|
AfCFTA-000-004 |
2.5. Rules of origin |
2020-06-16 |
Niger: Gaya |
Benin |
Complaint registered with REC |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Le Certificat d'origine (CO) qui accompagne la marchandise est signé par la Directrice de la Promotion Industrielle (Direction Générale du Développement Industriel) conformément aux exigences pour l'exportation des produits industriels. Malheureusement les Services des douanes nigériens exigent un CO signé par la Direction Générale du Commerce. |
|
|
AfCFTA-000-011 |
2.5. Rules of origin |
2020-12-05 |
Kenya: Namanga |
Tanzania, United Republic of |
Transferred |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Republic of Kenya has denied importation of glass products from Tanzania Company Kioo limited. |
|
|
AfCFTA-000-012 |
5.1. Embargoes and other restrictions of similar effect |
2021-11-22 |
Kenya: Poultry products from Uganda have been banned from entering the Kenyan market. |
|
Transferred |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
The government of Kenya without giving any reason arbitrarily banned all poultry products from Uganda from accessing the Kenyan market. It is not clear when the ban will end or if it will end. My clients have lost and continue to lose a lot of money thanks to this arbitrary and protectionist measure by the government of Kenya going against all the principles of the International Trade especially Kenya's obligations as a part of the East African Community Customs Union. |
|
|
AfCFTA-000-015 |
6.5. Other |
2022-01-01 |
Mozambique: Ressano Garcia (Road) |
Mozambique |
Transferred |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Introduction by Autoridade Tributária de Moçambique of a SINGLE ENTRY Temporary Import Permit (TIP) at a cost of MZN700, which is currently processed manually for the majority of vehicles at Ressano Garcia's KM4 facility.
The costs are prohibitive for companies moving transit cargo from South Africa to the Port of Maputo, with 15 loads per week per vehicle a common achievement. In addition, the delays experienced by the manual processing of the TIP document adds significant cost on account of the waiting time that drivers are subjected to. The Port of Maputo has collaborated with Customs in Mozambique to collect electronic payments for the TIPs, but so far only 10 companies have taken up the use of the facility. Even those companies registered on the Port's electronic system are not guaranteed speedy processing, and delays are still experienced by drivers as they still have to queue to collect the TIP document. Electronic payments should take precedent over manual payments, but in reality this is not the case. It is common knowledge that a R50 bribe will speed up the processing of the TIP document.
The SADC Protocol on Trade is clear in its reference to the removal of tariffs and non tariff barriers. At this point, the TIP cost to one company moving 180 trucks per month, is in excess of R1,4million ZAR or USD88,000. The manual processing compromises the integrity of the system and the costs directly impact the competitiveness of the trade route for imports and transit imports into Mozambique.
With the push towards the harmonization of regulations within the SADC and TRIPARTITE region, the TIP process should be harmonized with that of South Africa which has a multiple entry TIP valid for 6 months and is processed at no cost to the user. |
|
|
AfCFTA-000-025 |
2.6. Customs formalities |
2023-03-10 |
South Africa: Skilpadshek |
Botswana |
Transferred |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Basotho nationals had gone to Zambia to buy goods. On arrival they are detained at the border by RSA authorities saying they should indefinitely SARS to evaluate the goods and the brand owners who will check if the brands of goods e.g Nike shoes are fake or original. If fake they confiscate their goods bought with lots of money. They closed the border and knocked off and left them in the taxis they were in. No food, and no toilets opened for them to help themselves. South African shops sell fake new brands in thier shops, e.g fake nike takkies. Why do they treat people buying from a SADC region like this. Why are they creating technical barriers. These goods which are not stolen but bought are only passing through South African land. Please help our people. There can't be an African free trade agreement and on the other hand Border gate employees at a border between Mahikeng and Botswana on the south African side detain people indefinitely and knock off |
|
|
AfCFTA-000-065 |
1.2. Restrictive practices tolerated by governments |
2024-03-01 |
Kenya: KAJIADO COUNTY |
|
Transferred |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
THE COUNTY OF KAJIADO CHARGES TRANSIT FEES OF 2000 KSH PER FOREIGN TRANSIT TRUCKS |
|
|
AfCFTA-000-066 |
3.2. Conformity assessments |
2023-09-19 |
Nigeria: Port of Onne |
Tanzania, United Republic of |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Nigeria has made it mandatory for COTECNA( Private Company) to inspect the sisal fiber that is exported to Nigeria, the same role is performed by the Tanzania Sisal Board which is the regulator of sisal in Tanzania, hence multiple inspections, and Nigeria do not recognize certificate from Tanzania Sisal Board. COTECNA charges an annual registration fee start with USD 1000 and adding up USD 120 per additional product and the fee for a certificate of conformity is USD 350 per consignment. which the Sisal Board does not charge for certificate of conformity |
|
|
Progress:
|
AfCFTA Secretariat in contact with State Parties National Focal points to resolve the NTB |
|
|
AfCFTA-000-084 |
2.1. Customs valuation |
2024-09-25 |
Ghana: Kotoka International Airport |
Rwanda |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Before the goods entered the country the National Coordination Office of AfCFTA for Ghana sent a letter to the CEO of FDA alerting that there were food products entering the country under AfCFTA that were part of the Biashara Afrika program. These products were not fully registered with the Ghana FDA but were registered with the Rwanda FDA. All documents were presented that complied with the requirements of the Ghana Standards Authority. There was a one-week delay in getting authorization to release from the Ghana FDA.
The commercial invoice was presented by the logistics company with the bill of entry to the Ghana Revenue Authority. GRA requested the Export Declaration document from the Government of Rwanda because the values of the goods were in question. This was submitted immediately and two days later, the values were accepted. The next challenge that occurred was the amount paid for freight charges. The Airway Bill with the cost was submitted, and GRA decided to add US$1,030 to the value. The original amount paid was $1275, and supporting documentation was presented, which included the bank deposit slip, the government-issued receipt for payment and the airway bill. The values assessed were NOT changed, and therefore the basis for assessment remained inflated by US$1030. The GRA released the goods on 9 October after the goods were at the airport for 10 days. Swissport issued a storage bill in the amount of $965.45 that was paid before the goods were released. Once these amounts were paid, a bill for Penalties was received from GRA in the amount of GHS 645.05. This amount represented accrued interest for not paying the duty on time. The bill for duties and taxes was paid immediately on receipt. |
|
|
AfCFTA-000-085 |
4.3. Other |
2024-09-24 |
Tanzania, United Republic of: Kabanga |
Burundi |
Transferred |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
URT IS IMPOSING TO BURUNDI A TAX FOR SALUBRITY FOR TRANSIT TRUCKS . |
|
|
AfCFTA-000-087 |
2.4. Samples |
2024-11-20 |
Lesotho: Maseru Bridge |
Lesotho |
Transferred |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Samples being sent by road-freight to South Africa for testing at an accredited laboratory were refused passage.
Company was informed that the only way to send the samples for testing was to send via air |
|
|
AfCFTA-000-088 |
3.1. Technical regulations, and standards including packaging, labelling and marking requirements |
2024-08-01 |
Tanzania, United Republic of: Tunduma |
South Africa |
Transferred |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Certain African countries are now requiring annual renewal of all test reports for our safety footwear crossing their borders. Financially, this translates to approximately R55,000 per test per style. For manufacturers such as ourselves exporting multiple styles annually, the cost could potentially run into millions, significantly impacting our margins but also creating potential delays or disruptions. |
|
|
AfCFTA-000-092 |
2.6. Customs formalities |
2024-09-03 |
Côte d'Ivoire: Noe |
Ghana |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Ladyshes Code Ventures is a registered company in Ghana that import and export agro-based products.
The company received orders to supply cocoa shells to be used as fertilizer in Ghana. Because there was limited supply in Ghana, the company decided to take advantage of the Africa Continental Free Trade Area (AFCFTA) to import from Cote D'Ivoire.
Accordingly, the company visited AFCFTA secretariate to enquire further about the possibility to import the Cocoa Shells from Abidjan/Cote D' Ivoire to Ghana. The secretariat advised that we obtain the AFCFTA Certificate of Origin or ECOWAS Trade Liberalization (ETLS) and that we should visit the Ministry of Industry and Commerce in Abidjan to attain it of which we did.
The Cocoa Shells was bought and unfortunately for us when the truck got to the Noe border, customs requested an authorization from us before the truck (LSR-379YD) would be allowed to cross the border.
Quickly the agent wrote to the Cote D'Ivoire Cocoa and Coffee Board for the authorization on two (2) different occasions but to no avail.
On one faithful day, customs officials asked the driver to take the truck through the scan of which he did.
Afterwards a report issued and confirmed that it was cocoa shells but they still need an authorization to cross the border.
Notwithstanding the above, the driver was arrested, detained, put in cells and now facing trial for not having authorization letter.
Currently, the truck has been there for almost two months, the shells is at its perishable stage, the authorization has still not been issued, and the driver is facing trial.
|
|
|
AfCFTA-000-093 |
2.2. Customs classification |
2025-02-17 |
Tanzania, United Republic of: Customs division, Tanzania Revenue Authority |
Ghana |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Viva&Co Ghana Limited is a Ghanaian manufacturing enterprise which produces glass fibre-reinforced polymer (GFRP) bars. This product is made from the glass fibers and due to technological process afterwards receiving properties that are allowing it to be used as a construction material
As a Ghanaian manufacturer we were exited to start trading with other African countries using preferential treatment provided by AfCFTA.
However having an understanding that Tanzanian authorities might not consider our product as a one which falls under AfCFTA we have decided to test the waters and send first consignment to Tanzania by air. In December 2024, we have received Assessment document from TRA where import duty for our product was imposed at the level of 10%. At that time we were said, that our Certificate of Origin issued by the competent Ghanaian authority is not accepted by TZ customs. Since goods were already in TZ and we had no choice we had to pay full duties and clear the goods.
In order to get official clarification from the Tanzania Revenue Authority, on 15th January, 2025 we have submitted a letter to TRA requesting, inter alia, following:
1) Does HS code 7019.90 in the United Republic of Tanzania receives preferential treatment under Category A products (non-sensitive products) under AfCFTA?
2) Does rate of import duty for products with HS code 7019.90 in 2025 amounts to 5%?
3) Is a Certificate of Origin issued by a competent authority of the Republic of Ghana serves as enough evidence to a fact that goods originated from the Republic of Ghana?
In response, TRA by its letter dated 17th February, 2025 replied to us, that TRA failed to provide guidance/advance ruling on tariff classification and rate of the item listed because Viva failed to provide sufficient documents and justification to help officers to get better understanding of the good.
We are considering this answer as a part of the NTB for our product.
As an evidence to that we can say that, we have sent our product and cleared it under AfCFTA at the Republic of Kenya, where our product received preferential treatment and rate of import duty at the level of 5%. And as Kenya and Tanzania are part of East African Community, there shall be no differences between the classification of the goods.
Having clearance documents from the Kenya on hand on 9th March, 2025 we wrote another letter to the Commissioner for Customs & Excise of TRA and requested to provide another evaluation. However, so far we did not received a reply to this letter.
We consider all mentioned above as a pure NTB from the customs of the Republic of Tanzania. |
|
