| Complaint number |
NTB Type
|
Date of incident |
Location |
Reporting country or region (additional) |
Status |
Actions |
|
NTB-001-010 |
2.6. Additional taxes and other charges |
2020-03-20 |
Uganda: Busia |
Kenya |
Resolved
2022-06-14 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
INIQUITOUS TAX AND RESTRICTION OF TRADE
In order to export poultry products to Uganda, a Kenyan farmer/producer is charged 18% VAT, 6% withholding tax and 1% road levy. This is 25% cumulative tax payable to Uganda Revenue Authority (URA). It is important to note that in Uganda chicken is not vatable, yet they charge VAT on chicken from Kenya. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 14 June 2022, the EAC Secretariat reported that the SCTIFI meeting was informed that Uganda Law provides that processed chicken is charged VAT and is not discriminatory.
The meeting agreed that it was not an NTB and therefore resolved |
|
|
Products:
|
0207.13: Fresh or chilled cuts and edible offal of fowls of the species Gallus domesticus |
|
|
NTB-001-018 |
3. Technical barriers to trade (TBT)
B84: Inspection requirement
Policy/Regulatory |
2021-05-12 |
Uganda: Malaba |
Kenya |
Resolved
2021-07-06 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Uganda subjecting to Kenya perfumed petroleum jelly certified with Kenya SMark and manufactured using the EAC harmonized standards to Destination Inspection (DI) and it's costly charges. This violates the EAC SQMT Act 2006 mutual recognition principal and makes the cost of Kenya products to increase. This has been done despite KEBS writing a letter to UNBS, they proceeded with subjecting Kenya petrolium jelly products to DI and delays for over two weeks. These act by Uganda has negatively affected Kenya export of the products as DI fees and it's process including the delays is extremely high and increases the cost of the products. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
The issue was discussed between the CEO of KEBs and UNBSs and resolved.
It was an operational issue arising from the use of the wrong standard. |
|
|
NTB-001-019 |
4. Sanitary & phyto-sanitary (SPS) measures
A1: Prohibitions/restrictions of imports for SPS reasons |
2021-03-01 |
Uganda: Malaba |
Kenya |
Resolved
2021-07-06 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
PVOC is currently a requirement for seed shipment into Uganda. This is causing considerable delays in seed shipment. In addition, the enforcement of PVOC requirements in Uganda is based on Uganda standards 821. There is however a disconnect between the Uganda standards and the parent seed regulations in terms of some of the conformity requirements such as label markings where the UG standards is asking for markings that are not in the Seed regulations. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
This is a legal requirement where all commodities under mandatory standards go through PoVC inspection and the standard in question is a harmonized East African Standard and not an NTB. Hence the issue is operational and should be resolved in the system |
|
|
NTB-001-033 |
1.8. Import bans |
2018-08-01 |
Tanzania: Tanzania Ministry of Livestock Development and Fisheries |
Kenya |
Resolved
2021-10-14 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Tanzania denial of Permission for importation of Turkey meat into Tanzania and instead decline approval of permit and ask local distributors to source it locally in Tanzania. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
Transfer of meat and meat products to Tanzania is allowed, reference is made to the importation permit issued on 24th August, 2021 (Which is attached by the importer). Also, The Animal and Animal products Movement Regulations, GN 489 published on 29th June, 2020 does not prohibit transfer of turkey meat to Tanzania. There is no evidence attached by importer to show that turkey meat from Kenya was denied market in Tanzania. Hence this is not an NTB. |
|
|
NTB-001-038 |
6.5. Variable levies |
2021-10-10 |
Tanzania: Tanzania Revenue Authority |
Kenya |
Resolved
2022-06-14 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Tanzania is charging FULL CET, RDL among other levies on Kenyan wholly produced cement despite the Verification Report recommending that products qualify should be accorded preferential treatment
Additionally, despite URT commitment in the Bilateral and SCTIFI that URT grants preferential treatment to wholly produced cement as required by the EAC rules of Origin, URT is still charging duties of 35%. This is despite Tanzania not being under any stay of application.
Kenya urges Tanzania to accord preferential treatment to Kenya wholly produced cement as per the verification findings and recommendation and URT commitment on facilitation of trade. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 14 June 2022, the EAC Secretariat reported that a verification mission was conducted and recommended that the products qualified should be accorded preferential treatment.
Additionally, URT committed in the Bilateral and SCTIFI to grant preferential treatment to the wholly produced cement as required by the EAC Rules of Origin.
The NTB is resolved |
|
|
NTB-001-037 |
1.7. Discriminatory or flawed government procurement policies |
2018-03-01 |
Tanzania: TZ MINISTRY OF LIVESTOCK AND FISHERIES |
Kenya |
Resolved
2022-11-03 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Tanzania Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries letter reference number CA.21/206/01/257 dated 13th October 2021 and an earlier letter ref: NC.2000/247/01/68 dated 10th October, 2018. The letter ban Turkey meat and its products from Kenya on the basis that there’s a bird flu in the world. In addition, the letter encourages Tanzanians to source chicks from Kenya for eggs or meat as well as sourcing meat in United Republic of Tanzania (URT) and not from the local EAC market.
Kenya has neither reported nor experienced the Bird Flu infection that URT is referring to. Further, URT is interested with Kenya’s live chicks and not processed meat. This clearly demonstrate that URT is outrightly denying market access for Kenya turkey meat on unsubstantiated blanket claim of prescence of Bird Flu in the world.
URT has been declining approval of permit for Kenya exporters of Turkey meat since 2018 by delaying and declining approval of permit despite payment of various required discriminative fees of Livestock Board, Atomic Energy among others. This has become a revenue collection for URT which has negatively affected Kenya Manufacturers who have been a major exporter of these highly demanded turkey meat in URT.
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. This is to create a level playing field and avoid any discrimination on treatment of community’s manufactured products within the region.
|
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
During SCTIFI that took place in May, 2022, the two parties agreed that the competent authorities in the two countries would resolve the issue administratively and report in the next bilateral meeting on 26th May 2022. Hence the matter was removed from the Time Bound Programme. |
|
|
NTB-001-040 |
2.3. Issues related to the rules of origin |
2021-10-14 |
Tanzania: URT TRA |
Kenya |
Resolved
2023-05-16 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Tanzania denial of preferential market access for Apple Juice and Strawberry manufactured in Kenya while citing reasons that the products are not originating from Kenya. URT delayed the shipment instead of facilitating clearance as is required by the protocal and the EAC Rules of Origin then follow the process of reporting the matter to the secretariat for action/guidance. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
The RMC noted that the Verification report was considered and approved by the Committee on Customs and the SCTIFI in May and June 2023 respectively. The verification recommendations have been implemented whereby the qualified products have been granted preferential treatment. The SCTIFI noted that the products that qualify for preferential treatment can be allowed to access the market as the two Partner States consult bilaterally on the two products that do not qualify. Hence the NTB is resolved |
|
|
NTB-001-042 |
2.6. Additional taxes and other charges |
2021-12-13 |
Uganda: Malaba |
Kenya |
Resolved
2022-05-05 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Uganda denial of preferential market access for footwear manufactured in Kenya by Umoja Rubber |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
Uganda Focal Point advised that this assessment was done before full declaration. The consignment wasn't charged all the indicated taxes after submission of relevant origin documents as in the attachment posted in the system. |
|
|
Products:
|
6402.99: Footwear with outer soles and uppers of rubber or plastics (excl. covering the ankle or with upper straps or thongs assembled to the sole by means of plugs, waterproof footwear of heading 6401, sports footwear, orthopaedic footwear and toy footwear) |
|
|
NTB-001-044 |
1.15. Other |
2021-12-03 |
Uganda: Malaba |
Kenya |
Resolved
2022-06-14 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Uganda Revenue Authority has introduced a mandatory requirement for import certificate for export and transit cargo to DRC and South Sudan.
This requirement is causing delays to transit cargo to Congo and Sudan and comes with an extra cost to the customers since they have to pay customs agents to secure the certificates on their behalf. This negatively affects export business. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 14 June 2022, the EAC Secretariat reported that this requirement is causing delays to transit cargo to Congo and South Sudan and comes with an extra cost to the customers since they have to pay customs agents to secure the certificates on their behalf.
The SCTIFI meeting was informed that this was upon the request of RSS and DRC and was later recalled. Hence the NTB is resolved. |
|
|
NTB-001-067 |
8.6. Vehicle standards |
2022-04-15 |
Kenya: |
Kenya |
Resolved
2023-02-20 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Non recognition of Truck specifications approved and registered in Uganda.Kenya charges truck drivers approximately 150,000 ksh with trucks that have three axle loads.These are recognized and approved for transportation by Uganda. The truck drivers after paying the penalty are required to apply for an exemption permit that should be applied for two weeks in advance which is an additional delay and amounts to an increase in business costs. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
The meeting was informed that Kenya is implementing the East African Community Vehicle Load Control (Vehicle Dimensions and Axle Configurations) Regulations (EAC-VLC) Act and its subsequent regulations of 2018. The trucks affected were found to be in violation of the Law. The Act provides a maximum of 4 axles (2 steerings and 2 rear) on a rigid chassis vehicle which must not exceed 12 meters. Impounded vehicles had 5 axles on a rigid chassis vehicle which is not allowed by law. The meeting agreed that the Partner States need to abide by the EAC Laws. Hence the complaint is not an NTB. |
|
|
NTB-001-079 |
2.6. Additional taxes and other charges |
2022-10-24 |
Uganda: Uganda Revenue Authority |
Kenya |
Resolved
2023-05-10 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
RESUBMITION
DISCRIMINATORY CHARGES BY UGANDA : 18% VAT ON FROZEN WHOLE CHICKEN
In order to export poultry products to Uganda, a Kenyan farmer/producer is charged 18% VAT. It is important to note that in Uganda chicken is not vatable, yet they charge VAT on chicken from EAC countries.
The issue had been reported under NTB-001-010 and indicated as resolved. However, on checking in the URA system, VAT is still charged on frozen whole chicken meat |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
The NTB was considered and resolved under NTB-001-010. The new evidence provided was incomplete and could not furnish Uganda with enough information. Hence the issue is still considered resolved. |
|
|
NTB-001-112 |
1.2. Government monopoly in export/import |
2023-01-01 |
Uganda: Ministry of Finance |
Kenya |
Resolved
2024-03-09 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Uganda Denial of Market Access to EAC Partner States Under Preferential Treatment by charging full CET of 35% to juices origination from Kenya transferred to Uganda by Bidcoro. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
During the 43rd SCTIFI the Republic of Uganda informed the meeting that the company Bidcoro was under a country-specific duty remission scheme to import raw materials for the manufacture of fruit juice from September 2021.
Kenya informed the meeting that the company is no longer gazetted under the country-specific DRS
The meeting therefore agreed that the NTB is resolved |
|
|
NTB-001-113 |
2.8. Lengthy and costly customs clearance procedures |
2023-01-01 |
Uganda: |
Kenya |
Resolved
2023-05-17 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
T1 generation delays:
T1 Mapping on to ICMS system from URA portal for generation of C2
• Goods are sometimes sent back to await clearance at the exporters’ expense.
• Truck Delays at loading bay due to lack of transport document to move along the corridor to partner state
• Time wasted, additional costs such as unit logistics costs due to number of days
-Delays at border Clearance- exit
a) Real time synchrony with partner agency systems as envisaged.
b) Quicker exit and entry clearances- online portal to facilitate trade on realtime. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
The RMC noted that the issue was operational and such issues are handled by the SCT ICT technical working group. This technical working group was put in place to handle such ICT-related issues as they occur The meeting, therefore, agreed that it is better handled there and be removed from the TBP |
|
|
NTB-001-115 |
1.1. Export subsidies |
2023-02-01 |
|
Kenya |
Resolved
2023-07-03 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Uganda subjecting full CET to export/transfered from Kenya Kenknit to Uganda. We urge Uganda to grant preferential treatment to Kenknit products that conform to origin. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 3rd July 2023, the EAC NTB Unit reported the trader confirmed through the EAC Secretariat that the issue had been resolved |
|
|
NTB-001-114 |
1.7. Discriminatory or flawed government procurement policies |
2023-02-01 |
Uganda: URA |
Kenya |
Resolved
2024-03-09 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Uganda charging VAT of 18% on exercise books from Kenya while Uganda manufacturers of the exercise books are VAT exempt as per the provisions in the Uganda VAT Act. Uganda not exempting VAT on Kenya exercise books is disadvantaging Kenya exercise books as it makes it uncompetitive compared to local manufacturers.
Complete evidence provided Entry no C17644 Ref. 20222094001751.
We request Uganda to grant exemption of VAT on Kenya exercise books as provided in the Act.
Uganda should stop discrimination of Kenya exercise books as this is a re-occuring NTB, it was resolved and now it is back. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
The 43rd Sectoral Council on Trade Industry Finance and Investment of February 2024 decided that NTB-001-114 on exercise books between the Republic of Uganda and Kenya was resolved through the amended VAT Act of 2022 (EAC / SCTIFI / 43 / 2024 / Decision 10 ) |
|
|
NTB-001-130 |
1.14. Lack of coordination between government institutions |
2023-09-30 |
Kenya: Busia |
Kenya |
Resolved
2023-10-11 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Dairy Board officers not in work over the weekend and week days after 1500HRS yet is 24 hr operational |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
The issue was addressed and the trader confirmed he was served |
|
|
NTB-001-136 |
2.6. Additional taxes and other charges |
2023-10-03 |
Tanzania: TRA |
Kenya |
Resolved
2024-07-04 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
URT Denial of preferential Market Access for Kibo Motorcycle transferred from Kenya into URT. URT is instead demanding for full CET instead of granting the preferential treatment as the motorcycle has been accompanied with the certificates of Origin. We urge URT to grant preferential treatment to Kenya manufactured motor cycles. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
There was a mistake in the Certificate of Origin. Kenya needs to rectify it and Tanzania grants preferential treatment. This is not an NTB and hence should be removed from TBP. The NTBs are resolved |
|
|
NTB-001-124 |
2.3. Issues related to the rules of origin |
2023-05-01 |
Tanzania: Namanga |
Kenya |
Resolved
2024-11-23 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
URT denial of preferential Treatment to Motorcycle Accessories exported to TZ by Silverline Accessories LTD in Kenya. URT is charging full CET despite the exported spares having the EAC Certificate of origin confirming that the spares have been manufactured in Kenya and qualify for the EAC preferential treatment. In addition, URT have declined to respond to interventions by the Kenya Revenue Authority and the EAC Secretariat.
We request URT to grant preferential treatment to Motorcycle Accessories exported by Silverline LTD in Kenya and incase URT have any doubts on the origin they should facilitate delivery of the goods and follow the ROO/protocal/EACCMA procedures to verify & ascertain their concerns. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
The 45th SCTIFI meeting noted that a verification was undertaken whereby the headlamps, tail lamps, and indicators qualified for preferential treatment and are being granted preferential treatment in the United Republic of Tanzania as directed by the 44th SCTIFI. The side mirrors however that had not qualified in the first verification also qualified for preferential tariff treatment under Rule 4(1) (b) of the EAC Rules of Origin, 2015, since they met both criteria i.e. material content and Change in Tariff Heading (CTH) after a second verification. |
|
|
NTB-001-137 |
1.7. Discriminatory or flawed government procurement policies |
2023-09-04 |
Rwanda: Rwanda Revenue Authority |
Kenya |
Resolved
2024-03-20 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Rwanda has introduced higher excise duties on confectioneries transferred from Kenya to Rwanda thus making the products uncompetitive. We request Rwanda to waive these higher excise duties on confectioneries from Kenya
The Rwanda new excise tax is vide Rwanda Official and special gazette of 14/09/2023 under article 4: products and corresponding rates section 2 at FRW 322/kg to confectionary and Chocolate at FRW 1930/KG and other products. This will greatly increase the tax burden on confectionery and discourage Kenya trans-fer/export to Rwanda. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
Rwanda advised that " According to Article 1 of the Law nº 050/2023 of 05/09/2023 establishing the excise duty, which provides that “This Law establishes the excise duty levied on some of the imported products and products manufactured in Rwanda”. It is clear that provision of Article 4 applies to Rwandan manufactured products and foreign manufactured products equally. Therefore, is no issue of discrimination.
On the other hand, this claim related to confectioneries is not an NTB because a non-tariff barrier is any measure, other than a customs tariff, that acts as a barrier to international trade. This issue is related to fees paid by manufacturers of confectioneries be they manufactured in Rwanda or in Kenya. Therefore, this claim of NTB should be withdrawn" |
|
|
NTB-001-138 |
1.1. Export subsidies |
2023-02-01 |
Tanzania: Tanzania Revenue Authroity |
Kenya |
Resolved
2024-03-09 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
SCT TRA at the ICD Kenya is delaying approval of export documents causing costly delays and non-timely delivery of products to clients in URT.
To release the tuck took 5 days. We have an issue with TRA where the physical documents have to be submitted manually. Exporters lodges documents waits for release, goes back for BT and still for a movement sheet and this is an online thing you must wait.
In case the movement sheet is not transmitted, exporters submit again for retransmission.
There is always a long queue in the ICD-TRA office that consumes a lot of time for exporters to be attended to.
This back-and-forth process is delaying the export process.
1. We request URT to resolve the matter and grant timely approval of export documents.
2. URT should automate the approvals and avoid manual approval.
3. When the SCT system is down, there should be quick resolution and an agreed time to release goods manually.
We request for timely delivery of goods to avoid the costly delays caused by URT.
Truck loaded on 24/10/2023
25/10/2023-Submitted physical file to Tra, release denied we were told to provide ETR receipt and tax invoice
26/102023- Submitted the file with all new requirements, release denied again, that the tax invoice does not match with the invoice on the assessment documents, the assessment document was declared based on proforma invoice
27/10/2023-Submitted the file again and release was issued ,BT was declared and received the same day from the agent..
30/10/2023-submitted the file again movement sheet was generated.
TZNG-23-1438288 & TZNG-23-1437343
26/9/2023- The files for the above assessment documents were submitted to TRA at ICD
• TZNG-23-1437343 - release was issued.
• TZNG-23-1438288 -was asked to compare manifest and compared the same date.
27/9/2023- the files were submitted again at 11 am
• TZNG-23-1437343- nothing was done.
• TZNG-23-1438288- release was issued.
On 27/9/2023 at 3 pm the files were submitted again
• TZNG-23-1437343-Movement sheet was generated.
• TZNG-23-1438288-movement sheet was generated.
|
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
The Secretariat advised that this issue is operational and was not considered as an NTB" |
|
English
Français
