| Complaint number |
NTB Type
|
Date of incident |
Location |
Reporting country or region (additional) |
Status |
Actions |
|
NTB-001-243 |
2.4. Import licensing
Policy/Regulatory |
2025-04-16 |
Kenya: Busia |
Uganda |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Kenya charges a discriminatory excise duty of 10% on fish transferred from Uganda, but does not charge excise duty on fish in Kenya. This means fish transferred from Uganda is being treated as an import, which is against the CUP. Kenya also charges an additional 5% levy on fish. |
|
|
Progress:
|
1. The Republic of Uganda submitted that the Law refers to imported Fish, but Kenya is charging Uganda for transfers. During the 46TH SCTIFI Kenya reported that there are ongoing consultations to resolve this issue in the next financial year.
2.During the Bilateral meeting the two Partner States agreed treat originating goods as transfers. Kenya committed to Fastrack the review of the law. |
|
|
NTB-001-244 |
6.5. Variable levies |
2020-10-13 |
Uganda: URA |
Kenya |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Uganda is subjecting Kenya manufacture furniture to discriminative excise duty of 20% that it is not subjected to Uganda manufactured furniture.
Uganda is requested to remove the discriminative excise taxes on Kenya furniture transferred to Uganda as it is prohibited in the EAC Customs Union Protocol; Articles 1 and 75 (6) of the Treaty as well as Articles 15 (1) (a) and (2) of the Customs Union Protocol on National Treatment, 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. |
|
|
Progress:
|
During 39th RMC, noted that the matter is under bilateral discussions and will be handled as per the agreement. |
|
|
NTB-001-245 |
6.2. Administrative fees |
2025-04-01 |
Democratic Republic of the Congo: From Goli through Mahagi to Kisangani on the DRC side |
Uganda |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
A review of the route from Goli through Mahagi to Kisangani on the DRC side revealed 24 Roadblocks.
The traders reported that they pay 300 dollars per roadblock; we wouldn't pick evidence of this payment because its illegal |
|
|
Progress:
|
1. During the 38th RMC, DRC reported that they would consult and revert
2.During the 39th RMC, DRC requested 2 weeks to resolve the NTB |
|
|
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:
|
1. 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
2.The 39th RMC meeting agreed that the fees to be considered during the harmonization/removal of fees, levies and charges |
|
|
NTB-001-251 |
2.3. Issues related to the rules of origin |
2024-07-05 |
Tanzania: TRA |
Kenya |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
URT is subjecting full CET of 35% on ZESTA JAM manufactured in Kenya by Trufoods. The Zesta Jam is manufactured using locally sourced sugar.
We request Tanzania and Kenya to conduct on spot verification on June 2025 to ascertain origin as the jam transferred is using locally manufactured sugar and qualify under the EAC Preferential treatment.
Kenya communicated to TRA vide letter ref: C&BC/HQ/8 Dated 24/9/2024 requesting Tanzania for application for Zesta Jam to be granted preferential treatment. |
|
|
Progress:
|
During 47th SCTIFI, noted that the matter is administrative and referred to Customs Committee where the two Partner States agreed to conduct bilateral verification to ascertain the origin criteria by end of February 2026 |
|
|
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:
|
1. 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 .
2.The 34th CMT meeting held in June 2025 , CMT noted that the Senior Officials received a report by Eswatini, indicating that her exports of sugar and other products such as steel and cement to Zimbabwe are facing a surcharge of 30% since 15 May 2025. Eswatini indicated that the measure is against the SADC Protocol on Trade and requested Zimbabwe to remove the surcharge. The Committee of Ministers of Trade directed Zimbabwe and Eswatini to have bilateral engagement on the surcharge |
|
|
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-001-271 |
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 |
In process |
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. |
|
|
Progress:
|
During 39th RMC, Kenya informed the meeting that the matter is being handled internally, it is at the parliament level |
|
|
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.
3. During 39th RMC,RSS is consulting internally and will report back during the 40th RMC |
|
|
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. |
|
|
Progress:
|
During the SADC regiomal workshop on resoltuion of NTBs held on the 14-15 April 2026, SARS indicated that VAT refunds are being processed through South African-based agents, with delays and backlog attributed to the transition from the pre-COVID system to a new system, as well as some claims being rejected due to incomplete or non-compliant documentation; approximately R93 million has been paid out regionally in batches. Botswana companies are encouraged to use reference numbers to track claims, while coordination between the private sector, local consultants, and South African agents will be strengthened, and SARS will provide guidance on documentation requirements to improve compliance and efficiency. Overall, the matter is partially resolved, with progress made but further follow-up required to clear outstanding claims and enhance system efficiency. BURS is also working on it and plans to have a meeting with SARS as soon as possible. |
|
|
NTB-001-279 |
1.7. Discriminatory or flawed government procurement policies |
2025-05-19 |
Tanzania: Tanzania Dairy Board |
Kenya |
In process |
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. |
|
|
Progress:
|
1. During 39th RMC, URT informed the meeting that this is among the identified list of fees, levies and charges hence it is to be considered during harmonization process
2. On 26 March 2026, Kenya Focal Point further reported that The Tanzania Dairy Board (TDB) is discriminatively imposing a charge of 1.75% of the F.O.B. value on Kenyan dairy products—specifically pasteurized whole milk, skimmed milk, condensed milk, yoghurt, ice cream, and powdered milk. This measure cannot be justified as for ‘harmonisation’ as it clearly violates the EAC Treaty and the EAC Customs Union Protocol, which prohibit Partner States from applying discriminatory charges on goods originating from Kenya and other EAC countries.
Furthermore, both SCTIFI (Sectoral Council on Trade, Industry, Finance and Investment) and SCFEA (Sectoral Council on Finance and Economic Affairs) have expressly directed all Partner States to remove all discriminatory levies and consider EAC products as transfer and not import. In line with these directives, the United Republic of Tanzania (URT) should cease the application of this charge and fully comply with the established EAC legal framework and Council decisions. |
|
|
NTB-001-281 |
1.7. Discriminatory or flawed government procurement policies |
2025-08-08 |
Tanzania: TRA |
Kenya |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Tanzania imposition of discriminatory Excise Duty on exports/Transfers that hinders Chocolate export from Kenya into Tanzania. The same is not subjecting to chocolate manufactured in Tanzania |
|
|
Progress:
|
During 39th RMC, URT informed the meeting that she is still consulting and will report back by December 2025 |
|
|
NTB-001-282 |
1.7. Discriminatory or flawed government procurement policies |
2025-05-13 |
Tanzania: Dar es salaam City Council |
Kenya |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Tanzania imposition of multiple road toll charges at the border, Dar Esalaam City Council on exports/Transfers that hinders ice cream, Chocolate etc exported from Kenya into Tanzania. |
|
|
Progress:
|
1. During the 39th RMC,Kenya reported that this is a road toll where the truck was charged Tsh 400,500/= The two Partner States agreed to consult on the evidence given and report back.
2. On 20 April 2026, URT Focal point made observations that the evidence provided does not justify any violations of EAC laws neither related to discrimination. The evidence and descriptions are contradicting therefore they advised that, the matter be removed from the matrix. |
|
|
NTB-001-284 |
1.7. Discriminatory or flawed government procurement policies |
2025-07-01 |
Tanzania: TRA |
Kenya |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
The Tanzania government imposed a 10% excise duty on soap detergents transferred/exported by Kenya into Tanzania, violating the principles of the EAC Protocal article 15 & 75 and creating an unfair competitive environment. This tax favours local Tanzania producers of whom do not pay the 10% excise duties, further distorting the market.
3401.11.00 Soap and
detergents 10%
3401.19.00 Soap and
detergents 10%
3402.50.00 Soap and
detergents 10%
3402.90.00 Soap and
detergents 10% |
|
|
NTB-001-285 |
1.7. Discriminatory or flawed government procurement policies |
2025-07-01 |
Tanzania: TRA |
Kenya |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
The Tanzania government imposed a 10% Discriminatory Levies: Industrial Development Levy
excise duty on Road tractor for semi-trailers transferred/exported by Kenya into Tanzania, violating the principles of the EAC Protocal article 15 & 75 and creating an unfair competitive environment. This tax favours local Tanzania producers/assemblers of whom do not pay the 10% Industrial Development Levy, further distorting the market.
Road tractor for semi-trailers 10% for HS
8701.21.90
8701.22.90
8701.23.90
8701.24.90
8701.29.90
|
|
|
Progress:
|
During the 39th RMC, URT informed the meeting that she is still in consultations and will update by December 2025 |
|
|
NTB-001-288 |
1.7. Discriminatory or flawed government procurement policies |
2025-08-20 |
Tanzania: TRA |
Kenya |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
URT imposition of discriminative Excise Duty on Unilever Soaps, detergents and bleaches -10%; Industrial Development Levy-5-15%
VAT Rate-18%
Impact to business
• Increased production costs due to excise and industrial levies.
• Reduced competitiveness against imported products, especially if inputs are taxed.
• Pressure on pricing, potentially leading to higher consumer prices or reduced margins.
Limited relief for manufacturers despite EAC integration goals.
This tax favours local Tanzania producers of whom do not pay the 10% excise duties, further distorting the market.
3401.11.00 Soap and detergents 10%, 3401.19.00 Soap and detergents 10%, 3402.50.00 Soap and detergents 10%, 3402.90.00 Soap and detergents 10% |
|
|
NTB-001-289 |
1.7. Discriminatory or flawed government procurement policies |
2025-06-20 |
Rwanda: Rwanda Revenue Authority |
Kenya |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Rwanda has introduced a 39% excise duty on juice products manufactured in Kenya and transferred into Rwanda. The excise subjected to Kenya juice is a charge on import. EAC is a local market, additionally, as stipulated in its financial Act of 2025.This measure is in contravention of the East African Community (EAC) Common Market Protocol, which seeks to promote the free movement of goods among member states. The imposition of this duty not only disrupts intra- regional trade and delays business operations but also undermines the spirit of regional and economical cooperation within the EAC. |
|
|
Progress:
|
1. The issue will be included in the list to be submitted for consideration by the 2nd Extra Ordinary SCFEA.
2. This issue was listed among the discriminatory charges imposed on Kenyan products by the Republic of Rwanda. Rwanda is treating Kenyan juice as an import and applying a charge, yet this movement is a transfer within the EAC Customs Union—not an import. As directed by SCFEA and SCTIFI, all discriminatory charges be removed, and therefore Kenya requests Rwanda to consider Kenya juice as a transfer and not an import and cease applying this levy. |
|
|
NTB-001-292 |
2.6. Additional taxes and other charges |
2025-07-01 |
Kenya: Mombasa sea port |
Egypt |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
It has been revealed that Kenya imposed a new duty called “Export and Investment Promotion Levy” as of the beginning of July 2025 on several imports, including some steel products on which duties were imposed at a value of 17.5% of the customs value on all exporting countries without exception for customs items 7213 and 7214, even if they were from partner countries such as Egypt, which The COMESA privileges are effectively emptied of their content on the ground upon application and actually lead to raising the total cost of the Egyptian product and undermining the customs exemption privilege granted under the agreement. (Attached is the relevant document, which was issued on June 27, 2025)
These fees come under names such as “market regulation fees” or “infrastructure development fees,” and are used as an indirect tool to limit the price competitiveness of Egyptian products, which practically means that the Egyptian product has begun to incur the same financial burdens imposed on imports from China, Turkey, and others.
It should be noted that Egypt's exports of rebar and iron coils to Kenya during the first half of 2025 amounted to approximately 60 thousand tons, according to data from the General Authority for Export and Import Control, which reflects the importance of the Kenyan market as one of the vital African markets, and highlights the direct impact of these duties on the movement of Egyptian exports.
These measures represent a direct threat to the ability of Egyptian exports to competitively access the markets of member states, and also weaken the effectiveness of the regional agreements that Egypt is striving to activate in order to support intra-trade on the African continent, at the heart of which is the COMESA Agreement.
Accordingly, the relevant authorities in Kenya, to ensure adherence to the signed commitments, and to safeguard the rights of Egypt and its exporters under the agreement |
|
|
NTB-001-295 |
2.6. Additional taxes and other charges |
2025-10-20 |
Uganda: Malaba |
Eswatini |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
We have COMESA certificate but Uganda is not accepting, they are charging import duty 36% instead of 6%. we are making big losses due to import duty |
|
|
Progress:
|
1. After receiving the NTB, the Secretariat followed up with Uganda National Focal Points, who confirmed that they were engaging with the Uganda Revenue Authority on the matter. |
|
|
NTB-001-296 |
2.7. International taxes and charges levied on imports and other tariff measures |
2024-07-30 |
Madagascar: |
Mauritius |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Madagascar has imposed a duty of 24% on imports of cartons which it referred to as a 'safeguard duty'. However, Mauritius is of the view that the duty cannot be considered as a safeguard duty given that Madagascar has not taken binding commitment on these products at WTO level. It has simply imposed duties on these products including on the SADC and COMESA Member States. It is violating its regional market access commitments.
Mauritius has requested bilateral consultations with Madagascar on this issue and is still awaiting same. |
|
|
Progress:
|
1. On 10 April 2026, Mauritus Focal Point reported that the two countries held several bilateral consultations and where Mauritius informed Madagascar that the imposition of the duty to protect its domestic industry is violating its commitments taken at regional level, namely at SADC and COMESA whereby Members have taken commitments to eliminate duties on all intra-regional trade. Mauritius is therefore of the view that Madagascar is using the safeguard measure as a barrier to intra-regional trade. The measure should have been discussed and negotiated at regional level before imposition.
2.ollowing bilateral consultations held during the SADC Regional NTBs meeting in April 2026, an e-mail was sent to the Ministry of Trade of Madagascar as well as to the ANMCC to explain that the imposition of the safeguard duty violated Madagascar's regional market access commitments at SADC level. It was also highlighted that Mauritius was not the main exporter of these products to Madagascar and yet Madagascar was exempting the main exporters and was discriminating against Mauritius. Mauritius shared the trade data, from TradeMap, which shows that the main suppliers of these products to Madagascar. Mauritius requested that the discriminating duty be eliminated immediately against its exports. The Ministry of Trade of Madagascar agreed to consult with ANMCC with a view to resolving the NTB and a response will be provided to Mauritius by 24 April 2026.
3. In a letter dated 6 April 2026, Mauritius informed the COMESA Secretariat that, through the Mauritian Embassy in Madagascar, three bilateral meetings had been held with Madagascar on 17 December 2025, 20 January 2026, and 3 April 2026. Mauritius further indicated that an additional bilateral meeting was facilitated by the Southern African Development Community (SADC) on 19 March 2026.
4. During a bilateral meeting on 2nd April 2026 Madagascar proposed to waive the 24% tariff for Mauritius but replace it with a tariff rate quota (TRQ). |
|
English
Français
