Active complaints

Showing items 21 to 40 of 57
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-000-830 8.2. Administrative (Border Operating Hours, delays at border posts, etc.) 2018-07-16 Botswana: Martins Drift Zambia In process View
Complaint: A Zambian Registered Tanker carrying sulphuric acid from South Africa was weighed at the Martins Drift weighbridge with the following axle masses: Steer axle - 5200 kg (legal limit 8000 kg); Drive axles - 18200 kg (legal limit 18000 kg); Trailing axles - 22800 kg (legal limit 24000 kg). Tolerance is 5% on an axle set or on GVM, in this case it would be 900 kg on the driving axle set. The weigh bridge official instructed the Driver to Park telling him that his driving axle was overloaded without the application of the 5% tolerance. It is observed that only at this weigh bridge there is no application of the 5% tolerance. In the spirit of harmonization South Africa, Zambia and Botswana the legal limits are the same with a 5% tolerance except at Martins Drift weighbridge. Kindly assist to resolve this issue at Martins Drift which is causing unnecessary loss of transit time and charges. Please note that this is not a one off incidence.  
NTB-000-823 2.6. Additional taxes and other charges 2018-06-01 Botswana: BURS, BOTSWANA RECEIVER OF REVENUE South Africa In process View
Complaint: Botswana government is imposing daily double tax on imported alcohol beverages to Botswana. The motivation for imposing the excise and not imposing on local manufacturers is that local manufacturers create jobs and have manufacturing plant in the country. It is the Wine Industry submission that wine as a commodity cannot be manufactured in Botswana due to the weather conditions.
SA Wine Companies, pay excise in South Africa and do not expect to pay another excise in Botswana for the very same products. We appeal for the repeal of the Regulations to allow both local and importers to be treated the same. Locals have more competitive edge compared to importers. Furthermore, the methodology as per Regulations is different from what is practically implemented. Enclosed self explanatory email clarifying the differences. Botswana is in breach of the WTO GATT Agreement, Article 34
 
NTB-000-818 3. Technical barriers to trade (TBT)
B42: TBT regulations on transport and storage
2018-05-17 SADC South Africa In process View
Complaint: Failure to implement Article 5.8 (6.2 Road Traffic Policy) leading to variable treatment of the transport of High Cube containers with height exceeding 4.3 metres.

The transport of High Cube Containers, on “standard” deck height (1.5 metres) vehicles and trailers results in overall height of approximately 4.5 metres.
Botswana: Imposes requirement for abnormal load permits for each load.
South Africa threatens to repeal moratorium on prosecution from 1 Jan 2019
Other countries ignoring “illegal” height, but “illegality” leaves insurance threats to operators.
Zambia (4.8), Zimbabwe 4.65), Malawi (4.6); Tanzania (4.6) have increased legal height to at least 4.6 metres.
Uncertainty in region is causing growing concerns regarding viability of international transport routes amid fears of further enforcement costs and barriers.
 
NTB-000-889 2.14. Other 2018-04-05 Mozambique: Delegação Aduaneira de Zobwe Malawi New View
Complaint: The Ministry of Industry, Trade and Tourism received a complaint from Limbe Leaf Tobacco Company Ltd of a Non-Tariff Barrier imposed by Mozambican Customs Authorities at Zobue Border Post.

The company reported that Mozambique Customs Officials are demanding that containers carrying processed tobacco transiting through Mozambique should be opened after passing through Zobue Border Post.

Once the container is opened for physical inspection, customers (buyers of tobacco) demand that the exporter should get an official letter from the Mozambique Customs Officials. Unfortunately, Mozambique customs authorities have not issued documents nor provided formal reports stating the occurrence of the inspections and confirming changes in seal numbers once an inspection has taken place.
 
NTB-000-803 2.6. Additional taxes and other charges 2018-02-28 Tanzania: Importation into Tanzania Malawi In process View
Complaint: CORI Ltd visited Tanzania last year to look for export markets for cooking oil in Tanzania. CORI was informed that the government in Tanzania does not promote/support importation and that Tanzania has a 15% surcharge on the importation of cooking oil.  
NTB-000-797 1.14. Lack of coordination between government institutions 2018-01-02 South Africa In process View
Complaint: Distell, a Tape Town based exporting company is experiencing delays and high costs of processing SAD500 entries and SADC certificates for their wine exports to Zimbabwe. The current procedure where the Distell driver cannot take the SAD500 entry and SADC certificate to Customs to have it stamped and signed over the counter is cumbersome and costly for the company. The company has to wait for at least 2 days for either the release notification or the stamped and signed SADC certificates. This leads to the truck waiting at the depot for the documents, which results to either standing time cost at the depot or standing time at the border.
The requirement is as follows: Distell Company loads Bulk orders in Tanktainers and Drums from Monis in Paarl or Adam Tas in Stellenbosch, Cape Town which goes by road to Zimbabwe. Currently export documents can only be done by the Freight forwarder immediately after the Tanktainer or Drums are loaded. Export documentation cannot be processed earlier, as company has to wait for the final weight loaded into the truck. The alternative method to use flow meters and cut off the loading on a specific amount of liters is used because it is does produce accurate measurements.
Actual Current process for Bulk - Tanktainers (Tankerservices transport)
- Truck to be arranged for loading very early on a Tuesday morning @ 07:00am
- Most of the time 2 to 3 truckloads which will load one after the other.
- The following is all also done on the Tuesday:
o The wine is loaded.
o Distell invoices and forward the relevant documentation to Imperial Logistics in Johannesburg.
o Imperial Logistics processes the Customs entry via EDI.
- Once EDI release is received (after at least 2 days), Imperial Logistics sends the Release notification via e-mail.
- Distell advises Tanker Services to collect the relevant documentation and leave for the border.
- Imperial Logistics will have the SADC certificate stamped at the border.
- Tanker services driver to collect the original SADC certificates at the border.
A permanent solution for exporters in Cape Town to provide an over the counter service for our SAD500 & SADC entries is required.
 
Products: 2204.10: Sparkling wine of fresh grapes  
NTB-000-864 2.3. Issues related to the rules of origin 2017-11-17 Uganda: URA Kenya In process View
Complaint: Discriminatory treatment (Excise duty) of Kenyan manufactured products among others Juices and Pharmaceutical products Kenya reported that the Juices are still charged 13% excise duty.  
Progress: 1.Delmonte Pineapple Juice:
Uganda reported that it is difficult to differentiate between pineapple juice manufactured using the locally-acquired concentrate and juice manufactured using concentrate imported under duty remission for exports.
Therefore, Uganda could not accord preferential treatment to Delmonte pineapple Juice.
2. During the JPC held with Kenya,Uganda stated that this provision in the excise Duty Act is global and not specific to juices coming in from Kenya. This provision is under a law which is considered domestic and the country has a sovereign mandate to make provisions related to internal tax.Uganda however promised to undertake stake holder consultation on the excise duty tax and report by June 2019.
3.The Regional Monitoring Committee held on 15th October, 2019 noted that these are two separate NTBs on Juices and Pharmaceuticals and should be treated separately. The NTB on Juice was referred to the Customs Committee for resolution during the SCTIFI meeting on 10th November, 2018.

On Pharmaceuticals: Kenya and Uganda agreed to resolve the NTB bilaterally as it was agreed by Heads of State. The two Partner States agreed to update the EACS on the progress.

During the Regional Monitoring Committee held on 15th October, 2019Uganda informed the meeting that work is ongoing to resolve the NTB and would report back by November, 2019
 
NTB-000-754 7.3. Corruption 2017-07-01 Mozambique: Police checkpoint in Dondo Mozambique In process View
Complaint: A week or so ago one of the drivers got stopped at Dondo Check Point in Mozambique.
They told the driver that his International Driving Permit (AA) was fake.
We ended up having to pay a fine of 50,000 mts equating to $833.00. With administration charges we have paid out $1,026.00 (fine attached)
The AA have verified our Driving permit is actually not fake.
Attached the report from our agent in Beira of Beloma Mr. Dirk Dieltiens.
Attached his report and correspondence.
Attached the old and new Permit from AA and the letter confirming documentation is in good order.

 
Progress: The Mozambique Focal Point reported that consultations had been initiated with the focal point in the Ministry of Industry and Trade, who will get in touch with the police to clarify this issue, as soon as possible  
Products: 98 - 99: Service  
NTB-000-788 2.3. Issues related to the rules of origin 2017-06-01 Ethiopia: All Ethiopian banks. Egypt In process View
Complaint: Ethiopian banks are requiring invoices for sales to Ethiopian customers to be stamped by a Chamber of Commerce in Egypt as validation for letters of credit, which is contrary to COMESA rules. Indeed, as per Rule 10 of the COMESA Protocol on Rules of Origin, the only documentary evidence to demonstrate that a good originates from a COMESA Member State is a certificate of origin (not invoices). Consequently, any company should be able to issue an invoice from any country inside or outside the COMESA region, as long as the origin of the products themselves is correctly documented according to COMESA rules through a certificate of origin. Ethiopian banks should comply with Rule 10 of the COMESA Protocol on Rules of Origin and stop requiring invoices to be stamped by predetermined entities (including, inter alia, by a Chamber of Commerce in Egypt).  
Progress: On 26 September 2019 , Ethiopia Focal Point reported that :
Article 10(1) of the Protocol on the Rules of Origin for Products to be Traded Between the Member States of COMESA states goods to be accepted as originating from a Member State shall be supported by a certificate given by the exporter or his authorized representative in the form prescribed in Appendix I of this Protocol; and the certificate shall be authenticated by an authority designated for that purpose by each member State. Moreover, the evidences which shall be listed in the form of certificate of origin are prescribed in the Appendix I of this Protocol; and invoice no. is one of those listed evidences.

Accordingly, certificate of origin shall contain evidences including invoice as prescribed in the Appendix I of that Protocol and it should be stamped/authenticated by designated authority of the exporting countries. Therefore, requesting invoices stamped/authenticated by designated authority of the exporting country (Egypt in this case) is not contrary to the COMESA rule.

Notwithstanding of the above, article 10 of the COMESA protocol on rule of origin does not indicate the procedures or requirements for validating letter of credit rather it talks about the certificate of origin of products and the documentary evidence that shall be included in the form of this certificate. Thus, Article 10 of the COMESA protocol on rule of origin does not related with requirements to open letter of credit; and thereby, the banks of importing or exporting countries can request the sale contract of buyer/importer and seller/exporter, and other documents necessary to open letter of credit.

Regarding letter of credit payment system in Ethiopia, it is opened by the request of buyers/importers of Ethiopia when they buy goods from sellers/exporters of exporting countries. The documents that are to be included in the letter of credit are always based on negotiation of importers and exporters; and all documents required by the contract of parties are not necessarily mentioned in the letter of credit. But it is required to present a stamped/verified commercial invoice and to mentioned it in the letter of credit because the importers’ banks use it as an evidence to receive the mentioned price from importer themselves and pay to the exporters’ banks. Therefore, Ethiopian importers who buy goods from Egyptian exporters or other countries’ exporters on letter of credit basis should present to their banks the commercial invoice that stamped/verified by chamber of commerce of those exporting countries.
 
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. Cigarettes manufactured in Kenya exported to Tanzania required to have a local 75% tobacco.  
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.
3.Status as at 13th September, 2019:
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.

Both Parties Kenya and Tanzania agreed to handle the matter under domestic tax harmonization.
A similar case was filed at the EACJ between Uganda and BAT where a ruling was given that the excise duty charged on cigarettes was contradicting the Community Laws and was Directed to withdraw immediately.
According to Article 39 of the Customs Union Protocol, The Customs Law of the Community shall consist of: … (c) Applicable decisions made by the Court.
Also the EAC Treaty Article 38 (3) provides that: A Partner State or the Council shall take, without delay, the measures required to implement a judgment of the Court.

EAC Secretariat should communicate and circulate the court ruling Partner States.

URT will consult internally on the court ruling and report to the next SCTIFI meeting on how they will implement the ruling.
4. The Regional Monitoring Committee held on 14th October, 2019 agreed that Tanzania gives an update during SCTIFI in November, 2019.
 
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 meeting 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. During the SCTIFI meeting of 16th November 2018, Tanzania reported that she is committed to resolve this by December 2018 as agreed during the Bilateral meeting.
4. The 27th Regional Monitoring Committee meeting held from 29 April - 3 May 2019 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.
5. The Ministerial bilateral meeting 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.
The Extra Ordinary SCTIFI of September, 2019 noted that the matter will be resolved by the concerned Partner States as agreed by November 2019.
 
NTB-000-751 8.7. Costly Road user charges /fees 2017-05-01 Zambia: Ministry of Trade Botswana 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.
 
Progress: On 11 January 2019, Zambia Focal Point reported that the two parties (Zambia and Botswana) are undertaking consultations on the matter in order to resolve the issue  
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-000-742 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-000-745 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-000-725 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-000-718 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-000-720 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-000-689 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-000-781 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.
 
1 2 3