SA Customs Procedure Guideline and Chart – 2019

SARS Customs clearance has operated under a Customs Procedure Code (CPC) regime for almost 10 years now. To commemorate the 10-year anniversary, the accompanying CPC Chart and External User Guideline is intended for expert users and newcomers to Customs clearance, alike. In particular, it is important for cross-border traders to understand that the CPC combinations cannot be used indiscriminately; but, have specific meanings and associations with various other Customs rules for the electronic processing of goods for import, transit and export. Attempts to ‘fudge’ a CPC for any particular purpose or reason, may lead to a negative result downstream. Accuracy in the use and application of CPCs results in improved trade compliance, more accurate trade statistical data and fewer declaration amendments hence less penalties and lost time. Over the last decade, it is certain that most international freight forwarders and tertiary Customs training institutes and universities have introduced some or other CPC methodology into their curricula. Feel free to use this guide in support of such curricula. I do however, request that in so doing, the attached material – made freely available to you – will be delivered ‘intact’ in the form as compiled and presented here.

The files can be dowloaded below –

External CPC Tutorial & Self-Assessment Guide 2019

CPC Chart October 2019

Advertisements

Coming soon – A CPC Tutorial on South African Customs Clearance Procedures

A Tutorial and Self Assessment Guide on the application and use of Customs Procedures Codes, for external stakeholders involved in the clearance of goods in South Africa, will shortly be uploaded to this site.

Watch this space!

SA Customs launches AEO Programme

Customs stakeholders with members of the SARS Preferred Trader team 

The stakeholders – from various business associations and Customs umbrella bodies – were very positive after the engagement and were open to form part of an AEO Working Group going forward. The idea is to have representatives from the public and private sectors who would discuss and examine the various issues related to the design and roll-out of the future AEO programme.

An engagement with various key Customs stakeholders was held on 25 September to share Customs’ plans to introduce an Authorised Economic Operator (AEO) programme in South Africa.

The AEO programme follows in the footsteps of Customs’ Preferred Trader programme which offers various benefits to compliant Customs clients. The SARS’ Preferred Trader programme, which was officially launched in May 2017, currently has 105 accredited clients who have been awarded Preferred Trader status. 

The AEO programme – based on the World Customs Organisation’s SAFE Framework of Standards – requires an extra level of safety and security compliance from traders and offers additional benefits, compared to the Preferred Trader programme. It is also open to the entire Customs value-chain, as opposed to only local importers and exporters.

SARS Customs intends to pilot the AEO programme in South Africa before the end of 2019. Clients in the motor vehicle manufacturing industry – representing big businesses have been earmarked to participate in the pilot, as well as SMMEs in the Clothing and Textile Industry. SARS is also in the planning stage of engagements with its major trading partners within BRICS and the EU for the purpose of establishing Mutual Recognition Agreements (MRAs) for its AEO Programme and intends to commence engagements within Africa as well.

At the recent stakeholder engagement session, Customs and Excise Group Executive, Rae Vivier, indicated that the AEO programme was being designed for Customs to partner with the private and public sector to improve voluntary compliance and trade facilitation in the country. She mentioned a few key points that SARS was looking at when it came to AEO, including Mutual Recognition Agreements with SACU/SADC trading partners, close cooperation with Other Government Agencies (OGAs) in South Africa to ensure the programme is recognised by all government departments, exploring modern technology such as block chain and augmenting AEO benefits in order to design a programme that would be beneficial for trade. 

She also mentioned that C&E Trade Services would soon be sending a survey to Customs traders to find out what clients’ requirements are, from a trade facilitation point of view. “We need to collaborate with each other to ensure we design something for the future,” she said. 

Source: South African Revenue Service

WCO SAFE FoS – 2018 Edition

SAFE FoS 2018 Edition2

The WCO has published a 2018 edition of its Framework of Standards. The 2018 version of the SAFE Framework augments the objectives of the SAFE Framework with respect to strengthening co-operation between and among Customs administrations, for example through the exchange of information, mutual recognition of controls, mutual recognition of AEOs, and mutual administrative assistance.

In addition, it calls for enhanced cooperation with government agencies entrusted with regulatory authorities over certain goods (e.g. weapons, hazardous materials) and passengers, as well as entities responsible for postal issues. The Framework now also includes certain minimum tangible benefits to AEOs, while providing a comprehensive list of AEO benefits.

The updated SAFE Framework offers new opportunities for Customs, relevant government agencies and economic operators to work towards a common goal of enhancing supply chain security and efficiency, based on mutual trust and transparency.

Customs officers and trade practitioners also be on the lookout for then new WCO Academy course on SAFE and AEO. The Framework of Standards to Secure and Facilitate Global Trade is a unique international instrument which usher in a safer world trade regime, and also heralds the beginning of a new approach to working methods and partnership for both Customs and business. This E-Learning course aims to present this tool and the benefits of its implementation.

Compilation of Customs Integrity Practices

WCO Compilation of Integrity PracticesThe WCO Secretariat has undertaken a new initiative involving the compilation of good internal control [governance] practices by Customs administrations, and their relationship with external controls. The Secretariat carried out a survey of Members to find out how they implement principle 6 of the Revised Arusha Declaration. The responses indicated that internal control functions can be structured differently and do not operate in the same way.

The survey collected material on the experiences of Members and on their integrity practices, with a view to compiling a good practice guide which Members could use to enhance their integrity strategies, including external oversight. It consisted of 18 questions, and was divided into four sec- tions: (1) Governance of Internal Control; (2) Operational Aspects; (3) Relationship with External Controls; and (4) Sharing Good Practices with Other Members. Responses were received from 58 Member administrations. Download this link.

 

 

Customs Tariff – Mobile-learning course on the HS 2017 Edition

WCO-HS-Mob-App.jpg

A new online course on the 2017 Edition of the Harmonized System (HS) has just been released by the WCO.

Through educational videos and a knowledge test, this course allows you to learn about the major changes in the 2017 version of the HS.

This course is available on CLiKC!, the WCO online learning platform, but is also the first WCO e-learning course which is built using mobile learning technologies. By downloading the app, available on the App Store and on Google Play, users will benefit from more features such as a search engine which indicates if a specific HS code has been amended in the 2017 version.

The app is available for free to anybody who wishes to learn about HS2017.  The added feature for our Member administrations’ Customs officers, who have an account on this website, is that it will be synchronized with CLiKC!

Source: WCO

30th anniversary of the Harmonized System (HS) – a universal language for international trade

HS_30_GalleryThe Harmonized System (HS) allows a world of many languages to speak with one. A multipurpose nomenclature for trade, the HS is one of the most successful instruments developed by the World Customs Organization. Its Convention has 156 Contracting Parties and the HS is used by more than 200 countries, territories and Customs or Economic Unions. It forms the basis for Customs tariffs and statistical nomenclatures around the world, and is used for around 98% of world trade. The year 2018 marks the 30thAnniversary of the HS which came into effect on 1stJanuary, 1988.

As an international standard with global application, the HS plays a key role in facilitating world trade. The HS is used as the basis for:

  • Customs tariffs;
  • Trade policies and quota controls;
  • Collection of international trade statistics and data exchange;
  • Rules of origin;
  • Trade negotiations such as the WTO Information Technology Agreement and Free Trade Agreements;
  • Monitoring of controlled goods, for example, chemical weapons precursors, hazardous wastes and persistent organic pollutants, ozone depleting substances and endangered species;
  • Many Customs controls and procedures, including risk assessments and profiling, electronic data input and matching and compliance activities; and Economic research and analysis..

The HS is crucial to the development of global trade. It is also fundamental to achieving fair, efficient, and effective revenue collection, a primary Strategic Goal of the WCO. In addition, as it provides an essential tool for the simplification and harmonization of customs procedures and provides the basis of knowing what trade goods are crossing borders, it contributes to other major strategic goals of Customs administrations and of the WCO.

The HS is a living language. The HS is now in it’s 6th edition and in the process of preparing for the Seventh Edition of the HS (HS 2022). During the life of the HS, there have been 60 meetings of the Harmonized System Committee (HSC) where 4,144 agenda items were discussed, 10 Recommendations were produced concerning the application of the HS Convention, 2280 classification decisions made and 871 Classification Opinions adopted to ensure the harmonization of classification. On 1st of January 2018, Members can be congratulated on having worked through the 60 HSC meetings, 53 meetings of the Review Sub-Committee (RSC) and 32 meetings of the Scientific Sub-Committee (SSC) to maintain and update the HS to keep it responsive and relevant to current needs.

On the occasion of this anniversary, the WCO calls for the international Customs community, in partnership with the international trade community, to continue to be proactive and pursue its efforts to develop and maintain the HS, especially in terms of the application and uniform interpretation of the HS, so as to safeguard and further grow the benefits of this success. Source: WCO, 3 January 2018.

Hamburg Süd becomes first fully electronic ‘Cargo Reporter’ in South Africa

Hamburg Sud_1

Durban-based Hamburg Süd is the first shipping line – and the first South African Revenue Service (Sars) client – to be granted exemption from the requirement to submit paper manifests to local customs branches, thus becoming the first fully electronic cargo reporter.

While the electronic reporting of pre-arrival manifests to Sars has been a requirement since August 2009, shipping lines are, to date, still required to present pre- and post-arrival paper manifests to local customs branches in order to account for cargo. This was also because the data accuracy of electronic submissions varied significantly between different reporters.

Sars’ implementation of the new Manifest Processing (MPR) system in June 2016, provided industry with the mechanism to also report acquittal manifests electronically. Additionally, the system is able to match customs clearances to their corresponding cargo reports (manifests) in order to identify instances of non-reporting.

Three months after MPR was introduced, the facility for full paperless cargo reporting was made available to shipping lines and airlines who submit both pre-arrival and post-arrival manifests to Sars electronically; submit complete sets of manifests without any omissions; achieve a reporting data accuracy rate of 90% or higher in respect of both their pre-arrival and acquittal manifests reported for each of the three months preceding any application for exemption from paper reporting requirements; and can maintain that level consistently.

A significant benefit to carriers reporting electronically is the cost-saving of hundreds of thousands of rands spent per year in the paper and administrative costs associated with submitting paper manifests to Sars offices. The process is now more efficient allowing for improved risk management, security and confidentiality.

“Hamburg Süd’s core business strategy is to deliver a premium service to our customer, and to achieve this, compliance is a core driver. SARS paperless reporting is in line with our compliance and sustainability strategy,” said Jose Jardim, general manager of Hamburg Süd South Africa.

For Customs, the mandatory submission of cargo reports forms a significant part of the new Customs Control Act (CCA) in order to secure and facilitate the international supply chain.

With the impending implementation of Reporting of Conveyances and Goods (RCG) under the CCA – targeted for 2018 – carriers of internal goods in the sea and air modalities are urged to follow Hamburg Süd’s example and ensure that they become compliant in good time so that they can enjoy a smooth transition to the new legal dispensation.

Paperless cargo reporting would bring an end to one of the last remaining paper-based processes in customs while further contributing to the expedited processing of legitimate trade through an enhanced and integrated risk management environment.

According to a Sars spokesman technical stakeholder sessions to implement the reporting requirements introduced by the new Customs Control Act are due to commence soon and carriers and other supply chain cargo reporters are urged to attend in order to ensure they adapt their systems in good time.

Source: adapted from FTW Online, Venter. L, “German shipping line first Sars client to become fully electronic reporter”, September 14, 2017.

India – Customs introduces ‘self-sealing’ export container procedure

Customs_&_Central_Excise_DKBThe Indian Customs department (CBEC) has allowed self-sealing procedure as of 1 October for containers to be exported, as it aims to move towards a ‘trust based compliance environment’ and trade facilitation for exporters.

In a circular to all Principal Chief Commissioners, the Central Board of Excise and Customs (CBEC) said exporters who were availing facility of sealing at the factory premises under the supervision of customs authorities will be automatically entitled for self-sealing facility.

It said that permission once granted for self-sealing at an approved premise will remain valid unless withdrawn. However, in case of change in the premise, a fresh approval from Customs department will be required.

“The new self-sealing procedure shall come into effect from October 1, 2017. Till then the existing procedure shall continue,” the CBEC said.

It asked field officers to notify a Superintendent-rank officer to act as the nodal officer for the self-sealing procedure.

The officer will be responsible for coordination of the arrangements for installation of reader-scanners.

Earlier in July, the CBEC had said it will introduce the system of self-sealing by 1 September , as against the practise of sealing of containers under the supervision of revenue officials.

However, the CBEC now said that exporters can self-seal containers using the tamper proof electronic seals from 1 October 2017.

Under the new procedure, the exporter will have to declare the physical serial number of the e-seal at the time of filing the online integrated shipping bill or in the case of manual shipping bill before the container is dispatched for the port.

The exporters will directly procure RFID seals from vendors.

“In case, the RFID seals of the containers are found to be tampered with, then mandatory examination would be carried out by the Customs authorities,” the CBEC said.

From October 1, the exporters will need to furnish e-seal number, date of sealing, time of sealing, destination customs station for export, container number and trailer track number to the customs authorities.

In a circular in July, the CBEC had said it endeavours to create a trust based environment where compliance with laws is ensured by strengthening risk management system and Intelligence setup of the department.

Accordingly, CBEC has decided to lay down a simplified procedure for stuffing and sealing of export goods in containers. Source: The India Times > Economic Times, 5 September 2017.

C-TPAT falters – how ‘SAFE’ are the world’s AEO programmes?

AEO group

The following article appeared on Maritime Executive’s webpage titled ‘Can C-TPAT be fixed?‘ authored by Stephen L. Caldwell (2017-07-18). The assessment reveals that Customs-Trade partnerships require continuous review and enhancement to retain their appeal and relevance – a significant challenge for customs and border authorities primarily focussed on compliance with the law. I have appended hyperlinks to the critic’s articles at the bottom of this post.

As the Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism celebrates its fifteenth anniversary, it faces stagnant membership, software train wrecks, questionable assertions of benefits and a much- needed retooling to stay current.

The Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C-TPAT) is a voluntary security program started in the aftermath of 9/11. Member companies sign up and agree to maintain strong supply chain security. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) staff then validate members’ security practices to ensure they meet minimum criteria. Members are then eligible for benefits such as reduced likelihood that CBP will examine their shipments.

C-TPAT currently has about 11,500 members including importers, consolidators, sea carriers, port terminals and foreign manufacturers. Membership is segregated into three “Tiers” with Tier I representing companies that sign up, Tier II representing validated members, and Tier III representing companies with the highest demonstrated level of security.

The program grew rapidly in the beginning, reaching 1,500 members by 2002, 3,000 by 2003, 7,000 by 2004 and 10,000 by 2012. Given this growth, Congress wanted to make sure it was more than just a “sign- up sheet” and asked its watchdog, the Government Accountability Office (GAO), to monitor the program.

GAO’s July 2003 report found that, after companies signed up but before any validation process was completed, CBP went ahead and provided benefits by reducing their scores in its risk algorithm. By May 2003, for example, there were 3,355 members receiving benefits but only 15 had been validated. It took a couple of years to work down the backlog.

Even then, GAO’s March 2005 report found the validation process was not rigorous enough to ensure that a company’s security practices were reliable, accurate and effective. Its 2008 report found that CBP still faced challenges in verifying that C-TPAT members met minimum security criteria. It also found that CPB’s records management system did not allow managers to determine whether C-TPAT members complied with program requirements.

Midlife Crisis

Michael Laden, head of customs compliance firm Trade Innovations in Eden Prairie, Minnesota, has been helping industry clients with C-TPAT since 2005. Laden has been a licensed customs broker since 1981 and served as Director of Global Trade Services at Target Corporation prior to founding his own firm. He believes that C-TPAT is having a midlife crisis: “The stagnation of membership levels in the 10,000-12,000 range is an indication that industry has lost its appetite for C-TPAT.” He cites a problematic history of revolving short-term leadership as part of the problem.

Laden says the program reached its nadir with the August 2015 release of the much-anticipated Portal 2.0 software, designed to further automate the validation process. “The release was rushed into service with limited capabilities and minimal pre-testing,” he explains. “It was a complete train wreck. The data from the previous version just disappeared. In some cases, not only did the data disappear but the company disappeared too.”

The problems with Portal 2.0 were documented in GAO’s most recent report of February 2017, which found that Portal 2.0 incorrectly altered C-TPAT members’ certifications or security profiles, impairing the ability of C-TPAT specialists to identify and complete required security validations. Portal 2.0 problems also prevented C-TPAT members from accessing their own data and responding to validation reports.

Since C-TPAT was presented as a partnership with CBP benefiting from its knowledge of member companies’ security practices and companies benefiting from reduced scrutiny of their shipments, CBP in 2012 developed a software “Dashboard” to track such benefits. It used the Dashboard in its Program Benefits Reference Guide to assert that entries filed by C-TPAT members were less likely to undergo a security examination than those filed by non-members. Tier III members, for example, were nine times less likely to be examined, and Tier II members 3.5 times less likely.

However, the February 2017 GAO analysis found that C-TPAT members’ shipments did not consistently experience lower examinations, hold rates or processing times compared to non-member shipments. When GAO shared its preliminary analysis with C-TPAT officials, they acknowledged that they had never completed system verification, acceptance-testing, or checks on the data in the Dashboard. GAO’s conclusion was that the data was unreliable going back to the Dashboard’s introduction in 2012, and CBP to this day remains unable to determine the benefits of C-TPAT membership.

Industry Finds Its Own Solutions  

While industry was anxious for definitive information on membership benefits, it decided to find its own solutions to some of the costs. One key cost involves security audits of the supply chain, particularly in foreign countries. Shippers and importers got together and created the Supplier Compliance Audit Network (SCAN) to address costs, “audit fatigue,” inconsistent reporting and varying compliance requirements.

Companies pay a sliding fee to become part of SCAN, where they can commission audits and get access to completed audits, which could obviate the need for a new audit of a particular supplier. In 2016, SCAN completed more than 3,379 audits in 51 countries. Its board of directors represents some of the largest importers in the U.S., and its audits are conducted by proven service providers such as Bureau Veritas and business standards company BSI.

Dan Purtell, Senior Vice President of 30 BSI’s Supply Chain Solutions Group, says, “SCAN members clearly see the benefit of the C-TPAT program. These companies are the ‘who’s who’ of the Tier III C-TPAT community and truly are the supply chain security thought-leaders within the private sector. Member companies compete on the shelf but unite to secure trade, mitigate supply chain risk, and identify and correct security deficiencies.”

Purtell notes that “More than 15,000 such deficiencies have been remedied by SCAN since its inception just two years ago. No other association has done more to address global supply chain exposures.”

Next Steps

Despite problems, there are signs of improvement according to Trade Innovations’ Laden, starting with the decision by the last CBP Commissioner to make the Director of C-TPAT a more permanent position. “This should add continuity to the leadership of the program,” he explains, “allowing it to reach its true potential.” Laden also praises the new Director, Elizabeth Schmelzinger, for her openness to listen to industry.

“We’re retooling the program so that it stays current,” says Schmelzinger. “There are a lot of factors that have changed over the years. We want to make sure the minimum standards are still relevant.” CBP had enlisted its industry-based Commercial Operations Advisory Committee (COAC) to help it validate those minimum standards and develop C-TPAT best practices with the results to be announced at COAC’s March 1 meeting in Washington, DC. However, it was announced at the meeting that the results had been delayed to “make sure they get it right.”

When asked whether the intent of revisiting the minimum standards was to increase membership, Schmelzinger responded: “C-TPAT’s standards remain high. It’s not all about joining the program. We also suspend companies and remove them from the program. So, there is a constant churn in membership.”

She also described the evolving roles of C-TPAT and CBP’s newer Trusted Trader program, noting that “C-TPAT was foundational to any Trusted Trader status.” In other words, the first element of a Trusted Trader program was to ensure security. Then the elements of compliance with rules and regulations would be taken into consideration.

Ultimately, C-TPAT and Trusted Trader would transition into a global safety net whereby low-risk importers and exporters would have their goods expedited through customs processes in both the U.S. and its trading partners.

AEOs and Mutual Recognition

In international parlance, security partnership arrangements like C-TPAT are called Authorized Economic Operator (AEO) programs. The U.N. reported that, as of 2016, some 79 countries had established AEO programs and an additional 16 planned to launch such programs in the near future. The E.U., consisting of 28 countries, has the largest program, and its Union Customs Code of 2013 aims to, among other things, reinforce swifter customs procedures for compliant AEOs.

Many countries with AEO programs, including the U.S. with its C-TPAT, have signed “mutual recognition agreements” whereby two countries’ customs administrations agree to recognize the AEO authorization issued under the other’s program and provide reciprocal benefits to companies. As of May 2016, some 40 bilateral agreements had been concluded with 30 more being negotiated. According to the U.N., these bilateral agreements will form the basis for multilateral agreements. To date, the U.S. has signed 11 agreements with, among others, the E.U., Canada, Mexico, Japan and Korea.

C-TPAT Director Schmelzinger adds that “We are also restructuring the program to include exports so that it is more in line with the structure of other countries’ AEO programs. As part of our agreements with countries that have AEO programs, those countries will honor a commitment to our exporters who are low- risk. This will help U.S. exporters establish a foothold in those markets.”

One Step at a Time

Michael Laden is more skeptical of mutual recognition, calling it a “noble gesture” but adding there will be little enthusiasm from industry. Most of his clients are importers and will not get any benefit from the new export component.

Regarding exporters, he says that “Since CBP so rarely examines exports, the usual benefit offered by C-TPAT membership does not exist for that part of industry.” In Laden’s view, “Let’s fix C-TPAT before we move on to harmonize customs security and compliance throughout the world.”    Source: Maritime-Executive

Recommended reading –

 

Mozambique – Single Road Cargo Manifest Phase II

Mozambique flagThe Maputo Corridor Logistics Initiative (MCLI) recently published a communication informing it’s stakeholders about the Single Road Cargo Manifest as received from the Mozambican Revenue Authority (MRA).

The MRA has informed MCLI that the 2nd phase of the Single Road Cargo Manifest process will come into effect from the 16th of June 2017, when all international road carriers transporting goods to Mozambique through the Ressano Garcia border post will be required to submit the Road Cargo Manifest on the Single Electronic Window platform in compliance with national and international legislation. MRA Service Order Nr 17/AT/DGA/2017, in both Portuguese and English, is attached for your consideration.

For information and full compliance by all members of staff of this service, both (National and Foreign) International Cargo Carriers, Clearing Agents, Business Community, Intertek and other relevant stakeholders, within the framework of the ongoing measures with a view to adequate procedures related to the submission of the road cargo manifest, for goods imported through the Ressano Garcia Border Post, in strict compliance to both the national and international legislations, it is hereby announced that, the pilot process for transfer of competencies in preparation and submission of the road cargo manifest to Customs from the importer represented by his respective Clearing Agent to the Carrier is in operation since December 2016.

Indeed, the massification process will take place from 15th of April 2017 to 15th of June 2017, a period during which all international carriers (national and foreign) who use the Ressano Garcia Border, are by this means notified to register themselves for the aforementioned purposes following the procedures attached herewith to the present Service Order.

As of 16th of June 2017, the submission of the road cargo manifest into the Single Electronic Window (SEW) for the import regime, at Ressano Garcia Border, shall be compulsory and must be done by the carrier himself.

International road carriers must therefore register for a NUIT number with the Mozambican Revenue Authority between the 15th of April and the 15th of June 2017 and the necessary application form is included. Road carriers are urged to do so as soon as possible to enable the continued smooth flow of goods through the border post.

Specific details can be found here! 

Source: MCLI

China Customs – pilots Independent Customs Declaration and Tax Payment for Imported Goods

China Customs EmblemAudit firm KPMG reports that the General Administration of Customs (GAC) will reform the existing customs clearance procedure for imported goods, according to a GAC Circular on Carrying out Pilot Reform of Tax Collection and Administration Procedure issued on 29 October 2016. Under the current procedure, review of the customs declaration is required before goods are released. This reform is designed to further guide import and export enterprises to be self-disciplined and law-abiding, with the principle stated as “honesty and observance of the law brings convenience; dishonesty and irregularity leads to punishment” to improve customs clearance efficiency.

Content of pilot reform  includes the following elements:

Independent customs declaration and tax payment – when importing goods, enterprises should submit customs declarations truthfully and accurately in advance, calculate tax payable and surcharges and handle payment-related procedures on their own.

Review of elements relating to tax calculation after release of goods  – generally, goods will be released after enterprises complete the customs declarations and tax payment procedures on their own. Afterwards, the customs authority will spot-check and review the valuation, classification and origin of the imported goods of the enterprises. In special cases, the authority will inspect the customs declaration in advance.

Proactive disclosure scheme After release of goods – enterprises are encouraged to report to the authorities in writing if they are aware of any of their own violations against customs regulations. Enterprises which the customs authority believes to be voluntary disclosers of their own irregularities will be less punished or free from punishment. For enterprises which have disclosed their irregularities and paid back taxes proactively, late fees can be reduced or eliminated.

For more details access the KPMG report here! Source: KPMG

SARS publishes updated EDI User Manual

sars-edi-user-manualSARS has been operating Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) with its external stakeholders since 2001. More than 98% of all customs declaration (CUSDEC) transactions are today submitted electronically to Customs and the electronic submission of multimodal cargo reports (CUSCAR) is steadily increasing. Today, declaration processing is fully electronic end-to-end thanks to the availability of highly established EDI and Customs software service providers supporting the local customs and logistics community. SARS has also recently introduced a benefit for compliant cargo reporters who will be absolved of certain manual (paper) submission requirements once they attain an acceptable level of electronic submission compliance and data accuracy.

The ultimate objective is to ensure that all Customs-to-Business (C2B) transactions are electronic to enable full supply chain connectivity between the South African business community and Customs. This in turn enables the possibility of SARS accrediting or approving ‘supply chains’ as opposed to just individual trader segments (importers and exporters). The extent of electronic compliance is also a pivotal requirement for traders operating under the new Customs Control Act, to be enacted in the future.

SARS overall EDI capability extends further than declarations and cargo reports. In recent years Customs-to-Government (C2G) messaging has also been successfully established between SARS and the Department of Trade and Industry (dti) as well as the South African Reserve Bank (SARB). SARS is also engaging other government stakeholders concerning IT connectivity and data exchange.

Moreover, developments for cross-border Customs-to-Customs (C2C) data exchange are also in the pipeline and could come to fruition with the partner administrations in Mozambique and Swaziland in the foreseeable future. These initiatives will usher in increased supply chain connectivity through active use of the Unique Consignment Reference (UCR) between participating customs administrations. The ultimate objective here is the creation of mutual recognition benefits for local and cross-border traders based on their accreditation status agreed between the participating customs administrations.

The SARS Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) Manual (which can be downloaded from the SARS EDI webpage) has been updated with the latest versions of SARS Edifact Data Mapping Guides as well as improved diagrams explaining the functional composition of the various electronic messages specified for Customs processing. Also included are the requirements for registering as an EDI user with SARS.

The manual includes recent updates relating to cargo reporting (manifests) as well as the updated customs declaration message incorporating recent inclusion of customs surety, penalty and forfeiture requirements. The latter enhancement removes another document based requirement (the Form DA70 Provisional Payment) for Customs Brokers with the view streamlining data requirements, enhancing customs billing and customs status reporting with the trade and logistics community. This EDI Manual will be an important document over the coming months and years in that it will feature updated electronic requirements in support of the new Customs Control Act. Watch this space!

WCO’s “Guidelines”on Customs-Tax Cooperation

customs-taxThe “Guidelines for strengthening cooperation and exchange of information between Customs and Tax authorities at the national level” have been formulated with the support of WCO Members and development partners, especially the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC). The Guidelines aim to provide reference guidance to Customs and Tax authorities who wish to go further in their cooperation and develop operational models which enable agencies to work together to their mutual benefit.

Although there is no limit to the ways in which these two agencies can work together, and countries should consider new and innovative methods based on their organizational structure, needs and operational requirements, the Guidelines highlight some overarching principles and associated benefits concerning enhancement of Customs-Tax cooperation.

The WCO Guidelines for Strengthening Cooperation and the Exchange Of Information between Customs and Tax Authorities at the National Level are intended to supplement the ongoing initiatives in this domain. The aim is to provide general, overarching principles for cooperation which take account of operational considerations, bearing in mind the different organizational structures and national requirements of countries. It is expected that these Guidelines will be useful to Member Customs administrations in developing a sustainable cooperation mechanism (including a MoU where needed) tailored to their unique situation, in close cooperation with their respective Tax authorities

In particular, the Guidelines provide a comprehensive overview of the enablers for mutual cooperation and the exchange of information, address the scope and remit of information exchange, cover different information exchange mechanisms, list the type of activities that Customs and Tax authorities may undertake together, and provide key principles and points to consider when developing a Memorandum of Understanding/Agreement (MOU/MOA). Source: WCO

Streamlined export clearance ‘worth billions’

trusted-trader-transparent

A new customs program aimed at bringing Australia into line with other major trading nations could substantially cut costs when exporting to Asia.

The Department of Immigration and Border Protection (DIPB) believes that the benefits to the Australian economy of this streamlined export process could be worth up to $1.5 billion for every one per cent increase in efficiency of transport and logistics supply chains.

The pilot for the Australian Trusted Trader (ATT) program launched this month will eventually allow accredited export businesses to gain streamlined customs and security clearance in countries that have a mutual recognition agreement with Australia.

Similar programs have already been adopted by more than 58 international jurisdictions – including China, India, Japan, Singapore, Taiwan and South Korea – since being introduced by the World Customs Organisation (WCO) in 2005.

Known generally as Authorised Economic Operator (AEO) schemes, they provide a framework of standards for trading partners in recognising each other’s customs and security regimes.

According to the Centre for Customs and Excise Studies (CCES) at Charles Stuart University, the goods of exporters who are accredited to the New Zealand AEO scheme are 3.5 times less likely to be inspected or held up on arrival in the US.

Professor David Widdowson, head of school at CCES, and a leading advocate and advisor on the introduction of the ATT, says that accreditation to an AEO is often an imperative for many international supply chains.

“When exporters send goods overseas and they get held up, there’s basically two ways that countries are dealing with them,” he said. “There those that come from a known secure supply chain – such those where a mutual AEO agreement is in place – and they’re treated as low-risk; and then there’s the rest, which are treated as high-risk.

“Without being part of an AEO or trusted trader agreement, Australian exporters are more often likely to fall into the latter category.

“In some jurisdictions it can be very difficult to be accepted onto an AEO scheme as an importer, so big multinationals often actively look for partners and suppliers who are already accredited to a scheme in their own country – and won’t deal with anyone who isn’t. They don’t want to run the risk of their non-accredited parts of their supply chain compromising their status on the scheme.

“So we can see how AEOs are actually now being used by commerce as a key indicator of the standard that business is looking for in terms of protecting their international supply chain.”

The aims of the ATT include expedited border clearance, reduced or priority inspections and priority access to trade services. The DIPB will also explore the possibilities for duty deferral and streamlined reporting arrangements.

Accredited trusted traders are to be assigned an account manager within the DIPB, as a single point of contact to assist with customs and export issues across all federal departments.

To apply to enter the program, Australian exporters and supply-chain businesses – including freight-forwarders, brokers and logistics firms – first need to obtain a self-assessment questionnaire from DIPB.

The information submitted by the business is then audited by the DIPB to ensure that the necessary security systems and procedures are in place, before accreditation can be given. There is no licence or application fee for the program, and Prof Widdowson expects the process to take “a few weeks if it’s a major company or it could be a few days if it’s a medium-sized company”.

The pilot phase will be completed in this current financial year, and only four companies will be taking part initially: Boeing Aerostructures Australia, Devondale Murray Goulburn, Mondelez Australia and Techwool Trading.

Teresa Conolan, assistant secretary of the Trusted Trader and Industry Branch at the DIPB, said more companies would be included in the pilot as it progresses.

“We’re hoping to have around 40 companies over the 12 months in the pilot, across a range of business sectors, so we can actually test the processes and make sure they are not too burdensome,” she said.

“Over four years we’re expecting around 1500 companies to join the scheme – so it’s certainly not going to cover all business.”

Conolan added that preliminary discussions with some countries were already underway, though negotiations on agreements were unlikely to begin until the ATT was fully launched next July.

She said Australia’s key trading partners would be the priority, but expected the negotiations and implementation of agreements with some of them to take a further year.

The rollout of the pilot program follows years of pressure from the Australian business community to embrace AEO, after initial reluctance by the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service (ACBPS).

Following an article by The Australian Financial Review on March 20, 2013, which flagged Australia’s non-participation, business leaders sponsored a research study, undertaken by the CCES, which found that the scheme could be highly beneficial. Business groups began to lobby the federal government, by which time the ACBPS had reversed its attitude and agreed to consider implementing an Australian scheme.

For more information on the Australian Trusted Trader scheme, visit – trustedtraders@borders.gov.au

Also read: