| Complaint number |
NTB Type
|
Date of incident |
Location |
Reporting country or region (additional) |
Status |
Actions |
|
NTB-000-361 |
7.9. Inadequate trade related infrastructure |
2010-02-10 |
Kenya: Ministry of Transport |
Tanzania |
Resolved
2016-06-29 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Unreliable, different readings on the internal weighbridges in Tanzania, Kenya, Uganda, Rwanda and Burundi. Readings can differ as much as between 500-700kgs resulting in transporters paying unnecessary huge fines. Weighbridges are often verified, however, various factors which include technical faults of the instruments and unscrupulous conduct of the transporters sometimes result in false readings: This problem relates to transit goods in properly sealed containers that, under normal circumstances, cannot be opened before they get to destination. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
The EAC secretariat reported that the EAC Axle load act was enacted by EALA in May, 2014 |
|
|
NTB-001-136 |
2.6. Additional taxes and other charges |
2023-10-03 |
Tanzania: TRA |
Kenya |
Resolved
2024-07-04 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
URT Denial of preferential Market Access for Kibo Motorcycle transferred from Kenya into URT. URT is instead demanding for full CET instead of granting the preferential treatment as the motorcycle has been accompanied with the certificates of Origin. We urge URT to grant preferential treatment to Kenya manufactured motor cycles. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
There was a mistake in the Certificate of Origin. Kenya needs to rectify it and Tanzania grants preferential treatment. This is not an NTB and hence should be removed from TBP. The NTBs are resolved |
|
|
NTB-001-124 |
2.3. Issues related to the rules of origin |
2023-05-01 |
Tanzania: Namanga |
Kenya |
Resolved
2024-11-23 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
URT denial of preferential Treatment to Motorcycle Accessories exported to TZ by Silverline Accessories LTD in Kenya. URT is charging full CET despite the exported spares having the EAC Certificate of origin confirming that the spares have been manufactured in Kenya and qualify for the EAC preferential treatment. In addition, URT have declined to respond to interventions by the Kenya Revenue Authority and the EAC Secretariat.
We request URT to grant preferential treatment to Motorcycle Accessories exported by Silverline LTD in Kenya and incase URT have any doubts on the origin they should facilitate delivery of the goods and follow the ROO/protocal/EACCMA procedures to verify & ascertain their concerns. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
The 45th SCTIFI meeting noted that a verification was undertaken whereby the headlamps, tail lamps, and indicators qualified for preferential treatment and are being granted preferential treatment in the United Republic of Tanzania as directed by the 44th SCTIFI. The side mirrors however that had not qualified in the first verification also qualified for preferential tariff treatment under Rule 4(1) (b) of the EAC Rules of Origin, 2015, since they met both criteria i.e. material content and Change in Tariff Heading (CTH) after a second verification. |
|
|
NTB-001-287 |
2.6. Additional taxes and other charges |
2025-09-04 |
Tanzania: TRA |
Kenya |
Resolved
2025-11-25 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
URT denial of the preferential treatment to blankets that have been manufactured in Kenya and instead subjecting the blankets to full CET of 25% duty on the blankets transferred from Kenya into URT by Spinner and Spinners LTD with reason that the company is benefitting from DRS. The raw material used in the manufacture of the blankets is EAC wide remission on HS Code 5402.33.00 as a regionally eligible code under the DRS. The affected consignment is Assessment Ref: TRA Namanga, Entry Ref. 158254115-25-9900817 subjecting to 25% duty. This creates an unfair trade barrier, distorts competition, and frustrates intra-EAC trade integration goals.
URT to grant preferential treatment to blankets enjoying regional DRS
|
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
The consignee did not request for preferential tariff treatment when making his declaration and thus he was required to pay a total tax of Tshs 37 million. Later an amendment was done on 11th October 2025 and currently the taxes assessed are Tshs 13 million. This resolved the matter. |
|
|
NTB-001-217 |
1.1. Export subsidies |
2024-09-24 |
Tanzania: Kabanga |
Burundi |
Resolved
2026-03-04 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
URT IS IMPOSING TO BURUNDI A TAX FOR SALUBRITY FOR TRANSIT TRUCKS imposed by port health on borders. This case is for 2 borders : Kabanga and Mutukula with different dates: 24 September 2024 and 02 October 2024. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
URT reported that the matter is not discriminative. The measure applies to all entry and exit points and it applies to Tanzanians as well. The Republic of Burundi confirmed that the NTB was resolved. |
|
|
NTB-001-048 |
3. Technical barriers to trade (TBT)
B31: Labelling requirements |
2022-01-03 |
Tanzania: Standards Authority |
South Africa |
Resolved
2026-04-15 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Vague Labelling requirement "Statutory Warning" Clause 12 (k), rejection of the UK Chief Medical Warning which is accepted in other African countries such as Uganda, Kenya without any objection in addition to their requirement. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
The labelling dispute previously raised with the Tanzania Bureau of Standards (TBS) has been resolved, and exports currently continue in line with the agreed framework.
However, as exporters to Tanzania, South African producers are required to:
Register with appointed inspection companies
Undergo container inspections at a cost of USD450 per container
Pay annual registration fees, renewable every 12 months. |
|
|
NTB-000-195 |
2.10. Inadequate or unreasonable customs procedures and charges |
2009-07-27 |
Zimbabwe: Zimbabwe Revenue Authority |
Zimbabwe |
Resolved
2011-03-01 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
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 an office specifically dealing with valuation matters is now in place at Beitbridge and is headed by a senior officer. |
|
|
NTB-000-587 |
2.8. Lengthy and costly customs clearance procedures
Policy/Regulatory |
2013-04-01 |
Mozambique: Beira Port |
Zimbabwe |
Resolved
2013-09-13 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Various exporter/importers in Zambia , Zimbabwe , Malawi are facing current challenges with Mozambique customs Authorities , whom I believe are part of the SADC grouping . We request SADC secretariat intervention as SADC to salvage the situation which has seriously affected clearance of goods at the following border posts/ports Machipanda , Nyamapanda , Mwanza and Beira Port
The Complaint :
Zimbabwe German Graphite , Samrec Vermiculite ,Zimbabwe Alloys , William Over , Carnaud Metal Box, Zam Beeef , Unicef Containers have stayed in Beira port for a full month , Cornelder the port authorities are charging huge storage bills which in some cases would out weight the value of the cargo . We have had stakeholders meetings with both customs & Cornelder in Beira but Customs have not accepted any responsibility whilst Cornelder insists on collection of storage.
Shipping lines have also placed Freight Forwarders and transit agents on notice for line demurrage as the empties have exceeded their free period but still full inside the port
Some cargo has expiry dates / short life span like photographic material – will get damaged still in port as the documents are still a mission to be processed by customs
Ships / Vessels are going back empty as the cargo ( exports ) can not be loaded before clearance is done – most minerals from Zambia , Zimbabwe and tobacco from Malawi has been affected as the sailing dates are now one month behind and risk order cancellations
Zimbabwe , Zambia and Malawi are now at the verge of losing millions of dollars on these shipments currently stuck in Mozambique some of which are seasonal goods Mozambique
This problem arose because Mozambique customs introduced an electronic clearing system the single window electronic concept – to migrate from manual processing of entries from 01.04.2013 Coupled to it they also introduced the transit bonds registration and the bonds were to be managed electronically like the Zimbabwe/ Zambia situation
The bonds were requested for all of a sudden and the processes are quite long takes at least ….. (number of )weeks during which cargo was coming into Beira and got stuck and at Machipanda , Nyamapanda & Mwanza land borders to Mozambique
? The Single window concept itself has serious setbacks like it relies on network for connectivity which failed daily and could be own for days at outside ports like Machipanda , Nyamapanda , Mwanza , trucks pile at for weeks before any solution has been in sight
? Customs staff at Machipanda , Nyamapanda & Mwanza border post appear inadequately trained to use the new system as a result smaller queries take one to two days to be resolved , Machipanda & Nyamapanda seems to have have inadequate equipment
All the Despachantes were only given one access code per organization which affected the entry processing badly with documents piling as vessels arrived inland and that even for imports from other regional countries , are initiated from Customs in Beira to give reference numbers called Contra Marcas in order to proceed with the clearances
Alfandega had no fall back method in place as they refused to use the manual method to clear the backlog
Request to Mozambique,
1. Mozambique Ministry of Finance is requested to get customs to consider a parallel system to run with the electronic single window programme to clear the backlog in Beira port now and also consider providing release against Report orders to reduce further downtime in port . This will be a stop gap measure until the customs staff are well versed , fully trained and that the new system can work well
2. Mozambique authorities to facilitate arrangements with Cornelder to consider waiving storage for this special situation or at least offer 75% credit on the bills due which I must say are now astronomical based on the days the cargo has stayed in port both imports and exports
3. Mozambique authorities to facilitate arrangements with shipping lines to consider waiving completely the demurrage due on the empty containers or at least give say 15-21 more days grace period before demurrage starts accruing
4. Mozambique authorities to facilitate arrangements that Mozambique customs get technical assistance to assist roll this new programme out without causing huge catastrophies like this
We trust that our request make sense and look forward to getting your valuable assistance |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 11th September 2013, Mozambique Focal Point reported that the alleged NTB´s related to the transit procedures in Mozambique, were removed, through the approval of Ministerial Diploma nº 116/2013 of 8th of August, which approves the Norms and Specific Principles to be taken into account in the implementation of Customs Transit of Goods. This Ministerial Diploma repeals the Ministerial Diploma nº 307/2012, of 15 of November.
Pursuance to reaching a common understanding on this matter, FCFASA members in Malawi reported that CAFAAM Executive Committee Members together with Malawi Revenue Authority, Ministry of Trade and Ministry of Transport and Executives from Malawi, travelled to Cuchamano and Nyamapanda to appreciate the various challenges (delays, costs, etc.) which came about as a result of the new transit procedures introduced in Mozambique in April 2013. The delegation met with Mozambique customs , Beira , Port authorities and had an opportunity to interact with Mozambican Clearing and Forwarding Agents and some Malawian drivers during the launch of the Diploma nº 116/2013 of 8th of August.
The delegation reported:-
1. It was agreed that the new Transit Bond Procedures in Mozambique are in line with international practice and appreciated the fact that in the absence of these procedures, a lot of traders were smuggling goods into Mozambique under the guise of “transit cargo”.
2. Mozambican Clearing agents had been given adequate notice to put in place the required bond guarantees although they were not ready by implementation date.
3. The general consensus was that the conditions (e.g. the required collateral) set up by banks, insurance companies and the authorities themselves for setting up the transit bond guarantees were too tough to be met by transporters and forwarding agents.
4. To this end, the Mozambican Government’s had exempted some products (tobacco, tea, sugar, cotton, etc.) from monetary bonding and reduced bond values from 100% on containerized cargo to 20% or 35% on break-bulk cargo. This measure would reduce pressure on the available bond levels for other cargo not exempted.
5. That there was need to license more “Despachantes” to speed up clearance procedures or alternatively, allow forwarding agents to be doing own customs clearing of cargo which they are moving.
6. There was need for Station Managers at the various borders to be taking stock of trucks available at the borders every day and talk to drivers who have stayed at the border for more than a day to encourage them to proceed with their journey so as to minimise the prevalent corrupt practices by some customs officers, guards, clearing agent.
7. A proposal to set up a “Help Desk” at the borders to achieve transparency and quarterly meetings between the various players at senior level.
8. Joint border training sessions between customs and other authorities and clearing & forwarding agents to be enhanced.
9.That various customs authorities establish a deliberate policy for Accrediting Clearing agents based on an exhaustive Risk assessment of each one of the agents and track record in order to “smoke out” fraudulent clearing and forwarding agents who cheat importers or assist them with smuggling practices,.
10. That Mozambican authorities should endeavor to translate and display the various rules and regulations into English to enable none Portuguese speaking people to understand the applicable regulations.
11.Mozambique customs advised that:
a. Clearing Agent need to quickly do a Supplementary Entry if there are any changes to a declaration (e.g. amending border of exit, amending values or quantity of goods, etc.) to avoid truck delays at the border or bond acquittals being blocked.
b. Once CORRECT documents are lodged and payment effected, their processing time is up to 3 hours only.
c. They would as far as possible, be rotating their staff to avoid corruption if they familiarize themselves too much to one border station. |
|
|
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-000-455 |
8.8. Issues related to transit |
2011-09-03 |
Kenya: Central Corridor |
Rwanda |
Resolved
2011-09-19 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Varying application of axle load specifications by Kenya. Kenya demands that trucks should noit weigh more than 48Tonnes axle load whereas other partner states allow 56tons. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
The 6th EAC Regional Forum on Non tariff barriers held from 12-13 March 2012, adopted recoomendation from the meetin of EAC permanent secretaries of the sectoral Council of transport , communications and metrology held in Nairobi on 16-19 August 2011 that a meeting of experts be convined by EAC secretariat to develop supportive legal, institutional and operative framework for approval by the council in 2012. This NTB is therefore considered resolved by the regional forum. |
|
|
NTB-000-455 |
8.8. Issues related to transit |
2011-09-03 |
Kenya: Central Corridor |
Rwanda |
Resolved
2011-09-19 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Varying application of axle load specifications by Kenya. Kenya demands that trucks should noit weigh more than 48Tonnes axle load whereas other partner states allow 56tons. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
The axle load was agreed at 56 tons in the recent past and could possibly be a case where a hiccup arises due to lack of information by the implementing agency. When we have such cases of varying application of axle load specifications by Kenya along the Northern Corridor (Weighbridge), then it is useful to specify the weighbridge and give necessary details for us to follow and address the complain . However, the issue of varying application of axle load specifications should no longer occur because the region has adopted a uniform applicable axle load of 56 Tonnes |
|
|
NTB-000-070 |
2.10. Inadequate or unreasonable customs procedures and charges |
2009-07-23 |
Lesotho: Maseru Bridge |
Lesotho |
Resolved
2011-07-28 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
VAT clearance procedures at the border posts are open to corruption. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
The Lesotho Revenue Authority (LRA) reported that they have all the necessary measures to combat corruption for all customs procedures and there is a high intolerance for corruption as there is a Corruption Investigation Unit within the LRA. LRA are in the process of introducing an automated system. |
|
|
NTB-001-353 |
5.14. Restrictive licenses |
2026-04-10 |
Rwanda: Rwanda FDA |
Kenya |
Resolved
2026-09-16 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
wanda FDA is subjecting Kenya products to costly charges for re-testing and registration of the products despite the products being certified by the Kenya bureau of standards with valid standardization mark.
The two products include ace pine fresh and ace citrus fresh liquid toilet cleaners. Rwanda FDA informed that the certifications for the two products had been revoked on the basis that they allegedly contained Nonyl Phenol despite successfully applying for and receiving product registrations from Rwanda FDA under certificates Rwanda FDA‑ADP‑MA‑0070 and Rwanda FDA‑ADP‑MA‑0072. Further the manufacturer confirmed they not using Nonyl Phenol
|
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
The two Partner States agreed that the NTB be resolved, because there will no retesting of Ace Pine Fresh and Ave Pine Citrus toilet cleaners once certified by KEBs |
|
|
NTB-001-254 |
2.13. Issues related to Pre-Shipment Inspections |
2025-04-01 |
Malawi: Songwe |
Malawi |
Resolved
2025-06-17 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
We are a company that exports groundnuts from Malawi to Kenya. On average we export three containers in a month to Kenya. Before loading the cargo into the container, the cargo is being inspecting by the MRA official who certify the accuracy of the cargo being loaded into the container for Export.
Once the container is loaded, a seal is placed on it till the container reaches the exit border post, where this seal is removed again for the second confirmation of the load being exported. This requires offloading the consignment, running the risk of contamination, damage and delays as well as cost of offloading and loading. We have been exporting to Kenya since 2022. However, since October 2024, we have been encountering these challenges of being forced to offload cargo at the exit boarder post for inspection purposes by MRA officials, both to and from. This is despite that the cargo is being loaded into the container in the presence of the MRA official at the point of origin of goods. As a result of this we are paying unnecessary costs which is expensive and at times delays the clearance process. All these costs are being encountered by the exporter/importer.
The exit border has machine scanners which have been out of service for some time now. If these were working, we could not encounter this delay and expense which is originating from the offloading and loading of the cargo. At the same times some of the exported or imported cargo gets damaged when carrying out this exercise. Hygiene is also another issue, considering the places where we are doing the off-loading and loading exercise.
A resolution needs to be found ASAP to avoid such delays, repetitive inspections and costs before exiting the country. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
The NTB 001-254 issue is now effectively resolved. In a productive virtual meeting on June 17, 2025, key stakeholders—including the SADC Secretariat, a representative from the concerned company in Malawi, the Malawi Revenue Authority, the SADC Business Council, and GIZ—came together to address challenges experienced by exporters at the Songwe Border Post. The Malawi Revenue Authority took the initiative to inform exporters of the obstacles encountered during border crossings and clearly outlined the customs procedures necessary for a smooth export process from Malawi. This collaborative effort demonstrates a commitment to enhancing trade efficiency and supporting exporters. |
|
|
Products:
|
1202.42: Groundnuts, shelled, whether or not broken (excl. seed for sowing, roasted or otherwise cooked) |
|
|
NTB-001-014 |
1.6. Domestic assistance programmes for companies
Policy/Regulatory |
2021-03-17 |
South Africa: Rhodes Quality, Cape Town |
Botswana |
Resolved
2026-04-15 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
We are a freight logistics company based in Gaborone, Botswana(100% citizen). During registration on supplies portals in South Africa they require us (Foreign freight logistics companies without branches in South Africa ) to be BBBEE compliant despite we providing them with all company documents verifying that we are foreign based with Head Offices out of South Africa borders. Because of the nature of our business which compels us to conduct cross border transportation, South African supplies would immediately inform us we can't do business with them on the basis of non - compliant on BBBEE requirements. Arrangement in place promotes South African transporters to do cross border and prohibits foreign transporters to haul commodities back to country of operation. Please note we are not issued with any documents as a dispensation on our Head offices out of South African borders.
Kindly assist in the best possible way. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
The SADC Regional workshop on NTBs heled on 14-15 April 2026 agreed that the requirement by South Africa for foreign companies to comply by the national investment codes is not a NTB therefore this matter is resolved |
|
|
NTB-001-234 |
2.2. Arbitrary customs classification |
2025-01-20 |
Botswana: Tlokweng Gate |
South Africa |
Resolved
2025-05-27 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
We are a small female-owned company based in Gaborone, Botswana that manufactures small leather goods, mostly for corporates, government and individuals. Our team consists of 5 female employees with 4 full time and 1 on contractual basis. We import our raw material (which is mostly finished leather) from South Africa. We have been importing our material since 2019, however, since 2021 we have been facing a challenge of our raw materials being misclassified. we import finished leather products which is not subjected to Veterinary requirements since it is a finished product. However, we are subjected to go through veterinary regulations which causes delays and confusions on the applicable regulations. We request the proper application of regulations be applied when dealing with our product. The veterinary processes must be done away if there are not applicable.
Our company imports material about 3 times a month from South Africa, with a total average of 3200 dm of finished leather. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
A virtual meeting was held on the 29th of April, 2025, between Customs Services(External Eelations & Classification office), the Tlokweng Border Post Manager, Ministry of Trade officials, SADC officials, and the trader to learn more about the trader's challenge. The trader was given the contact details of the Tlokweng Border Manager for assistance in case she faces similar challenges in the future. |
|
|
Products:
|
4113.20: Leather further prepared after tanning or crusting "incl. parchment-dressed leather", of pigs, without hair on, whether or not split (excl. chamois leather, patent leather and patent laminated leather, and metallised leather) |
|
|
NTB-000-486 |
8.7. Costly Road user charges /fees
Policy/Regulatory |
2012-02-15 |
SADC |
South Africa |
Resolved
2013-05-23 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
We are a South African Transport Company transporting goods into DRC. We are paying on weekly basis exorbitant road duties in Botswana, Zambia, and Zimbabwe & DRC if we offload loads from Johannesburg RSA to Mutanda DRC. Our cost on a tri-axle on road fee is 1060 Pula on return trip (Martinsdrif to Kazangula and back), insurance 50P for 3 months and then about 100 Pula on a yearly level also. Zambia insurance 300 000KW for year, then toll fee for 285USD on return trip Kazangula to DRC border and back, 200 000KW carbon tax, 70 000KW for extra toll fees on road. Zimbabwe insurance 170USD for year, the 100USD on toll fees, then coupons another 10USD and environmental cost depends on the load and weight up to 160USD & 90USD carbon 3 months. Going into the DRC, border customs parking 133USD, entry fee and costing 350USD, 300USD PEAGE, 4x 150USD for toll fees going to Mutanda and coming back.
None of the foreign trucks from DRC, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Botswana or Namibia pay this cost when entering South Africa. We drive on the roads to supply clients with goods, we provide a service, the same as for the foreign transporters, but they don't pay similarly high costs when entering South Africa. We need an explanation from the countries listed above as to why is this done. At the moment, we give to a driver for one load going to DRC from JHB, 2400USD, 2500 PULA & R5000 to cover these expenses and we cannot increase our rates easily, without risking losing our clients. What can be done about this situation? |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
Focal Points from Botswana, Zambia and Zimbabwe reported the current standard official charges and argued that these are in accordance established regional protocols. At the 11th meeting of the SADC Sub -Committee on Trade Facilitation held on 23 May 2013, South Africa focal point requested that the NTB be considered non actionable as they could not trace the complainant.
However, the NTB is considered resolved as it does not fall under the ' non actionable' category of complaints. |
|
|
NTB-000-878 |
2.8. Lengthy and costly customs clearance procedures |
2019-01-29 |
South Africa: Maseru Bridge |
Lesotho |
Resolved
2019-02-01 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
We are experiencing delays by SARS customs who are taking time to inspect our container that is in transit. The delay is causing difficulties to meet the vessel to carry the shipment as it will be closing on Thursday 31st January at 06:00am and we are running out of time. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
This NTB was resolved too late and the consignment missed the vessel thereby adding to transport costs. Lesotho reported that:
1. The inspection took long resulting in the consignment missing the vessel in Durban Harbour; trader incurred additional costs by taking the consignment to Cape Town instead of Durban; and
2. the congsinor was charged provisional payments upon the release of the consignment.
Lesotho observed that SARS treatment of Lesotho transit goods compromises prospects of Lesotho's international trade opportunities as the country seeks to expand and diversify both products and markets to contribute to economic growth and poverty reductionNTB Focal Point in South Africa are requested to assist in clarifying the situation on inspection with SARS at Maseru Border Post to expedite the process. |
|
|
NTB-001-183 |
3. Technical barriers to trade (TBT)
B1: Import authorization/licensing related to technical barriers to trade |
2024-08-08 |
Kenya: Kenya Bureau of Standards |
Uganda |
Resolved
2025-05-30 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
We are experiencing unfair treatment by KEBS, Where the institution refused to recognize PERMITS Issued by UNBS.
Unfortunately, efforts to engage with border KEBS officials have not been fruitful because we didn't receive any help insisting we pay the Inspection fee. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
The SCTIFI noted that this was not an NTB but an operational challenge and should be referred to the Committee on Standards for consideration. |
|
|
Products:
|
4412.94: Laminated wood as blockboard, laminboard or battenboard (excl. of bamboo, plywood consisting solely of sheets of wood <= 6 mm thick, sheets of compressed wood, inlaid wood and sheets identifiable as furniture components) |
|
|
NTB-001-183 |
3. Technical barriers to trade (TBT)
B1: Import authorization/licensing related to technical barriers to trade |
2024-08-08 |
Kenya: Kenya Bureau of Standards |
Uganda |
Resolved
2025-05-30 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
We are experiencing unfair treatment by KEBS, Where the institution refused to recognize PERMITS Issued by UNBS.
Unfortunately, efforts to engage with border KEBS officials have not been fruitful because we didn't receive any help insisting we pay the Inspection fee. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
During the Sectoral Committee on Trade meeting, Partner States agreed that this was not an NTB but an operational challenge and was referred to the East African Standards Committee (EASC) for consideration. |
|
|
Products:
|
4412.94: Laminated wood as blockboard, laminboard or battenboard (excl. of bamboo, plywood consisting solely of sheets of wood <= 6 mm thick, sheets of compressed wood, inlaid wood and sheets identifiable as furniture components) |
|
English
Français
