| Complaint number |
NTB Type
|
Date of incident |
Location |
Reporting country or region (additional) |
Status |
Actions |
|
NTB-000-664 |
3. Technical barriers to trade (TBT)
B3: Labelling, Marking and Packaging requirements
Policy/Regulatory |
2013-01-01 |
Tanzania: Tunduma |
Burundi |
Resolved
2015-11-09 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
TFDA is imposing new requirements on export of BRARUDI beers into Tanzania. TFDA is requesting new labels to include additional information and storage condition for the product that was not required when they submitted the application for export. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
Burundi reported that TFDA had finally registered Burundi beers and that the company had received its certificate of registration. |
|
|
NTB-000-497 |
5.1. Quantitative restrictions
Policy/Regulatory |
2012-05-08 |
Eswatini: Bordergate |
South Africa |
Resolved
2015-12-03 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Swaziland is to impose Quantitive import restrictions on imported edible cooking oil from within the SADC region as well as 15% import duties over and above the quantitive restriction. Such has happen already on Wheat Flour and after 8 years of 'Infancy Protection', NO IMPORT permits are issued to date. Court Case is currently being heard by the High Court of Swaziland. (Various Stakeholders versus Government of Swaziland) |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
At their meeting held on 23 May 2013, the SCTF recalled Articles 3 and 7 of the Trade Protocol, on elimination of trade barriers and quantitative restrictions. Swaziland reported that measure was implemented in the context of the SACU, which provides for quantitative restrictions and protection of infant industry protection. SCTF requested Swaziland to provide its relevant national legal instrument and information on how the measure is applied including whether or not it is applicable to trade with non-SACU SADC FTA Member States. Swaziland undertook to provide the information as requested. Swaziland submitted the legislation as per requirement . This NTB is therefore resolved . |
|
|
Products:
|
1205.10: Low erucic acid rape or colza seeds "yielding a fixed oil which has an erucic acid content of < 2% and yielding a solid component of glucosinolates of < 30 micromoles/g", 1205.90: High erucic rape or colza seeds "yielding a fixed oil which has an erucic acid content of >= 2% and yielding a solid component of glucosinolates of >= 30 micromoles/g", whether or not broken and 1206.00: Sunflower seeds, whether or not broken |
|
|
NTB-000-634 |
8.7. Costly Road user charges /fees |
2013-11-12 |
EAC |
Egypt |
Resolved
2016-02-08 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Egypt's National Monitoring Committee received a complaint from Chemicals and Fertilizers Exporting Company that the cost of shipment between Egypt and the eastern countries in Africa is very high. In addition east African countries prefer that the shipment companies ship fruits rather than chemicals. And hence a suggestion was made to hold a meeting between transport syndicates especially of the landlocked countries in COMESA and the business community in an attempt to reach a solution.
please consider the above mentioned suggestion. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 8th February 2016, Egypt Focal point reported that the NTB be considered closed on the basis that Egypt's National Monitoring Committee did not receive any details from the Exporting Company. |
|
|
NTB-000-637 |
5.5. Import licensing requirements
Policy/Regulatory |
2014-07-14 |
Zimbabwe: Ministry of Industry and Trade |
Egypt |
Resolved
2016-02-08 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
There is a ban on importation of Soya bean oil packed in bottles by Zimbabwe. Requirement by Zimbabwe for import permit and license for soya oil and detergents from Egypt |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 8th February 2016, Egypt Focal point reported that the NTB be considered closed on the basis that Egypt's National Monitoring Committee did not receive any details from the Exporting Company. |
|
|
NTB-000-678 |
2.3. Issues related to the rules of origin
Policy/Regulatory |
2011-08-25 |
Egypt: Egyptian Customs Authority - Ministry of Finance |
Kenya |
Resolved
2016-02-08 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Non acceptance of COMESA certificates of origin on mill white sugar, LG Electronics (TV sets) originating from Kenya |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 8th February 2016 , Focal Point for Egypt reported that the NTB be considered resolved on the basis of a recommendation from a joint visit on the spot verification for Mill White Sugar and LG products (TV Sets) was undertaken that White sugar & LG Electronics (TV sets) qualify for preferential treatment according to COMESA protocol of ROO. |
|
|
NTB-000-683 |
2.14. Other
Policy/Regulatory |
2016-02-10 |
Zimbabwe: Mt. Selinda |
|
Resolved
2016-03-18 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
ZIMRA has introduced a new ruling at all its border posts effective 10 February re the vehicle manifest without proper pre-dialogue with regional and border post stakeholders as well as transporters who are being affected the most by this ruling and which is in breach of the SADC protocol to which Zimbabwe is a signatory. The attached Notification and copy of the ZIMRA Manifest Form No. 1 are self-explanatory, the ZIMRA manifest is just a duplication of a standard vehicle manifest with the ZIMRA logo on it and official form number, however ZIMRA are refusing to allow clearing agents to submit any other format of the manifest other than the attached document and transporters are being delayed for days on end until such time as the clearing agent submits documents with the ZIMRA manifest. the average cost per day for a transporter to stand at the border post is US $250 which ultimately will be added onto the cost of an already outrageous transportation cost for the end user consumer to pay. This practice is unethical, in breach of the SADC Protocol on Trade and Transport and not conducive to trade facilitation in the region. Imagine the chaos this situation would cause if all countries or member states in the SADC region adopted the same principal as Zimbabwe has, the transporter would have to fill in a different manifest for every country entered or transited.
This matter requires the immediate and urgent intervention of the focal point representative in Zimbabwe. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 18 march 2016, Zimbabwe Focal Point from ZIMRA advised that submission to the Zimbabwe Revenue Authority (ZIMRA) of a Manifest (Form 1) on importation of goods by Road has always been a requirement. This is in terms of Section 6 of the Customs and Excise (General) Regulations published in Statutory Instrument 154 of 2001 which reads "6 The report in terms of section 26 of the Act on vehicles engaged in the transportation of goods, other than trains, shall be made in form No. 1, completed at the time of loading the goods in the country of exportation, signed jointly by the transporter who loaded the goods and the person in charge of the vehicle, together with such copies as may be required by the officer to whom the report is made". Section 26 of the Customs and Excise Act (Chapter 23:02) is on "26 Person in charge of vehicle to report goods in his or her charge" The Form 1 (Manifest) is a ZIMRA form and is a prescribed form in terms of the said Regulations and therefore it is a requirement that it be standard. It is thus not proper for Clearing Agents to use other formats of the Manifest. For the convenience of the clients arrangements are being made for the Manifest to be available for downloading from the ZIMRA Website .
However the Zimbabwe Focal point advised that the Commissioner Customs and Excise had temporarily given a reprieve and is accepting other formats of the Manifest as submitted by the Agents. The Act and the Regulations were submitted. |
|
|
NTB-000-685 |
1.15. Other |
2016-03-01 |
Zimbabwe: |
Botswana |
Resolved
2016-03-18 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
As of the 1st of March 2016 Zimbabwe introduced a system whereby you need to obtain a certificate of conformity in order to export into Zimbabwe. One needs to obtain this certificate from Bureau Veritas. Trucks have been piling up at the Plumtree border while they await clearance with charges up to $250.00 per consignment. No formal communication has been reported by the Government of Zimbabwe to Botswana on this new development. Furthermore we have no record of which products will be affected and who needs to apply for this certificate. We are not even aware of where the Bureau Veritas offices are located in Botswana. As they are situated in South Africa. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 18th March 2016, the Zimbabwe Focal Point from ZIMRA reported that a verification with the Station Manager at Plumtree Border Post had not revealed any cases of trucks piling up at the Border Post. It would be appreciated if the client furnishes more details relating to the Companies affected, the dates, the vehicles involved and the registration numbers so that the Station Manager carries out further verification if need be. The goods affected are listed in Statutory instrument 132 of 2015 which was published on 18 December 2015. The Statutory Instrument (SI) is as available at Printflow (formerly Government Printers) in Zimbabwe, which is too large to attach here. |
|
|
NTB-000-647 |
8.7. Costly Road user charges /fees
Policy/Regulatory |
2014-12-11 |
Tanzania: Tanzania National Park |
Rwanda |
Resolved
2015-11-04 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Tanzania National Park charges Rwanda transporters transiting through the national park US$300 per truck as national park fees . |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
Tanzania National Park is no longer charging Rwanda transporters transiting through the national park US$300 per truck as national park fees |
|
|
NTB-000-648 |
5.3. Export taxes
Policy/Regulatory |
2014-12-11 |
Uganda: Uganda Revenue Authority |
Rwanda |
Resolved
2015-11-18 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Charge of "export tax" of 0.2 % of raw materials exported from Uganda by Rwanda Premier Tobacco Company Ltd |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
At the 16th EAC Forum on NTBs, Uganda undertook to study evidence provided by Rwanda and report back to the next meeting of the forum. UGANDA is adhering to EAC preferential treatment. |
|
|
NTB-000-649 |
8.7. Costly Road user charges /fees
Policy/Regulatory |
2014-12-11 |
Tanzania: Ministry of Transport |
Burundi |
Resolved
2015-11-30 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
United Republic of Tanzania is charging USD200.00 as transit permit for containers with chemical products. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
Following the recommendations of the 16th EAC Forum on NTBs, Tanzania removed the transit charges . |
|
|
NTB-000-500 |
8.8. Issues related to transit |
2012-03-14 |
Tanzania: Along MAjor highways |
Rwanda |
Resolved
2015-11-30 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Weighing of empty trucks in Tanzania |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
Tanzania introduced weighing in motion |
|
|
NTB-000-658 |
8.8. Issues related to transit
Policy/Regulatory |
2014-12-11 |
Kenya: Along corridor |
Rwanda |
Resolved
2015-11-30 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Containerized cargo is being subjected to Imposition of 4 weighbridges instead of agreed 2 as agreed by Partner States. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
During the 45th SCTIFI Rwanda reported that Weighbridges exceed the designated number of two (2) that trucks should go through both in the Central Corridor (7 weighbridges) and the Northern Corridor (8 to 9 weighbridges);
(a) 5 Weighbridges in Kenya which are located at Dongo Kundu, near the Port of Mombasa Mariakani, Mlolongo, Gigil, Busia mobile weighbridge (if you pass through Busia border) or Webuye (if you pass through Malaba border). At each of these weighbridges, the track is weighed which wastes time.
(b) 3 to 4 weighbridges in Uganda: If passed through Malaba, there is Malaba weighbridge (If passed through Busia border there is no weighbridge), Iganga, Lukaya and Mbarara.
(c) 8 Weighbridges in Tanzania which are located at Kurasini, Vigwaza, Mikese, Dumila, Dodoma, Singida, Kahama, and Nyakahura.
The Republic of Kenya informed the meeting that trucks are weighed once at the Mariakani weighbridge as per the Presidential Directive. However, Kenya took note of the complaint and committed to consult the Ministry of Transport on the 5 Weighbridges and report to the 38th RMC.
The United Republic of Tanzania submitted that transit trucks are weighed at three weighbridges: Vigwaza, Singida and Nyakahura.
It was noted that the challenge is with truck drivers who sometimes do not differentiate between the weighbridges dedicated for transit vehicles and the ones dedicated for domestic vehicles and hence noted the need for weighbridges for international transport to bear clear signage or color to be differentiated from local weighbridges.
Senior Officials noted the need to sensitize the truck drivers and weigh bridge officers on the weighbridges required for the international transfers.
The SCTIFI directed Secretariat to develop a mechanism to differentiate transit truck weighbridges from domestic cargo trucks by putting clear signage or colouring them differently and circulating the information to stakeholders / transporters and report to the 46th Sectoral Council for Trade, Industry, Finance and Investment (EAC / SCTIFI 45 / Directive / 54); |
|
|
NTB-000-655 |
8.7. Costly Road user charges /fees
Policy/Regulatory |
2014-12-11 |
Kenya: Kajiado and Kwale counties in Kenya |
Tanzania |
Resolved
2015-11-30 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Kajiado and Kwale counties in Kenya re-introduced County transit Fee |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
ajiado and Kwale counties in Kenya removed the County transit Fee |
|
|
NTB-000-543 |
6.7. Other |
2012-01-01 |
Zambia: Chirundu |
Zimbabwe |
Resolved
2016-03-31 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Traders are being forced to pay $20 each by the Immigration side of Chirundu if they bear same address of where they are going in Zambia yet they will just going for a day to buy whatever goods for trade, this kind of behaviour of immigration officers is disturbing out traders different from Zimbabwe side what they do to Zambians trading in Zimbabwe |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 31st March 2016, Zambia Focal Point reported that there is no law in Zambia that compels a trader to pay $20. In the event that a trader is asked to pay, they should request for an official government receipt which can be verified with Focal Points. |
|
|
NTB-000-565 |
8.1. Government Policy and regulations
Policy/Regulatory |
2013-02-05 |
Zambia: Copperbelt |
South Africa |
Resolved
2016-03-31 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
This complaint is registered by FESARTA.
When a vehicle foreign to Zambia, enters that country and wishes to operate to the copperbelt, the driver has to identify the destination town and pay the relevant road user charge.
During the trip, after offloading, the transporter may wish to load at a different town on the copperbelt.
The driver then has to purchase additional road user charges to that town, from Ndola, which is the only town issuing rucs. The vehicle may not be going to Ndola.
This is very inconvenient and costly to the transporter. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 31st March 2016, Zambia Focal Point advised that it is mandatory for transporters to pay Road User Chargers in all cities in Zambia. This applies to the cited area (Kasumbalesa and Mufulira Mokambo) in the complaint posted. The charges apply during working days and over the weekend, transporters can only pay at the border post (Kasumbalesa and Mufulira Mokambo). Given this clarification, Zambia therefore recommended that this complaint be resolved. |
|
|
NTB-000-608 |
8.7. Costly Road user charges /fees
Policy/Regulatory |
2013-10-04 |
Zambia: Ministry of Transport, Works, Supply and Communications |
COMESA |
Resolved
2016-03-31 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
This complaint is registered by FESARTA.
Zambia is to introduce toll fees for all road users, on 1st November 2013.
The structure of the fees is detailed in the attachments.
The introduction is considered an unfair practice, since the tolls apply to foreign vehicles, and these vehicles pay road user charges on entry into the country.
The road user charges that the foreign vehicles pay (between USD10 per 100 kms and USD16 per 100 kms), are set to cover the road usage cost by the vehicles as they travel the country's roads.
The level of road user charges was recommended by COMESA, of which Zambia is a member.
Updated road user charges are being developed by the COMESA/EAC/SADC Tripartite and, when finalized, will be disseminated to member countries for their implementation.
Thus there is no justification for Zambia to introduce toll fees for foreign vehicles, as it is a duplication of the road user charges paid by them on entry into the country.
The added fees mean that foreign vehicles will be paying more than their fair share for road usage, and merely add to the cost of goods consumed in landlocked countries. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 31st March 2016, Zambia Focal Point reported that Toll fees are charged once at the port of entry for road usage from one point to the other and back. Transporters are only charged extra if they divert from their original route. The toll fees are discriminatory. |
|
|
NTB-000-618 |
7.1. Arbitrariness |
2013-12-06 |
Zambia: Nakonde |
|
Resolved
2016-03-31 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
This complaint is registered by FESARTA.
Resolved NTB 514 refers, whereby ZAMESCO had been forcing transporters to park in its parking area at Nakonde border post, and pay a daily fee.
In April 2013, Zambia reported that this practice was no longer occurring and the NTB was considered resolved.
However, transporters report that ZAMESCO continues to force transporters to park in its area and pay an increased US$35 per day.
This is unacceptable. If trucks have to park at the border to await clearance, there should be free parking available. If they wish to use ZAMESCO's facility, it should be their choice. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 31st March 2016, Zambia Focal Point reported that there was variety of parking at Nakonde Border which transporters can use. The situation where transporters were being coerced to park at ZAMESCO had been addressed. Therefore, given the availability of variety of packing spaces, Zambia advise that the transporters should explore and opt for best options available. Given this development, this complaint was considered resolved. |
|
|
NTB-000-432 |
2.3. Issues related to the rules of origin |
2010-09-01 |
Zimbabwe: Beitbridge |
Eswatini |
Resolved
2016-03-24 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Zimbabwe Revenue Authority (ZIMRA) is charging duty on of fridges and freezers manufactured in Swaziland and exported into Zimbabwe under the FTA preferential trade regime querying the originating status. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 24th March 2016, Zimbabwe Focl Point reported that a joint verification mission on the Palfridge case was carried out during the period 19 to 21 January 2016 in Swaziland between the Swaziland Revenue Authority (SRA) and the Zimbabwe Revenue Authority (ZIMRA). In attendance was the COMESA Secretariat and representatives from the Ministries responsible for Trade from the two countries. After deliberations and tests carried out SRA and ZIMRA agreed that he fridges and freezers are listed as goods of economic importance to Swaziland and should acquire a minimum value addition of 25% for them to qualify under COMESA preferential treatment. The freezers and fridges qualify as originating from Swaziland under COMESA as they acquired a minimum value addition of 25% should therefore be accorded preferential treatment when imported into Zimbabwe |
|
|
Products:
|
8418.50: Furniture "chests, cabinets, display counters, show-cases and the like" for storage and display, incorporating refrigerating or freezing equipment (excl. combined refrigerator-freezers with separate external doors, household refrigerators and freezers of |
|
|
NTB-000-673 |
7.3. Corruption |
2015-06-14 |
Botswana: Martins Drift |
|
Resolved
2016-02-26 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
A Zambulk Tanker carrying Fuel was weighed at the subject weighbridge with the following axle masses: Steer axle - 6960 kg (legal limit 8000 kg); Drive axles - 17660 kg (legal limit 18000 kg); Trailing axles - 24160 kg (legal limit 24000 kg). Tolerance is 5% on an axle set or on GVM, in this case it would be 1200 kg on the trailing axle set. The weighbridge official printed a weighbridge ticket for the driver which reflected the weights indicated above and showed the legit limits as indicated above with the Total GVM being 48780 kg and the max or legal limit being 50000 kg. This vehicle was within the legal limit on GVM and well within the tolerance on the trailing axle set. Yet printed at the bottom the weighbridge ticket is the comment - TRUCK MUST EXIT AND RETURN TO DISPATCH IMMEDIATELY SO THAT THE LOAD CAN BE CORRECTED!!! (see attached weighbridge ticket). When the driver queried this with the weighbridge official he was told that he must park off the truck and move fuel from the rear tank to the front tank to correct the load. This is clearly not an option and highly dangerous given the nature of the product being carried. The driver went back and started negotiating and gave her Pula 200. The Operator refused to give the driver 5% when entering Botswana. The Operator said it is only applicable AFTER the Martins Drift Weigh Bridge. At Serule and Francistown there was no problem.
This is obviously an attempt a corrupt activity that is taking place at this weighbridge and needs to be stamped out immediately. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 26th February 2016, Botswana Focal Point reported that the general public and business community were encouraged to report all corruption cases with Botswana Police as and when they happen. There are police officers stationed at all Botswana entry points. This will assist in addressing corruption issues. However, it should be noted that the 5% is not applicable at the 1st weigh bridge in Botswana but AFTER the 1st weigh bridge. In this instance, it will be applicable in Serule or Francistown. |
|
|
NTB-000-694 |
2.8. Lengthy and costly customs clearance procedures |
2016-05-10 |
South Africa: OR Tambo International Airport |
Lesotho |
Resolved
2016-05-17 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
The South African Revenue Authority ( SARS) are delaying release of goods imported through OR Tambo airport . SARs has detained ur goods for seven days now since 10th May without an explanation. It is the second time that the goods we are importing for business are detained at OR Tambo by Customs. The goods arrived on 10 May 2016, and they are still not released by today 17 May 2016. We are concerned that SARS may demand us to pay for storage and yet we do not understand why Customs has detained the goods for this long? My company has already lost revenue and missed on opportunity to sell and the demand for storage payment will cripple our business? We therefore request that SARS expedites release of our goods . |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
The consignment was identified by SARS Case selection for inspection by the Customs Border Control Unit and subsequent to the inspection, the consignment was detained for proof of payment, original invoice and also to verify the importer’s code. Due to the Master Airway Bill stating final destination as Johannesburg (refer to Airway Bill attached under Airport of Destination), it was difficult for the inspection team to identify if the goods were in transit. This was only discovered after the client informed SARS that the goods in question was an RIT entry to Lesotho.
After the client informed SARS of the status of the consignment, the goods were then released on 17 May 2015
Our advise going forward is that in order to avoid future delays, the documents should clearly state the final destination as Maseru, Lesotho. |
|
English
Français
