| Complaint number |
NTB Type
|
Date of incident |
Location |
Reporting country or region (additional) |
Status |
Actions |
|
NTB-001-221 |
3. Technical barriers to trade (TBT)
B8: Conformity assessment related to TBT |
2024-10-03 |
Kenya: Lunga Lunga OSBP |
Tanzania |
Resolved
2025-05-30 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Non-recognition of Standards certificate from TBS by KBS for salt transferred by Neelkant Tanzania company into Kenya, charging six thousand Kenya shillings for each shipment. The EAC Partner States are implementing a harmonised standard on salt. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
During the 38th RMC Kenya informed that the NTB was on lime and not salt as reported. The meeting was also informed that there are two harmonized and gazetted standards on lime, but other Partner States are still using their national standards.
Hence if a Partner State is using National Standards, retesting and inspection has to be done
The meeting requested TBS to adopt the harmonized standards EAS;73, EAS;1165;2024 or write to EAC Secretariat in case of any specific reasons for not adopting the standard for further consideration by other Partner State
Hence the NTB is resolved |
|
|
NTB-000-844 |
Insurance |
2018-09-28 |
Uganda: Police |
Burundi |
Resolved
2018-09-28 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Non-recognition of the COMESA Insurance by Uganda in case of accident. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
Uganda reported that under the Law, in case of a fatal accident, the drivers are supposed to be taken to court unless you opt to resolve it. The meeting agreed that this NTB has been resolved. |
|
|
NTB-000-493 |
8.7. Costly Road user charges /fees
Policy/Regulatory |
2012-04-16 |
South Africa: Gauteng |
South Africa |
Resolved
2013-05-23 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Note: This is not reported by South Africa, but by FESARTA; a sub-regional organization.
The South African National Roads Agency, SANRAL, is planning to introduce new toll fees on its upgraded Gauteng freeways (E-tolls). The proposed fees are in excess of fees agreed at regional level, viz:
In 2007, the SADC-recommended road user charge for South Africa, was US$2.92/100kms, for a heavy goods vehicle. In 2009, this was revised to US$3.46/100kms. These recommended figures were calculated from the road maintenance data submitted to SADC by South Africa in those years.
On its busiest freeway, the N3 from Durban to Gauteng, the 2012 toll fees charged by SANRAL amount to approximately US$13/100kms. This is far in excess of the fees recommended by SADC.
Now, SANRAL is proposing to charge around US$19/100kms for the use of the Gauteng freeways by a heavy goods vehicle.
It is considered that these fees are excessively high and will unnecessarily add to the cost of goods to the consumer in the East and Southern African region. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
At its 11th meeting of the SADC Sub -Committee on Trade Facilitation held on 23 May 2013 in Gaborone, SCTF noted that the report was based on toll fees that were not yet implemented. As such traders are not affected. It was agreed that matter be filed until such time that the fees are effected |
|
|
NTB-000-438 |
1.1. Export subsidies
A9: SPS measures n.e.s. |
2009-09-16 |
EAC |
Kenya |
Resolved
2016-06-30 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Numerous institutions involved in testing goods in the EAC partner states. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
There is collaboration among testing agencies |
|
|
NTB-000-657 |
5.15. Other
Policy/Regulatory |
2014-12-11 |
Tanzania: Various State Agencies |
|
Resolved
2023-07-03 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Numerous monetary charges required by various agencies in the United Republic of Tanzania on exports of dairy products |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
The 42nd SCTIFI noted that the Republic of Uganda and the Republic of Kenya are handling the diary issues bilaterally with the United Republic of Tanzania whereby several meetings at the Ministerial and Summit levels have taken place and are at the final stages to be resolved. Also, the issue is being handled in the ongoing process of harmonization of fees, levies, and charges, and all the charges will be harmonized together with other charges. The SCTIFI hence guided that the NTB should be removed from the Time Bound program and allow the ongoing bilateral processes to be finalized. |
|
|
NTB-000-484 |
7.10. Other |
2012-01-03 |
Zimbabwe: Victoria Falls Weighbridge |
South Africa |
Resolved
2012-10-03 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Old and inaccurate weighbridge. The Vic Falls weighj bridge is a manual weighbridge and transporters have endless trouble there with trucks which pass all Zambian electronic weighbridges and are then declared overweight in Vic Falls. The fines also are astronomical. They will not allow a reweigh and when the fine is paid the truck is allowed to proceed without any adjustment or offloading and it then passes all other Zimbabwe weighbridges and RSA weighbridges without any overweight. The weighbridge is old and inaccurate and should not be used for enforcement. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 03 October 2012, FESARTA reported that they had recieved input from the Zimbabwe VID, to the fact that the Victoria Falls weighbridge is reasonably new and calibrated regularly. FESARTA reported that there had been no reports of problems at this weighbridge and therefore FESARTA recommended that this NTB can be removed from the system. |
|
|
NTB-001-184 |
8.8. Issues related to transit |
2024-08-09 |
Zimbabwe: Forbes |
Zambia |
Resolved
2026-01-22 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
On 10 August 2024, Zimbabwe imposed a requirement enforcing payment of duty on fuel in transit at the Port of Entry at all border posts ‘in order to secure duty and levies on fuel imported under Removal in Transit Facility’. Such duty and levies shall be recovered on acquittal at the Port of Exit. Zimbabwe Revenue Authority (ZIMRA) advised that the payment of duty for fuel in transit was to mitigate against transit fraud. With effect from 10 August 2024 all fuel, petrol, diesel, paraffin and jet A1, in transit imported through ports of entry by road is now required to pay duty and levies on entry. The duty and levies will be refunded at the port of exit upon compliance with all the transit procedures, including submission of proof that the fuel has been exported. Consignee’s and/or their representatives should approach ZIMRA at the port of entry to initiate the fuel clearance and payment process. For the refund process, once the fuel has been exported, they should approach ZIMRA at the port of exit to initiate the requisite refund process.
This requirement increases cost of transport. The refund procedures are not clear, and the risk of delayed refunds is very high negatively affecting cashflows for transporters. Also this requirement is treating compliant and non-compliant transporters without distinction and is penalizing the transporters who have been compliant to the Electronic Cargo Tracking System (ECTS) where the alleged abuse has been detected.
We therefore request The Minister to urgently reconsider improving this measure to facilitate movement of fuel at reasonable costs. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
Under the Finance Act, 2025 [Chapter 23:04], Zimbabwe removed the requirement for a deposit for duties on transit of fuel, with specific reference to Article 57 Amendment of section 234 of Cap. 23.02 |
|
|
NTB-001-194 |
1.8. Import bans |
2024-08-13 |
Kenya: Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock Development, State Department for Agriculture |
Uganda |
Resolved
2024-11-23 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
On 13th August 2024, the Government of Kenya, through the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock Development's State Department for Agriculture, imposed a ban on the importation of brown/table sugar into Kenya through an internal communication from the Principal Secretary. This decision was based on the significant improvements in the production of locally manufactured sugar in Kenya as quoted in the letter.
The letter though internal nal was brought to our attention.This action is in direct violation of the East African Community (EAC) Customs Union Treaty. Under Article 75 of the Treaty, the EAC establishes a free trade area for goods and services among partner states, while also outlining the application of Common External Tariffs (CET). Furthermore, Articles 76 and 104 of the Common Market Protocols emphasize the free movement of goods, people, labour, services, and capital between partner states, as well as the rights of establishment and residence, without restrictions that may hinder regional integration.
The ban, therefore, undermines the principles of regional cooperation and integration enshrined in the EAC Treaty.
There is no mention that the ban won't affect member states. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
During the 45th SCTIFI meeting, the Republic of Kenya reported that the communication was an internal proposal that was not implemented. There is no ban on Sugar transfers from EAC Partner States per the Public Notice of 9 September 2024 issued by the Office of the Cabinet Secretary from the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock Development. |
|
|
NTB-000-821 |
6.5. Variable levies
Policy/Regulatory |
2017-02-21 |
Zambia: Zambia Revenue Authority |
Kenya |
Resolved
2019-08-21 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
On 20th and 21st February 2017, Zimbabwean and Kenyan companies involved in distribution of tilapia into Zambia reported that the Government of Zambia had enacted the Customs and Excise Amendment Act number 47 of 2016 effective 1 January 2017.The amendment imposes a surtax of 5% on all imported goods that are produced or manufactured in Zambia. The surtax was meant to encourage local sourcing of inputs for the manufacturing sector in order to reduce the cost of production. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
Zambia and Kenya held a bilateral meeting during the 5th TFTA focal points meeting held in Nairobi in August, 2019. Zambia informed Kenya that the measure is under review and has also affected domestic companies and therefore does not violate the national treatment principle. Thus it should not be reported as an NTB. |
|
|
NTB-000-982 |
1.4. Preference given to domestic bidders/suppliers |
2020-08-24 |
Botswana: Ministry of Trade and Industry |
Zimbabwe |
Resolved
2026-04-15 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
On 24 August 2020, Botswana’s Ministry of Investment, Trade and Industry released a statement that the country would be restricting the importation of baked goods. This will affect products such as pastries, cookies, muffins and other products derived from some form of grain.
The statement was supported by S.I 102 of 2020. The Botswana’s Ministry of Investment, Trade and Industry highlighted that the move is meant to protect the domestic producers. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
Botswana provided the Statutory Instrument for clarity, So the NTB is resolved |
|
|
NTB-001-046 |
8.8. Issues related to transit |
2021-12-03 |
Uganda: Malaba |
|
Resolved
2022-06-14 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
On 3rd December Traders reported that URA enforce regulation on all transit cargo to South Sudan and DRC, where all consignment are to pay a fee of $150 to $214 depend on the type of cargo, and those charges are collected by private company "Sunco Ltd." its said to be a contract between South Sudan government and K-Polygone SAS. then K-Polygone contracted Sunco Ltd. When the issue was raise to the Ministry of Trade by the National Chamber of Commerce Industry and Agriculture. at the time goods have stop flowing to Nimule border of South Sudan, Then Minister of trade issue ministerial order suspending the contract between its ministry and K-Polygone to allow smooth follow of goods to RSS, Upton date traders are still complaining the charges at Malaba border of Uganda still on going and the matter is not resolve.
|
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 14 June 2022, the EAC Secretariat reported that charges are collected by the private company "Sunco Ltd." at the Malaba Uganda border
The two Partner States agreed to handle the matter administratively and is resolved. |
|
|
NTB-001-047 |
8.8. Issues related to transit |
2021-12-01 |
Kenya: Mombasa sea port |
|
Resolved
2022-06-14 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
On 4th December Juba Trades Union reported challenges in clearing their consignment at Mombasa Port due to new regulations, which is not clear to them at the time they getting their goods for the holiday season, the complain of challenges with the new introduce system including the payment which is not clearly justified or oriented to the stakeholders, clearing process at Mombasa come to stop and goods stop flowing to Nimule border of South Sudan, South Sudan National Chamber of Commerce reported the concern to the Ministry of Trade and Industry indicating the impact of the measure on the market prices and lack of goods if no action is taken considering its a holiday season. traders are losing by been charge demurrages at port and arrival of the goods after the season. The Ministry of trade took action by canceling the Certificate of Destination to allow the flow of goods to the county, However the action was not honored by the RSS Customs office in Mombasa, reported by Kenya International Freight & Warehousing Association (KIFWA), National Chamber did meet with the RSS Minister of Finance to look at the matter and he promise to communicate to the Revenue Authority since he is not aware of the new regulation and the charges imposed. With the mounting pressure from the stakeholders National Revenue Authority send a letter to Kenya Revenue Authority and Kenya Port Authority to support the flow of goods to South Sudan unrestricted and the Minister of trade order is to be honored as per NRA letter, lastly on 21st December the official at Customs RSS in Mombasa started releasing the cargo to RSS with only $50 Charges not those mention on the Certificate of Destination Chagres below:-
1- 40ft Container $400
2- 20ft Container $365
3- Vehicle 4x4 $365
4- Regular Vehicle $300
5- All UN Consignment $365
6- Loose cargo $250
The main challenge traders have face is lack of coordination between different institutions and the partner states when introducing new regulations or policies, this current measure is not official resolved by Customs Division of NRA. we hope Kenya and South Sudan should address it to assure its traders they are on regional integration and the free movement of goods and people are a true. Engagement of stakeholders is a key in success of any measure introduce by the government |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 14 June 2022, the Secretariat reported that the framework under the Single Customs Territory (SCT), but also One-Stop Border Post (OSBP) manual has the provisions that allow the deployment of Customs Officers.
The National Revenue Authority sent a letter to Kenya Revenue Authority and Kenya Port Authority to support the flow of goods to South Sudan unrestricted. On 21st December the official at Customs RSS in Mombasa started releasing the cargo to RSS with only $50. The two Partner States agreed to handle the matter administratively and should be resolved from the TBP |
|
|
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-001-030 |
2.3. Issues related to the rules of origin |
2021-08-17 |
South Africa: SARS Customs |
Mauritius |
Resolved
2026-02-12 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
On 6 September 2021, the SADC Business Council (SADC BC) convened an online Non Tariff Barrier Workshop with the private sector in Mauritius. In the meeting, participants indicated challenges with variances in alignment of HS codes between Mauritius and South Africa(RSA).
1. …For exports from Mauritius to RSA, where a SADC is applicable, an exporter can insert 10 HS CODES on one SADC certificate. This is because the SADC certificate has now become electronic while before it was manual.
2. When it was manual, if someone had a nice handwriting, the person could insert more than 10 HS CODES as long as it legible.
3. When importing from RSA, Mauritian importers receive SADC certificates with 1 HS CODE only. Meaning RSA issues SADC certificates with ONE Line HS code only.
4. Thus if a Mauritian exporter is sending 10 different items to RSA and SADC is applicable, only one SADC certificate will be issued by Mauritian Revenue Authourity CUSTOMS.
5. On the other hand, if a SOUTH AFRICAN exporter sends only 3 different items to Mauritius, and of course SADC is applicable, SARS will issue THREE sadc certificates.
6. IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT: SADC certificates are payable at both ends. Meaning a local broker will charge an exporter when issuing a SADC certificate and SARS will charge a SOUTH AFRICAN exporter when issuing on their side.
If a Mauritian exporter has 18 ITEMS to be exported out of Mauritius and a SADC certificate is applicable, he/she will have to have TWO SADC certificates only WHILE on the other hand, if a Mauritian imports 18 ITEMS from RSA, he/she will have 18 SADC certificates with each certificate obtained at a cost which represents a huge amount for the one who pays for these certificates. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
The update received from the SA Focal Point indicated that SARS require regular Traders to apply for an Origin Determination that is available under Section 49 (8) of the Customs and Excise Act No. 91 of 1964 as amended. This is a best practice that can be included in the Proposed Amendments to Annexe I, which has been long in the making. Therefore, this matter can be considered s resolved. |
|
|
NTB-001-028 |
2.3. Issues related to the rules of origin |
2021-09-07 |
South Africa: SARS |
Mauritius |
Resolved
2026-02-12 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
On 6 September 2021, the SADC Business Council convened an online Non Tariff Barrier Workshop with the private sector in Mauritius. In the meeting, participants indicated challenges in the application for SADC for export to South Africa. Mauritian exporters need to make a fresh application to customs each and every time they export to South Africa even if the manufacturing process remains the same and same materials are used. They need to resubmit all documents (raw material import documents, BOE, Stock movement statement etc) at each shipment. This is time consuming and complicates export procedures. It also put exporters at risk if they don’t get the certificate or it is delayed and the goods have already been produced.
Mauritian exporters request the region's policy makers to develop a longer certificate of origin that can be used repeatedly for similar shipments. And may be a yearly review/assessment by Customs for renewal |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
The update received from the SA Focal Point indicated that SARS require regular Traders to apply for an Origin Determination that is available under Section 49(8) of the Customs and Excise Act No. 91 of 1964 as amended. This is a best practice that can be included in the Proposed Amendments to Annexe I, which has been long in the making. Therefore, this matter can be considered s resolved. |
|
|
NTB-001-029 |
2.3. Issues related to the rules of origin |
2021-09-07 |
South Africa: South Africa Revenue Services ( SARS) |
Mauritius |
Resolved
2026-02-12 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
On 6 September 2021, the SADC Business Council convened an online Non Tariff Barrier Workshop with the private sector in Mauritius. In the meeting, participants indicated challenges in the application for SADC for export to South Africa. Mauritian exporters need to make a fresh application to customs each and every time they export to South Africa even if the manufacturing process remains the same and same materials are used. They need to resubmit all documents (raw material import documents, BOE, Stock movement statement etc) at each shipment. This is time consuming and complicates export procedures. It also put exporters at risk if they don’t get the certificate or it is delayed and the goods have already been produced.
Mauritian exporters request the region's policy makers to develop a longer certificate of origin that can be used repeatedly for similar shipments. And may be a yearly review/assessment by Customs for renewal |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
The update received from the SA Focal Point indicated that SARS require regular Traders to apply for an Origin Determination that is available under Section 49(8) of the Customs and Excise Act No. 91 of 1964 as amended. This is a best practice that can be included in the Proposed Amendments to Annexe I, which has been long in the making. Therefore, this matter can be considered s resolved. |
|
|
NTB-000-151 |
2.8. Lengthy and costly customs clearance procedures |
2009-07-27 |
Kenya: Kenya Revenue Authority |
Tanzania |
Resolved
2010-11-22 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
On a number of occasions, Kenyan customs demands that products originating from Tanzania have to be unloaded for physical verification, which means destruction of the product packages. The importer has thereafter to repackage goods at own cost so as to fit original packages. Products most affected include tyres, textiles, cognac spirits and cigarettes. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
Issue resolved through COMESA customs and trade comittee |
|
|
NTB-001-178 |
8.8. Issues related to transit |
2024-05-13 |
Uganda: kasindi |
Democratic Republic of the Congo |
Resolved
2025-05-30 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
On May 13, 2024 the vehicles of certain economic operators transporting salted fish from South Sudan, Kenya and Tanzania in transit through Uganda destined for the DRC are blocked in Uganda. The reason given by the protection unit was that these vehicles transported small fish whose marketing was formally prohibited in Uganda |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
The NTB was resolved through a bilateral meeting between DRC and Uganda. |
|
|
NTB-000-541 |
2.7. International taxes and charges levied on imports and other tariff measures |
2012-10-29 |
South Africa: Lebombo |
Lesotho |
Resolved
2013-05-23 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
On Monday 29 October I was crossing into South Africa from Mozambique. I was importing used shoes from Mozambique destined to Lesotho, however the customs officials from Lebombo border post on South African could not let my goods pass through and my goods were confiscated.
I was holding the reciept from the seller from Mozambique, the value of the goods was M2,857 (R2,857 or equivalent of 10, 000 Meticais). I was then told by the custom official at the border that I will have to pay R 9000 plus VAT which is not refundable according to the official. This value is way more than the value of the goods.
The other option was that I should hire currier service s very expensive, I was forced to use currier even though I had my own transport and to use an urgent. I was holding an import permit from my country Lesotho at the time however I was told to pay the R 9000 which is not refundable. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 13 November 2012, South Africa Focal Point reported that each of the SACU member state has its own import/export control regime. For South Africa, importation of used clothing and footwear for resale purposes is not allowed, except in specifically defined conditions. The conditions for used clothing are that, imports should be for the purpose of cutting up to manufacture industrial wiping rags in a customs rebate store. For used footwear, imports are only allowed if the shoes are donated to a registered charity for free distribution in terms of a customs rebate provision.
Given the above background, second hand clothing and footwear imports in transit through SA have to transit SA territory under special procedures: these goods need to be cleared in bond first, and then the goods need to be transported by an in-bond carrier to the country of destination (Lesotho in this case). For this reason the importer was told to use courier services. Such courier service would constitute an in-bond carrier. Such an in-bond remover must have sufficient security in place to cover the duty and VAT on these goods in bond; and this surety would be acquitted with the final clearance upon arrival in Lesotho. If the importer therefore did not comply with the in-bond transit measures, it would explain the duties charged.
During the 11th meeting of the SADC Sub -Committee on Trade Facilitation held on 23 May 2013 in Gaborone, Lesotho noted the response by South Africa and undertook to provide clarification upon consultation with the importer. |
|
|
NTB-001-298 |
7.6. Lack of information on procedures (or changes thereof) |
2025-03-14 |
Zambia: Kazungula Ferry |
Botswana |
Resolved
2026-04-15 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
On the 14th of March 2025 i encountered challenges when crossing to Zambia for business purposes. The immigration officer at the border enquired on the purpose of my visit to Zambia and i informed her that i was travelling for business and requested for a Business Visit (BV) stamp. The officer indicated that BV is only used when someone is travelling to Zambia to sell not to buy as i had intended to go and purchase sweet potatoes. I informed her that we had previously had challenges with law enforcement officers as they insist that whoever is coming to Zambia for business purposes should have a BV stamp not visitors stamp. The officer solicited a bribe amounting to BWP500.00 in order to give me the BV stamp. This contraction of information between immigration officers and the police officers in Zambia cost us as traders lots of money as well as time. It also compromises our safety when we go to Zambia |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
The issue was resolved during the Bi- National meeting held in February 2026. It was agreed that Zambia will increase number Business Visists from 30 days to 90 days annually. Furthermore, the Travellers are not expected to pay for the Business Visa Stamp. |
|
|
Products:
|
0714.20: Sweet potatoes, fresh, chilled, frozen or dried, whether or not sliced or in the form of pellets |
|
English
Français
