Non-Tariff Barriers :: Complaints

Resolved complaints

Showing items 501 to 520 of 912

Complaint number	NTB Type Category 1. Government participation in trade & restrictive practices tolerated by governments 1.1. Export subsidies 1.2. Government monopoly in export/import 1.3. State subsidies, procurement, trading, state ownership 1.4. Preference given to domestic bidders/suppliers 1.5. Requirement for counter trade 1.6. Domestic assistance programmes for companies 1.7. Discriminatory or flawed government procurement policies 1.8. Import bans 1.9. Determination of eligibility of an exporting country by the importing country 1.10. Determination of eligibility of an exporting establishment (firm, company) by the importing country 1.11. Occupational safety and health regulation 1.12. Multiplicity and Controls of Foreign exchange market 1.13. "Buy national" policy 1.14. Lack of coordination between government institutions 1.15. Other Category 2. Customs and administrative entry procedures 2.1. Government imposing antidumping duties 2.2. Arbitrary customs classification 2.3. Issues related to the rules of origin 2.4. Import licensing 2.5. Decreed customs surcharges 2.6. Additional taxes and other charges 2.7. International taxes and charges levied on imports and other tariff measures 2.8. Lengthy and costly customs clearance procedures 2.9. Issues related to transit fees 2.10. Inadequate or unreasonable customs procedures and charges 2.11. Lack of control in Customs infrastructure 2.12. Lack of capacity of Customs officers 2.13. Issues related to Pre-Shipment Inspections 2.14. Other Category 3. Technical barriers to trade (TBT) Category 4. Sanitary & phyto-sanitary (SPS) measures Category 5. Specific limitations 5.1. Quantitative restrictions 5.2. Exchange controls 5.3. Export taxes 5.4. Quotas 5.5. Import licensing requirements 5.6. Proportion restrictions of foreign to domestic goods (local content requirement) 5.7. Minimum import price limits 5.8. Embargoes 5.9. Non-automatic licensing 5.10. Prohibitions 5.11. Quantitative safeguard measures 5.12. Export restraint arrangements 5.13. Other quantity control measures 5.14. Restrictive licenses 5.15. Other Category 6. Charges on imports 6.1. Prior import deposits and subsidies 6.2. Administrative fees 6.3. Special supplementary duties 6.4. Import credit discriminations 6.5. Variable levies 6.6. Border taxes 6.7. Other Category 7. Other procedural problems 7.1. Arbitrariness 7.2. Discrimination 7.3. Corruption 7.4. Costly procedures 7.5. Lengthy procedures 7.6. Lack of information on procedures (or changes thereof) 7.7. Complex variety of documentation required 7.8. Consular and Immigration Issues 7.9. Inadequate trade related infrastructure 7.10. Other Category 8. Transport, Clearing and Forwarding 8.1. Government Policy and regulations 8.2. Administrative (Border Operating Hours, delays at border posts, etc.) 8.3. Immigration requirements (Visa, travel permit) 8.4. Transport related corruption 8.5. Infrastructure (Air, Port, Rail, Road, Border Posts,) 8.6. Vehicle standards 8.7. Costly Road user charges /fees 8.8. Issues related to transit Other Policy or Regulatory NTB Not a policy or regulatory NTB Check allUncheck all	Date of incident	Location COMESA Burundi Comoros Democratic Republic of the Congo Djibouti Egypt Eritrea Eswatini Ethiopia Kenya Libya Madagascar Malawi Mauritius Rwanda Seychelles Somalia Sudan Tunisia Uganda Zambia Zimbabwe EAC Burundi Democratic Republic of the Congo Kenya Rwanda Somalia South Sudan Tanzania Uganda SADC Angola Botswana Comoros Democratic Republic of the Congo Eswatini Lesotho Madagascar Malawi Mauritius Mozambique Namibia Seychelles South Africa Tanzania Zambia Zimbabwe COMESA EAC SADC	Reporting country or region (additional) COMESA Burundi Comoros Democratic Republic of the Congo Djibouti Egypt Eritrea Eswatini Ethiopia Kenya Libya Madagascar Malawi Mauritius Rwanda Seychelles Somalia Sudan Tunisia Uganda Zambia Zimbabwe EAC Burundi Democratic Republic of the Congo Kenya Rwanda Somalia South Sudan Tanzania Uganda SADC Angola Botswana Comoros Democratic Republic of the Congo Eswatini Lesotho Madagascar Malawi Mauritius Mozambique Namibia Seychelles South Africa Tanzania Zambia Zimbabwe COMESA EAC SADC	Status	Actions
NTB-000-442	7.8. Consular and Immigration Issues	2011-09-03	Kenya: Immigration Department	Rwanda	Resolved 2014-12-11	View
Complaint:	Lengthy procedures for issuing work permits by Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania Immigration departments.As per BCI 2008 ,business take between 1-5 months to acquire work permits for workers sourced from another EAC country.Businesses are forced to employ locals who may lack required skills.
Resolution status note:	At the 16th EAC regional forum on non tariff barriers held in Kigali in December 2014, EAC Secretariat reported that the Kenya had abolished this requirement. This NTB is therefore resolved
NTB-000-498	8.5. Infrastructure (Air, Port, Rail, Road, Border Posts,)	2012-03-14	Kenya: Mombasa sea port	Rwanda	Resolved 2014-12-11	View
Complaint:	Congestion in the Dar-es- Salaam and Mombasa Ports
Resolution status note:	At the 16th EAC regional forum on non tariff barriers held in Kigali in December 2014, EAC Secretariat reported that the ports of Mombasa and Dar Es Salaam are implementing National single window system to redress delays at the ports. This NTB is therefore resolved
NTB-000-448	8.8. Issues related to transit	2011-09-02	EAC	Rwanda	Resolved 2014-12-11	View
Complaint:	Inadequate Police Escort mechanism.
Resolution status note:	At the 16th EAC regional forum on non tariff barriers held in Kigali in December 2014, EAC Secretariat reported that the All Partner States were providing police escorts. This NTB is therefore resolved
NTB-000-450	2.11. Lack of control in Customs infrastructure	2011-09-03	EAC	Uganda	Resolved 2014-12-11	View
Complaint:	There is lack of verification sheds and parking yards at most border posts in the EAC partner states.
Resolution status note:	At the 16th NTBs forum held in Kigali in December 2014, EAC Secretariat reported that the 15th EAC Forum on NTBs noted that the ongoing construction of OBSP was addressing this NTB and Partner states reported that construction of OSBPs was at advanced stages at key border posts. This NTB is therefore resolved
NTB-000-436	2.14. Other	2009-04-16	EAC	Kenya	Resolved 2014-12-11	View
Complaint:	There is lack of harmonized procedures manual for the EAC partner states.
Resolution status note:	At the 16th NTBs forum held in Kigali in December 2014, EAC Secretariat reported that the EAC harmonized procedures manual was adopted by the Council in 2012. This NTB is therefore resolved
NTB-000-435	2.14. Other	2010-09-16	EAC	Kenya	Resolved 2014-12-11	View
Complaint:	Lack of implementation of EAC harmonized documents by partner states.
Resolution status note:	At the 16th NTBs forum held in Kigali in December 2014, EAC Secretariat reported that Partner States are now using EAC harmonized documents. This NTB is therefore resolved
NTB-000-507	2.3. Issues related to the rules of origin	2012-03-14	EAC	Kenya	Resolved 2014-12-11	View
Complaint:	Lack of recognition of CTH criteria in the EAC Rules of Origin for motor vehicles by Tanzania, Uganda and Rwanda
Resolution status note:	At the 16th NTBs forum held in Kigali in December 2014, EAC Secretariat reported that Partner States are now recognizing EAC rules of origin. This NTB is therefore resolved.
NTB-000-456	1.1. Export subsidies A83: Certification requirement	2011-09-03	EAC	Kenya	Resolved 2014-12-11	View
Complaint:	EAC Standards Bureaus have varying procedures for issuance of certification marks, inspection and testing.
Resolution status note:	At the 16th NTBs forum held in Kigali in December 2014, EAC Secretariat reported that Partner States Regulatory Agencies are collaborating in clearance of goods and that there is now mutual recognition of certificates issued by Partner States Testing bodies. This NTB was therefore resolved.
NTB-000-609	7.1. Arbitrariness Policy/Regulatory	2013-11-05	Botswana: About 100 km North of Gaborone on the Gaborone- Francistown road	South Africa	Resolved 2014-11-24	View
Complaint:	This complaint is registered by FESARTA. A transporter's truck was pulled over at the weigh bridge, about 100 km North of Gaborone, on the Francistown road, at about 3:00pm on the 3rd November 2013. The weighbridge officials on duty at that time demanded a spot fine â€“ payable immediately alleging that it did not meet the applicable dimensions. The reason for the fine was that the truck was over length â€“ which it was not. The allowance is 22m and .30m for the bull-bar and spotlights. The total length of the vehicle was 22.26 m; 4cm under the allowed length. This truck passed the length inspection on this exact same spot in Botswana the week before. The official, who did not want to give his name, said that he did not care what happened last time. The truck was over length and would not move until he was satisfied. The official did not want to speak to the transporter's management and said it was between the official and the driver. They did not want to let the truck go before the unrecorded payment was made. They indicated they would keep it till Monday, when the driver would have the opportunity to pay the fine. This is not the first time that Botswana officials have issued unrecorded fines for either over height, over length or over width vehicles. Transport operators request the Botswana central government authorities to clamp down on officials that are unjustifiably harassing drivers and not facilitating the flow of goods along the corridors.
Resolution status note:	Botswana focal point reported that the legal length of any vehicle combination as per the Botswana Road Traffic Act is 22m, which conforms to the requirements of the SADC Protocol on Transport and Metereology. There was no allowance in the Botswana regulations for inclusion of any other fitted devices to the vehicle since they are considered as part of the 22m. However the Botswana Ministry of Transport and Communication is in consultation with the relevant agencies on the matter of those vehicles which are more than 22m long. Botswana was in the process of reviewing the regulations . On 24 November 2014, FESARTA reported that, following high-level discussions between SA and Botswana on dimensions, Botswana had agreed that there won’t be prosecutions whilst the regulations were being updated. Botswana was given till March 2015 to complete this. FESARTA advised that this NTB be considered resolved on the above basis. Please remove the NTB.
NTB-000-609	7.1. Arbitrariness Policy/Regulatory	2013-11-05	Botswana: About 100 km North of Gaborone on the Gaborone- Francistown road	South Africa	Resolved 2014-11-24	View
Complaint:	This complaint is registered by FESARTA. A transporter's truck was pulled over at the weigh bridge, about 100 km North of Gaborone, on the Francistown road, at about 3:00pm on the 3rd November 2013. The weighbridge officials on duty at that time demanded a spot fine â€“ payable immediately alleging that it did not meet the applicable dimensions. The reason for the fine was that the truck was over length â€“ which it was not. The allowance is 22m and .30m for the bull-bar and spotlights. The total length of the vehicle was 22.26 m; 4cm under the allowed length. This truck passed the length inspection on this exact same spot in Botswana the week before. The official, who did not want to give his name, said that he did not care what happened last time. The truck was over length and would not move until he was satisfied. The official did not want to speak to the transporter's management and said it was between the official and the driver. They did not want to let the truck go before the unrecorded payment was made. They indicated they would keep it till Monday, when the driver would have the opportunity to pay the fine. This is not the first time that Botswana officials have issued unrecorded fines for either over height, over length or over width vehicles. Transport operators request the Botswana central government authorities to clamp down on officials that are unjustifiably harassing drivers and not facilitating the flow of goods along the corridors.
Resolution status note:	Botswana focal point reported that the legal length of any vehicle combination as per the Botswana Road Traffic Act is 22m, which conforms to the requirements of the SADC Protocol on Transport and Metereology. There was no allowance in the Botswana regulations for inclusion of any other fitted devices to the vehicle since they are considered as part of the 22m. However the Botswana Ministry of Transport and Communication is in consultation with the relevant agencies on the matter of those vehicles which are more than 22m long. Botswana was in the process of reviewing the regulations. On 24 November 2014, FESARTA reported that, following high-level discussions between SA and Botswana on dimensions, Botswana had agreed that there won’t be prosecutions whilst the regulations were being updated. Botswana was given till March 2015 to complete the exercise. FESARTA advised that this NTB be considered resolved on the above basis.
NTB-000-609	7.1. Arbitrariness Policy/Regulatory	2013-11-05	Botswana: About 100 km North of Gaborone on the Gaborone- Francistown road	South Africa	Resolved 2014-11-24	View
Complaint:	This complaint is registered by FESARTA. A transporter's truck was pulled over at the weigh bridge, about 100 km North of Gaborone, on the Francistown road, at about 3:00pm on the 3rd November 2013. The weighbridge officials on duty at that time demanded a spot fine â€“ payable immediately alleging that it did not meet the applicable dimensions. The reason for the fine was that the truck was over length â€“ which it was not. The allowance is 22m and .30m for the bull-bar and spotlights. The total length of the vehicle was 22.26 m; 4cm under the allowed length. This truck passed the length inspection on this exact same spot in Botswana the week before. The official, who did not want to give his name, said that he did not care what happened last time. The truck was over length and would not move until he was satisfied. The official did not want to speak to the transporter's management and said it was between the official and the driver. They did not want to let the truck go before the unrecorded payment was made. They indicated they would keep it till Monday, when the driver would have the opportunity to pay the fine. This is not the first time that Botswana officials have issued unrecorded fines for either over height, over length or over width vehicles. Transport operators request the Botswana central government authorities to clamp down on officials that are unjustifiably harassing drivers and not facilitating the flow of goods along the corridors.
Resolution status note:	Botswana focal point reported that the legal length of any vehicle combination as per the Botswana Road Traffic Act is 22m, which conforms to the requirements of the SADC Protocol on Transport and Metereology. There was no allowance in the Botswana regulations for inclusion of any other fitted devices to the vehicle since they are considered as part of the 22m. However the Botswana Ministry of Transport and Communication is in consultation with the relevant agencies on the matter of those vehicles which are more than 22m long. Botswana was in the process of reviewing the regulations. On 24 November 2014, FESARTA reported that, following high-level discussions between SA and Botswana on vehicle dimensions, Botswana agreed that there won’t be prosecutions whilst the regulations were being updated. Botswana was given till March 2015 to complete the exercise. FESARTA advised that this NTB be considered resolved on the basis of this development.
NTB-000-626	8.6. Vehicle standards Policy/Regulatory	2014-02-28	Botswana: Martins Drift	South Africa	Resolved 2014-11-24	View
Complaint:	Various incidents at both Martins Drift Border post and at Kazungula - Officials imposing Botswana height restrictions of 4.1 - on SA registered vehicles - agreement at 4.3? please advise
Resolution status note:	Thanks Kelly. Please upload a copy. Regards
NTB-000-596	8.6. Vehicle standards Policy/Regulatory	2013-06-19	Mozambique: Dondo , Beira	Malawi	Resolved 2014-11-20	View
Complaint:	Mozambique Police at Dondo, Beira have fined a Malawian truck belonging to ZAGAF Transport, truck number ZA8837/BN4273 because of the blue line on the colour of the trailer which is recorded as White in the blue book. White is the primary colour. The trailer has a small blue line and the police are demanding that this should be indicated in the blue book too. The blue book conforms to Malawi vehicle registration requirements where only the primary colour is indicated in the blue book.
Resolution status note:	On 20th November 2014, Malawi focal point reported that Malawi transporters were no longer experiencing this problem in Mozambique. This NTB was therefore resolved.
NTB-000-628	6.3. Special supplementary duties	2014-03-01	Malawi: Malawi Revenue Authority	Malawi	Resolved 2014-09-23	View
Complaint:	Malawi is currently applying a discriminatory excise duty regime that discriminates against imported cigarettes and foreign manufacturers of cigarettes. The Malawian government formally introduced the two-tier discriminatory cigarette excise regime on 3 June 2011. Currently, for imported cigarettes, a specific excise tax of US$ 30 per 1000 cigarettes is levied, compared to the excise rate of US$ 15 per 1000 cigarettes with more than 70% local content. This practice infringes the national treatment principle which requires that cigarettes, once they have crossed the border and entered the domestic market of Malawi, be taxed no less favourably than locally produced cigarettes. In this regard, and under its regional commitments, Malawi should not be allowed to discriminate against foreign made cigarettes by applying higher and discriminatory excise duties.
Resolution status note:	On 13 November 2014, Focal Point Malawi reported that this NTB had been resolved (Customs and Excise (Tariffs) (Amendment) order 2014 ) and Malawi applies a uniform rate. Communication to COMESA Secretariat, currently coordinating the tripartite process, had since been sent and a report of the same was also submitted to the NTBs Focal Point meeting that was held in Nairobi, Kenya on 23 - 25 September, 2014. uploaded for clarity.
Products:	2402.20: Cigarettes, containing tobacco
NTB-000-611	2.8. Lengthy and costly customs clearance procedures	2013-11-15	Mozambique: Beira Port	Malawi	Resolved 2014-09-05	View
Complaint:	We are the drivers of a Malawi transport company (name supplied) coming to carry clinker from Beira to Malawi. Were here at Beira port, on 15 November 2013 and we have got a problem of document processing since morning up to this period (1600hrs). Mozambique customs officials on duty (name supplied) are receiving unrecorded money from others therefore not attending to those who have not paid him. We re quest that the Mozambique authorities facilitate that our documents are processed without us having to pay un- recorded fees.
Resolution status note:	On 5 September 2014, Mozambique focal point reported that Mozambique had increased surveillance activities therefore these kind of situations were under control . Mozambique had not received any similar complaints after surveillance started. This NTB is therefore resolved.
NTB-000-562	8.1. Government Policy and regulations	2012-12-10	Kenya: Throughout Kenya	Kenya	Resolved 2014-07-03	View
Complaint:	This complaint is registered by FESARTA. The Kenya National Highways Authority (KENHA) is enforcing the axle load limits, rather than the GCM limit for the vehicle combination. This is seriously compromising the ability of the transporters in Kenya to operated effectively and the Kenya Transporters Association (KTA) has taken the matter to court. Some comments by the KTA: 1. KENHA is implementing this axle load rule on an axle by axle case rather than group axles. We realize the official position is group axle because when our enraged members stormed the Mariakani weighbridge yesterday, they promptly switched to weighing on group axles and giving a 5% tolerance, a matter that had hitherto not happened. 2. Their axle weights are 8-16-24 rather than 8-18-24 as the case is said to be in Tanzania. To comply here means one can’t optimize on his load. 3. The Traffic Act in Kenya requires an offender in this case is taken to court, fined and then made to redistribute cargo so that each axle is in conformity before the truck can proceed. The complication arises when the cargo is containerized transit goods which cant be opened sice continer is sealed and opening is criminal! 4. Similar complications arise in the case of liquid cargo which moves rapidly even when truck is being weighed or “sandy” like cargo such as clinker and the like which shifts depending on road terrain/condition or upon braking. 5. Our members are now forced to load 22 to 24 tons of the above cargo instead of the normal 27 tons. Unfortunately the overheads do not come down at all and they are now left with no option but to raise their rates by a similar margin. The question is whether our corridor and hinterland can afford such excessive costs. FESARTA has drawn up a proposal to solve the problem and it is attached to this complaint.
Resolution status note:	On 03 July 2014 FESARTA Kenya was about to sign a Load Charter with its transporters, which covered this issue therefore the NTB should be considered resolved.
NTB-000-580	8.5. Infrastructure (Air, Port, Rail, Road, Border Posts,)	2013-04-17	Rwanda: Rusumo	Rwanda	Resolved 2014-07-02	View
Complaint:	Lack of parking facilities at Rusumo Border Post is creating congestion and clearance delays.
Resolution status note:	On 03 July 2014 FESARTA reported that there were initiatives to improve this border post and so the NTB is resolved.
NTB-000-619	8.1. Government Policy and regulations	2014-01-10	Mozambique: Tete Corridor	South Africa	Resolved 2014-07-02	View
Complaint:	This complaint is registered by FESARTA. South African-registered trucks are required to be escorted by the Mozambique authorities, from the Cuchamano border post, along the Tete Corridor, to their destinations. They are charged US$100 to the Zobue border post and US$150 to the Calomue border post. Transporters have confirmed that they would prefer not to be escorted, as it delays their trips. If the Mozambique authorities insist on escorting the vehicles, then the cost should be covered by Mozambique. Transporters should not have to pay for something that they do not want and it should be included in the Mozambique authorities' budget.
Resolution status note:	On 03 July 2014 FESARTA reported that they had received communication from the Mozambique authorities that escorts are only required under exceptional cases, and no charges can be made. This NTB is therefore resolved.
NTB-000-388	8.7. Costly Road user charges /fees	2011-01-30	EAC	Tanzania	Resolved 2014-05-15	View
Complaint:	There are too many roadblocks along the major hoghways in EAC partner states. Too many stops points (police check points ) that cause unnessary delay of goods from ports to various destinations in the partner states.
Resolution status note:	On 15th May 2014, Kenya Focal Points reported that this NTB had been resolved. KRA abolished the requirement of Cash bonds as recommended by the EAC regional forum on NTBs and Council . What is required and applied is a general bond . Therefore the NTB should be recorded as resolved.
NTB-000-535	8.1. Government Policy and regulations	2012-10-12	South Africa: Vioolsdrift	South Africa	Resolved 2014-04-10	View
Complaint:	This complaint is registered by the Road Freight Association. The South African Cross-Border Road Transport Agency is requiring cross-border permits for two vehicles to take one load from South Africa to Namibia. One permit is required to take the load from Johannesburg or Cape Town to Upington, and another permit to take the load from Upington to Namibia. The Truck taking the load from Johannesburg or Cape Town to Upington should not require a cross-border permit, since the transport is being done wholly in South Africa. The CBRTA quotes the following excerpt from the Act: "“cross-border road transport” means the transport of passengers for reward or the transport of freight to or from the Republic crossing or intending to cross its borders into the territory of another state or in transit across the Republic or the territory of another state with a vehicle on a public road; (xv)" If this clause means that two permits are required, then the clause must be changed. In the meantime, a moratorium to remove the requirement for two permits, must be put in place.
Resolution status note:	On 10 April 2014, Namibia Focal Point reported that the explanation provided by South Africa Focal Point confirming that CBRTA was acting within the legal framework was adequate evidence to have this NTB resolved. This NTB is therefore resolved on the grounds that the CBRTA action was legal.

<< Previous 1 2 3...24 25 26 27 28...44 45 46 Next >>

Display:

Non-Tariff Barriers

Reporting, Monitoring and Eliminating Mechanism

Resolved complaints