Non-Tariff Barriers :: Complaints

Active complaints

Showing items 81 to 100 of 125

Complaint number	NTB Type Category 1. Government participation in trade & restrictive practices tolerated by governments 1.1. Export subsidies 1.2. Government monopoly in export/import 1.3. State subsidies, procurement, trading, state ownership 1.4. Preference given to domestic bidders/suppliers 1.5. Requirement for counter trade 1.6. Domestic assistance programmes for companies 1.7. Discriminatory or flawed government procurement policies 1.8. Import bans 1.9. Determination of eligibility of an exporting country by the importing country 1.10. Determination of eligibility of an exporting establishment (firm, company) by the importing country 1.11. Occupational safety and health regulation 1.12. Multiplicity and Controls of Foreign exchange market 1.13. "Buy national" policy 1.14. Lack of coordination between government institutions 1.15. Other Category 2. Customs and administrative entry procedures 2.1. Government imposing antidumping duties 2.2. Arbitrary customs classification 2.3. Issues related to the rules of origin 2.4. Import licensing 2.5. Decreed customs surcharges 2.6. Additional taxes and other charges 2.7. International taxes and charges levied on imports and other tariff measures 2.8. Lengthy and costly customs clearance procedures 2.9. Issues related to transit fees 2.10. Inadequate or unreasonable customs procedures and charges 2.11. Lack of control in Customs infrastructure 2.12. Lack of capacity of Customs officers 2.13. Issues related to Pre-Shipment Inspections 2.14. Other Category 3. Technical barriers to trade (TBT) Category 4. Sanitary & phyto-sanitary (SPS) measures Category 5. Specific limitations 5.1. Quantitative restrictions 5.2. Exchange controls 5.3. Export taxes 5.4. Quotas 5.5. Import licensing requirements 5.6. Proportion restrictions of foreign to domestic goods (local content requirement) 5.7. Minimum import price limits 5.8. Embargoes 5.9. Non-automatic licensing 5.10. Prohibitions 5.11. Quantitative safeguard measures 5.12. Export restraint arrangements 5.13. Other quantity control measures 5.14. Restrictive licenses 5.15. Other Category 6. Charges on imports 6.1. Prior import deposits and subsidies 6.2. Administrative fees 6.3. Special supplementary duties 6.4. Import credit discriminations 6.5. Variable levies 6.6. Border taxes 6.7. Other Category 7. Other procedural problems 7.1. Arbitrariness 7.2. Discrimination 7.3. Corruption 7.4. Costly procedures 7.5. Lengthy procedures 7.6. Lack of information on procedures (or changes thereof) 7.7. Complex variety of documentation required 7.8. Consular and Immigration Issues 7.9. Inadequate trade related infrastructure 7.10. Other Category 8. Transport, Clearing and Forwarding 8.1. Government Policy and regulations 8.2. Administrative (Border Operating Hours, delays at border posts, etc.) 8.3. Immigration requirements (Visa, travel permit) 8.4. Transport related corruption 8.5. Infrastructure (Air, Port, Rail, Road, Border Posts,) 8.6. Vehicle standards 8.7. Costly Road user charges /fees 8.8. Issues related to transit Other Policy or Regulatory NTB Not a policy or regulatory NTB Check allUncheck all	Date of incident	Location COMESA Burundi Comoros Democratic Republic of the Congo Djibouti Egypt Eritrea Eswatini Ethiopia Kenya Libya Madagascar Malawi Mauritius Rwanda Seychelles Somalia Sudan Tunisia Uganda Zambia Zimbabwe EAC Burundi Democratic Republic of the Congo Kenya Rwanda Somalia South Sudan Tanzania Uganda SADC Angola Botswana Comoros Democratic Republic of the Congo Eswatini Lesotho Madagascar Malawi Mauritius Mozambique Namibia Seychelles South Africa Tanzania Zambia Zimbabwe COMESA EAC SADC	Reporting country or region (additional) COMESA Burundi Comoros Democratic Republic of the Congo Djibouti Egypt Eritrea Eswatini Ethiopia Kenya Libya Madagascar Malawi Mauritius Rwanda Seychelles Somalia Sudan Tunisia Uganda Zambia Zimbabwe EAC Burundi Democratic Republic of the Congo Kenya Rwanda Somalia South Sudan Tanzania Uganda SADC Angola Botswana Comoros Democratic Republic of the Congo Eswatini Lesotho Madagascar Malawi Mauritius Mozambique Namibia Seychelles South Africa Tanzania Zambia Zimbabwe COMESA EAC SADC	Status New Complaint registered with REC In process Resolved Non-actionable	Actions
NTB-001-048	3. Technical barriers to trade (TBT) B31: Labelling requirements	2022-01-03	Tanzania: Standards Authority	South Africa	New	View
Complaint:	Vague Labelling requirement "Statutory Warning" Clause 12 (k), rejection of the UK Chief Medical Warning which is accepted in other African countries such as Uganda, Kenya without any objection in addition to their requirement.
Progress:	The stakeholder consultative meeting organized by the SADC Business Council which was attended by the concerned parties from South Africa and Tanzania and SADC Secretariat on 7 march 2022, agreed that the UK Chief Medical Officers Guidelines labelling should be retained (The UK Chief Medical Officers recommend adult do not regularly drink more than 14 units per week) provided that the Wine producer affixes an additional sticker which covers all missing information on the product package. The additional sticker (label) should be legibly and indelibly marked. The additional sticker should be submitted to the Tanzania Bureau of Standards for approval accompanied by the declaration letter from the Manufacturer stating that additional label originating from them and products imported in Tanzania will be labelled as such.
NTB-001-070	1.7. Discriminatory or flawed government procurement policies	2022-06-30	Tanzania: Namanga	Kenya	In process	View
Complaint:	URT charging Kenya an import discriminatory Excise Duty introduced vide URT Finance Act 2022. Additionally, some consignments are discriminatively subjected to Tsh.1000/kg not anywhere in the URT Finance Act 2022. The same excise duty is not applicable to the same or like products produced in URT hence creating unfair competition between the Partners States Originating products. This violates the EAC Treaty Article 75(6) and Article 15 of the EAC Common Market Protocol on the establishment of the East African Community Customs Union where Partner States undertook to refrain from enacting legislation or applying administrative measures which directly or indirectly discriminate against the same or like products of other Partner States. Section 2 of the East African Community Customs Management Act, 2004 defines import as to bring or cause to be brought into the Partner States from a foreign country, and export as to take or cause to be taken out of Partner States. Accordingly, Article 8 of the Treaty for Establishment of East African Community, EAC Community Laws take precedence over similar national laws on matters pertaining to the implementation of the Treaty
Progress:	1. During the Regional NTBs Forum,URT informed the meeting that the complaint is not an NTB but a charge of equivalent effect which is like what is in the Kenya’s Finance Act of 2022. This is a result of non-harmonization of domestic taxes in the Region. The Republic of Kenya informed the meeting that the Kenya Finance Act is not discriminatory and hence the Charge on Confectionary Sugar by URT is an NTB and should be resolved by abolishing the discriminative fees. The Trade Committee meeting recommends that the process of harmonizing the fees, levies and charges should be fast tracked. During the 41st SCTIFI meeting Kenya observed that confectionary products from Kenya should not be treated differently from confectionery products produced in Tanzania. At the 41st SCTIFI meeting, the Republic of Kenya observed that NTB-001-070: “URT discriminatory charges of import TSh.700 and unfounded charges of Tsh.1000 to Kenya confectionary, sugar and sugar products.” The EAC TBP submissions has referred to the excise duty as fees and subsequently recommended the process of harmonizing the Fees, levies and charges should be fast tracked. Kenya’s submission is that the description of the charges as fees is erroneous. The charge is an excise duty as contained in the United Republic of Tanzania Finance Act of 2022 and the custom entry presented as evidence. This measure is therefore disciplined under Article 15 of the Protocol establishing the EAC Custom Union and not subject to the process of harmonization of fees, levies and charges. The excise duty discriminates transfers of confectionary, sugar and sugar products from Kenya which are levied Tshs 700 per kilogram against locally produced like-products which are levied Tshs 500 per kilogram. This measure is a violation of Article 15 on National Treatment which prohibits Partner States from imposing, directly or indirectly, on the products of other Partner States any internal taxation of any kind in excess of that imposed, directly or indirectly, on similar domestic products In addition, in the custom entry presented as evidence, the Kenya exporter has been charged an excise duty of Tshs 1,000 per kilogram which is not justified by the existing Tanzania excise law (Tshs 700). Kenya therefore requested the United Republic of Tanzania to accord Kenyan transfers of confectionaries and sugar products the same treatment as accorded to similar domestic products at Tshs. 500. 2. During the 42nd SCTIFI, the Republic of Kenya informed the meeting that Kenya exporters were charged an excise duty of Tshs 1,000 per kilogram which is not justified by the existing Tanzania excise law (Tshs 700). Kenya, therefore, requested the United Republic of Tanzania to accord Kenyan transfers of confectionaries and sugar products the same treatment as accorded to similar domestic products at Tshs. 500. The United Republic of Tanzania informed the meeting that there was an error in the Law that had since been reviewed through a Government Notice number 478(1) of 4th July 2022. The meeting noted that in the reviewed Law, locals are charged NIL while exports are charged 1,000 Tshs. URT to consult on the application of the new law and revert. 3.During the 35th RMC URT informed that the NTB will be resolved in accordance with the SCTIFI Directive on harmonization of domestic taxes, especially excise duties. On the other hand, Kenya informed as follows: (a) Goods produced within the EAC should be considered local and therefore, not treated as imports. (b) Partner States align their internal Acts to define imports and exports in accordance with EAC CMP 4.The 36th RMC that took place from 1st - 4th May 2024 was informed that the NTB is being addressed under the Bilateral engagements where the two Partner States agreed to the harmonisation of all discriminatory taxes, conditions, levies, fees, and charges related to imports/exports for holistic consideration by 30th June 2024.
NTB-001-152	8.8. Issues related to transit	2024-02-07	Tanzania: Dar-es-Salaam Port	Zambia	New	View
Complaint:	All the Private Inland Container Depot Operators at Dar Port are refusing to discharge the vessel Ladonna MV for onward delivery of shipment to Zambia and DRC. Private Inland Container Depot Operators that were willing to discharge the vessel have been threatened by trading competitors to the current vessel owner/trader who is a new entrant in the regional market with total loss of current business if they discharged this vessel Dar Port. This is a clear violation of the WTO-TFA (World Trade Organization Trade Facilitation Agreement), AU (African Union), Comesa/SADC Regional protocols and agreements as well as individual Bi-lateral agreements relating to Trade Facilitation. Zambia has worked hard to secure this business to supply chemicals to the World Largest Copper Producer DRC in order to boost regional exports and promote continental economic growth. However, the private sector in Tanzania are now blocking these efforts despite the government working so hard to restore Dar Ports Image as the preferred port of choice on the Eastern Coast of Africa. These actions have potential to make serious negative impact to all 3 countries Tanzania, Zambia & DRC and overall the African Continent and therefore should be addressed to minimize the high costs of doing business.
Products:	2503: Sulphur of all kinds, other than sublimed sulphur, precipitated sulphur and colloidal sulphur.
NTB-001-218	2.6. Additional taxes and other charges	2024-10-29	Tanzania: Dar es Salaam	Kenya	In process	View
Complaint:	Tanzania's Finance Act 2024 introduced an excise duty for ‘’imported’’ products under HS Code 32.08 (Paints and varnishes including enamels and lacquers) of T Shs. 500 per kilo. However, this excise duty has NOT been imposed on any local manufacturers of the same products. We intend to import items under this heading made in Kenya. Under the spirit of the EAC Trade protocols, which allows for free movement of goods, no duties, taxes or other non-tariff barriers should be imposed on any goods from a EAC partner country that a local manufacturer does not pay. Therefore we believe this excise duty represents a huge disincentive to Kenyan manufacturers and hindrance to free trade within the EAC. After writing to the TRA for assistance in the above issue, we were told that the Excise duty is chargeable to all goods falling under that heading even if it is of Kenyan origin (see our letter and their response) We therefore request your assistance on way forward for us to import items under the HS codes mentioned from Kenya without being subject to this new excise duty of 500 T Shs. Per kilo.
Progress:	The SCTIFI of May 2025 noted that, although the Republic of Kenya had not provided transactional evidence on the reported excise duty, broader concerns remain regarding the misapplication of the term “imports” within the EAC context. Partner States were reminded that Article 15 of the Customs Union Protocol on National Treatment prohibits discriminatory treatment of goods originating from other EAC Partner States. The meeting therefore urged all Partner States to harmonize the interpretation and application of the term “imports” in national laws and practices with the EAC legal framework, in order to facilitate intra EAC Trade.
NTB-001-214	6.6. Border taxes	2024-10-01	Tanzania: Rusumo, Mutukula, Kabanga	Rwanda	In process	View
Complaint:	Through Port Health at Rusumo, Kobero / Kabanga and Mutukula/Mutukula, the United Republic of Tanzania charges the Republic of Rwanda and the Republic of Burundi Trucks 5 USD or the equivalent in Tshs as Free Pratique which is not in the EAC legal framework for free movement of cross-border trade.
Progress:	1.The United Republic of Tanzania submitted that Free Pratique is an internal health practice for taking samples, inspections, maintenance, vaccination, and sanitising at points of entry and exit. The fee which is charged once per vehicle per journey, is charged based on the Tanzania Public Health Act 2009 http://elibrary.osg.go.tz/bitstream/handle/123456789/1006/01-2009%20The%20Public%20Health%20Act%2c%202009%20.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y and International Health Regulations 2005. Free Pratique in the Tanzania Public Health Act 2009 Definition: "free pratique" means permission for a ship or an aircraft to enter a port embark or disembark, discharge or load cargo or stores; When is it granted: Section 40 (3) Where the Port Health Officer is satisfied that - a) a communicable or infectious disease is not on board; b) The Responses on the Maritime Declaration of Health Form are negative: c) the Ship Sanitation Control Certificate or Ship Sanitation Control Exemption Certificate is valid; and d) there is no other reason for the ship to be further inspected he shall grant a certificate for free pratique and allow the ship to enter the port as prescribed in the Seventh Schedule to this Act. Section 43: Except in the case of danger, the Master of a vessel arriving at any port or place in the country and a person on board the vessel, shall not communicate or attempt to communicate with the shore or any other vessel, other than by signal, until a certificate for free pratique has been granted to that vessel in accordance with the provisions of this Act and any other relevant laws. Partner States expressed their concern on the discriminatory fee charged at Rusumo, Kabanga and Mutukula OSBPs only and is demanded on truck drivers without any service being provided to them. 2.The United Republic of Tanzania submitted that Free Pratique is an internal health practice for taking samples, inspections, maintenance, vaccination, and sanitizing at points of entry and exit. The fee which is charged once per vehicle per journey, is charged based on the Tanzania Public Health Act 2009 http://elibrary.osg.go.tz/bitstream/handle/123456789/1006/02009%20The%20Public%20Health%20Act%2c%202009%20.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y and International Health Regulations 2005. Further, the United Republic of Tanzania reported that the charges are not confined to regional trade only and not discriminative as they are applied to all borders and all vehicles including those registered in Tanzania. In that view, the United Republic of Tanzania considers that the charges are not qualified to be NTB. In addition, the United Republic of Tanzania reported that the charges are 5 USD for buses / trucks and other surface vehicles; and USD 20 for trains. Other Partner States noted that the charge of 5 USD is only imposed at Rusumo, Kabanga and Mutukula OSBPs and hence, it is discriminatory. The meeting emphasized that the fee is an NTB because it impedes trade in goods and services and increases the cost of doing business in the region thus it should be removed. The United Republic of Tanzania requested for time to undertake consultations on the matter and report resolution by 28th February 2025. The Sectoral Council on Trade, Industry, Finance and Investment urged the United Republic of Tanzania to finalize the internal processes on the removal of the charges related to conveyance inspection and resolve the matter by 28th February 2025 (EAC / SCTIFI 45 / Directive / 48). 2.Tanzania through the Ministry of Health undertook a consultative meeting and agreed to consider the matter during the financial year 2025/26
NTB-001-217	1.1. Export subsidies	2024-09-24	Tanzania: Kabanga	Burundi	In process	View
Complaint:	URT IS IMPOSING TO BURUNDI A TAX FOR SALUBRITY FOR TRANSIT TRUCKS imposed by port health on borders. This case is for 2 borders : Kabanga and Mutukula with different dates: 24 September 2024 and 02 October 2024.
Progress:	1. Free Pratique in the Tanzania Public Health Act 2009 Definition: "free pratique" means permission for a ship or an aircraft to enter a port embark or disembark, discharge or load cargo or stores; When is it granted: Section 40 (3) Where the Port Health Officer is satisfied that: - (a) a communicable or infectious disease is not on board; (b) The Responses on the Maritime Declaration of Health Form are negative: (c) the Ship Sanitation Control Certificate or Ship Sanitation Control Exemption Certificate is valid; and (d) there is no other reason for the ship to be further inspected he shall grant a certificate for free pratique and allow the ship to enter the port as prescribed in the Seventh Schedule to this Act, Section 43. Except in the case of danger, the Master of a vessel arriving at any port or place in the country and a person on board the vessel, shall not communicate or attempt to communicate with the shore or any other vessel, other than by signal, until a certificate for free pratique has been granted to that vessel in accordance with the provisions of this Act and any other relevant laws. When is it applied: Section 46. The Port Health Officer may, upon arrival of- (a) any vessel, train, aircraft, vehicle, train or any other article or thing from infected area or suspected to be from that infected area; or (b) any vessel, aircraft, vehicle, train or any other article or thing which has during the voyage been in transit in an infected area with plague, cholera, yellow fever or any other communicable or infectious disease, order the implementation of the measures to deal with that vessel, vehicle, train, aircraft or any other article or thing in accordance with the provisions of this Act. The United Republic of Tanzania requested time to undertake consultations on the matter and report the progress by 28th February 2025. The Sectoral Council on Trade, Industry, Finance and Investment urged the United Republic of Tanzania to remove the charges related to free pratique as it impedes trade in goods and services and increases the cost of doing business in the Region and report progress by 28th February 2025 (EAC / SCTIFI 45 / Directive / 49). 2. Tanzania through the Ministry of Health undertook a consultative meeting and agreed to consider the matter during the financial year 2025/26
NTB-001-228	2.8. Lengthy and costly customs clearance procedures	2025-01-16	Tanzania: Tanzania Revenue Authority Ministry of Minerals	Zambia	New	View
Complaint:	Tanzania Revenue Authority has introduced a new system for copper imports whereby the Ministry of Minerals must stamp the export permit. Only once this is done can the assessment be completed and the vehicles cross the border (Nakonde/Tunduma) to Tanzania. Once the vehicle is on the Tanzania side, the Ministry of Minerals must stamp the assessment. After the assessment is stamped, it must be scanned to the TRA HQ in Dar es Salaam for approval. The Approval is then scanned back to the border, and the T1 can be generated and the vehicles cleared for movement. This is time-consuming and leads to further congestion at this border post, where containerised cargo to Zambia takes a fortnight to cross between Tunduma and Nakonde.
NTB-001-246	2.3. Issues related to the rules of origin	2024-11-01	Tanzania: Ministry of Agriculture	Uganda	In process	View
Complaint:	Quantitative restrictions on Ugandan Sugar transfers to Tanzania only up to 20,000 MT, are accepted These Quotas have been subject to bilateral negotiations to allow market access for Uganda Sugar. We request that Tanzania to remove quantitative restrictions.
Progress:	During the RMC Uganda submitted that engagements with URT on the NTB had not achieved results and would seek the issue to be escalated to the Policy level. During the SCoT URT submitted that Uganda requested the quota and was granted through a bilateral agreement and hence discussions to resolve the NTB should be continued bilaterally
NTB-001-247	6.2. Administrative fees	2018-01-03	Tanzania: Diary board,Ministry of Agriculture,Atomic Council	Uganda	In process	View
Complaint:	Multiple requirements and fees upon transfer of milk into Tanzania. These are; (a) Charges of T. Shs. 2,000 per Kg of milk transfers by the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries of Tanzania (b) 1% FOB by Tanzania Dairy Board plus Tsh. 30,000 as application fees (c) The Tanzania Atomic Energy Commission charges 0.4 % FOB
Progress:	The 38th RMC was informed that the NTB was discussed in the bilateral meeting between the two Partner States but was not resolved. Tanzania requested Uganda to provide evidence for her to review and revert on the matter. Uganda indicated that traders are not currently engaging in this business due to the multiple charges
NTB-001-251	2.3. Issues related to the rules of origin	2024-07-05	Tanzania: TRA	Kenya	New	View
Complaint:	URT is subjecting full CET of 35% on ZESTA JAM manufactured in Kenya by Trufoods. The Zesta Jam is manufactured using locally sourced sugar. We request Tanzania and Kenya to conduct on spot verification on June 2025 to ascertain origin as the jam transferred is using locally manufactured sugar and qualify under the EAC Preferential treatment. Kenya communicated to TRA vide letter ref: C&BC/HQ/8 Dated 24/9/2024 requesting Tanzania for application for Zesta Jam to be granted preferential treatment.
NTB-001-275	2.3. Issues related to the rules of origin	2025-08-18	Tanzania: Namanga	Kenya	New	View
Complaint:	The Tanzania Revenue Authority (TRA) Customs has raised doubts regarding the Certificate of Origin issued by the Kenya Revenue Authority (KRA). However, TRA has failed to provide any written explanation for its objections and has refused to verify the certificate directly with KRA via email. As a result, the goods have been held at the Namanga border, causing delays and financial losses to the consignee. This action by TRA Customs constitutes a violation of the EAC Protocols and Regulations, undermines the rights of the importer, and damages the legitimate business interests of Kenyan enterprises engaged in intra-EAC trade.
NTB-001-279	1.7. Discriminatory or flawed government procurement policies	2025-05-19	Tanzania: Tanzania Dairy Board	Kenya	New	View
Complaint:	Tanzania Dairy Board discriminatively charging 1.75% F.O.B value of on Kenya dairy produce on Pasteurized whole Milk, Skimmed, Condensed, Yoghurt, ice cream and Powdered milk. TDB is violating the Article 15 of the EAC Custom Union Protocol on national treatment. Same treatment as Tanzanian products in terms of charges.
NTB-001-281	1.7. Discriminatory or flawed government procurement policies	2025-08-08	Tanzania: TRA	Kenya	New	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
NTB-001-282	1.7. Discriminatory or flawed government procurement policies	2025-05-13	Tanzania: Dar es salaam City Council	Kenya	New	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.
NTB-001-283	1.7. Discriminatory or flawed government procurement policies	2025-07-07	Tanzania: TRA	Kenya	New	View
Complaint:	Tanzania imposition of discriminatory EXCISE DUTY OF TZS 400/KG on exports/Transfers that hinders ON SAFETY MATCHES export from Kenya into Tanzania. The same is not subjecting to SAFETY MATCHES manufactured in Tanzania.
NTB-001-284	1.7. Discriminatory or flawed government procurement policies	2025-07-01	Tanzania: TRA	Kenya	New	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	New	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
NTB-001-286	5.10. Prohibitions	2025-05-23	Tanzania: TBS	Kenya	New	View
Complaint:	Tanzania ban of Kenya juice products with Sugar and Nonnutritive sweetener combination. Kenya products are being seized from retail customer outlets. This restriction of market access is going against the spirit of the SQMT Act as the products has the KEBS standardization Mark manufactured using the EAC harmonised standard that allows for sugar reduced drinks.
NTB-001-287	2.6. Additional taxes and other charges	2025-09-04	Tanzania: TRA	Kenya	New	View
Complaint:	URT denial of the preferential treatment to blankets that have been manufactured in Kenya and instead subjecting the blankets to full CET of 25% duty on the blankets transferred from Kenya into URT by Spinner and Spinners LTD with reason that the company is benefitting from DRS. The raw material used in the manufacture of the blankets is EAC wide remission on HS Code 5402.33.00 as a regionally eligible code under the DRS. The affected consignment is Assessment Ref: TRA Namanga, Entry Ref. 158254115-25-9900817 subjecting to 25% duty. This creates an unfair trade barrier, distorts competition, and frustrates intra-EAC trade integration goals. URT to grant preferential treatment to blankets enjoying regional DRS
NTB-001-288	1.7. Discriminatory or flawed government procurement policies	2025-08-20	Tanzania: TRA	Kenya	New	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.

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

Display:

Non-Tariff Barriers

Reporting, Monitoring and Eliminating Mechanism

Active complaints