Login
Login
Email address
Password
Reset your password
Create an account
Help
English
|
Français
|
Português
|
عربي
Non-Tariff Barriers
Reporting, Monitoring and Eliminating Mechanism
The online mechanism
Reporting using a mobile phone
What are Non-Tariff Barriers?
Non-Tariff Barrier categories
Register a complaint
Active complaints
Resolved complaints
About non-tariff measures
List of non-tariff measures
Survey reports
Meeting reports
Regulations
Active complaints
Showing items 81 to 88 of 88
Go
Clear all
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
Apply search
Clear search
Check all
Uncheck 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
Apply search
Clear search
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
Apply search
Clear search
Status
New
Complaint registered with REC
In process
Resolved
Non-actionable
Apply search
Clear search
Actions
NTB-001-362
2025-09-23
Ethiopia: Ethio-Dibouti Railway
Ethiopia
New
View
Complaint:
The Ethio-Djibouti Railway, in addition to providing transport services to the Dewele border, also offers freight forwarding services to exporters, either directly or through its agents. While the contractual agreement is established between the exporter and the railway operator, the actual service delivery is often carried out by third-party agents with whom exporters have no direct contact.
This arrangement limits the exporters ability to track consignments in real time. In several instances, exporters only become aware about the missing consignment at the border. So,the remaining/missing goods will be shipped separately through the same process, resulting in additional transport costs and delays. Consequently, there is a delay in meeting delivery deadlines, which affects the trader’s reliability and lead to financial losses as well.
NTB-001-363
2025-11-18
Ethiopia: Government Institutions at One Stop Border Post
Kenya
New
View
Complaint:
There is a lack of coordination arising from the fragmented structure of the offices and the limited number of officers assigned to support operations. Offices are located in different buildings that are not interrelated, and staffing constraints further reduce efficiency. For example, only one officer is responsible for conducting standard inspections for both export and import goods, creating a bottleneck.
In addition, each institution operates independently under its own supervision, with limited cross-agency integration. While some services, such as agriculture-related offices, still rely on manual processes, others, such as customs, have fully adopted digital systems for clearing goods. However, customs procedures still depend on confirmations from these other agencies before goods can be cleared, leading to delays and inefficiencies.
Overall, these structural and operational challenges contribute significantly to the lack of coordination.
NTB-001-364
2026-01-07
Kenya:
Ethiopia
New
View
Complaint:
Ethiopian maize quality standards are not accepted in Kenya, requiring additional conformity assessment. This has resulted for an extra costs of approximately 44,000 Kenyan Shillings per consignment, increasing the cost of doing business.
NTB-001-365
2025-12-10
Ethiopia: Moyale
Ethiopia
New
View
Complaint:
There were delays in obtaining approval or certification for goods imported through the Moyale border. Samples are required to be tested in Addis Ababa before clearance can take place. As a result, importers are expected to obtain the necessary approval before the goods are shipped to Ethiopia. Otherwise, if the approval is sought after the goods arrive and undergo document verification, significant delays may occur.
Following the complaint received, a visit was conducted to the Moyale One-Stop Border Post (OSBP), where these issues were confirmed. For instance, a Vaseline product with all the required specifications (five types) intended for import into Ethiopia was required to obtain prior approval. However, the process took up to two months. This approval or certification is essential for clearance.
If importers fail to secure the approval before the goods arrive at the border, they may face extended waiting periods to obtain the necessary authorization before clearance can proceed. This situation was observed at the Moyale OSBP and confirmed by officers responsible for document verification.
NTB-001-366
2026-01-08
Ethiopia:
Ethiopia
New
View
Complaint:
Imported tyres are subject to duplicated conformity assessment at destination, despite having undergone identical testing procedures in the country of origin. The absence of recognition of prior test results leads to unnecessary duplication and additional testing cost.
NTB-001-367
2026-02-02
Djibouti: Djibouti sea port
Ethiopia
New
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.
NTB-001-368
2026-03-06
Djibouti: Galafi
Ethiopia
New
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-001-369
2026-02-16
Kenya:
Ethiopia
New
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.
<< Previous
1
2
3
4
5
Next >>
Display:
10
20
50
100
250
/active_complaints/page:6/sort:unique_number/direction:asc/limit:#
Complaint
Close
{"transfer_retrieve_error":"Transferred complaint details could not be retrieved.","translate_error":"Text could not be translated"}
https://www.tradebarriers.org/img/flag_icons