| Complaint number |
NTB Type
|
Date of incident |
Location (additional) |
Reporting country or region |
Status |
Actions |
|
NTB-001-045 |
|
2021-11-22 |
Kenya: Poultry products from Uganda have been banned from entering the Kenyan market. |
|
Resolved
2022-06-14 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
The government of Kenya without giving any reason arbitrarily banned all poultry products from Uganda from accessing the Kenyan market. It is not clear when the ban will end or if it will end. My clients have lost and continue to lose a lot of money thanks to this arbitrary and protectionist measure by the government of Kenya going against all the principles of the International Trade especially Kenya's obligations as a part of the East African Community Customs Union. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 14 June 2022, the EAC Secretariat reported that the ban was lifted as a result of the Bilateral meeting of the two Partner States in December 2021.
So, the matter is resolved |
|
|
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-001-042 |
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-001-041 |
3. Technical barriers to trade (TBT)
B6: Product identity requirement |
2021-11-04 |
South Africa: Beit Bridge |
Zimbabwe |
Resolved
2021-11-22 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
South Africa Port Health officials demanding an extended description on one of our products. The product is a sweet type described as Apricots on both packaging and invoice but the officials want us to have the packaging written Apricots sweets. We have been exporting the sweet to South Africa for more than 5 years. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
The company had been allowed to export its consignment to South Africa after removing prohibited products. The NTB was resolved are following required procedures |
|
|
Products:
|
2008.50: Apricots, prepared or preserved, whether or not containing added sugar or other sweetening matter or spirit (excl. preserved with sugar but not laid in syrup, jams, fruit jellies, marmalades, fruit purée and pastes, obtained by cooking) |
|
|
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-001-038 |
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-001-033 |
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-001-031 |
2.6. Additional taxes and other charges |
2021-06-30 |
Kenya: |
Egypt |
Resolved
2023-08-08 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
The Kenyan Government, through the Finance Act 2021, introduced a new Excise Duty on imported pasta of tariff 1902 whether cooked or not cooked or stuffed (with meat or other substances) or otherwise prepared, such as spaghetti, macaroni, noodles, lasagne, gnocchi, ravioli, cannelloni, couscous, whether or not prepared, at
the rate of 20%. This Excise Duty is to be levied at the point of importation and is effective from 1st July 2021.
• Excise Duty is a tax imposed on goods and services manufactured in Kenya or imported into Kenya and specified in the first schedule of the Excise Duty Act (2015). This is usually considered on luxury products such as Alcohol, Fuel, Chocolates, Airtime, etc…
• Excise Duty is different from Customs Duty (imposition of tax on imports to protect local industries) Imposition of this new Excise Duty came as a surprise to us since it was not part of the Finance Bill 2021 that had been tabled before the Kenyan Parliament and was only introduced as a new amendment to the Bill on 24 June 2021 at the second reading stage, in Parliament.
• The Kenyan Constitution as well as the Public Finance Management Act requires that the Kenyan Government to call for public participation on the Finance Bill before amendment of tax laws through the enactment of the Finance Act. Unfortunately, this was not done in this case since the amendment introducing the Excise Duty was done way after public participation on the Bill had taken place.
|
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
The finance bill of 2023 undergone through the public participation and through the parliament as per attached evidence. Excise duty on Pasta is not discriminatory as per section 43 (iv) herein attached, that underwent through parliament process and public participation process. |
|
|
NTB-001-027 |
2.2. Arbitrary customs classification |
2021-07-26 |
Madagascar: Toamasina Port à gestion autonome ( sea port) |
|
Resolved
2021-10-04 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Dear All,
Shipment of 3 Shipment Ex port-Louis - Toamasina
B/L 912715161 (3 isotanks) et 912706516 (2 isotanks) ETD Port-Louis 21/7/2021 ETA Toamasina 26/7/2021
B/L 912756116 31/07/2021 ETD 31/07/2021 ETA Toamasina 05/08/2021
For B/L 912715161 et 912706516- After all the proper import procedures were made. Goods were delivered to our client premises. Customs requested for another product testing and a minutes was signed between customs and my client (Sama)
FYI, kindly note that for all product of this kind a product sample is provided to the ministry of health for a certificate of conformity. Same was received for both shipments.
Despite all the export and import procedures were followed scrupuciously and in good faith. To-date our client has not received any notification regarding the product testing and its results. The goods are in our client premises but cannot be used as long as clearance is not obtained from customs. All the queries made by our client to the customs has been unfruitful.
B/L 912756116 - Those isotanks are blocked in the port. No clearance will be received as long previous shipment has not received clearance form customs. All the storages incurred will be on the behalf of our client.
This situation is severely jeopardising our client activities given they are almost out of stock. On our side, we have not received any payment from our client given that there is no visibility about this customs issue.
We hope the above will help and remain at your disposal for any further info you may require.
Very best regards
JEAN FRANCOIS DESVEAUX
MANAGING DIRECTOR
Ground Floor2
Hi Tech Center
Coastal Road
Pointe Aux Sables
Mauritius
Office: +230 235 02 69
Mobile:+230 5 254 70 20
E-mail: jeanfrancoisd@skvaint.com
Website: www.skvaint.com
|
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
The Malagasy Customs Attache based in Mauritius facilitated the exchange of information with the Malagasy Customs and the issue was resolved. All containers have been cleared as confirmed by the exporter on 4th October 2021. The issue is resolved. |
|
|
Products:
|
3808.94.9: --- Other: |
|
|
NTB-001-025 |
8.1. Government Policy and regulations |
2021-08-10 |
Malawi: SONGWE KARONGA BOX 8 WEIGHBRIDGE |
Rwanda |
Resolved
2023-04-06 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
The Rwanda truck carrying Fertilizer TPT from Tanzania to Malawi Lilongwe was refused to enter Malawi and charged USD 1000 for violating third country rule a provision that is being applied betwen Zambia and Malawi to protect their national transport operators against foreign transporters not registered in Malawi. This is a discrimination against other trucks transporting goods to Malawi |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
The COMESA workshop on Capacity building for Member States held on 2- 6 April 2023, reviewed this matter and recommended that the Secretariat to recommend to Rwanda to regard this NTB as resolved considering that there are Legal Instruments supporting its implementation. The relevant transport instruments would be shared with Rwanda. |
|
|
NTB-001-020 |
1.11. Occupational safety and health regulation
Policy/Regulatory |
2021-06-14 |
Democratic Republic of the Congo: Kasumbalesa |
Zambia |
Resolved
2021-06-19 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
It has been reported that the DRC Health Department has implemented a mandatory COVID testing fee of US$45 per driver disregarding any other COVID certificates issued by Member States . This has led to Drivers from various countries parking their trucks and not crossing into DRC because they would like the DRC Government to reverse the directive on mandatory COVID19 test at a fee of $45. Currently, there is no traffic movement at Kasumbalesa.
This has disrupted the movement of goods and people between the two countries. We therefore request the relevant officials to resolve this matter.
Reporting on behalf of Truck Drivers |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 19th June , 2021 Zambia Focal Point advised that they had received information that the fees had been reduced to US$10 and therefore the trucks were cleared resolving the problem . The trucks are now able to cross over to DRC side. |
|
|
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-001-018 |
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-001-017 |
2.8. Lengthy and costly customs clearance procedures |
2021-02-09 |
|
|
Resolved
2021-10-13 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Differences on the Health Attestation requirements for different countries within the SADC region
1. resulting to the same products having to comply with multiple requirements.
2. Multiple movement certificate has to be issued by the State Vet for the same product in order to meet exporting country’s requirements. This is done for every lot to ensure easy exportation of products by Nestle and our customers.
3. The difference in requirements has resulted in shipment rejections by State Vet since picking of stock for exportation is done at the warehouse after movement certificate has be issued.
4. Above has a huge impact on cost, time delays and meeting customer service level.
This is experienced in Eswatini, Namibia, Zambia and Zimbabwe. The health authorities are requested to look into it and facilitate trade. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 13 October 2021, Namibia during the meeting of 29 September 2021 where the issue was discussed, it was agreed that, since Namibia only has additional requirement when there is/was Foot and Mouth disease for a certain period, this is not an NTB. It was agreed that the complaint should be removed. Namibia therefore requests that her name be considered resolved . |
|
|
NTB-001-016 |
2.10. Inadequate or unreasonable customs procedures and charges |
2021-04-28 |
|
Uganda |
Resolved
2021-10-19 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Exporters of mattresses are suddenly required to pay 1250 USD dollars per mattress.This is an unclear tax and exorbitant. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
The Republic of Uganda confirmed that the NTB was resolved. |
|
|
Products:
|
9404.2: - Mattresses : |
|
|
NTB-001-013 |
1.8. Import bans |
2021-03-05 |
Kenya: All Kenyans borders |
Tanzania |
Resolved
2021-05-20 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
On 5th March, 2021 the Republic of Kenya, through the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, Fisheries and Cooperatives (Agriculture and Food Authority) issued a letter to the Commissioner of Customs, Kenya to stop importation of maize from the United Republic of Tanzania following a report from a surveillance which indicated high levels of mycotoxins that are very consistently beyond safety limits. The letter that was sent to all Counties bordering the two Partner States was neither notified to the EAC Secretary General nor to the concerned Partner States as per the EAC notification procedures; causing disruption to traders carrying maize at those borders. This incidents has caused loss to our traders. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
The REC Focal Point reported that the NTB had been resolved by the Regional Meeting held in May 2021 |
|
|
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-001-008 |
2.2. Arbitrary customs classification |
2020-05-05 |
Zambia: Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries |
South Africa |
Resolved
2022-10-10 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Nestle is facing Product classification challenges in the Zambian market involving imitation products that are not dairy who are classified as dairy and face similar penalties that dairy products face. This product in question is Cremora which is classified by the authorities as a dairy product. However, CREMORA is a non-dairy creamer. To this effect, the request is to consider CREMORA for exemption from the dairy category of definition and profile of the product. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
A bilateral meeting between the two countries was held on 10 October wherein Zambia, informed that the NTB was resolved. Nestle was issued with an exemption letter which allows it to export CREMORA as a non-dairy product to the Zambia market. To close the matter, NESTLE would write a letter to the Zambia Revenue Authority (ZRA) requesting a change in the tariff code. The Ministry of Industry (Zambia) would also write another letter to ZRA in support of Nestle’s proposition |
|
|
NTB-001-007 |
2.6. Additional taxes and other charges |
2021-02-25 |
Zambia: Livingstone |
|
Resolved
2021-11-29 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
A member of the South African Brand owners Association is experiencing push back from Zambia’s Ministry of Health in that they do not want to issue the Zambian importers a Health Clearance certificate unless the product has been subjected to re-testing in Zambia.
The association presented the Certificate of Analysis issued by South African Department of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development which is responsible for analysis of products in South Africa, which was rejected by Zambia authorities.
The importers ended up going to meet the Permanent Secretary at the Ministry of Health to plead their case for clearance of which the Ministry said that they could not advise on which specific metals to test and advised that for future reference and to avoid this occurring again, the importers may use the former certificates to identify the metals that are present to enable the lab to test accurately. The example attached by the Ministry was for the inclusion of the following tests:
Natamycin
Sorbic Acid
Zinc – ZN
Copper – CU
Iron – FE
Lead – PB
For years the South African Health Clearance Certificate was accepted. The duplication of test conducted results in the below additional costs for our importer:
R240 per wine selected. We export 202 skus. If we have to test all of them at least once a year then we will spend R48 480 annually to confirm that our products are in spect.
Following the meeting with Ministry of Health , the Zambian importers reported that some past COA’s have successfully now managed to gain clearance for 2021 Q1 and Q2. We would appreciate if this matter can be resolved. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
A meeting held on 29 November 2021 between the Zambian Health Authority , DTIC and affected stakeholders . resolved the matter as follows:
1. Undertaking by Zambia to finish South Africa with the copy of the Regulations.
2. Acceptance of the South African Health Clearance Certificate
3. Testing of products once a year instead of bi-annually. |
|
English
Français
