1. On 30 October 2017, Zimbabwe Focal Point reported that Statutory Instrument 64 of 2016 has been consolidated with other Statutory Instruments through SI 122 of 2017 which was gazetted on 22 September 2017. The consolidated SI removed the requirement for import and export licences on some products.
2. On 15th June 2017, Zimbabwe Focal Point reported that SI 64 of 2016 is being reviewed with the aim of removing some products from import licencing.

3. At the 5th Meeting of the COMESA NTB Focal Points held in Nairobi form 23-25 August 2016, Zambia confirmed that the NTB was still pending resolution by Zimbabwe. In response , Zimbabwe reported that Permanent Secretaries of Zimbabwe and Zambia met and agreed that Zimbabwe should communicate all the measures that had been taken and any future measures well on time for the information of trading partners . The parties agreed to meet regularly to share information and discuss mutually beneficial matters of interest to the two countries . Zimbabwe undertook to notify COMESA about the Statutory Instrument 64 by 31 October 2016.
 
NTB-000-714 6.7. Other
Policy/Regulatory
2016-06-30 Tanzania: Tanzania Food and Drug Authority Kenya In process View
Complaint: TFDA registers injectables as per pack size and treats each product by itself rendering retaining licences for the product very expensive.  
Progress: 1. At the 21st meeting of the EAC Regional Forum on NTBs, Tanzania undertook to investigate and report back.
2. During the Bilateral meeting held in December 2018, Tanzania reported that PSSs should instruct that the Issues related to TFDA be discussed by the EAC Standards Committee where food and drug authorities are members to advice if these are NTBs and resolve them. The Meeting recommended that the Task Force established by the Standards Committee should analyse all the fees and charges applicable to food, drugs and cosmetics and make appropriate recommendations by March 2019.
 
NTB-000-718 8.8. Issues related to transit 2016-08-02 Mozambique: Beira Port Zambia In process View
Complaint: With reference to Resolved NTB-000-606, the matter is anything but resolved. We continue to experience attacks on our vehicles when using the Munhava Port Access. We have contacted numerous Security Companies in Beira to provide security for the vehicles, all have refused quoting the security situation. We have also been advised by other transporters that placing guards on the vehicles will only draw further action against the vehicles in an act of defiance/retribution. The Police do seem to be prepared to escort the vehicles, but we have no contacts nor tariffs charged. In the past week we have recorded 3 violent incidents.  
Progress: During the 15th meeting of the SADC Sub Committee on Trade facilitation, Mozambique reported that they noted the misbehavior by certain truck drivers sometimes they divert the trucks to inappropriate cites and are reported . Zambia has never reported those wrong doers and perpetrators. Mozambique requested Zambia to clarify the specific experiences. Zambia to provide feedback.  
NTB-000-725 2.6. Additional taxes and other charges 2016-11-01 Angola: Port of Luanda South Africa In process View
Complaint: Angola has Cumbersome and costly documentation and export/import requirements. The following is list of documentation required for a single consignment : i) 2x1 Original Bill of Landing; (ii)Original stamped and signed Commercial invoice; (iii) Original stamped and signed packing list; (iv) Analysis certificates if so required by consignee; (v) Loading Certificate (known as ARC or CNCA) PIP number prior to loading (required to do the pre-inspection) - not compulsory ; (vi) Voluntary pre-shipping control of merchandise (to be done at place of origin by inspector that issued the PIP number) Certificate of Origin( if so required by consignee) transport documents, full load container have to be sealed; (vii) letter from consignee nominating Orey as his forwarder agent; (viii) letter of responsibility from consignee to the carrier accepting full responsibility for demurrages and eventual container damages; (ix) copy of tax payer card of consignee; (x) Ministry of Commerce to issue license upon presentation of the commercial invoice; (xi) Ministry of Commerce to provide DU number, each invoice has different DU number.
The expected time frame is 72 hours (3 days) to get a DU number. CNCA certificate can only be issued upon presentation of the DU number for each specific shipment. Cost to produce DU number is 10 USD per invoice + Process DU (MINCO) FOB value 0.2%.

Costs
There is Fixed delivery and clearance rates in Luanda. Transport costs of 25% as from 15/1/2016, plus other additional chargers. Lab analysis costs 3000 USD per invoice. Analysis are mandatory to any imported edible goods, from water to beverages.

Delivery costs to Luanda per 20" + - 800 USD + 250 USD per night time delivery within city limits. overtime applies all the time due to restriction on delivery during the day due to traffic. Exporters are forced to pay incentives costs to EHO by OREY for DDP shipments. 20" => 150 USD if customs clearance handled by Orey, 40" => 170 USD if customs clearance handled by Orey.

Other fees charged are:
Shipment tracking & dispatch, BL Validation 160 per unit, Container deposit 1000 per unit
Delivery order 25 USD per unit. Port Tax 93.00 per unit, Wharfage 280.00 USD per unit, Tracking fee 100 USD per unit, Clearance transport and petties 350 USD per unit, delivery between Luanda /Soyo 3500.00 USD, return empty 400 USD per unit, transport between Luanda and Cabinda 11000.00 USD per unit, co-ordination 2.5% minimum USD 50.00. Consumption Tax of 5% service costs rendered in Angola. Taxes in all alcohol beverages is high 30% Cocktail 50% Ciders 51%

We believe this costs makes it difficult for investors to do business in Angola, most of them amount to tariff and non-tariff barriers we would like Regulators to review them.
 
Progress: During the 15th meeting of the SADC Sub Committee on Trade facilitation held in may 2017, the Secretariat requested Angola to submit names of its Focal points to enable processing of reported NTBs. Angola reported that : (i) based on their research, the documents are necessary and that these are part of universal documents required for import permit. (ii) South AFrica was also imposing more cumbersome procedures than Angola as evidenced by the fact that the documents she require are the same as those required by Angola therefore this does not constitute NTB.; (iii) the Ministry of Trade is the focal point and there is a national secretariat for SADC through which all SADC Affairs are channeled ; (iv) . Angola was working on establishing the Trade facilitation committee after which focal points will be appointed; (v) she was in the process of revising its commercial legislation that considers trimming the number of import/export documentation; (vi) The ministry would undertake consultations with Ministry of Transport to simply the procedures . 3. In response, South Africa reported that consultations will be made to find out the reasons for the complaint. South Reported that she does not require numerous documentation.  
NTB-000-745 6.1. Prior import deposits and subsidies 2017-01-19 Zambia: Kazungula Ferry South Africa In process View
Complaint: “SARS received an escalation in January 2017 from Deloitte, regarding a complaint by fuel exporters from South Africa. The complaint is regarding Zambia Revenue Authority (ZRA) Circular No. 9 of December 2016, notifying its officers “that all fuel imported from South Africa under preferential arrangements should be subjected to payments of a monetary deposit equivalent to the full customs duty payable.

The modalities of collection of the said deposit will be temporarily suspending both SSA and SDC preferential rates against goods of HS 2710.12.10 and 2710.19.10 until the Origin verification process is finalised”.

SARs is of the view that the collection of the monetary deposits on fuel imported from South Africa is against the spirit of the SADC Protocol on Trade and the WTO, as this treatment applies only to oil imported from South Africa. It pre-supposes that the ZRA is nullifying the SADC Protocol on Trade relating to those specific products without following the proper procedures regarding derogation on infant industries.

SARs has tried several times to get answers from Zambia Revenue Authority (ZRA) to explain their reasoning behind the circular and so far, they have not provided any correspondence to this matter.
 
Progress: 1. On 25th January 2018, Zambia Focal Point reported that the deposit was a temporal measure pending origin inquiry. The inquiry has reached advanced stage and will soon be concluded and stakeholders will be fully advised on the way forward. This is consistent with the provisions of the protocol on trade which allow for collection of such deposits where necessary, while origin verification is underway.

2. During the 15th meeting of the SADC Sub Committee on Trade facilitation held in may 2017, Zambia reported that consultations will be undertaken with relevant authorities and report back.
 
NTB-000-742 3. Technical barriers to trade (TBT)
B1: Prohibitions/restrictions of imports for objectives set out in the TBT agreement
2017-02-20 Uganda: Port Bell Lake port South Africa In process View
Complaint: Verification Agencies (SGS) apply standards that are higher than International accepted standards requiring additional tests and certificates which is of high costs. Additional tests include tests for copper, iron, manganese, lead and coliforms which are expensive tests adding to the costs of doing business. The additional tests last for a week in addition to the export process. The Agency offers Route B or C product registration. Product meant for Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda are tested once a year Route C is a security factory audit for wine export to the abovementioned countries  
Progress: This matter was brought to the attention of the Uganda Focal Points along the margins of the 23rd EAC NTBs forum on 6 May 2017 . Uganda private sector Focal Point reported that consultations had been initiated with the Ministry of Trade , Industry and cooperatives to try and resolve the matter amicably. They will provide feedback in due course .  
NTB-000-821 6.5. Variable levies
Policy/Regulatory
2017-02-21 Zambia: Zambia Revenue Authority Kenya In process View
Complaint: On 20th and 21st February 2017, Zimbabwean and Kenyan companies involved in distribution of tilapia into Zambia reported that the Government of Zambia had enacted the Customs and Excise Amendment Act number 47 of 2016 effective 1 January 2017.The amendment imposes a surtax of 5% on all imported goods that are produced or manufactured in Zambia. The surtax was meant to encourage local sourcing of inputs for the manufacturing sector in order to reduce the cost of production.  
Progress: During the 33rd meeting of the COMESA Customs and Trade Committee, it was noted that Zambia private sector had lobbied for imposition of surtax on locally produced inputs, however there was a blanket application of the surtax covering inputs not locally produced and finished products as a way of raising revenue for the government.

 
NTB-000-737 7.4. Costly procedures 2017-03-01 South Africa In process View
Complaint: KBP company who constructed the new border between Zambia and DRC , about 6 years or so ago pegged crossing fees at $100/truck for the Zambia side and $100 for DRC side. The same charge is levied for the return journey therefore transporters pay total crossing fees of $400/truck for a round trip .Further , parking fees of $25/truck/day are enforced for units that stay over 24 hours in the parking bay. These fees were justified at the beginning as these were to modernize the border. However, the transport rates have tumbled by as much as 40 % and we all now have to look at cutting costs.

Taking into account the number of vehicle crossings daily, the US$ 400 crossing fees per round trip has now become a barrier to trade and is having an impact on growth in trade in the region.
 
Progress: During the 15th meeting of the SADC Sub Committee on Trade facilitation, Zambia reported that the new border had been constructed under a PPP agreement between KBP and Zambian Government and therefore the charges could be part of the contractual conditions governing such contracts. Zambia will undertake further consultations on the issue and report back.  
NTB-000-751 8.7. Costly Road user charges /fees 2017-05-01 Zambia: Ministry of Trade Zambia In process View
Complaint: Transporters have noted the many benefits of using Botswana as a transit instead of Zimbabwe. It is a well known fact that Zimbabwe borders are slow and congested, there are many tolls we pay (for no service), numerous road blocks (harrassment of drivers and lack of adherence to SADC appreciation of the Soveriegnty of Foreign COF's), high fuel costs and failing road infrastructure. The completion of the Kazungulu Bridge is a much anticipated event that will give transporters access to an efficient and cost effective transit to Zambia.

On the 11th November 2016, Zambia issued SI 85 of 2016, The Tolls Act in which the Second Schedule Section A and B outlines Entry Tolls for COMESA/SADC and other Countries. Botswana was not included under SADC and awarded tolls higher than other SADC States. On the 1st May 2017, Botswana retaliated by issuing an Amendment of the Road Traffic and Road Transport (Permits) regulations, 2017. Under this Amendment, tolls were increased and in turn, Zambian Transporters handed a hefty penalty. The result is that as a Zambian Transporter our Transit Fees through Botswana increased by 70%.

This makes the Botswana route unattractive and given the congestion at Kazungulu, we have had to run through Zimbabwe again. We are delayed here by congestion, delays in ZIMRA electronic sealing processes and run the gauntlet as described above.

Surely the whole idea of building the Kazungula Bridge is to improve the flow of traffic through Botswana and create economic advantage? With the increase in the tolls in a tit for tat manner, building the bridge is a waste of time.

Could the member States please meet and look at treating each other in the spirit encouraged by SADC.
 
NTB-000-747 8.8. Issues related to transit 2017-05-03 Zambia: Several Locations in Zambia South Africa In process View
Complaint: There are plus minus 540 trucks loaded with Mukula Wood which were loaded in the DRC, impounded by the Zambian Government in Zambia.

There is another plus minus 600 trucks still on the DRC side which have been refused entry through Zambia. These 540 trucks impounded in Zambia have been there for approximately 60 to 70 days in all different areas of the country, in the middle of the bush without any water, sanitation or access to supplies.

There has already been incidence of drivers having to leave their trucks in critical condition with malaria and other drivers with diabetes that have run out of medication, as well as a driver who suffered a stroke this morning at Kafue.

The goods were loaded in Lubambashi and other areas in the DRC and the wood is in transit through Zambia to various Ports in Namibia, South Africa, Tanzania and Mozambique.

No Seizure Notices of any sort have been given to the drivers, they trucks were impounded by the Zambian National Services and according to them it comes from the top and their hands are tied.

Last week Friday 28 April, a contingent of around 28 transporters and exporters from the DRC met with the Zambian Director of Lands to try and resolve this matter and after discussion, he informed us that there were two teams travelling around the country to verify the cargoes and endeavour to get them released.

After this meeting we met with the Permanent Secretary’s Office in Lusaka and demanded a meeting. Whereafter, we had a consultation lasting approximately 1.5 hours. The Secretary assured us that two teams had been appointed to the task of travelling around Zambia with the aim of releasing the impounded vehicles.

We brought to his attention the inhumane conditions in which these drivers have been detained and although he empathized he didn’t seem overly concerned about their plight.

On the same day, Friday a team had to be rushed to Nkonde Border between Zambia and Tanzania where there were about 110 trucks stuck on the Zambian side as Tanzania had temporarily closed the border due to the discontent on the drivers. The Secretary told us these trucks would be released the same day but until now, nothing has happened and the trucks are still there.

The 180 trucks stuck at the Kasumbalesa Border between DRC and Zambia on the Zambian side which were inspected and verified on Sunday are still stuck there and no one has been released and ZNS are not telling the drivers why they have not been released.

We estimate that there is in the region of 80-90 South Africa trucks being detained and the rest comprise of Zambian, Tanzanian, Botswana and Namibia trucks.

As you can imagine this has caused chaos with the Transporters as the banks are not getting paid and people are losing their businesses because of the dire situation. We need urgent intervention to prevent any further destruction of our businesses and the welfare of our drivers.

We have this minute been informed by drivers on the Zambian/Tanzania Border on the Zambian Side, that plus minus 250 trucks have been locked and surrounded by the Zambian Army and the drivers told to go home until further notice.

NOT ONE TRUCK HAS BEEN ALLOWED TO LEAVE.
 
Progress: On 8th June Namibia Focal Point prpvided the following update and plea for Zambia to release the trucks:
The Namibia Chamber of Commerce and Industry (NCCI) has been intervening in this issue since it was brought to their attention by their members affected by this development.

During February 2017, a number of Namibian trucks contracted by various customers to transport timber from the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) were intersected and impounded by the Zambian authorities once they entered the Zambian territory. The goods on those trucks were NOT harvested in Zambia but by businesses operating in the DRC with valid permits from the Government of the DRC to do so. The Namibian truckers were simply transporting goods from the suppliers to the clients and were never involved in the harvesting of the timber. Namibia understand that the Mukula timber which caused the impounding, is prohibited to be harvested in Zambia but not in the DRC.

Namibia trucks carried timber from the DRC with valid documentations which were inspected by Zambian customs officials and found to be valid and authentic. The Zambian authorities even sealed the cargo at the Kasumbalesa border post between DRC and Zambia which under normal circumstances would be inspected again at the Sesheke-Katima Mulilo border post. Despite the valid and authentic documents which Namibia drivers had and despite the Zambian authorities having satisfied themselves at the boarders that the trucks were carrying goods legally, the same Zambian authorities still impounded trucks.

While the harvesting of makula timber is not permitted in Zambia, the Zambian law never disallowed such timber to be transported on Zambian roads until April 2017 when they reportedly passed a law preventing the transportation of mukula timber on Zambian roads. This law was enacted and implemented retrospectively which is neither normal nor legal. The NCCI has engaged the Zambian and Namibian authorities on several occasions to resolve this dispute diplomatically and amicably but these efforts did not yield any results.

Namibia trucks remain impounded illegally by the Zambian Government. As a result of the impounding, Namibian drivers have been living in deplorable and inhumane conditions in Zambia for the past five months, far away from their families. NCCI members (the trucking companies) lost a lot of money totalling close to N$ 100 million (a hundred million Namibian Dollars). Their trucks have been standing in Zambia without generating income and some of our members are at risk of losing their businesses altogether. It is important to understand that the Walvis Bay – Ndola – Lubumbashi corridor was developed to promote trade within the region and with the outside world. A lot of efforts were made to promote this transport corridor.

On the 5th of March 2010, the Governments of DRC, Namibia and Zambia signed an agreement which established the Walvis Bay – Ndola – Lubumbashi Development Corridor and since then, we have seen a significant growth in the movements of goods along that corridor. Unfortunately, there were also more goods destined for Zambia and DRC from the Port of Walvis Bay in comparison with goods from Zambia and DRC to Namibia or to the outside world via the Port of Walvis Bay. One of the products identified to be transported as a return load from the DRC to the Port of Walvis Bay was timber and the main market destination was China.

A number of trucks from various countries, primarily Namibia, Zambia, DRC, Tanzania and South Africa started taking timber from the DRC as a return load. It is unfortunate and regrettable that the Zambian authorities decided to impound trucks for such a long time instead of impounding the products which they were trying to protect. The impounding of our trucks has harmed our economy severely, at the time when our economy is already not doing well. There is clear evidence of the impact of the impounding of our trucks on the transport and logistics sector in Namibia. There is currently a lot of cargo that cannot be transported out of the Port of Walvis Bay due to lack of trucks because so many of them are kept standing in Zambia. The timber crisis that we are now experiencing could have been avoided if there was effective communication amongst SADC member states and especially the signatory to the Walvis Bay – Ndola – Lubumbashi Development Corridor Agreement. The Zambian Government implemented laws affecting the operations on the corridor without consulting other member states as required by the agreement they signed in Livingstone in March 2010.


In fact, the Zambian Government has violated that very same agreement. As a representative body for businesses in Namibia, the Namibia Chamber of Commerce and Industry demanded for an immediate release of our trucks unconditionally. We further urge the Zambian and all other Governments which are party to the Walvis Bay – Ndola – Lubumbashi Development Corridor agreement to adhere to this agreement strictly in order to ensure that the corridor plays its rightful role in the development of trade within SADC.
 
NTB-000-756 8.7. Costly Road user charges /fees 2017-05-05 Kenya: Kaijado County Burundi In process View
Complaint: Namanga/Kajiado County charges 2,000 Ksh for all Burundi cargo trucks transiting Kenya  
Progress: 1. During the Meeting that was held in October, 2017, Kenya reported that she was consulting the County Government on the same and will report during the NTB Forum in March, 2018

2. Kenya reported during the RMC meeting held on 29April - 3 May 2019 that the County has stopped charging the levy, but will consult further and revert.
 
NTB-000-760 2.3. Issues related to the rules of origin
Policy/Regulatory
2017-05-05 Tanzania: Tanzania Revenue Authority Kenya In process View
Complaint: Lack of preferential treatment. Payment of full CET duty on cement exports from Kenya to Tanzania due to interpretation of Chapter 25. This also affects situations where the local content is at a high percentile. Tanzania authorities attach a 35% duty to cement that is not ‘wholly produced’ in an EAC state. This is opposed to previous practice which had other categories on the rules of origin certificate that for cement included ‘value addition’ and/or ‘substantially transformed using material content not exceeding 60%’ - the Authorities do not consider these categories anymore; the rules of origin must state whether the item is either wholly produced or not.  
Progress: 1. The Extra Ordinary SCTIFI that sat in February, 2018 directed that the EAC Secretariat coordinates a verification mission on edible oils, cement, lubricants in Kenya by 31st March 2018.
2. During the SCTIFI meeting of 16th November, 2018, Kenya reported that the NTB for Lubricants & edible oils has been resolved but the NTB on cement in respect of Clinker that is locally sourced and imported is not resolved.The Meeting of the SCTIFI directed the Secretariat and CoC to develop guidelines on applicability of separation of materials as provided by Rule 11 of the EAC Rules of Origin, 2015.
3.During the bilateral meeting in December 2018,Kenya reported that the NTB for Lubricants & edible oils has been resolved but the NTB on cement in respect of Clinker that is locally sourced and imported is not resolved.
The Meeting recommends to the SCTIFI to direct the Secretariat and CoC to develop guidelines on applicability of separation of materials as provided by Rule 11 of the EAC Rules of Origin, 2015.
 
NTB-000-765 2.7. International taxes and charges levied on imports and other tariff measures
Policy/Regulatory
2017-05-05 Tanzania: Tanzania Revenue Authority Kenya In process View
Complaint: Tanzania does not recognize price adjustments for duty purposes particularly the reduction by milk processors in Kenya.  
Progress: 1. During the Regional Monitoring Committee meeting of 2018, Tanzania reported that, this is not an NTB but a valuation issue that can be resolved between the revenue authority and the importer. KRA and TRA were therefore quested to hold a bilateral meeting to resolve the matter by 21st November 2018.
2. The Regional meeting held from 29 April - 3 May 2019 referred the matter to the Committee on Customs .
 
NTB-000-769 2.3. Issues related to the rules of origin 2017-05-05 Tanzania: Tanzania Revenue Authority Kenya In process View
Complaint:
Despite Kenya Tobacco raw material being fully sourced in Kenya, the manufacturers are required to pay 80 per cent higher excise for cigarettes exports into Tanzania.

 
Progress: 1. The Bilateral meeting that took place in January 2018 noted that Kenya and Tanzania need to harmonize their domestic taxes and local content policies and request the EAC Secretariat to fast track the process of harmonization in all partner states.The meeting also agreed that the two Partner States should take cognizance of the national treatment provision under Article 15 of Custom Union Protocol not to impose directly or indirectly internal taxation on goods from other partner states in excess of that imposed on similar domestic goods.
2.During the Bilateral Meting held from 23- 27 April 2019, both parties reiterated their 2018 commitments to champion harmonization of their domestic taxes and local content policies and therefore request the EAC Secretariat to fast track the process of harmonization. In this regard, United Republic of Tanzania maintained that, both parties should implement the 2018 bilateral agreement on harmonization of their domestic taxes and local content policies. Kenya, however, maintained that this is a trade restrictive matter and should be resolved at the Community level in accordance to Article 15(2) of the EAC Customs Union Protocol. The bilateral Meeting therefore agreed to escalate this matter to the Council of Ministers.
 
NTB-000-776 8.7. Costly Road user charges /fees
Policy/Regulatory
2017-05-05 Tanzania: Ministry of Works, Transport & Communications Uganda In process View
Complaint: Tanzania still charges US$500 to Uganda trucks compared to US$152 charged on Rwanda trucks.  
Progress: 1. During the Extra Ordinary SCTIFI, the issues of Road User Charges were referred to the Sectoral Council on TCM for resolution.
2. The meeting Senior Officials meeting that met in October, 2017 noted that this NTB would be resolved if Road User Charges were harmonised with in the EAC. The meeting therefore urged the Secretariat to expedite the process of harmonisation of the Road User Charges to facilitate resolving this NTB.
3.The Ministerial bilateral meting held on 19 December 2018 directed that Experts and Senior officials of the two countries should engage and harmonize the charges and report progress to the Ministers by end of June 2019.
4. The 27th Regional Monitoring Committee meeting held from 29 April - 3 May noted that Tanzania was committed to resolve this NTB as agreed during the Bilateral meeting. Uganda requested that this NTB be discussed during the PSs level
Bilateral meeting.
 
1 2 3 4