| Complaint number |
NTB Type
|
Date of incident |
Location |
Reporting country or region (additional) |
Status |
Actions |
|
NTB-001-361 |
|
2026-01-14 |
Ethiopia: Dilla Customs Office |
Ethiopia |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
The Dilla Customs Office has repeatedly delayed the clearance of export goods destined for the Moyale Border for extended periods, despite all required documents and formalities having been duly completed. These products were issued permits with specific validity periods, yet the delays persist, causing unnecessary disruptions. This issue has occurred several times at the same government institution. |
|
|
Progress:
|
During the NMC meeting held on 26th May 2026, Ethiopia Customs explained that there is a standard operating procedures. Dilla is a customs check point , sometimes the delay at Dilla occurred until the customs officers verify the goods are for export , for some traders sometimes they moved the goods to Moyale and illegally export it |
|
|
NTB-001-333 |
2.3. Issues related to the rules of origin |
2026-02-01 |
Zambia: Chirundu |
|
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
ZIMRA is not clearing the products originated in Zambia using the STR Declaration even the products are under the Common List. The goods are subjected to the submission of Formal Customs Declaration and subject to pay customs duties, instead of granting preferential tariff treatment under the COMESA FTA. |
|
|
Progress:
|
As at 10 July 2026, there was no response form the National Focal Points. This NTB is awaiting processing by Zimbabwe and Zambia Focal Points |
|
|
Products:
|
2009.12: Orange juice, unfermented, Brix value <= 20 at 20°C, whether or not containing added sugar or other sweetening matter (excl. containing spirit and frozen) |
|
|
NTB-001-358 |
8.8. Issues related to transit |
2026-02-02 |
South Africa: |
Botswana |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Business Botswana member -Flo-Tek has highlighted challenges relating to road transit bonds and cabotage restrictions. The company noted that South African authorities shifted responsibility for road transit bonds from transporters to the importer or owner of the goods. As a result, Flo-Tek is now directly responsible for administering and carrying the liability associated with transit bonds for shipments passing through South Africa. The company argues that this arrangement places an unfair financial and administrative burden on exporters, despite the transporter being in physical control of the cargo during transit. Flo-Tek also raised concerns about South Africa’s cabotage regulations, which prevent Botswana-registered trucks from completing deliveries in situations where the South African entity is the invoice holder or where goods are destined for onward export to neighbouring countries such as Lesotho. Consequently, cargo must be transferred to South African trucks before final delivery, resulting in additional transport arrangements, delays, cargo handling risks, and increased logistics costs. Flo-Tek believes these restrictions are largely protectionist in nature and hinder regional trade integration.
Flo-Tek maintains that the NTBs imposed by these South Africa undermine Botswana’s export competitiveness, increase the cost of cross-border trade, and contradict the broader objectives of SADC regional integration and trade facilitation. |
|
|
NTB-001-367 |
2.8. Lengthy and costly customs clearance procedures |
2026-02-02 |
Djibouti: Djibouti sea port |
Ethiopia |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
The importer experienced significant challenges during the customs clearance process at the Port of Djibouti. Upon arrival of the shipments (both containerized cargo and vehicles), they were informed of multiple documentation-request by customs authorities. These issues included minor discrepancies such as spelling errors in the Bill of Lading, as well as requirements to provide additional supporting documents that had not been communicated to them prior to the arrival of the cargo.
Importantly, these documentation requirement were not raised in advance, which prevented them from making the necessary corrections before the shipment has reached to the port. As a result, they were required to repeatedly amend and resubmit documents under a time pressure leading to delays in the clearance process.
Due to these combined challenges, the cargo remained at the port beyond the allowed free storage period. Consequently, the importers has incurred significant unplanned costs, including demurrage charges and other related port fees. |
|
|
Progress:
|
Awaiting feedback from National Focal Point |
|
|
NTB-001-302 |
2.6. Additional taxes and other charges |
2026-02-06 |
Zambia: ZAMBIA REVENUE AUTHORITY |
Kenya |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
10% Selected Goods Surcharge (SGS) Imposed by Zambia
Zambia has introduced a 10% Selected Goods Surcharge (SGS) on CIF value, identified only upon reviewing the attached ASYCUDA import entry for Kenya manufacturer Carbacid LTD recent CO₂ shipment. This surcharge was unexpected and has a significant commercial impact on our exports.
CO₂ Is COMESA Originating and Should Not Be Charged discriminatively.
Carbacid LTD food grade CO₂ (HS 281121) is fully COMESA originating, supported by a valid Certificate of Origin for every shipment.
Under COMESA Treaty Article 49(1), Member States must remove existing NTBs and refrain from imposing new restrictions on goods originating from COMESA countries.
The COMESA NTB Regulations (2020) prohibit new discriminatory or trade restrictive measures.
The SGS surcharge therefore constitutes:
• A discriminatory charge
• A trade restrictive NTB
The surcharge raises the Kenya manufacturer landed cost and undermines Kenya’s products competitiveness in Zambia. As CO₂ is essential for soft drink bottling, the measure operates as a protectionist NTB in violation of COMESA obligations.
Zambia to remove the 10% SGS surcharge on COMESA originating CO₂ and restores compliance with COMESA trade rules, ensuring Kenyan goods are not unfairly discriminated against. |
|
|
Progress:
|
1.In March 2026, Kenya requested for an urgent interim measure to stop charging the new 10% SGS on Kenyan Co2 to ensure the continued and timely export of CO2 to Zambia required as a raw material by industries.
This surcharge was unexpected and presents a significant commercial impact on our exports. Kenya therefore sought Zambia support to suspend the application of the surcharge on Kenyan shipments and avoid disruptions to trade and ensure business continuity while the matter is being reviewed .
2. In April 2026, Zambia Focal point reported that this was a policy issue that required more time to process. The Ministry had initiated consultations with Zambia Revenue Authority and Ministry of Finance and will provide a comprehensive response as soon as possible. |
|
|
NTB-001-369 |
|
2026-02-16 |
Kenya: |
Ethiopia |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Under the East African Community (EAC) Vehicle Load Control Act, 2016, Kenya applies permissible maximum axle load limit of 28-ton along the Moyale–Nairobi (A2) corridor. In contrast, Ethiopian trucks are permitted to carry loads of up to 40 tons up to the Moyale One-Stop Border Post (OSBP). Due to this regulatory mismatch, Ethiopian trucks cannot proceed further into Kenya and must offload their cargo at the border.
This process is further delayed by the limited availability of Kenyan trucks to take over the cargo, as well as a shortage of warehouse facilities at the border, which forces vehicles to wait longer with their goods. Conversely, Kenyan trucks are generally able to transport goods into Ethiopia without similar restrictions. |
|
|
NTB-001-359 |
5.5. Import licensing requirements |
2026-02-17 |
Zimbabwe: |
Botswana |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Business Botswana member - Flotek has reported that In Zimbabwe, imports exceeding USD 5,000 require an import licence issued through the Zimbabwe Revenue Authority (ZIMRA). These licences are generally valid for only three months and must be secured before goods can enter the market. The company indicated that most of its consignments exceed the threshold, meaning nearly all exports to Zimbabwe are affected by the licensing requirement. Delays in obtaining or renewing licences can disrupt deliveries, delay customer projects, and create financial losses. In addition, Zimbabwe requires mandatory Bureau Veritas (BV) pre-shipment inspections for trucks entering the country, with inspection fees charged on a per-invoice basis rather than per shipment. Flo-Tek stated that the fees range between USD 250 and USD 300 per invoice, resulting in significant cumulative costs for shipments containing multiple invoices. According to the company, this creates unnecessary inefficiencies and increases the cost of exporting into Zimbabwe.
Flo-Tek maintains that the NTBs imposed by these countries undermine Botswana’s export competitiveness, increase the cost of cross-border trade, and contradict the broader objectives of SADC regional integration and trade facilitation. The company therefore requested that relevant mechanisms be triggered to resolve this NTB. |
|
|
NTB-001-329 |
5.3. Export taxes |
2026-02-20 |
Ethiopia: Galafi |
Ethiopia |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
The Small scale cross border traders who were able to export different live animals and agricultural products to Djibouti through the Galafi Border are required to pay export tax per head of the livestock at the border. The total export amount allowed in a month is up to USD 1,000 per cross border trader that are found in different parts of the Afar region.
The export tax in Dewele border is not yet implemented and it is considered as a discriminatory compared to the Dewele border of the country. |
|
|
Progress:
|
As at 10 July 2026, there was no response form the National Focal Points. This NTB is awaiting processing by Ethiopia Focal Points |
|
|
Products:
|
0106.13: Live camels and other camelids [Camelidae], 0104.20: Live goats and 0703.10: Fresh or chilled onions and shallots |
|
|
NTB-001-373 |
2.6. Additional taxes and other charges |
2026-02-27 |
Malawi: Malawi Revenue Authority |
Kenya |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
The Malawi Revenue Authority, through the New Customs and Excise Tax Measures for the 2026/2027 Financial year effective 27 February 2026, introduced import surcharges on various products including refined edible oils (10%), cane sugar (15%), sweets (20%), biscuits (20%), crisps (20%), vegetables (40%), chilli sauce (15%), beverages (15%), cement (30%), plastic household articles (20%), blankets (25%), polypropylene bags (20%), aluminium pots (15%), plastic furniture (20%), ballpoint pens (15%), among others, ostensibly to protect local industries.
The additional import surcharges increase the cost of Kenyan products entering Malawi, thereby eroding the Kenya COMESA preferential market access, reducing competitiveness of Kenyan exports.
Kenya and Malawi are both COMESA Member States. Kenyan products that meet COMESA Rules of Origin should enjoy preferential treatment. The imposition of protective import surcharges on products originating from COMESA Member States has the effect of nullifying or impairing tariff preferences and constitutes a measure equivalent to a non-tariff barrier, contrary to the principles of trade liberalisation and non-discrimination under the COMESA Treaty.
Kenya requests Malawi to:
1. Consider removing the import surcharges on COMESA-originating products
2. Restore full preferential treatment for eligible Kenyan products.
3. Engage Member States through COMESA before introducing trade-restrictive measures.
4. Ensure industrial protection measures are implemented in a manner consistent with COMESA obligations and do not undermine regional integration. |
|
|
Progress:
|
1. On 1st September 2026, Kenya Requested the Secretariat to facilitate bilateral consultations to resolve the issue. |
|
|
NTB-001-368 |
|
2026-03-06 |
Djibouti: Galafi |
Ethiopia |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
The movement of goods through the Galafi border corridor is significantly constrained by poor road infrastructure between Ethiopian border and Djibouti, particularly around the Dikil town corridor, which stretches approximately 80 kilometers. Traders and transporters said that traveling within this route can take up to 19 hours for a relatively short distance compared to the same distance takes 4 hours in normal road infrastructure, mainly due to the poor condition of the road.
The prolonged travel time has several direct and indirect impacts on traders. First, delays in transportation often result in late arrival at the border post, which in turn leads to additional costs such as extended storage/container fees, and missed clearance schedules. These delays also significantly affect perishable goods, including agricultural products and livestock trade. Traders indicated that animals transported along this route sometimes suffer from stress, illness, or death due to the long and difficult journey, resulting in financial losses.
Another major concern is the health and safety of drivers. Spending nearly a full day to cover only 80 km exposes drivers to extreme fatigue, poor working conditions, and limited access to medical or emergency services along the route. The difficult road conditions also increase the likelihood of vehicle accidents and mechanical failures.
In cases of vehicle breakdown or accidents, transporters face additional burdens such as expensive car towing services, which further increase operational costs. Moreover, traders highlighted that insurance coverage for goods in transit is either unavailable or extremely expensive for this route. Because of the high risk associated with the road condition, many transporters are unable to afford insurance, leaving them financially vulnerable in the event of accidents, cargo or container damage, or loss.
Traders also emphasized that these challenges persist despite the existence of an alternative road that has already been constructed but is not yet operational. If this alternative route were opened and fully functional, it could significantly reduce travel time, lower transport costs, improve driver safety, and minimize losses related to perishable goods and livestock.
Overall, the poor infrastructure along the Galafi–Dikil corridor represents a substantial non-tariff barrier to trade, creating delays, increasing costs, and exposing traders and transporters to significant financial and safety risks. |
|
|
NTB-001-330 |
2.3. Issues related to the rules of origin |
2026-03-11 |
Mozambique: DGA - Mozambique
SARS - South Africa |
Mozambique |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Conferring of origin in a member state on non-originating material. This then affects the issuance of a SADC certificate for the issuing country being Mozambique.
Mozambique customs authority and DGA consider that the process taking place within Mozambique, does not confer origin.
The exact same process carried out in South Africa, receives a SADC certificate from SARS.
SARS as the importing country does not dispute or challenge that the process confers origin and is satisfied that the process under which a SADC certificate is issued, and therefore receives preferential duty in the importing country is sufficient and complies with the SADC trade agreement.
While the SADC agreement, lists simple processes, which do not confer origin, under chapter 63 there is a specific declaration made, where rags is included, before the word, except, and then it lists exceptions. It states that for chapter 63, origin is conferred, the requirement stated is " manufacture from materials of any heading except that of the product"
What is peculiar, is that the issuing country being Mozambique contends the conference of origin, but it has not been raised by the importing country being South Africa.
We know, with absolute certainty, that a SADC for the exact same process is issued by South Africa for exports to Mozambique and to Botswana, and neither of these countries have ever referred them back for investigation or referral on the back of the SADC certificate as is the protocol and possibility if there is a contention. |
|
|
Progress:
|
On April 15th, 2026, Mozambique focal point reported that they are working with the relevant authorities to provide a response on this matter. Within 10 days, we will update the information. |
|
|
Products:
|
6310.10: Used or new rags, scrap twine, cordage, rope and cables and worn-out articles thereof, of textile materials, sorted |
|
|
NTB-001-370 |
8.8. Issues related to transit |
2026-03-17 |
South Africa: City of Ekurhuleni |
Zambia |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
FLAMMABLE SUBSTANCE TRANSPORT PERMIT
Regarding the permit, the issue is our trucks were instructed to obtain Fire Certificates from municipal authorities as a precondition for loading. This requirement was introduced for the first time, despite our longstanding operations transporting the same product without such a condition. We were required to apply for a permit that we already have through the Zambian government.
The responses received from those responsible was that the Certification from the Chief Inspector of Explosives (CIE) in South Africa authorising the transportation of explosives and hazardous materials is sufficient. Furthermore, it is not a requirement from CIE for our trucks to obtain Fire certificates, however the client we were loading for insisted that it is a requirement for them to load the trucks.
The duplication of regulatory oversight resulted in delays and inefficiencies as the trucks had to wait almost 4 weeks for the certificates to be issued. |
|
|
NTB-001-347 |
7.3. Corruption |
2026-03-17 |
Zimbabwe: |
Zambia |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Informal traders carrying small quantities of goods, such as fresh produce, cooking oil, rice, sugar and pasta cross the Victoria Falls border post by bike or foot.Over 50 traders cross the border per day,.
When entering Zimbabwe from Zambia, they get stopped by Customs and face arbitrary restrictions on quantities of goods that can enter (which change on a daily basis and depending on the specific officer on duty). When these arbitrary quantities are exceeded, the officers often confiscate all of the goods or demand bribes to release the traders. They also face threats when questioning the behaviour of the officer.
When returning after selling goods on the market in Zimbabwe, and after clearing the Zimbabwe Customs, they often get stopped by police or soldiers in the no-man's-land between the borders who demand further bribes from the proceeds of their sales.
If bringing merchandise from Zimbabwe back to Zambia, depending on the officers at the border and despite the small quantities carried, they will be asked to obtain an export license from Harare. Or to pay another bribe to be released. |
|
|
NTB-001-357 |
2.6. Additional taxes and other charges |
2026-03-30 |
Zambia: |
Botswana |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Business Botswana member, Flo-Tek is currently facing trade barrier in Zambia, Flo-Tek raised concerns regarding the imposition of a mandatory entry permit fee of approximately USD 541 per truck shipment for Botswana-registered trucks transporting PVC and HDPE pipes. According to the company, the fee applies regardless of the size or value of the shipment and significantly increases the cost of exporting to the Zambian market, particularly for smaller and more frequent consignments. In addition, Zambia imposes a 20% Selected Goods Surtax (SGS) on PVC pipes, HDPE pipes, and fittings. While the surtax is reportedly intended to protect local manufacturers, Flo-Tek argues that Zambia does not manufacture the large-diameter pipes supplied by the company, meaning there is no local industry being protected in this particular market segment. The company therefore views the surtax as an unnecessary trade barrier that inflates infrastructure project costs and weakens the competitiveness of Botswana manufacturers in the regional market.
The NTB's undermine Botswana’s export competitiveness, increase the cost of cross-border trade, and contradict the broader objectives of SADC regional integration and trade facilitation. The company therefore request resolution through bilateral and regional trade mechanisms. |
|
|
NTB-001-390 |
3. Technical barriers to trade (TBT)
B81: Product registration/approval requirements |
2026-06-29 |
Rwanda: Rwanda FDA |
Kenya |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
RFDA Mandatory Product Registration Requirements on 44 medicated cosmetics, 6 household chemical and 13 liquid detergent.
The Rwanda Food and Drugs Authority (RFDA) has made it mandatory for all such products to undergo product registration and obtain approval before they can be marketed, distributed, or advertised in Rwanda. The registration process is lengthy, taking between 6 and 12 months, and requires submission of product samples, test reports, labels, and other technical documentation. In addition, Kenyan products that have already undergone conformity assessment, testing, and certification by competent authorities in Kenya are subjected to
duplicate testing, inspections, and additional charges in Rwanda. This increases the cost of doing business, delays market entry, and undermines the competitiveness of Kenyan manufacturers.
This requirement is inconsistent with the spirit of the EAC Standardization, Quality Assurance, Metrology and Testing (SQMT) which promotes mutual recognition of conformity assessment results and the EAC Regulatory Framework to facilitate cross-border trade of pre-packaged food and cosmetic products. The duplicative requirements also constitute a significant Non-Tariff Barrier (NTB) that restricts the free movement of goods within the region and increases the cost of Kenya products which has valid standardization marks (SMarks) thus making the Kenya and regional goods to be uncompetitive. |
|
|
NTB-001-388 |
2.6. Additional taxes and other charges |
2026-07-01 |
Kenya: Kenya Sugar Board |
Uganda |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Kenya – Excise Duty on Ugandan Sugar
Kenya, through the Kenya Sugar Board, increased the excise duty applicable to sugar imported from Uganda from KES 7.50 per kilogram (KES 7,500 per tonne) to KES 40 per kilogram (KES 40,000 per tonne), as provided under Part IV – Excise Duty, Section 36(a)(vi) of the Kenya Gazette Supplement.
The substantial increase in the excise duty has significantly raised the cost of Ugandan sugar in the Kenyan market, thereby reducing its competitiveness and negatively affecting market access for Ugandan sugar exporters.
The measure also has the potential to disrupt the long-standing trade relationship between Uganda and Kenya, which has been facilitated under the EAC integration framework. The increased duty may constitute a Non-Tariff Barrier (NTB) and raises concerns regarding compliance with the EAC principles of free movement of goods, fair competition and non-discrimination among Partner States.
|
|
|
NTB-001-387 |
6.3. Special supplementary duties |
2026-07-01 |
Kenya: Kenya Revenue Authority |
Tanzania |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Kenya has recently imposed excise duty on float glass originating from Tanzania under HS Code 7005, following the removal of the excise duty exemption previously applicable to float glass originating from EAC Partner States.
According to Kenya Gazette Supplement No. 157 (Acts No. 19) dated 26 June 2026, float glass imported into Kenya under HS Code 7005 is now subject to excise duty at the rate of 35% of the excisable value or KES 500 per square metre, whichever is higher, including float glass originating from Tanzania and other EAC Partner States.
This policy change has already had a direct and measurable impact on Tanzanian exports. Customs Entry Documents for recent shipments of Tanzanian-origin float glass to Kenya show that excise duty has been assessed and charged. For example, one shipment of 1,186.42 square metres was charged KES 593,208 in excise duty at KES 500 per square metre, while another shipment of 2,450.25 square metres was charged KES 1,225,125 in excise duty.
The measure significantly increases the cost of Tanzanian float glass entering the Kenyan market and creates an additional tax burden on goods traded within the East African Community. Kenya is currently the largest export market for Tanzanian float glass, and continued access to this market is essential for sustaining production, employment, export earnings and industrial investment in Tanzania.
Kenya currently does not have domestic float glass production, while Kenyan glass processors and secondary manufacturers rely on imported float glass as a key raw material. The imposition of excise duty therefore not only restricts market access for Tanzanian manufacturers, but also increases production costs for Kenyan downstream industries.
We therefore request the EAC Secretariat and relevant EAC organs to review this measure and facilitate its resolution, including the reinstatement of the excise duty exemption for float glass originating from EAC Partner States. |
|
|
Products:
|
7005.10.90: -- Other, 7005.21.13: --- Of a thickness not exceeding 2 mm (excluding optical glass), 7005.21.15: --- Of a thickness exceeding 2 mm but not exceeding 2,5 mm (excluding optical glass), 7005.21.17: --- Of a thickness exceeding 2,5 mm but not exceeding 3 mm (excluding optical glass), 7005.29.13: --- Of a thickness not exceeding 2 mm (excluding solar glass and optical glass), 7005.29.15: --- Of a thickness exceeding 2 mm but not exceeding 2,5 mm (excluding solar glass and optical glass), 7005.29.17: --- Of a thickness exceeding 2,5 mm but not exceeding 3 mm (excluding solar glass and optical glass) and 7005.30: Float glass and surface ground and polished glass, in sheets, whether or not having an absorbent, reflecting or non-reflecting layer, wired, but not otherwise worked |
|
|
NTB-001-396 |
2.7. International taxes and charges levied on imports and other tariff measures |
2026-07-21 |
Tanzania: TRA |
Kenya |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Tanzania is subjecting a discriminative excise duty on Margarine - HS 1517.10.00 transferred to Tanzania, it charges an IMPORT Excise duty of Tsh. 540. 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. Additionally, this goes against SCFEA and Summit directive directing Partner States to remove all discriminative charges and treat EAC goods as transfer does not import. We urge URT to remove these discriminative charges and treat Kenya Margarine products as locally produced not IMPORTED. |
|
|
Products:
|
1517.10: Margarine (excl. liquid) |
|
|
NTB-001-374 |
1.1. Export subsidies |
2026-07-25 |
Botswana: Tlokweng Gate |
Botswana |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Customs officials dispute the invoice issued,saying the goods I bought are underprice and as a result my goods are detained. |
|
|
NTB-001-380 |
8.7. Costly Road user charges /fees |
2026-07-31 |
Zambia: Ministry Of Commerce |
Botswana |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
BW transporters expected to pay combines border/road/toll fees in excess of $900 whilst other vehicles from neighbouring regions pay approximately $300. We are an exporter of Steel from Selebi Phikwe to Zambia at a rate of 1000+ tons that is 30+ trucks with planned demand increasing to 4000+ tons, this emplies cost differences up to $18,000 currently. This greatly inhibits Botswana transporters from uplifting our product significantly affecting our sales to Zambia. |
|
English
Français
