| Complaint number |
NTB Type
|
Date of incident |
Location |
Reporting country or region (additional) |
Status |
Actions |
|
NTB-001-238 |
1.11. Occupational safety and health regulation |
2025-02-16 |
South Africa: Beit Bridge |
Zimbabwe |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Our delivery truck (ADS 3378, AFQ 8744, AFQ 8746) destined for South Africa was detained at Beitbridge border post last night by South Africa Port Health authorities due to concerns regarding a cholera outbreak in Zimbabwe and the potential risk of contamination in the water. |
|
|
NTB-001-153 |
2.3. Issues related to the rules of origin |
2024-01-26 |
Zambia: ZAMBIA REVENUE AUTHORITY |
Tanzania |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
The ZB Card company shipped a shipment to Zambia at the end of January which is subject to the original SADC laws. When you arrived at ZRA, they refused to allow it, claiming that the HS Code is incorrect, so they ordered ZB Card to change it. ZB Card did that but ZRA has rejected the CoO claiming that it is not authentic. We have contacted TCCIA so that they can confirm its authenticity and TCCIA has done so but since 10/02/2024 there has been no success |
|
|
NTB-001-184 |
8.8. Issues related to transit |
2024-08-09 |
Zimbabwe: Forbes |
Zambia |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
On 10 August 2024, Zimbabwe imposed a requirement enforcing payment of duty on fuel in transit at the Port of Entry at all border posts ‘in order to secure duty and levies on fuel imported under Removal in Transit Facility’. Such duty and levies shall be recovered on acquittal at the Port of Exit. Zimbabwe Revenue Authority (ZIMRA) advised that the payment of duty for fuel in transit was to mitigate against transit fraud. With effect from 10 August 2024 all fuel, petrol, diesel, paraffin and jet A1, in transit imported through ports of entry by road is now required to pay duty and levies on entry. The duty and levies will be refunded at the port of exit upon compliance with all the transit procedures, including submission of proof that the fuel has been exported. Consignee’s and/or their representatives should approach ZIMRA at the port of entry to initiate the fuel clearance and payment process. For the refund process, once the fuel has been exported, they should approach ZIMRA at the port of exit to initiate the requisite refund process.
This requirement increases cost of transport. The refund procedures are not clear, and the risk of delayed refunds is very high negatively affecting cashflows for transporters. Also this requirement is treating compliant and non-compliant transporters without distinction and is penalizing the transporters who have been compliant to the Electronic Cargo Tracking System (ECTS) where the alleged abuse has been detected.
We therefore request The Minister to urgently reconsider improving this measure to facilitate movement of fuel at reasonable costs. |
|
|
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:
|
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. |
|
|
NTB-001-244 |
6.5. Variable levies |
2020-10-13 |
Uganda: URA |
Kenya |
New |
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. |
|
|
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-001-253 |
8.8. Issues related to transit |
2025-05-11 |
Zimbabwe: Nyamapanda |
South Africa |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
While in transit from BBR to Nyamapanda with a load destined for Malawi, our truck had to divert off the predetermined statutory route through Harare due to roadworks/congestion by no more than 400m. The Zimra tracking seal picked up this diversion and thus, we have been punished with a $2000 fine we which feel is incredibly excessive, especially with proof that the truck was not stationary at all while off-route. This punishment does not seem to fit the crime. |
|
|
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:
|
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 . |
|
|
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-001-265 |
8.8. Issues related to transit |
2025-06-03 |
South Africa: Lebombo |
South Africa |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
In relation to Complaint NTB-000-632, "Copper Moon Trading, the company that is running the Lebombo dry port at Komatipoort, near the Lebombo/Ressano Garcia border post, is forcing transporters to use and pay for its parking facilities in Komatipoort. Transporters' vehicles are required to visit the SARS customs clearing offices at the Lebombo dry port and so parking should be provided for them, free of charge, by SARS.
If parking is not provided, then trucks must be allowed to park along the roadway."
The complaint was resolved in 2016, is this still the case? Attached is a receipt.
|
|
|
NTB-001-269 |
6.2. Administrative fees |
2025-06-12 |
Kenya: |
Tanzania |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Cross-border traders trading under the EAC simplified trade regime apply for the port health inspection certificate. The cost for the port health inspection certificate is Ksh. 500 (USD 5) per vehicle entering TAVETA. The certificate is issued, but no receipt is provided.
We request the EAC Regional Monitoring Committee to urge EAC partner states to waive this fee or have a transparent payment method with charges displayed for cross-border traders of cereals and horticulture trading under the EAC simplified trade regime at all OSBPs. |
|
|
NTB-001-268 |
6.2. Administrative fees |
2025-03-13 |
Kenya: Busia |
Uganda |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
The EAC Simplified certificate of origin is issued to cross-border traders at a fee charged for a photocopy (10 KES) without giving a receipt. This is to request the Regional Monitoring Committee (RMC) to urge Partner States to issue EAC Simplified Certificates of Origin free of charge to small-scale cross-border traders. |
|
|
NTB-001-270 |
2.8. Lengthy and costly customs clearance procedures |
2025-06-09 |
Kenya: |
Tanzania |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
EABC undertook a practical case study on trading cereals and horticulture products under the EAC Simplified Trade Regime.
Findings on Trading Consignments of Horticulture under the EAC Simplified Trade Regime at the Holili/Taveta One Stop Border Post (OSBP) from Tanzania to Kenya is as below
1) Procedural Complexity: The 11-step process spans multiple agencies, including the Ministry of Agriculture, Atomic Commission Agency (i.e., TAEC and KNRA), KEPHIS, TPHPA, Port Health, Police, AFA, KRA, and Customs Authorities, contradicting the STR’s promise of streamlined trade. Each step adds time and administrative hurdles.
2)High Costs: Cumulative fees and taxes disproportionately erode profits for small consignments. For example, exporting 1,000 kg of onions incurs of the USD 2,000 threshold. This financial burden negates the STR’s duty-free benefit. approximately USD 682 in inspection fees, excise duties, and road tolls—approximately one-third
3)Redundant Certifications: Phytosanitary requirements overlap unnecessarily. Tanzania’s TPHPA issues a certificate, yet Kenya’s KEPHIS demands its own inspection and certification, duplicating efforts and costs. This is coupled with the requirement for a Radiation certificate for goods traded in EAC.
4)Transparency Gaps: Cash payments for inspections (e.g., police fees of Kshs. 200–500, Port Health’s Kshs. 500) often lack receipts, exposing traders to potential exploitation and undermining accountability.
5)Cross border traders are afraid to report NTB reporting due to risk of retaliation: NTB reporting requires the reporter to submit evidence of the NTB/complaint) with women and youth Small Cross border traders expressing fear of retaliation from regulators as their personal information will be shared when they submit evidence of the complaint.. |
|
|
NTB-001-272 |
2.6. Additional taxes and other charges |
2025-07-08 |
Kenya: Kenya Revenue Authority (KRA) |
Uganda |
New |
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. |
|
|
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-001-218 |
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-001-225 |
5.3. Export taxes |
2024-12-28 |
Kenya: Malaba |
Uganda |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
The Kenyan government has violated the East African Community trade agreement and has begun to impose consumption taxes on products from other East African Community countries. |
|
|
Progress:
|
During the 46TH SCTIFI Kenya reported that There are ongoing consultations to resolve this issue in the financial year 2025/26 |
|
|
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-001-245 |
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:
|
During the 38th RMC, DRC reported that they would consult and revert |
|
|
NTB-001-242 |
6.5. Variable levies |
2024-12-27 |
Kenya: Ministry of Finance |
Tanzania |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Through, the Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 2024 of Kenya passed on 11 December 2024 and came into force on 27 December 2024, the Government of Kenya, among other things, introduced excise duty on various products such as marble, transformers, float glass, coal imported from outside Kenya including East African Community countries. Also, has increased the valuation rates in calculating tax on tiles when they are sold in the country. These challenges have affected production due to the decline in the market for the products in Kenya caused by competition after the prices of the products in question became high |
|
|
Progress:
|
1.On excise duty charged on originating goods from Tanzania, Kenya was urged to refrain from enacting discriminatory laws that treat EAC originating goods as imports. The RMC was informed by Kenya that, through the Supplementary Legal Notice, excise duty was removed from Glass and Transformer. Kenya provided the supplementary gazette removing the two products.
(b) On valuation rates on tiles from Tanzania and Uganda when they are sold in the country as per the complaint from Tanzania below, entries as evidence on valuation adjustments examined showed adjustments as noted in the Internal KRA Memo on valuation for tiles from Uganda & Tanzania. The meeting noted that valuation of goods is administrative and operational, hence the valuation matter be referred to the Sectoral Committee on Customs for Commissioners (SCOC) to consider and resolve. The EAC guided that Valuation in EAC is guided by Section 122 and Fourth Schedule of the EAC CMA.
The 38th RMC meeting referred the NTB on valuation to SCOC for consideration and resolution and report back to the next RMC |
|
|
NTB-001-110 |
1.7. Discriminatory or flawed government procurement policies
Policy/Regulatory |
2022-07-01 |
|
Kenya |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
United Republic of Tanzania subject a discriminatory treatment to Kenyan export/transfer on products of animal and animal products despite their commitment in the bilateral meeting to amend the Act to resolve the discriminatory charges on the Kenya animal and animal products by June 2022.
Tanzania charges descriminatory meat products an import fees of Tshs 3,000 per kilogram (Kg) for imports consignment. The fees is contained in the animal diseases (animals and animal products movement control) .(amendment) regulations, 2022 of the United Republic of Tanzania that came into operation on 1st July 2022. These charges have rendered Kenyan exports especially milk and milk products, meat and meat products including sausages uncompetitive in the Tanzanian market while Kenya facilitates Tanzania meat and meat products sausages into Kenya without any discrimination.
These charges contravene the GATT 1994 Art III on National Treatment, Articles 1 and 75 (6) of the Treaty as well as Articles 1 (1) (definition of imports) and 15 (1) (a) and (2) (National Treatment) of the Customs Union Protocol 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.
Kenya urges:-
a)Tanzania to abolish these prohibitive discriminatory charges and treat our animal and animal products as from the local market and accord same rate as their own without discriminating not to call it import as import is from outside EAC.
b) URT to abolish the discriminatory charges as per the customs union protocol.
d) URT to treat Kenya meat and meat products as local and not as an import.
C)URT to stop restricting the quantities to be imported/transfered by the Kenya companies.
In addition URT charges xthe following discriminative charges:
1) URT charges import fee of 2% FOB by Tanzania Meat Board
2) 0.4% on FOB by Tanzania Atomic Energy
3) 0.2% FOB by Weight and Measure Agency
Kenya request URT to consider abolishing the discriminatory charges which are equivalent import duty prohibited in the EAC Protocal.
On the contrary Kenya facilitates Tanzania sausages without any charge.
This is really unfair practices where URT is charging import charges to Kenya products despite Kenya being in the EAC Customs union where we transfer products and not import |
|
|
Progress:
|
1. Kenya recognized the effort made by URT in reducing the fee from 5,000 Tshs to 3,000 Tshs per kg of meat. The Republic of Kenya indicated that the fee is still very high, discriminative, and amounts to import duty. The Kenyan companies exporting meat products to URT have been negatively affected by a sharp decline in the volume of meat products exported to URT, since the imposition of these charges. A consignment of 25,000 kgs exported from Kenya to URT is charged Kshs 3,750,000. In addition, it is charged an import fee of 2% FOB by the Tanzania Meat Board, 0.4% FOB by the Tanzania Atomic Energy Commission, and 0.2% FOB by Weight and Measures Agency. A similar consignment exported to Kenya from URT is charged Kshs 3,000. Thus, Kenya proposes that the two Partner States engage and harmonize these regulations to either charge per kg or per consignment.
Tanzania Meat Board had also denied market access to beef products imported from Kenya and thus Kenya urges URT to address this matter.
2. The 34th RMC noted that the NTB was new. URT reported that they would consult the relevant stakeholders and revert during the 35th RMC
3.During the 36th RMC Kenya reported that the NTB was considered during a bilateral meeting between Republic of Kenya & the United Republic of Tanzania whereby the two Partner States agreed to harmonization of all conditions, levies, fees and charges related to import / exports for holistic consideration by 30th June 2024
4. During the 38th RMC meeting, Kenya agreed to send a formal invitation to URT for the Bilateral Meeting.
The two Partner States held their meeting in July 2025. An update shall be provided during the RMC |
|
English
Français
