| Complaint number |
NTB Type
|
Date of incident |
Location |
Reporting country or region (additional) |
Status |
Actions |
|
NTB-000-452 |
7.8. Consular and Immigration Issues |
2011-09-03 |
Tanzania: Mbeya |
Uganda |
Resolved
2012-04-26 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Tanzania Border posts charge Visa charges of US$ 250 for businessmen from Uganda. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
At the 3rd meeting the Tripartite NTBs Focal Points and NMC Chairs held in Dar -es-Salaam on 19-20 April 2012, Tanzania reported that it does not charge visa from EAC members. |
|
|
NTB-000-777 |
7.8. Consular and Immigration Issues |
2017-05-05 |
Tanzania: Ministry of Home Affairs - Immigration |
Uganda |
Resolved
2018-05-12 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Tanzania imposes Business visa fees of US$100 charged contrary to provisions of the Common Market Protocol |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
During the Senior Officials' meeting held in October, 2017 Tanzania reported that she would follow up with the relevant Authorities on the NTB of charging Business VISA fee for drivers and report back to the Regional Forum in March, 2018. During the 25th EAC Regional Forum on NTBs held from 9- 12 May 2018 Uganda reported that the requirement had been lifted and therefore the issue has been resolved. |
|
|
NTB-000-246 |
7.7. Complex variety of documentation required |
2009-09-08 |
Namibia: Revenue Authority |
Namibia |
Resolved
2012-04-26 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Procedures for VAT (claim back) in Namibia are too complicated |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
At the 3rd meeting the Tripartite NTBs Focal Points and NMC Chairs held in Dar -es-Salaam on 19-20 April 2012, Namibia reported that customs only processess those refund applications accompanied by relevant documentation. The documents required are a completed NA66, a proof of export (SAD 500 that has been dully proceeded at the point of export) and the invoice that the goods have been obtained. This process was to verify that the goods are indeed obtained and exported. If any of these documents are outstanding customs has the right to refuse such payment.
The Ministry of Finance, Customs Division was in the process of reviewing customs procedures and once this exercise is finalized the revised procedures will be posted on the customs website and will be made available to the public. The meeting accepted Namibia’s submission to resolve this NTB |
|
|
NTB-000-363 |
7.7. Complex variety of documentation required |
2010-02-10 |
Kenya: Kenya Revenue Authority |
Zambia |
Resolved
2010-11-22 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Documentations requirements for exports to Kenya are too cumbersome (SGS invoice is issued after one month and you are charged inspection charges. With regards to import permits, Zambian exporter has to raise COMESA Certification and send to Kenyan importer before shipping the goods. This process takes more than 3 months. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
Issue resolved through COMESA Customs and Trade Committee |
|
|
NTB-000-933 |
7.7. Complex variety of documentation required |
2018-10-12 |
Egypt: Port Said Sea Port |
Mauritius |
Resolved
2020-10-08 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
The Egyptian authorities require a number of lengthy and costly documentation for clearance of consignment at customs. The identified cumbersome documentation requirements are as follows:
1. All export documents must be signed and stamped by the exporter's legal representative
2. All export documents must be signed and stamped by the Prime Minister's Office of Mauritius (Apostille requirement)
3. All export documents must be signed and stamped by Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Mauritius (Apostille requirement)
4. All export documents must be signed and stamped by the Egyptian Embassy in Mauritius
5. All export documents must be signed and stamped by the Mauritius Chamber of Commerce and Industry
Some products also require a Certificate of Origin issued by the Mauritius Chamber of Commerce and Industry despite being already accompanied by a COMESA Certificate of Origin. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
During the 5th Meeting of the COMESA Trade and Trade Facilitation Sub Committee held on 6- 8 October , Mauritius reported that the NTB had been resolved |
|
|
NTB-001-069 |
7.7. Complex variety of documentation required |
2016-09-15 |
Egypt: Chamber of Commerce
Egyptian Embassy
Ministry of Foreign Trade |
Mauritius |
Resolved
2025-10-08 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
A number of procedural requirements are currently impeding the exports of Mauritian products to Egypt. To that effect, the concerned authorities in Mauritius have made enquiries with a registered trader in Egypt and it has been brought to its attention that for an exporter to start trading with an Egyptian importer, the following documents, duly certified by the Chamber of Commerce and approved by the Embassy of the Arab Republic of Egypt, have to be submitted as per Ministerial Decree 43/2016:
i. A registration form by the legal representative of the factory or authorised person;
ii. A certificate of legal status of the factory and the issued license of the factory;
iii. A list of products of the factory and their brand;
iv. The brand of the product and the Trademark produced according to a license from the owner;
v. A certificate that the factory has a Quality Control System from a recognised body of The International Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation (ILAC) or the International Accreditation Forum (IAF) or from an Egyptian or Foreign Government body approved by the Minister of Foreign Trade.
The authorities in Mauritius consider that these procedural requirements constitute a Non-Tariff Barrier and in that regard contravene Article 49 of the COMESA Treaty.
We would appreciate that the authorities concerned in Egypt review these procedures in order to facilitate trade in line with the spirit of the COMESA Treaty.
|
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
Egypt has approved the accreditation of Mauritius Standards Bureau (MSB) as a government entity to issue quality management system certificates, as required for registration by Ministerial Decree No. 43 of 2016. The NTB can now be marked as 'Resolved' |
|
|
NTB-000-424 |
6.6. Border taxes |
2011-07-04 |
Kenya: Malaba |
Uganda |
Resolved
2011-08-29 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Effective July 2007 to date Kenya Plant Health Inspectorate Service (KEPHIS) imposed a Plant Import Permit (PIP) of KShs 500 on every truckload of Uganda tea in transit to Mombasa, reason that they have to issue a Phytosanitary certificate when Uganda tea is being exported. However at this time Uganda tea is already sold off. This practice is contrary to international practice where the Phytosanitary certificate is issued by a competent authority in the country of origin in this case Uganda. The above practice also many times delays Uganda tea at Malaba due to making receipts, verification and clearing hence late for listing at Mombasa auction therefore making it less competitive. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
At the NMC meeting held in Nairobi on 29 August 2011, Kenya reported that:
1. Kenya does not issue plant import permit to goods in transit.
2. If tea is specifically declared as in transit, Malaba border verifies documentation and release without charging import permit. However if declared for local consumption, permit is invoked. |
|
|
Products:
|
0902.30: Black fermented tea and partly fermented tea, whether or not flavoured, in immediate packings of <= 3 kg |
|
|
NTB-000-650 |
6.6. Border taxes |
2015-02-01 |
Mozambique: Delegação Aduaneira de Ressano Garcia (Road) |
South Africa |
Resolved
2015-06-19 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Good day. Terminal Operator at Ressano Garcia plans to enforce fees to all cargo vehicles for the utilization of Ressano Garcia with effect from the 16th February 2015. The fees as attached to this request are ridiculous as a truck weighing 28Tons with Imports to Mozambique is expected to pay no less than R3000 on each occasion they enter Mozambique via Ressano Garcia. The upgrades at the port were an investment to ease trade facilitation and I'm of the view that traders are not opposed to paying however the required amount is way high and unfortunately the end-user will end up carrying these costs the end of the day. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 25 February 2015, Mozambique focal point confirmed that there has not been any fee set or fee charged for the use of the cargo Terminal of Ressano Garcia, since this matter is still under discussion internally. This NTB is therefore resolved |
|
|
NTB-000-729 |
6.6. Border taxes |
2017-01-01 |
Zambia: All Zambian Border Posts |
|
Resolved
2018-01-25 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Introduction of fees on all motor vehicles exiting and entering Zambia
This measure will effectively increase transportation costs for both businesses and individuals.
As a landlocked country which is primarily reliant on road transport, this will have major cost repercussions for all industry sectors and increase the cost of doing business, making Zambia less competitive.
The Minister proposes to increase various user fees and charges to recover costs. This would include statutory fees and charges for services provided by government institutions.
Unless the fee increases are matched by an increase in efficiency, this measure will have an overall detrimental effect.
Effective date
All of the above measures will take effect from 1 January 2017. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 25 January 2018, Zambia Focal Point reported that this measure had not been implemented therefore this NTB is resolved |
|
|
NTB-000-731 |
6.6. Border taxes |
2017-01-01 |
Zambia: All Zambian Border Posts |
|
Resolved
2018-01-25 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Introduction of fees on all motor vehicles exiting and entering Zambia
This measure will effectively increase transportation costs for both businesses and individuals.
As a landlocked country which is primarily reliant on road transport, this will have major cost repercussions for all industry sectors and increase the cost of doing business, making Zambia less competitive.
The Minister proposes to increase various user fees and charges to recover costs. This would include statutory fees and charges for services provided by government institutions.
Unless the fee increases are matched by an increase in efficiency, this measure will have an overall detrimental effect.
Effective date
All of the above measures will take effect from 1 January 2017. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 25 January 2018, Zambia Focal Point reported that this measure had not been implemented therefore this NTB is resolved |
|
|
NTB-000-960 |
6.6. Border taxes |
2020-06-05 |
Zimbabwe: Beitbridge |
|
Resolved
2022-10-20 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Zimbabwe has promulgated a new legislation S.I 127 of 2020 which proposes to charge amounts up to USD300 per entry of Beit Border Border Customs Yard meant for payment of the border post modernization and upgrade project. This charge is over and above the Bridge Toll of USD23 per entry and the ZINARA road tolls fees. The proposed charges are just too high and unsustainable, thus we seek their immediate suspension to allow for stakeholder engagement for their input. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
The relevant authorities in Zimbabwe submitted report as follows :
As a way of addressing challenges at Beitbridge Border Post Government made a decision to upgrade and modernise Beitbridge Border Post through a concession to Zimborders for a period of 17,5 years. Zimborders will invest US$296.7 million dollars into the project and will recoup their investment by collecting border user fees. This project will bring about the much sought efficiency at the border post by providing modern infrastructure and equipment such as terminal buildings, warehouses, weighbridges and scanners. There will also be automation of most processes and the introduction of a single window payment system bringing about convenience to transporters and the travelling public.
The financing model used in this project (Built Operate Transfer), is a universal mode of project financing which can be applied to projects that are bankable where users are expected to pay for the product or service used. In this case, it is Government’s view that the charges are fair relative to the amount invested and the efficiency brought about by the investment. Removing the fee is asking the country to default on the Concession Agreement. Defaulting on agreements leads to country reputational risk and reduction in credit worthiness.
The figure quoted of USD300 applies only for abnormal load vehicles. The fees are as follows.
Type of vehicle USD
Heavy vehicle 100,00
Goods vehicle 175,00
Abnormal (load) vehicle 300,00
Minibus 35,00
Coach 70,00 |
|
|
NTB-000-194 |
2.2. Arbitrary customs classification |
2009-07-27 |
Zimbabwe: Ministry of Industry & Commerce |
Zimbabwe |
Resolved
2011-03-01 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
The Zimbabwe tariff regime has a wide dispersion of import duty rates across the harmonised System. Zimbabwe Revenue Authority (ZIMRA) and importers are often engaged in disputes over which tariff code to classify certain commodities. Where two tariff codes appear similar, ZIMRA officials would want to maximize revenue and classify commodities according the high revenue earning tariff. At the same time, importers classify commodities according to the lowest tariff rates in order to minimize costs. These tariff classification disputes act as a non tariff barrier which can delay the clearing of goods. Valuation of goods is done by senior Customs (ZIMRA) Officers who are not always available thus causing further delays. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
Zimbabwe reported that Clear tariff resolution structures are in place. These start from station level up to National level. Importers of goods may escalate the disputes to Fiscal courts and ZIMRA may also seek the assistance of WCO tariff rulings. |
|
|
NTB-000-220 |
2.2. Arbitrary customs classification |
2009-07-28 |
Zambia: Zambia Revenue Authority |
Zambia |
Resolved
2010-11-22 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
The valuation of imported goods carried by Small cross border traders is not transparent. Customs officials rely on power to impound imported goods to make small scale cross border traders pay rather suspicious duties. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
Zambia reported that she is using the WTO Customs Valuation procedure, and has an appeals mechanism to address complaints from the traders |
|
|
NTB-000-395 |
2.2. Arbitrary customs classification |
2011-02-11 |
Mozambique: "FRIGO" customs clearing in Maputo |
Mozambique |
Resolved
2012-03-27 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Meat in brine imported from South Africa classified under tariff code 0210.20.00 being subjected to 15% import duty. We have been importing under tarrif code 0210.20.00 for 18 mnths without paying duty. Now a ruling was made on 11 February that duty of 15% is applicable.Mozambique customs does not agree with the tarrif code notwithstanding that this is the code accepted by South Africa as correct. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
Mozambique confirmed that the duty applied on tariff cod 0210.20.00 is zero. Customs Authorities have rectified the problem and are not charging duty on the product. |
|
|
Products:
|
0210.20: Meat of bovine animals, salted, in brine, dried or smoked |
|
|
NTB-000-395 |
2.2. Arbitrary customs classification |
2011-02-11 |
Mozambique: "FRIGO" customs clearing in Maputo |
Mozambique |
Resolved
2012-03-27 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Meat in brine imported from South Africa classified under tariff code 0210.20.00 being subjected to 15% import duty. We have been importing under tarrif code 0210.20.00 for 18 mnths without paying duty. Now a ruling was made on 11 February that duty of 15% is applicable.Mozambique customs does not agree with the tarrif code notwithstanding that this is the code accepted by South Africa as correct. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
Mozambique reported that the 15% duty is the applicable duty under her preferential tariff reductions offer to South Africa. Mozambique tariff reduction offer for RSA began in 2011 and goes up to 2015.
The goods in question, classified in HS code 02.10.20.00 is of class C1, according to Mozambique’s offer and the percentage of duties in 2011 is of 5% for the other SADC Member States, while for RSA it’s maintained at 15%. The application of zero (0) tax for 18 months was a result of miss interpretation of the Customs Tariff, a fact that was later corrected by the competent authority. Service Order nº 3, from January 11 from the Revenue Department established a 15% tax for class C1 goods coming from RSA and 5 % for products coming from other SADC Member States. |
|
|
Products:
|
0210.20: Meat of bovine animals, salted, in brine, dried or smoked |
|
|
NTB-000-552 |
2.2. Arbitrary customs classification
Policy/Regulatory |
2012-11-01 |
Zimbabwe: Head Office Zimra |
Zimbabwe |
Resolved
2013-08-07 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
form 47 which is customs declaration form on Rebate states, who enjoys travellers rebate and marked(excluding) reads excluding Any person employed as the pilot or master or any member of the crew of an aircraft, ship or vehicle arriving from outside Zimbabwe ,bus crew members,drivers are also included,why are they not given rebate allowance as other nationalities, this is a national benefit why excluding them , what benefits do they have as bus crew members? even the remission they dont understand about it even to be given that remmission they are not, this is the other reason why bus crew members are involved in smuggling with border officials, give them an allowance on daily basis |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 7th August 2013, Zimbabwe Revenue authority reported that , travelers rebate excludes "any person employed as the pilot or master or any member of the crew, of an aircraft, ship or vehicle arriving from outside Zimbabwe" This is in terms of Section 114 of the Zimbabwe Customs and Excise General Regulation Statutory Instrument 154 of 2001. This is therefore a legal requirement and it is mandatory that this be implemented. The same regulations also provide for a remission of duty for a consignment of a maximum value of US$20.00 every time one travels. Once the consignment exceeds the US$20.00 duty is paid on the full value of the consignment. Please note that smuggling of goods is an offence which may lead to seizure of the goods and at times prosecution and is therefore discouraged.
Based on this explanation, SADC secretariat advised that the NTB be marked resolved. |
|
|
NTB-000-568 |
2.2. Arbitrary customs classification |
2013-02-13 |
Zimbabwe: Kariba |
Zimbabwe |
Resolved
2013-06-17 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Revaluation of products by customs ,a trader came with catapillar or madora and the value was k 2000000.00=$400.00 and was revalued to K 4180000.00, customs is refusing value for these goods ofwhich it only pays pre sumptive tax this is not the first time Zimra raises value to goods which pays only p tax. Some of these goods are not bought at Lusaka markert were thay have pegged there prices this is one of the reasons why why people would resort to smuggling |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 17 June 2013, Zimbabwe Revenue Authority reported that valuation of consignments is provided for in the Zimbabwe Customs and Excise Act (Chapter 23:02). This particular valuation of Madora at Kariba Border Post was based on previous importations, investigations and information gathered from the neighboring country Zambia because no commercial invoices were tendered. ZIMRA advised that, where the values declared are within the given range, they are accepted. However where the values differ drastically the assessed values are resorted to. The complainant is advised to liaise with the Station Manager Kariba or the Supervisors to understand how the valuation is conducted. |
|
|
NTB-000-709 |
2.2. Arbitrary customs classification |
2016-04-01 |
Tanzania: Tanzania Revenue Authority |
Kenya |
Resolved
2018-07-05 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Arbitrary uplifting of value exports of the Air filters for internal Combustion manufactured by Kenafric products leading to high charges on VAT |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
The Secretariat reported that this NTB had been resolved by the report of the bilateral meeting held from 3rd -5th July 2018 between Kenya & Tanzania . |
|
|
NTB-000-815 |
2.2. Arbitrary customs classification |
2017-11-17 |
Uganda: Uganda Revenue Authority |
Kenya |
Resolved
2019-05-31 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Denial of market access and hiking & fixing of confectionary products values thus making Kenya products uncompetitive. Clients are scared of fixed uplifted value in September |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 7th October 2019, the EAC Secretariat reported that all issues of valuation were considered and resolved by the Customs Committee in May 2019 |
|
|
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 |
|
English
Français
