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 121 to 125 of 125
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-000-830
8.2. Administrative (Border Operating Hours, delays at border posts, etc.)
2018-07-16
Botswana: Martins Drift
Zambia
In process
View
Complaint:
A Zambian Registered Tanker carrying sulphuric acid from South Africa was weighed at the Martins Drift weighbridge with the following axle masses: Steer axle - 5200 kg (legal limit 8000 kg); Drive axles - 18200 kg (legal limit 18000 kg); Trailing axles - 22800 kg (legal limit 24000 kg). Tolerance is 5% on an axle set or on GVM, in this case it would be 900 kg on the driving axle set. The weigh bridge official instructed the Driver to Park telling him that his driving axle was overloaded without the application of the 5% tolerance. It is observed that only at this weigh bridge there is no application of the 5% tolerance. In the spirit of harmonization South Africa, Zambia and Botswana the legal limits are the same with a 5% tolerance except at Martins Drift weighbridge. Kindly assist to resolve this issue at Martins Drift which is causing unnecessary loss of transit time and charges. Please note that this is not a one off incidence.
Progress:
1. The Meeting of NTB-Market Access Task Force 18-20 March 2020 reported that SADC has set up a Task Force to look into this matter among other NTBs.
2. On 22nd June 2020, Botswana Focal Point reported that they have contacted the relevant institution and they stated that they are still investigating on the matter and will give their feedback sometime during week 30 June - 4 July 2020
NTB-001-108
3. Technical barriers to trade (TBT)
B9: TBT Measures n.e.s.
2023-05-02
Kenya: Kenya Bureau of Standards
South Africa
In process
View
Complaint:
A South African Exporter has reported that the Kenyan authorities have issued notification on new requirements for exporters and importers to record all trademarks in aid to protect intellectual properties and prevent importation of counterfeit goods into Kenya under the Anti-Counterfeit Act, No. 13 of 2008. This requirement, while it is , has cost implications to the Wine industry of South Africa who have to incur additional costs to enforce it. Further, it is not clear how it will work in practice or how it will be managed especially that applications are done on line and that the registration has 1 year validity, after which it has to be renewed annually.The cost to record is estimated at USD25 000 for the Brands exported to Kenya. The exporters also have the same products analyzed by ISO 17025 labs and pay USD265 per container to confirm full compliance.
The Exporter is of the view that whenever products are to be exported, are certified by SGS as to who the proprietors of the products are. The annual required registration would result in increased cost of the products.
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-001-059
7.10. Other
2017-03-07
South Africa:
Botswana
New
View
Complaint:
A Botswana based company, MOTOVAC reporting challenges is struggling to get payment of its Value Added Tax (VAT) import refunds from the South African Revenue Services (SARS) in time. It is reported, VAT refunds are not processed by SARS. The outstanding payments date back as far as 2017 with the company owed BWP 3,528,278.07 in VAT refunds by SARS.
NTB-001-001
1.14. Lack of coordination between government institutions
2021-01-19
Namibia: NRST Head Office / Innovation Hub Cnr, Louis Raymond & Grant Webster Street Private Bag 13253 Windhoek Tel: +264 61 431 7000/99 Fax: + 264 61 216 531/+ 264 61 235 758 Email: info@ncrst.na
South Africa
New
View
Complaint:
1. GMO thresholds - Namibia is 1% and South Africa is 5%
2. The above then has implications on what should be labeled.
3. The prescribed GMO wording is also different
4. Namibia also requests additional information from the rights owner (GMO Tech developers), which users do not have in South Africa.
All of this adds up to South African manufacturers/exporters being unable to meet the application requirements, thereby not obtaining the required import permits.
CGCSA members revised applications 3 times, but were still unable to complete the applications to the specifications expected.
Progress:
1. On 12 October 2021 , Namibia Focal Point reported that they will consult the relevant authorities and submit feedback as soon as possible.
2. On 31 March 2022,Namibia Focal Point updated as follows:
Namibian GMO labeling regulations (0.9%) – Vs 5% for South Africa. The Namibian Biosafety regulations (No 6116), 2016 Biosafety Act No. 7 of 2006, were developed nationally through a consultative process, taking into account trading partners with different labeling requirements. As per the Biosafety regulation (17) (c), 2016, exemptions to genetically modified food or feed labeling requirements:
“any processed food or feed including one or more substances produced through genetic modification, subject thereto that the genetically modified food or feed in the aggregate does not account for more than 0.9 percent of the processed food or feed or such other percentage or quantity as the Council may from time to time determine”;
This part of the regulations ‘labeling requirements’ will remain in place until such a time the regulation is amended
<< Previous
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Next >>
Display:
10
20
50
100
250
/active_complaints/page:7/sort:complaint/direction:desc/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