| Complaint number |
NTB Type
|
Date of incident |
Location |
Reporting country or region (additional) |
Status |
Actions |
|
NTB-000-528 |
8.1. Government Policy and regulations
Policy/Regulatory |
2012-09-10 |
Zimbabwe: Nyamapanda |
Zimbabwe |
Resolved
2015-06-10 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
This complaint is registered by FESARTA.
Port Health at Nyamapanda, Zimbabwe, has issued a notice to the effect that all goods transiting the border are to be inspected, from 10th September.
The inspection in itself is not a problem.
However, a charge is to be levied for this inspection. This is unacceptable.
Port Health is a government department, which has a duty to perform, in the course of its daily work.
This duty is part of Port Health's daily workload and it budgeted for from Central Government.
Health inspections are done in the interests of the country and are not asked for by the transporter.
There should be no extra charge for this.
What would happen if every government department charged citizens for carrying out their daily duties? |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
During the meeting of COMESA Heads of Customs Sub- Committee held in Nairobi on 19-20 June 2015, Zimbabwe reported that the NTB was an internal control measure and what was required was sensitization of stakeholders on various import and export requirements. This was resolved at the 31st COMESA Trade and Customs Committee meeting held on 7-10 September 2015. |
|
|
NTB-000-533 |
7.6. Lack of information on procedures (or changes thereof) |
2012-09-24 |
Zimbabwe: Victoria Falls |
Zimbabwe |
Resolved
2013-06-30 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
We are importing fuel tankers from South Africa to Zambia. The trailers are SA Registered (Valid licence and Registration Plates - deregistered once in Zambia). The Truck Tractors are from our Zambian Fleet. On arrival at Beit Bridge, the documents are accepted by ZIMRA as trailers being exported to Zambia, drawn on their own wheels, in transit across Zimbabwe to Victoria Falls. The act of exporting the trailers on their own wheels is thus condoned by ZIMRA at Beit Bridge.
When we get to Victoria Falls, we are then told by ZIMRA that exported motorised vehicles must be carried on the back of a flat deck trailer. A statutory instrument is eluded to, but we have yet to see this.
Our arguement is as follows. The trailers have valid registrations and licences (not to mention all the Police Clearances for export), they are not motorised (self propelled), ZIMRA Beit Bridge has condoned the export on wheels and we are actually presenting ourselves at Vic Falls and have not disappeared with the units illegally into Zimbabwe.
Placing these units on flat decks is prohibitively expensive. We are not transporting imported cars from overseas that are deregistered and for which we understand the need to be transported whilst in transit across Zimbabwe on a flat deck etc.
There is no clear statutory instrument that we have seen on exports of this nature eg licenced trailers |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 30 June 2013, Zimbabwe Revenue Authority reported that the treatment by Beitbridge to allow the trailers on their wheels when transiting through Zimbabwe for re-exports to Zambia was the correct treatment. The legislation on movement of goods in transit through Zimbabwe is in terms of Section 234(3) of the Zimbabwe Customs and Excise Act (Chapter 23:02) which reads "Where the goods in transit concerned are motor vehicles, no such motor vehicle shall be driven on any road in Zimbabwe but shall be transported on a long-haul motor vehicle carrier". This requirement was inserted by Act 3 of 2010 and was with effect from 1 November 2010. The requirement only affects motor vehicles and does not affect trailers as they cannot be driven but are rather pulled by mechanical horses. This interpretation had been discussed with the Station Manager Victoria Falls who shared the same view and assured that there would be no issues raised in this regard on trailers being re-exported to Zambia. |
|
|
NTB-000-544 |
2.3. Issues related to the rules of origin |
2012-06-01 |
Zimbabwe: Chirundu |
Zimbabwe |
Resolved
2013-06-13 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Customs Manager Churundu, Zimbabwe, he is not giving Value to STR Simplified Trade Regime under Comesa, all congnments with a $1000 value, though it is the value threshold he is revaluing the goods in order to exceed $1000 so that the trader will will not have the benefit of not paying duty, thereby confusing traders and prejudicing them of their priviledges and rights given to then by the gorvnment of not paying duty if they buy products on the List of Eligible products |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 1st June 2013, ZImbabwe Revenue Authority explained that the price paid or payable which is the transaction value is normally used to arrive at the value for duty purposes. For STR consignments where the transport and insurance has not been proved the value will be uplifted by 6% as the value for duty purposes in Zimbabwe is on a Cost, Insurance and Freight Basis.There is never an intention by Chirundu or any ZIMRA Office to deny importers their right to clear goods under STR where the goods are properly declared. Where the goods are not properly declared the offices may be forced to resort to revaluation. It should borne in mind that value of goods under STR are generally predictable as the suppliers are few, known and their range of prices can be common.
Zimbabwe Revenue Authority further observed that, this complaint is too general and is not pointing to a particular incident. Should they have a specific query, the complainant is encouraged to make a write up to the Commissioner General of the Zimbabwe Revenue Authority so that investigations are carried out and the query responded to. In the spirit of transparency the complainant is also advised to raise any issues with the Regional Manager responsible for Chirundu who is based at Kurima House in Harare.
In the absence of specific reference to affected product or incidence, this complaint will be considered resolved on the basis of the explanations above. |
|
|
NTB-000-546 |
1.2. Government monopoly in export/import |
2010-09-01 |
Zimbabwe: Harare offices |
Zimbabwe |
Resolved
2016-08-24 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Zimbabwe has too many agencies issuing agricultural Permits, thereby giving problems to those who would want to obtain them, for example you have to go to gugunyana offices then you go to Mazowe Plant and Quarantine offices then also you have to go to AMA (agricultural marketing authority) this process we feel its too long why cant it be done under one roof, or one just live your application then the move around into different offices is done within the office bearers |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
Zimbabwe reported that most of the issues are of policy nature therefore awareness programmes with relevant stakeholders and government agencies will be undertaken . |
|
|
NTB-000-551 |
8.7. Costly Road user charges /fees
Policy/Regulatory |
2012-11-02 |
Zimbabwe: Victoria Falls |
South Africa |
Resolved
2016-09-13 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
This complaint is registered by FESARTA.
The Zimbabwean Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure is levying a toll of US$30 per trip, for the crossing of the Victoria Falls bridge. Ref: SI 171 of 2012.
This toll is not justified because it was never discussed with those who are having to pay the toll and there is no reconciliation for the amount of the toll.
Furthermore, transporters pay road user charges, which are to cover the wear and tear caused to the roads and bridges. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 13th September 2016, FESARTA advised that the transporters were no longer facing this barrier so the NTB is resolved. |
|
|
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-000-558 |
2.3. Issues related to the rules of origin |
2012-10-06 |
Zimbabwe: Beitbridge |
Zimbabwe |
Resolved
2013-08-07 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
My company was importing a pallet of various alcoholic beverages. The consignment was accompanied by the required SADC origin papers from the manufacturer in South Africa. When the pallet was searched officers found, on the label of one of the products, bottled in south, produce of mexico. Upon seeing this the officers immediately seized the tequila, along with some South African made whiskey. Firstly this is in contravention to the SADC protocols of trade, whereby- Rule 9 of the protocols of trade, sections 3 and 4-
3. The competent authority designated by an importing Member State may in exceptional circumstances and notwithstanding the presentation of a certificate issued in accordance with the provisions of this Rule, require, in case of doubt, further verification of the statement contained in the certificate. Member States, through their competent authorities, shall assist each other in this process. Such further verification should be made within three months of the request being made by a competent authority designated by the importing Member State. The form used for this purpose shall be that contained in Appendix IV to this Annex.
4.The importing Member State shall not prevent the importer from taking delivery of goods solely on the grounds that it requires further evidence, but may require security for any duty or other charge which may be payable: provided that where goods are subject to any prohibitions, the conditions for delivery under security shall not apply.
This section clearly states the rules and procedures to be followed when there is a query on the legitimacy of the origin of a product. The Zimbabwean border officials ignored these and seized the goods.
Upon seizure we were given the opportunity to appeal the seizure and prove the origin of the goods.
We did this and the Station Manager at Beitbridge completely ignored all of the evidence we sent him. We have documentation from the manufacturer, proving the origin of the goods, further we gave them the contacts of various people in the South African Tax Department to verify their claims. All of this was summarily ignored and we were issued a notice to pay the duties due for a non-sadc product, and a fine. Together this figure amounts to almost double the value of the products. We have since appealed to the ZIMRA Commissioner General to have the fines and duties repealed and the products released, and are awaiting reply. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
SADC Secretariat, in consultation with Zimbabwe Revenue Authority recommended that the NTB be considered resolved and that the importer be educated about issues of origin within the context of a Free Trade Area. ZIMRA reported that seizure of the consignment was done in terms of Section 193 (1) of the Zimbabwe Customs and Excise Act (Chapter 23:02) which reads "Subject to subsection (3), an officer may seize any goods, ship, aircraft or vehicle (hereinafter in this section referred to as articles) which he has reasonable grounds for believing are liable to seizure". In this case the origin of the goods was incorrect. |
|
|
Products:
|
2208.30: Whiskies and 2208.70: Liqueurs and cordials |
|
|
NTB-000-575 |
8.1. Government Policy and regulations |
2013-03-14 |
Zimbabwe: Beitbridge |
South Africa |
Resolved
2017-06-09 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
This complaint is registered by FESARTA.
The old bridge at Beitbridge cannot be opened to traffic because of an existing agreement between the government of Zimbabwe and a private sector company.
It is accepted that it is an old bridge and that it may not be safe for many heavy trucks using it at one time. However, there is a railway line over it and there does not seem to be any refusal to allow trains to use it.
It could be used by private motorists, so freeing the new bridge for heavy goods.
There seems to be no justification to renew the existing agreement. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
Zimbabwe reported that the two Governments of Zimbabwe and South Africa had agreed that the old Bridge remain closed following commissioning of the new bridge that is functioning properly without congestion. |
|
|
NTB-000-563 |
7.1. Arbitrariness |
2013-01-11 |
Zimbabwe: Chitungwiza |
South Africa |
Resolved
2013-09-13 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
This complaint is registered by FESARTA.
A transporter's vehicle has once again been held up by the road traffic authorities in Zimbabwe, for the vehicle not complying strictly to the Zimbabwe vehicle regulations.
In this instance, the rear lights of the truck were not in precisely the right position, according to the Zimbabwe regulations.
The official, in this instance, was constable Munaki, official number 060189F.
After intervention by the road transport industry and much delay, the vehicle was released with a warning.
This complaint is similar to that in NTB 524, where the information plate on the vehicle did not comply with the Zimbabwe regulations.
The practice of Zimbabwe road traffic authorities harassing transporters over trivial vehicle equipment regulations is not acceptable.
Vehicles foreign to Zimbabwe, comply with the regulations in their own countries and receive a certificate of fitness to show that they are compliant.
This certificate of fitness should be acceptable to the Zimbabwe authorities, unless, of course, the vehicle is clearly not roadworthy. The rear lights being in a different position, or the information plate giving different information, does not make the vehicle unroadworthy.
Two of the clauses in one of the bi-lateral road transport agreements that Zimbabwe holds with another country, state that each country should "promote fair and equitable treatment for carriers from both countries" and "strengthen their economic and commercial relations in the spirit of co-operation and friendship".
The actions of the Zimbabwe road traffic authorities do not subscribe to the above requirements and the authorities are requested to adhere to the objectives of the bi-lateral agreements. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 13 September 2013, FESARTA reported that they had subsequently received a letter from the Ministry of Transport, Communications and Infrastructural Development, directed to the Zimbabwe Republic Police, instructing the police to accept the standards of South African vehicles. FESARTA believes that this letter will also indirectly apply to vehicles from countries other than South Africa entering Zimbabwe. Therefore, FESARTA recommends that NTBs 524 and 563 be considered 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-000-582 |
2.6. Additional taxes and other charges |
2013-03-18 |
Zimbabwe: Kariba |
Zimbabwe |
Resolved
2013-07-30 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Customs charging duty on STR goods which are exempted from paying duty under the Comesa Simplified Trade Regime |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 30 July 2013, Zimbabwe Focal point confirmed ZIMRA report that Zimbabwe does not charge customs duty on goods that qualify under STR if the goods have been properly declared as per the requirement. It should however be taken into cognizance that Import Value Added Tax (VAT) at a rate of 15% is payable. Also where the importer does not have a Tax Clearance Certificate (ITF 263) Presumptive Tax at a rate of 10% of the Value of the goods being imported is payable. Clearance under STR is limited to a consignment of us$1000. If the consignment exceeds the US$1000 duty is paid on the excess
List of goods which qualify under STR are displayed at the respective Border Posts. Furthermore TIDOs are placed at the respective Border Posts to assist persons importing such goods understand the clearance procedures. |
|
|
Products:
|
5402.11: High-tenacity filament yarn of aramids (excl. sewing thread and yarn put up for retail sale) |
|
|
NTB-000-577 |
2.6. Additional taxes and other charges |
2013-04-12 |
Zimbabwe: Zimra Head Office |
Zimbabwe |
Resolved
2013-07-30 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Customs and Excise (Surtax Tariff) Notice ,2012, Statutory Instrument 112 of 2012,
Customs has introduced surtax on almost most of the agricultural products on the STR list of Eligible products, instead of paying 10% as presumptive tax there are now required to additional tax 25% as surtax that will amount to 35% and those which are not agriculture products instead of paying 25% as vat and presumptave tax there is additional 25% that means they will pay 50%, this a barrier, this will disturb the spirit of STR and all efforts to formalise transactions, and inrease cases of smuggling and corruption ,can there be clarity from Customs/Zimra for this surtax |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 01 June 2013, Zimbabwe Revenue Authority ( ZIMRA) reported that the introduction of surtax was not targeted at STR products as the surtax is also levied on importations of the same goods from other countries taking into consideration the terms of any trade arrangements or protocols that may exist between Zimbabwe and that trading partner or block. The On 30 July 2013, Zimbabwe Focal Point advised that the NTB be conisdered resolved by the confirmation from ZIMRA that the surtax was not discriminatory. |
|
|
NTB-000-578 |
2.10. Inadequate or unreasonable customs procedures and charges |
2013-04-13 |
Zimbabwe: Kariba |
Zimbabwe |
Resolved
2013-06-13 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Customs at kariba Border Post seized my goods: 12 off klorpoder 25 kg and 28 off micromatic plus all cleaning powders claiming that the prices on the invoice are not true. Invoice price for Micromatic was at $3 & $3.50 for klorpowder which are manufactured by Nemchem Zimbabwe .These prices can be verified with manufacturer, Contact Nemchem at + 263 774017418 |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 12 June 2013, Zimbabwe Revenue Authority reported that, the goods were seized in accordance with the Zimbabwe Customs and Excise Act (Chapter 23:02) which provides that an officer may seize any goods which he has reasonable grounds for believing are liable to seizure. The Act empowers the Commissioner to either unconditionally or subject to such conditions, whether as to the payment of a fine, order the release of any such goods from seizure or declare them forfeited. The client is therefore advised to make the required representations for possible release of the seized goods and submit them to the office though which the goods were seized stating all the facts relating to the seizure. Any decisions made can be appealed against up to until they reach the Commissioner-Generals office or even the courts to ensure transparency |
|
|
NTB-000-578 |
2.10. Inadequate or unreasonable customs procedures and charges |
2013-04-13 |
Zimbabwe: Kariba |
Zimbabwe |
Resolved
2013-06-13 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Customs at kariba Border Post seized my goods: 12 off klorpoder 25 kg and 28 off micromatic plus all cleaning powders claiming that the prices on the invoice are not true. Invoice price for Micromatic was at $3 & $3.50 for klorpowder which are manufactured by Nemchem Zimbabwe .These prices can be verified with manufacturer, Contact Nemchem at + 263 774017418 |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
he Zimbabwe Customs and Excise Act (Chapter 23:02) provides that an officer may seize any goods which he has reasonable grounds for believing are liable to seizure. On the other hand the same Act empowers the Commissioner to either unconditionally or subject to such, conditions whether as to the payment of a fine, order the release of any such goods from seizure or declare them forfeited. The client is therefore advised to make the required representations for possible release of the seized goods and submit them to the office though which the goods were seized stating all the facts relating to the seizure. Any decisions made can be appealed against up to until they reach the Commissioner-Generals office or even the courts to ensure transparency. |
|
|
NTB-000-583 |
6.7. Other |
2013-03-26 |
Zimbabwe: Kariba |
Zimbabwe |
Resolved
2013-07-30 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Kariba border post, Zimbabwe. Imports from Zambia; one truck carrying two imports from Zamleather for two different Zimbabwean companies. VAT paid in Harare and transferred to Kariba by ZIMRA. ZIMRA system has IT problem and duty of 5% was to be charged. Protest was lodged and ZIMRA advised that there is no duty because of the Comesa certificates. A day went by and we were then advised that our one shipment had been cleared: with 2% duty. We were informed that there were new acts passed and duty was now applicable. I could find no record of this and refused to pay extra duty in order to clear the VAT and duty now short on the second shipment. ZIMRA Harare advised that this was an IT issue and they were working on it. Third day begins and Kariba say no way to clear shipment without duty being paid. Harare advise Kariba to raise manual IM4 entry, Kariba say the duty is still payable. We are now going into the weekend and I cannot see my truck being cleared until Monday. I have had this issue before in a slightly different context where ZIMRA took duty paid for a shipment on its way to correct an IM4 done the prior month. No notification was given and it took 6 months for my claim to be accepted and the US$ 5703 to be refunded. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 30th July 2013, Zimbabwe Revenue Authority reported that the consignments were eventually cleared manually (i.e. outside the Asycuda System) and allowed under the COMESA Free Trade Area (FTA) at Rates of duty 0% as Zambia is party to the COMESA (FTA). ZIMRA would continue to clear such similar consignments manually until such time Kariba customs migrates from Asycuda ++ to Asycuda World and the clearance will be done in the system. The client will not be inconvenienced by the use of either of the two clearing systems. |
|
|
Products:
|
3403.11: Textile lubricant preparations and preparations of a kind used for the oil or grease treatment of leather, furskins or other material containing petroleum oil or bituminous mineral oil (excl. preparations containing, as basic constituents, >= 70% petroleu and 6403.40: Footwear, incorporating a protective metal toecap, with outer soles of rubber, plastics, leather or composition leather and uppers of leather (excl. sports footwear and orthopaedic footwear) |
|
|
NTB-000-624 |
8.6. Vehicle standards |
2014-02-18 |
Zimbabwe: Victoria Falls |
Zambia |
Resolved
2014-03-19 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
This complaint is registered by FESARTA.
A Zambian transport company has 6 vehicles carrying copper into Zimbabwe, detained at the Vic Falls weighbridge, because “the exhaust is pointing down to the ground “ and it must be “up in the air “ according to an official on duty.
The vehicles are manufactured by Mercedes Benz and, for these vehicles; the exhaust is designed to point to the ground.
This exhaust position is perfectly within the law in Zambia where the vehicles are registered. Zimbabwe should respect and accept the Zambian standards.
This action taken by the Zimbabwean official is unacceptable and the Focal point is requested to explain if this is a violation of Zimbabwean law. It is suggested that urgent action be taken to allow the truck to continue with its journey and also to facilitate movement of goods. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 19 March 2014, Zimbabwe reported that the trucks were released on the same day and the owner was advised to contact the manufacturer (Mercedes Benz) to adjust the exhaust as required by Zimbabwean Law. The requirement is in terms of the Construction, Equipment and Use Regulations promulgated under the Road Traffic Act [Chapter13:11] uploaded onto the system.
However, the Ministry of Transport indicated that they shall not enforce this requirement on foreign registered trucks as long as this is not in their domestic legislation. Zimbabwe is expected to issue a formal notification to this effect to enable enforcement of the said exemption on foreign trucks. |
|
|
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-000-685 |
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-000-686 |
2.8. Lengthy and costly customs clearance procedures |
2016-03-10 |
Zimbabwe: Blantyre |
Malawi |
Resolved
2016-05-03 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
We understand that as of 1st March, 2016 goods exported into Zimbabwe need a certificate of clearance from Bureau Veritas. The complaint (Nampak Malawi Limited) which has informed us that their goods destined for Bulawayo were inspected by Bureau Veritas on 10th March, 2016 on Nampak Malawi premises.
However, to date the company has not received clearance for the goods to be exported to Zimbabwe. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 22nd April 2016, Bureau Veritas confirmed that, having received an inspection request on 8 March 2016, the inspection of the consignment was done on 10 March 2016 and subsequently issued on 24 March 2016.However,because the certificate is only issued after payment ,it could not be immediately released on 24 March until after the Easter Holiday which began on 25 March 2016 and ended on 28 March 2016.
However,please note that Bureau Veritas has taken the necessary steps to improve the overall efficiency with regards to the issuance of CBCA certificates. Kindly note that we have developed alternative compliance routes(Registration or Licensing) where manufacturers can now get a Certificate of Conformity issued within 48 hours from the date of request. All Manufacturers are encouraged to apply for qualification under the Licensing Compliance routes.We also have a platform conformity. zimbabwe@bureauveritas.com which is a complaints resolution platform that is dedicated to also explain procedures,to give clarification and to immediately remedy any situation in a proactive manner. |
|
|
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. |
|
English
Français
