Category / SAFE Framework

by Mike Poverello

SADC launches National Customs Business Forums

Namibia Customs Business Forum Launch – 22nd May 2013 in Windhoek, Namibia.
Zambia Customs to Business Forum (ZCBF) launched on April 26th, 2013.

The SADC Sub-Committee on Customs Cooperation (SCCC) emphasizes great importance in strengthening cooperation between Customs and the private sector in order to give Customs Administrations in the SADC region an opportunity to offer a more efficient and effective customs service to their clients. The overall purpose of Customs to business partnerships is to ensure a partnership and dialogue structure of key stakeholders in the trading chain that contributes to trade facilitation, improvements in customs operations and higher compliance by the trading community.

The SCCC during its 20th meeting made the recommendation to establish National Customs Business Forums (NCBF) in all SADC Member States. Recently National Customs Business forums were established and launched in Malawi (September 2012), Zambia (April 2013) and Namibia (May 2013).  The NCBFs are meant to facilitate a stronger partnership between Customs and business at national level, promoting a regular and results oriented dialogue, and taking action on existing challenges in the supply chain of goods.

The Zambia Customs to Business Forum (ZCBF) was launched on April 26th, 2013 by the Deputy Minister of Commerce Trade & Industry in the presence of Commissioner General of the Zambia Revenue Authority (ZRA), Commissioner Customs (ZRA) and several public sector and business representative organizations which are important players in the Trading chain. In his keynote address, the Minister said “As a minister responsible for trade, i am profoundly delighted at seeing such initiatives being brought to the fore as this will help in improving the ease of doing business in Zambia. Furthermore, it is important to state that such initiatives are in line with best practices as stipulated under both multilateral organisations namely; the World customs organisation and the World trade organisation”.

The Namibia Customs Business Forum was launched by the Finance Minister Saara Kuugongelwa-Amadhila on the 22nd May 2013 in Windhoek, Namibia. The forum is envisaged to become “a bi-annual dialogue forum that brings together public and private sector [actors] in the trading chain to continually assess and adopt measures that promote effective trade facilitation, as well as enhance customs operations and higher compliance,” a statement from the Finance Ministry says.

In May 2013, the SCCC endorsed a Private Sector involvement strategy which additionally recommends the establishment of a Regional Customs Business Forum (between Customs and its stakeholders) in a bid to facilitate the implementation of the SADC Protocol on Trade. Source: SADC Secretariat.

by Mike Poverello

Singapore and China’s Mutual Recognition Becomes a Reality

Director-General of Singapore Customs Fong Yong Kian and Vice Minister of the General Administration of China Customs Sun Yibiao (both seated), signed the China-Singapore MRA at the WCO Council Sessions in June 2012. The signing was witnessed by Chairperson of the WCO Council and Chairman of the Revenue Commissioners of Ireland, Josephine Feehily and WCO Secretary-General Kunio Mikuriya.

Director-General of Singapore Customs Fong Yong Kian and Vice Minister of the General Administration of China Customs Sun Yibiao (both seated), signed the China-Singapore MRA at the WCO Council Sessions in June 2012. The signing was witnessed by Chairperson of the WCO Council and Chairman of the Revenue Commissioners of Ireland, Josephine Feehily and WCO Secretary-General Kunio Mikuriya.

General Administration of Customs of Singapore has announced that the Mutual Recognition Arrangement (MRA), signed with Customs of the People’s Republic of China went into effect on March 15, 2013.  Following the effective date, both Singapore’s STP-Plus companies and China’s Class AA accredited companies will be recognized as Authorized Economic Operators (AEOs) of the respective countries.

This recognition as AEOs allows Customs from both countries to grant clearance facilitation for accredited AEOs such as lower examination rates, priority inspections, and priority handling of customs clearance documents at each country’s port.  Included in the announcement were specific instructions for how importers in both Singapore and China should fill out customs forms when receiving exported goods from one of their respective AEOs.

For goods exported directly to Singapore from a Chinese Class AA company, the Chinese exporter would need to provide the Singapore importer with the 10-digit Customs Registration Code to place on their import declarations to Singapore along with inputting the “AEO code” into the portal for mutual recognition purposes and benefits of AEO.  The AEO code is comprised of “AEO”, “CN” and the 10-digit Customs Registration Code.

For goods exported to China from a Singapore STP-Plus company, the Chinese importer must fill in the “AEO code” of the Singapore’s exporter in the “remark column” in their import declarations to receive mutual recognition benefits.  The format for the AEO code is as follows:  “AEO (written in English half-width characters and capital letters)” plus “<” plus “SG” plus “12-digit AEO code” plus “>”.  For instance, if the AEO code of one Singapore STP-Plus company is AEOSG123456789012, then the remark column filled in by the Chinese importer would read as “AEO”.

The MRA signed between China and Singapore is but one example of several security programs in different countries making it easier for trusted traders to move goods through the supply chain. Other countries that also participate in MRAs include:

  • US Customs & Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C-TPAT) which has MRAs in place with Canada’s Partners in Protection (PIP), New Zealand’s Secure Export Scheme Program (SES), Jordan’s Golden List Program (GLP), Japan’s Authorized Economic Operator Program (AEO), Korea’s AEO, and the European Union’s ( EU) AEO
  • European Union (EU) AEO which has MRAs in place with Canada’s PIP, Japan’s AEO, Australia’s AEO, New Zealand’s SES, and US C-TPAT
  • Japan Customs has MRAs in place with New Zealand’s SES, EU’s AEO, Canada’s PIP, Korea’s AEO, and Singapore’s STP-Plus
  • Singapore Customs has signed MRAs in place with Canada’s PIP, Korea’s AEO, Japan’s AEO, and China’s Class AA

Part of participating in any security program is the ability to assess and manage risk across the supply chain.  This includes soliciting and analysing information received from every partner within the supply chain to corrective actions and best practices.  While are security programs are still voluntary in nature, companies that take advantage of them are reaping benefits such as faster customs clearance and less inspections. Source: Integration Point

Related articles
by Mike Poverello

US C-TPAT member exports to receive expedited EU customs clearance

4209_image002January, 2013 saw the United States and the European Union implemented the mutual recognition arrangement for their respective supply chain security programmes. The US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) administers the Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C-TPAT), which is now recognised as equivalent to the European Union’s Authorised Economic Operator (AEO) programme.

Should they elect to allow CBP to share certain information with the European Union, US importers authorised under C-TPAT will be considered secure and their exports will receive a lower-risk score by the customs administrations of EU member states. In practice, certification translates into time and money savings for parties dealing with trusted operators. In that sense, certified operators are successfully marketing their status as a distinguishing competitive advantage.

Both programmes are voluntary, security-based programmes aimed at improving supply chain security. As programme members, importers receive lower risk-assessment scores in customs administrations’ computer targeting software. Therefore, members are subject to fewer security-related inspections and controls. The mutual recognition arrangement between the United States and the European Union allows for members of one programme to receive reciprocal benefits when exporting to the other jurisdiction.

However, not all C-TPAT members qualify for full AEO benefits. Only Tiers 2 and 3 C-TPAT importers (considered as more secure) may receive a lower risk-assessment score, and consequently undergo fewer inspections when exporting to an EU member state. In addition, in order to receive these benefits, C-TPAT members must expressly elect for the United States to share certain information with the European Union and certify that their exports meet all applicable requirements.

The mutual recognition arrangement may also exempt members’ facilities from undergoing validation site visits by both administrations when initially being certified or during revalidation visits. This benefit is available for every tier of C-TPAT membership.

The mutual recognition arrangement applies only to C-TPAT importers which also act as exporters. A C-TPAT manufacturer will benefit from the arrangement only if it also acts as the US exporter. For example, if a US company owns a C-TPAT-certified manufacturer in Mexico that directly ships merchandise to the European Union, those shipments will not benefit from the arrangement.

CBP’s targeting system recognises AEO-certified entities by their manufacturer identification number. Certified manufacturers will receive benefits under the arrangement regardless of whether they are the EU exporter. A certified exporter which is not a manufacturer may obtain a manufacturer identification number to gain from the benefits of mutual recognition. As such, AEO-certified manufacturers and exporters may benefit under the arrangement, but only US exporters are eligible for benefits.

Although the United States and the European Union have recently announced the possibility of a US-EU free trade agreement, this arrangement is a trade facilitation measure that companies may elect to participate in immediately, regardless of the results of potential free trade agreement negotiations.

The United States also has mutual recognition arrangements for supply chain security with Canada, Japan, Jordan, Korea, New Zealand and Taiwan. Source:  Sidley Austin LLP, and The International Law Office

Related articles
by Mike Poverello

AU considers continental Customs Connectivity

500px-Emblem_of_the_African_Union_svgThe African Union (AU) Technical Working Group on Interconnectivity has developed a ‘draft’ Strategy and Roadmap for Customs-2-Customs IT Connectivity on the continent. This strategy will effectively guide the process of the continental Interconnectivity of Computerized Customs Clearance and Information Systems in Africa. The ‘draft’ Roadmap envisages that the process of interconnectivity will take a period of 11 years with a total of four stages.

Stage 1 – by 2014, National states should have engaged one another (within their respective regions) on the matter of Customs connectivity.

Stage 2 – between 2013 and 2017, the AU has an extremely ambitious expectation that national Customs Administrations would have (at least commenced) if not completed Customs ‘connectivity’ within the various Regional Economic Communities (RECs) in Africa.

Stage 3 – between 2017 and 2020, the suggestion that Customs interconnectivity will be occurring between RECs across the African continent – North Africa: AMU; West Africa: ECOWAS and UEMOA; Central Africa: ECCAS and CEMAC; East Africa: COMESA, EAC, IGAD; and South Africa: SADC and SACU.

Stage 4 – between 2020 and 2025, consolidation of Customs IT-Connectivity across the RECs.

The ‘draft’ Strategy spells out the strategic objectives and activities at the national, regional and continental level that will need to be taken for this to be realized. The strategy also indicates the roles of all the major stake holders in the process.  This comes in the wake of several regional and bi-lateral initiatives to bridge the ‘cross-border divide’ through electronic exchange of structured customs information.

All in all an ambitious plan structured to meet the equally ambitious deadlines of the coming into being of an African Union. The real challenge in all of this lies with the Member States in being able to set aside and commit to regional and continental ambitions, over and above the already pressing and complex national agenda’s of their respective sovereign countries. In context of the African Union, the multiplicity of RECs in themselves add a layer of duplication…..is an “integrated Customs Union” in Africa going to continue to permit the existence of the respective RECs or will they be absorbed into the African Union? Member states need to begin speaking up on this issue otherwise accept being swamped by onerous commitments. No doubt the ‘international donor agencies’ wait eagerly in the wings to capitalise on Africa’s deficiencies.

Related articles
by Mike Poverello

Building Resilience in Supply Chains

WEF - Building Resilience in Supply ChainsOn 24 January 2013, the Secretary General of the WCO, Kunio Mikuriya, participated in a press conference dedicated to the launch of the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) Building Resilience in Supply Chains 2013 report. Sander van ‘t Noordende, Accenture’s Group Chief Executive for Management Consulting, introduced the report and its major findings, such as the top supply chain risks that include extreme weather, natural disasters, physical and cyber security threats, along with economic and political volatility. He highlighted that the report argued the need for a coherent and consistent framework to deal with supply chain resilience, partnerships between government, Customs and businesses, and the sharing information flows for risk assessment purposes.

Secretary General Mikuriya pointed out that supply chain resilience is very important for Customs, whose functions include ensuring that legitimate trade continues even in cases of disruption, an issue which has been addressed by a set of standards and instruments developed by the WCO, in particular, the 2011 WCO Resolution on the Role of Customs in Natural Disaster Relief.  He also stressed the importance of public-private partnerships in order to share security responsibility with trusted traders through the implementation of the WCO SAFE Framework of Standards to Secure and Facilitate Global Trade and its integral Authorized Economic Operator (AEO) programme.

Cooperation at intergovernmental level with longstanding partners of the WCO, such as the International Maritime Organization (IMO), the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), the Universal Postal Union (UPU), the International Air Transport Association (IATA), the International Road Transport Union (IRU) and the World Shipping Council (WSC), was also emphasized by the Secretary General as being key to harmonizing standards and creating synergies among different stakeholders. In addition, he pointed out that transparency and trust among stakeholders in supply chains was of the utmost importance, as this led to a global cohesive approach and even stronger partnerships.

The Secretary General of the IMO, Koji Sekimizu, addressed the concerns of the maritime sector, in particular, the sustainability of international transportation within the context of supply chain resilience. He mentioned that along with the WCO, the IMO has built its approach on risk assessment and risk management, resulting in the adoption of the International Ship and Port Facility Security Code (ISPS Code), a comprehensive set of measures to enhance the security of ships and port facilities. He also touched on the issues of port infrastructure, piracy and port security, and underlined the importance of cooperation with other stakeholders, such as the WCO and ICAO. Source: WCO

by Mike Poverello

SARS – Modernisation milestone materialising

Interfront logo2

Its been some time since I’ve penned an article on the South African Customs Modernisation Programme. Aside from it being the SA Revenue Service’s prerogative to communicate and publish notice of its internal developments and plans, some caution always needs to be exercised observing bureaucratic protocol, ensuring that the official message is forthcoming from SARS. Given the widespread interest in the programme as well as the development of the Interfront [formerly Tatis] integrated customs border management solution (iCBMs) as a wholly owned development of South Africa, I think it not out of place to inform the public interest on this matter. Readership of this blog has an extensive global following and a specific interest in Interfront developments.

Unlike ASYCUDA, Sofix, e-Biscus, and a host of other integrated Customs-tailored business solution offerings, Interfront’s solution for SARS will not include a client user frontend. In other words, the Interfront system (iCBMs) will essentially drive declaration backend processing. This comprises a fully integrated declaration validation and processing engine, supported by a sophisticated tariff engine and duty calculator; the latter offering future web-based services for customs users. In order to compliment the SARS corporate and standardised user interface approach, the iCBMs interfaces with SARS’s revenue accounting, trader registration, risk management, and case management workflow systems. Not only does this leverage cost savings and efficiencies, but ensures a unified ‘workspace’ for all of SARS employees.

Much of the Interfront technology is therefore hidden to the customs user, with traders experiencing an identical interface with SARS Customs, as it does today. From the outset of the Customs Modernisation Programme (July 2010), the approach has followed pragmatic migration of customs electronic clearance processing – across its 30 odd legacy systems – towards an integrated clearance process that could mimic the functionality featured on the new iCBMs. The modern technology and scalability of Interfront offers the ability and agility to enhance service levels and efficiencies to another level. At the same time, operational policies and procedures have been modernised with the aim and intent of meeting the requirements contained in Customs new Control and Duty Bills.

Much of the ‘change’ experienced by both customs officers and the trade over the last 2 years has prepared the country for the eventual migration to the new system. These have been significant, and at times painful changes, not without anxiety and apprehension. Over the last 6 months an even more painstaking and taxing effort has been expended by the Customs Modernisation Team, Interfront and other service providers in addressing a seamless harmonisation and switchover of customs business from disparate legacy systems to a new customs technology platform. The “Parallel Run” has witnessed the daily comparison of customs clearance data between the old and new systems, identification and logging of disparities (bugs), modification of the two environments to ensure the same result is achieved. This has not been an easy and simple process, as any country having undergone a system switchover can attest to.

This month, February 2013, service providers to the customs industry are readying their resources to commence user testing. This implies that service providers (computer bureaus) will engage their clients to prepare test cases for submission to customs to test the new Interfront process. Given that Customs legacy systems and Interfront have been synchronised to a high level of compatibility, the process for traders should not reveal much difference to what they have experienced over the period of modernisation over the last 2 years. One area of note will be the structure and content of Customs Response messages. Traders will have to familiarise themselves and test their interpretation of these messages to ensure they perform or respond appropriately to the instructions.

Satya Prasad Sahu - Technical Officer at the WCO provided members of SACU, SADC and the EAC comprehensive guidelines for the development of the GNC Utility Block concept in Africa (February 2012)

Satya Prasad Sahu – Senior Technical Officer at the WCO provided members of SACU, SADC and the EAC comprehensive guidelines for the development of the GNC Utility Block concept in Africa (February 2012)

In terms of compliance and compatibility with international developments, the new iCBMs is engineered on the WCO Data Model. All relevant simplification processes as exemplified in the Revise Kyoto Convention are likewise factored into its design, although not all of these will be immediately available with the initial rollout. Introduction of the new Customs Control and Duty Acts will require these principles to be fully functional and operational, however.

The WCO Data Model is the pivotal design component around which most of the new system’s business and validation rules are centred. This in itself is a major achievement as it bodes well for all future ‘cross border’, customs-2-customs connectivity initiatives. In this regard SARS is well advanced in bilateral and multilateral projects with key trading partners, for example IBSA (cross-global trilateral initiative), and in Africa, we are working with SACU, SADC, COMESA and the EAC to bring about regional customs connectivity. On a bilateral basis, initiatives with Swaziland, Mozambique and Zimbabwe are developing nicely. A significant contributor to cross border/cross global customs connectivity is undoubtedly the excellent work brought about by the dedicated members of the WCO’s Globally Networked Customs adhoc workgroup. In June last year, the WCOs policy Commission unanimously endorsed the GNC architecture and Utility Block approach. African customs connectivity efforts have likewise adopted this model which ensures harmonisation and uniformity in approach, legal dispensation, data exchange, risk management and procedure. The WCO moreover plays a overseeing role in many of these GNC and capacity building initiatives across the globe – this assists greatly in sharing and learning of experiences.

I would think that the above should be sufficient to wet the appetites of customs practitioners, traders, ICT technocrats, and perhaps even legislators and bureaucrats on developments in South Africa. Subsequent to the launch of Interfront SARS will make its ideas and strategy relating to forthcoming initiatives known to trade and the business community. A Year of Innovation? Yes, and hopefully a happy tale that will bode well for the South African trade and supply chain logistics community, and some good fortune for Interfront in its business development in the region and beyond!

Related articles
by Mike Poverello

2012 in review

The WordPress.com stats helper monkeys prepared a 2012 annual report for “What Happened to the Portcullis?“. A special thanks to everyone who has browsed regularly, commented or contributed to this blog. I am deeply grateful and appreciative! Mike

Here’s an excerpt:

4,329 films were submitted to the 2012 Cannes Film Festival. This blog had 52,000 views in 2012. If each view were a film, this blog would power 12 Film Festivals

Click here to see the complete report.

by Mike Poverello

Is Google moving into box tracking?

container-trackingThe US Patent and Trademark Office has granted Internet search giant Google a patent on a system for securing, monitoring and tracking containers. According to United States Patent 8284045, it describes a two-way communication system, supported by an electronic bolt seal, a network gateway, a web-based platform, and a mobile device, that allows containers to be networked for the transfer of data. Shipping containers are networked for transferring data between the shipping containers. The shipping containers include sensors for detecting conditions associated with the shipping containers. The conditions sensed by any shipping container whether transported by rail or ship is transmitted from an ad hoc network, via a gateway configured for satellite or cellular communications for example, to a container-tracking application server or equivalent computer system. The computer system is remotely located to the shipping container for central compilation, analysis, and/or display of data regarding the shipping containers.

The system describes an environmental sensor that can travel with a product within a carrier’s logistics network. The environmental sensor being configured to sense an environmental condition capable of affecting the product to generate product environment data. The system includes a scanner configured to read product environment data from the environmental sensor. The system also includes a hub control unit configured to communicate with the scanner and receive the product environment data from the scanner and determines whether the product environment data transcends a limit of exposure of the product to an environmental condition. The hub control unit is also configured to generate a transporting instruction to redirect transport of the product to an alternate destination different from its original destination if the hub control unit determines that the product environment data indicates the environmental condition of the product has transcended the limit of exposure. What a mouthful! I dare say that there are people out there that can decipher the patent content and relate to its various diagrams. If you are interested in this topic, please visit the following link – http://www.archpatent.com/patents/8284045. Also visit the Patent Buddy for similar information. Hopefully as the business case for this patent unfolds things may become a bit more clearer – and perhaps a little sinister too for some!

Related articles
by Mike Poverello

Building hard and soft infrastructure to minimise regional costs

I post this article given it ties together many of the initiatives which I have described in previous articles. The appears to be an urgency to implement these initiatives, but the real question concerns the sub-continent’s ability to entrench the principles and maintain continuity. At regional fora its too easy for foreign ministers, trade practitioners and the various global and financial lobbies to wax lyrical on these subjects. True there is an enormous amount of interest and ‘money’ waiting to be ploughed into such programs, yet sovereign states battle with dwindling skills levels and expertise. Its going to take a lot more than talk and money to bring this about.

South Africa is championing an ambitious integration and development agenda in Southern Africa in an attempt to advance what Trade and Industry Minister Rob Davies describes as trade and customs cooperation within the Southern African Customs Union (SACU), the Southern African Development Community (SADC) and other regional trade organisations.

Central to pursuing this intra-regional trade aspiration are a series of mechanisms to combine market integration and liberalisation efforts with physical cross-border infrastructure and spatial-development initiatives. Also envisaged is greater policy coordination to advance regional industrial value chains. “Trade facilitation can be broadly construed as interventions that include the provision of hard and soft infrastructure to facilitate the movement of goods, services and people across borders, with SACU remaining the anchor for wider integration in the region,” Davies explains.

This approach is also receiving support from the US Agency for International Development (USAid), which recently hosted the Southern African Trade Facilitation Conference, held in Johannesburg.

Trade programme manager Rick Gurley says that virtually every study on trade in sub- Saharan Africa identifies time and cost factors of exporting and importing as the most significant constraints to regional trade potential. Limited progress has been made by SADC member States and SACU partners to tackle the factors undermining trade-based growth, limiting product diversification and increasing the price of consumer goods, including of foodstuffs. However, far more would need to be done to realise the full potential of intra-regional trade.

Regional Alliance
One high-profile effort currently under way is the Tripartite Free Trade Area (T-FTA), which seeks to facilitate greater trade and investment harmonisation across the three existing regional economic communities of the SADC, the Common Market of Eastern and Southern Africa and the East African Community.

The existing SADC FTA should be fully implemented by the end of the year, with almost all tariff lines traded duty-free and, if established, the T-FTA will intergrate the markets of 26 countries with a combined population of nearly 600-million people and a collective gross domestic product (GDP) of $1-trillion. At that size and scale, the market would be more attractive to investors and could launch the continent on a development trajectory, Davies avers. It could also form the basis for a later Africa-wide FTA and a market of some $2.6-trillion.

However, as things stand today, intra- regional trade remains constrained not merely by trade restrictions but by a lack of cross-border infrastructure, as well as poor coordination and information sharing among border management agencies such as immigration, customs, police and agriculture.Cross-national connectivity between the customs management systems is also rare, often requiring the identical re-entry of customs declarations data at both sides of the border, causing costly and frustrating delays.

USAid’s regional economic growth project, the Southern African Trade Hub, is a strong proponent of the introduction of several modern trade-facilitation tools throughout the SADC – a number of which have already been successfully pioneered. These tools, endorsed by the World Customs Organisation (WCO) Framework of Standards, which offers international best-practice guidelines, are aimed at tackling the high costs of exporting and importing goods to, from, and within Southern Africa, which has become a feature of regional trade and discouraged international investment.

Bringing up the Rear
A country’s competitiveness and the effec- tiveness of its trade facilitation regime are measured by its ranking on World Bank indices and, with the exception of Mozambique, Southern African States perform poorly – with most in the region settling into the lowest global quartile of between 136 and 164, out of a total of 183. “Our transaction costs in Africa across its borders are unacceptably high and inhibit trade by our partners in the private sector,” says WCO capacity building director Erich Kieck. “We need our States to develop good ideas and policies, but the true test lies in their ability to implement them,” he notes.

He adds that not only does trade facilitation require efficient customs-to-customs connectivity, but also demands effective customs-to-business engagement, adding that, while customs units are responsible for international trade administration, they are not responsible for international trade. “The private sector is the driver of economic activity and international trade, and government’s responsibility is to understand the challenges faced by the business community and develop symbiotic solutions,” Kieck notes.

Despite the establishment of regional trade agreements and regional economic communities in Southern Africa, many partner- ships have failed to deliver on their full potential to increase domestic competitiveness.

In a report, African Development Bank (AfDB) senior planning economist Habiba Ben Barka observes that, despite the continent’s positive GDP growth record – averaging 5.4% a year between 2005 and 2010 – it has failed to improve its trading position or integration into world markets. In 2009, Africa’s contribution to global trade stood at just under 3%, compared with nearly 6% for Latin America and a significant 28% for Asia.

“Since 2000, a new pattern of trade for the continent has begun to take centre stage, as Africa has witnessed an upsurge in its trade with the emerging Brazil, Russia, India and China economies. Overall, Africa is trading more today than in the past, but that trade is more with the outside world than internally,” says Ben Barka. She adds that while many African regional economic communities have made some progress in the area of trade facilitation, much greater effort is required to harmonise and integrate sub-regional markets.

To address enduring trade barriers, consensus among business, government and trade regulators appears to lean towards the adoption of one or a combination of five facilitation tools. These include the National Single Window (NSW), the One-Stop Border Post (OSBP), cloud-based Customs Connectivity, Coordinated Border Management (CBM) and Customs Modernisation Tools.

A National Single Window
NSWs connect trade-related stakeholders within a country through a single electronic-data information-exchange platform, related to cross-border trade, where parties involved in trade and transport lodge standardised trade-related information or documents to be submitted once at a single entry point to fulfil all import, export and transit-related regulatory requirements.Mauritius was the first SADC country to implement the NSW and consequently improved its ranking on the ‘Trading Across Borders Index’ to 21 – the highest in Africa. It was closely followed by Ghana and Mozambique, which have also reported strong improvements.

Developed in Singapore, the benefits of government adoption include the reduction of delays, the accelerated clearance and release of goods, predictable application, improved application of resources and improved transparency, with several countries reporting marked improvement in trade facilitation indicators following the NSW implementation.

In South Africa, the work on trade facili-tation is led by the South African Revenue Service (SARS), which focuses on building information technology (IT) connectivity among the SACU member States, and strengthen- ing risk-management and enforcement measures. However, SARS’ approach to the NSW concept remains cautious, Davies explains. “SARS has considered the viability of this option as a possible technological support for measures to facilitate regional trade, but considers that this would fall outside the scope of its current approach and priorities in the region,” he said.

One-Stop Border Posts
As reported by Engineering News in December last year, effective OSBPs integrate the data, processes and workflows of all relevant border agencies of one country with those of another, which culminates in a standardised operating model that is predictable, trans- parent and convenient. An OSBD success story in Southern Africa is the Chirundu border post, where a collaboration between the Zambia and Zimbabwe governments has culminated in a single structure, allowing officers from both States to operate at the same location, while conducting exit and entry procedures for both countries.

Launched in 2009, this OSBP model is a hybrid of total separation, joint border operations and shared facilities in a common control zone. Implementation of the model has reduced clearance times to less than 24 hours, significantly reduced fraudulent and illegal cross-border activity, enabled increased information sharing between border agencies and reduced the overall cost of export and import activities in the area.

Earlier this year, former South African Transport Minister Sibusisu Ndebele indicated that Cabinet was looking into establishing a mechanism that would bring all border entities under a single command and control structure to address the fragmentation in the country’s border operations, particularly at the high-traffic Beitbridge post between South Africa and Zimbabwe. “The ultimate vision is to create one-stop border operations to facilitate legitimate trade and travel across the borders,” he said.

Customs Connectivity and Data Exchange
Improved connectivity between customs limbs in sub-Saharan Africa has perhaps made the most indelible strides in the region, with improved IT connectivity between States identified as a priority by Sacu.

This includes customs-to-customs inter- connectivity, customs-to-business inter- connectivity and interconnectivity between customs and other government agencies. SACU members have agreed to pursue the automation and interconnectivity of their customs IT systems to enable the timely electronic exchange of data between administrations in respect of cross-border movement of goods. “As a consequence of this acquiescence, we have identified two existing bilateral connectivity programmes as pilot projects to assess SACU’s preferred connectivity approach, cloud computing between Botswana and Namibia and IT connectivity between South Africa and Swaziland,” says SACU deputy director for trade facilitation Yusuf Daya. He adds that a regional workshop was recently convened to explore business processes, functions, data clusters and the application of infrastructure at national level to improve and develop intra-regional links.

Coordinated Border Management
The SADC has been a strong proponent of CBM efforts in the region, which promotes coordination and cooperation among relevant authorities and agencies involved in, specifically, the protection of interests of the State at borders. “The union has drafted CBM guidelines for its members on implementation, based on international best practice, and has received indications of interest from several member States,” explains SADC Customs Unit senior programme officer Willie Shumba.He adds that CBM is a key objective of regional integration, enabling the transition from an FTA to a customs union and, eventually, to a common market, through effective controls of the internal borders.

Customs Modernisation
South Africa’s customs modernisation initiative is well advanced and came about following Sars’ accession to the WCO’s revised Kyoto Convention in 2004, which required customs agencies to make significant changes to it business and processing models. These changes included the introduction of simplified procedures, which would have fundamental effects on and benefits for trade and would require a modern IT solution.

Since its inception, the SARS Customs Modernisation Programme has gained tremendous momentum, with amendments to the Passenger Processing System and the replacement of SARS’s Manifest Acquittal System in the Automated Cargo Management system. Further adjustments were made to enable greater ease of movement of goods, faster turnaround times and cost savings, as well as increased efficiency for SARS. This phase included the introduction of an electronic case-management system, electronic submission of supporting documents, the centralisation of back-end processing in four hubs and an electronic release system and measures to enhance the flow of trucks through borders – in particular at the Lebombo and Beitbridge borders.

Proper Planning
AfDB’s Ben Barka warns that, prior to the implementation of any border improvement efforts by countries in Southern Africa, a thorough analysis and mapping of each agency’s existing procedures, mandate and operations should be undertaken.“Based on these findings, a new set of joint operational procedures need to be agreed upon by all involved agencies and must comply with the highest international standards,” she says.

Development coordination between States is essential, as the largest disparity among regional groupings, in terms of intra-regional trade, is clearly attributable to their differentiated levels of progress in various areas, including the removal of tariffs and non-tariff barriers, the freedom of movement of persons across borders and the development of efficient infrastructure. Source: Engineering News.

Related articles
by Mike Poverello

SADC Member States driving the Customs regional integration agenda

Delegates from the SADC member states gathered in Port Louis, Mauritius between 9 and 13 October to establish a SADC Customs ICT strategy for the region. The conference, sponsored by the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa, coincided with the 200th anniversary of Customs in Mauritius.

Following recent developments on IT connectivity and data exchange in the region, the conference addressed other areas of ICT in Customs which have a significant influence not only for internal Customs processing but its impact and effect on the broader stakeholder community. The conference was well attended with representatives from Angola, Mozambique, Lesotho, Swaziland, Namibia, Botswana, Tanzania, Zimbabwe, Seychelles, Mauritius, Democratic Republic of Congo, Malawi, and South Africa.

The event also drew international interest with representatives from the World Customs Organisation, Trans-Kalahari Corridor, SA Trade Hub, the East African Community, Southern African Customs Union, and the UN Economic Commission for Africa.

“Customs Connects, Borders Divide” conveyed the central theme for the event with the WCO IT and Capacity Building expert, Mats Wicktor, providing an enabling platform upon which the conference deliberations occurred. A detailed presentation clearly outlined the WCO’s the basis for standards, recommendations and guidelines, with specific reference to the Data Model, the Unique Consignment Reference and the most recent developments on Globally Networked Customs (GNC).

Other keynote addresses were made by Mozambique (DGA) on their experience in implementing the Single Window concept (for more details on this project visit URL: http://tfig.unece.org/case-stories.html).  Host nation Mauritius presented their Cargo Community System, and a number of other IT developments namely, e-Certificate of Origin, valuation database for 2nd hand motor vehicles, and the recently implemented Customs Enforcement Network (CEN) solution. SARS presented its Customs Modernisation journey highlighting some of the key ICT products and features and the respective efficiencies and trade facilitation benefits introduced for trade. Furthermore, it elaborated on its current bilateral data exchange initiatives with Swaziland, Zimbabwe, Mozambique as well as the IBSA countries.

The business end of the conference saw the finalisation, tabling and vetting of a draft SADC Customs ICT strategy. The strategy provides a broad framework, focussed around the concept of Customs-to-Customs data exchange. It seeks to create synergy between member states in regard to aspects such as transit management, common risk and enforcement principles, the entrenching of the One Stop Border Post concept, as well as automation of certificates of origin. From a SADC point of view, the strategy will support the realisation of its Strategic Plan – envisaged to include a Customs Union.

by Mike Poverello

Uganda prepares to introduce AEO

Authorised Economic Operators (AEO), a scheme focusing on compliant companies to facilitate trade starts before the year ends. The Uganda Revenue Authority (URA) Public and Corporate Affairs Assistant Commissioner Sarah Banage recently disclosed that AEO is meant to enhance compliance “by removing barriers for the most complaint taxpayer”.

“Under the scheme, the benefit of being complaint will be red-carpet treatment offered by URA,” she stated, adding, “we want to demonstrate that there are rewards for being compliant.” Banage cited electronic submission of declaration without supporting documents, pre-arrival clearance of cargo, and self-management of bonded warehouses as some of the benefits. Others are: priority treatment when cargo is selected for control, choosing the place for examination, automatic renewal of licences and withholding tax exemption status.

Because the relationship between URA and its clients is “symbiotic”, it is expected that there will be an increase in taxes, Banage argued. Potential beneficiaries of AEO are: agents, importers, exporters, shippers, internal container depot operators, and others involved in international shipment of goods, among others.

To be eligible, Banage said, one should be involved in international trade, have a good compliance history, be financially sound, install and use customs automated systems like e-tax and should implement the AEO compliance programme. To be authorized, companies/organizations will apply to the commissioner, after which a preliminary consultation is done.

“We will then determine who should formally apply. Officials will adjudicate submitted documents before a site is inspected to ensure compliance with guidelines,” she said. Subsequently, a one-year certificate will be issued.

“An AEO is an individual, a business entity or a government department that is involved in international trade and is duly authorized by the Commissioner of Customs of Uganda Revenue Authority.”

Banage said that implementing AEO does not only have short-term results but also resultant long-term benefits to the business community. These include reduction of the cost of doing business and increased turnover over time, among others. In the middle of April, customs officials held a breakfast meeting at Serena hotel, Kampala where Chief Executive Officers of major organizations were sensitized about the plan.

Later, customs officials interacted with personnel of the Auditor General, Export Promotion Board, the Trade, Industry and Cooperatives ministry, the Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries ministry and Uganda National Bureau of Standards. Also at Serena, it was meant to “share with them the programme in order to capture their ideas,” according to Banage.

Weeks ago, URA asked companies to express interest in joining the scheme. Over 20 organizations applied and are currently involved in talks expected to culminate in attaining AEO status. “Admission to the scheme will depend on how the companies implement the compliance programme. By December, some companies should be authorized,” Banage added. Among others, those expected to benefit from the first phase are importers, clearing agents and transporters.

Regarding the East African Community (EAC), customs administrators have adopted an AEO policy framework. It was adopted in 2010 as a basis for implementing trade facilitation initiatives that drive economic development for the EAC. Under AEO’s mutual recognition arrangement, a government formally recognizes the AEO programme of another country, thereby granting benefits to the AEOs of that country. Under a regional project, companies in the five countries receive benefits related to the scheme. Among the benefits is priority treatment at customs points. Source: The Observer (Kampala) 

by Mike Poverello

US Customs – $100 million customs fraud uncovered

 

The article below has been doing the rounds over various social media the last few days. The ‘standout’ issue for me is the fact that such an alleged crime occurred in the USA. With the focus of the customs world nowadays so much on the anti-terror campaign, could it be that one of the single biggest enforcement agencies in the world is not as sharp on traditional customs fraud activities? With the boundless focus on ‘safety and security’ it often seems as though the traditional customs crimes have given way to ‘globally networked syndicates’ using every means of technology to by-pass sovereign authorities. Yet, when you read the brief below, it all boils down to the human factor. To what extent the outcome of this case will attest to the Customs and Border Protection Agency’s risk management capability and moreover the extent to which such campaigns as CT-PAT really give the agency the edge in better ‘knowing’ its customers remains to be seen. A successful border agency must still do the basic things right, as dated as they may seem in the modern world. This case therefore proves how important it is for any national customs and border management agencies to invest in customs-skills training with lesser emphasis on the technology side of things. It is so unfortunate that most countries see Customs Capacity Building as an investment in technology. At this rate with no investment in customs technique, who is going to be able to properly interpret risk indicators if all the agency employs are statisticians and university post-graduates?

SAN DIEGO, CA – A complaint charging eight individuals and three corporations with operating a ring that illegally imported hundreds of millions of dollars in foreign goods into the United States though the Long Beach Port-of-Entry and evaded millions of dollars in import taxes was unsealed today, announced United States Attorney for the Southern District of California Laura E. Duffy.

According to the complaint, the defendants’ scheme focused on purchasing large, commercial quantities of foreign-made goods and importing them without paying import taxes or A Customs duties. As alleged in the charging documents, wholesalers in the United States would procure commercial shipments of, among other things, Chinese-made apparel and Indian-made cigarettes, and arrange for them to be shipped by ocean container to the Port of Long Beach, California. Before the goods entered   States, the defendants generated paperwork and database entries indicating that the goods were not intended to enter the commerce of the United States, but instead would be transshipped “in-bond” to another country, such as Mexico.

As noted in the complaint, this in-bond process is a routine feature of international trade. Goods that travel in-bond through the territory of the United States do not formally enter the commerce of the United States, and so are not subject to Customs duties.By claiming that the goods would be transshipped in-bond to another country, the defendants falsely represented that no Customs duties applied.

According to the complaint, instead of completing the in-bond transshipment, the defendants would hire truck drivers to haul the shipments to warehouses throughout Southern California. After generating the false paperwork and database entries, the goods would then be diverted back to Los Angeles and other destinations for shipment throughout the United States. As the conspirators had now effectively imported the goods tax-free, they could in turn sell more merchandise at cheaper prices and reap greater profits than their law-abiding competitors, including domestic American manufacturers of the same goods.

The complaint alleges that in addition to harming lawful domestic businesses, the defendants deprived the United States of the Customs duties that it was owed on these diverted shipments. To date, the government has already identified more than 90 commercial shipments of Chinese-made apparel, foreign-made cigarettes and other goods that were illegally imported in this manner. Altogether, these shipments were worth at least $100 million and resulted in more than $10 million in lost Customs duties, taxes and other revenue.

According to United States Attorney Duffy, “The charges announced today underscores our commitment to ensure that no one exploits the import process for personal gain. Not only does such illegal conduct present a significant danger to the American people, but it deprives law-abiding companies of a level playing field resulting in the potential loss ofbillions of dollars in revenue.”

“This investigation pulled back the curtain on a potentially costly fraud scheme operating in one of the world’sbusiest commercial centers,” said ICE Director John Morton. “Instead, HSI, aided by our law enforcement partners, exposed and dismantled this criminal ring and now those responsible will be held accountable.”
“Every day, U.S. Customs and Border Protection officials work to protect the U.S. and interdict fraudulent goods from entering the country. I commend the work of our officers for their instinct and diligence, and recognize the seamless coordination across government agencies,” said David V. Aguilar, Acting Commissioner, U.S. Customs and Border Protection. “Joint efforts such as this are crucial to maintaining our nation’seconomic security and competitiveness.”

“The FDA-Office of Criminal Investigations is fully committed to investigating and supporting the prosecution of those who may endanger the public’s health and safety by importing unsafe and potentially life-threatening products. We commend the U.S.Attorney’s Office in the Southern District of California for their diligence,”said Lisa Malinowski, Acting Special Agent in Charge, U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s Office of Criminal Investigations, Los Angeles Field Office. As alleged in the complaint,defendant Gerardo Chavez is President of the San Diego Customs Brokers Association and a licensed Customs broker. Using his Customs license, Chavez, his employees and his companies—including defendants Tecate Logistics, LLC and International Trade Consultants, LLC—generated the fraudulent Customs paperwork that was integral to the scheme. Similarly, Chavez and his companies would make false entries into Customs databases, in order to create the false appearance that in-bond shipments of foreign-made goods had been lawfully transshipped to Mexico. As part of this effort, Chavez, Joel Varela and others would also forge official Customs markings to make it appear as if a United States Customs official had certified various shipments as having been transshipped to Mexico.

Charging documents also allege that Chavez had several dedicated customers who were part of the conspiracy. For example, defendant Sunil Mirwani, a citizen of the United Kingdom, received dozens of shipments of illegally imported Chinese-made apparel at warehouses throughout the Los Angeles area. Mirwani marketed and sold the apparel using hiscompany, defendant M Trade Inc. Similarly, defendant Rene Trahin and other co-conspirators distributed various shipments of illegally imported “gray market” cigarettes ranging from Indian-made to German-made brands to warehouses, self-storage areas and a residence in San Diego, Los Angeles and parts between.

The complaint alleges that the defendants also imported produce infected by Salmonella Agona. Often called simply “Salmonella,” this pathogen is a potentially life-threatening infectious bacteria. On one occasion, after a shipment of nopal cactus (also known as prickly pear) tested positive for Salmonella,co-conspirator changed the description of the nopal cactus’ grower for subsequent shipments, for the purpose of evading future Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) inspections. Similarly, defendant Elizabeth Sandoval and Varela conspired to import Mexican snack foods that were mislabeled and adulterated with a prohibited dye. The remaining defendants named in the complaint are employees and agents of Customs brokers, wholesalers and transport companies who are alleged to have knowingly aided the conspiracy.

This case is being prosecuted in federal court in San Diego by Assistant United States Attorney Timothy C. Perry and is being investigated by the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement Homeland Security Investigations, and United States Customs and Border Protection, the Internal Revenue Service, the Food and Drug Administration, and the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau. A complaint is a formal charging document and defendants are presumed innocent until the Government meets its burden in court of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Source: US Department of Justice

 

by Mike Poverello

Revisiting the national transit procedure – Part 2

You will recall a recent challenge by trade to SARS’ proposed implementation of mandatory clearance of national transit goods inland from port of initial discharge – refer to Revisiting the national transit procedure – Part 1.

First, some background

Now lets take a step back to look at the situation since the inception of containerisation in South Africa – some 30 years ago. Customs stance has always been that containerised goods manifested for onward delivery to a designated inland container terminal by rail would not require clearance upon discharge at initial port of entry. Containers were allowed to move ‘against the manifest’ (a ‘Through Bill’) to its named place of destination. This arrangement was designed to expedite the movement of containers from the port of discharge onto block trains operated by Transnet Freight Rail, formerly the South African Railways and Harbours (SAR&H) to the inland container terminal at City Deep. Since SAR&H operated both the national railway and the coastal and inland ports, the possibility of diversion was considered of little import to warrant any form of security over the movement of containers by rail. Moreover, container terminals were designed to allow the staging of trains with custom gantry cranes to load inland manifested containers within a ‘secure’ port precinct.

Over the years, rail freight lost market share to the emergence of cross-country road hauliers due to inefficiencies. The opening up of more inland terminals and supporting container unpack facilities, required Customs to review the matter. It was decided that road-hauled containers moved ‘in bond’ by road would lodge a customs clearance (backed with suitable surety) for purposes of national transit. Upon arrival of the bonded freight at destination, a formal home use declaration would be lodged with Customs. Notwithstanding the surety lodged to safeguard revenue, this has the effect of deferring payment of duties and taxes.

Diversification of container brokering, stuffing and multi-modal transport added to the complexity, with many customs administrations failing to maintain both control and understanding of the changing business model. Equally mystifying was the emergence of a new breed of ‘players’ in the shipping game. Initially there were so-called ‘approved container operators’ these being ocean carriers who at the same time leased containers. Then there were so-called non-approved container operators who brokered containers on behalf of the ocean carrier. These are more commonly known as non-vessel operating common carriers or NVOCCs. In the early days of containerisation there were basically two types of container stuffing – full container load (FCL) and less container load (LCL). The NVOCCs began ‘chartering’ space of their containers to other NVOCCs and shippers – this also helped in knocking down freight costs. This practice became known as ‘groupage’ and because such containers were filled to capacity the term FCL Groupage became a phenomenon. It is not uncommon nowadays for a single FCL Groupage container to have multiple co-loaders.

All of the above radically maximised the efficiency and distribution of cost of the cellular container, but at the same time complicated Customs ‘control’ in that it was not able to readily assess the ‘content’ and ownership of the goods conveyed in a multi-level groupage box. It also became a phenomenon for ‘customs brokers/clearing agents’ to enter this niche of the market. Customs traditionally licensed brokers for the tendering of goods declarations only. Nowadays, most brokers are also NVOCCs.  The law on the other hand provided for the hand-off of liability for container movements between the ocean carrier, container terminal operator and container depot operator. Nowhere was an NVOCC/Freight Forwarder held liable in any of this. A further phenomenon known as ‘carrier’ or ‘merchant’ haulage likewise added to the complexity and cause for concern over the uncontrolled inland movements of bonded cargoes. No doubt a disconnect in terms of Customs’ liability and the terms and conditions of international conveyance for the goods also helped create much of the confusion. Lets not even go down the INCOTERM route.

Internationally, customs administrations – under the global voice of the WCO – have conceded that the worlds administrations need to keep pace and work ‘smarter’ to address new innovations and dynamics in the international supply chain. One would need to look no further than the text of the Revised Kyoto Convention (RKC) to observe the governing body’s view on harmonisation and simplification. However, lets now consider SARS’ response in this matter.

SARS response to the Chamber of Business

Right of reply was subsequently afforded by FTW Online to SARS.

Concerns over Customs’ determination to have all goods cleared at the coast – expressed by Pat Corbin, past president of the Johannesburg Chamber of Commerce and Industry in last week’s FTW – have been addressed by SA Revenue Service.  “One of the main objectives of the Control Bill is the control of the movement of goods across South Africa’s borders to protect our citizens against health and safety risks and to protect the fiscus. “In order to effectively determine risk, SARS has to know the tariff classification, the value and the origin of imported goods. This information is not reflected on a manifest, which is why there is a requirement that all goods must be cleared at the first port of entry into the Republic.“It appears that Mr Corbin is under the impression that the requirement of clearance at the first port of entry has the effect that all goods have to be consigned to that first port of entry or as he puts it “to terminate vessel manifests at the coastal ports in all cases”. This is incorrect. “The statutory requirement to clear goods at the first port of entry and the contract of carriage have nothing to do with one another. Goods may still be consigned to, for example, City Deep or Zambia (being a landlocked country), but they will not be released to move in transit to City Deep or Zambia unless a declaration to clear the goods, containing the relevant information, is submitted and release is granted by Customs for the goods to move. The release of the goods to move will be based on the risk the consignment poses to the country.“It is definitely not the intention to clog up the ports but rather to facilitate the seamless movement of legitimate trade. If the required information is provided and the goods do not pose any risk, they will be released.”

So, where to from here?

The issue at hand concerns the issue of the ‘means’ of customs treatment of goods under national transit. In Part 3 we’ll consider a rational outcome. Complex logistics have and always will challenge ‘customs control’ and procedures. Despite the best of intentions for law not to ‘clog up the port’, one needs to consider precisely what controls the movement of physical cargo – a goods declaration or a cargo report? How influential are the guidelines, standards and recommendations of the WCO, or are they mere studies in intellectual theories?

Related articles
by Mike Poverello

WCO News – 60 year Anniversary Edition

The Organization is celebrating its 60th anniversary, an occasion which gives the global Customs community the chance to reflect on where the WCO began, where it is now, and where it hopes to go in the future. This issue highlights some of the WCO’s milestones past and present, we take a brief look at the WCO’s historical beginnings and subsequent development, follow one man’s forty year Customs journey, look at the history of containerization: the box that changed the world, and even step back to 1969 when the Apollo 11 touched down on the surface of the moon. In this dossier, not only does the WCO look back with pride, but also looks forward with optimism, conscious of the fact that the WCO has served the global Customs community with dedication for sixty years, and will continue doing so to ensure that Customs administrations remain well-positioned to deliver effective and efficient services around the world. Also in this issue –

  • Doorless containers now a reality,
  • US/EU mutual recognition programme,
  • New guidelines included in WCO Revenue Package,
  • Globally Networked Customs,
  • GS1 and the WCO,
  • Algeria Customs and performance management,
  • Georgia’s success in rooting out corruption,
  • Hong Kong moves forward with its e-Lock plans.

Source: http://www.wcoomd.org

Related articles
by Mike Poverello

ZIMRA, Business to form Customs Forum

The Zimbabwe Revenue Authority (ZIMRA) is working in partnership with organised businesses associations in crafting a Memorandum of Understanding, creating the Zimbabwe Customs to Business Forum, an official has said. ZIMRA’s commissioner for customs and excise Mr Happias Kuzvinzwa said last week that the forum was a platform for his organisation and business to collaborate on issues of compliance, policy, capacity building, integrity and technical engagements. He was addressing delegates at the Shipping and Forwarding Agents’ Association of Zimbabwe 8th annual conference held in Beitbridge last week. Mr Kuzvinzwa said the interim steering committee was finalising the draft MoU and terms of reference.

“The forum is a prelude to the implementation of the authorised economic operator scheme. Membership of this forum is open to the businesses affiliated to recognised associations and shall be governed through a steering committee which is a higher committee, and standing committees which are lower committees chaired and constituted by both ZIMRA and business.

“The standing committees are organised in clusters for easy management of programmes. We expect all the concerned parties to sign the MoU soon upon its finalisation” he said.

Mr Kuzvinzwa added that in line with the SAFE framework of standards, ZIMRA would soon be plotting the authorised economic operators. He said the scheme sought to reward all compliant operators in the supply chain who meet the set criteria. He added that groundwork had been done and teams will be conducting stakeholder consultations and awareness workshops next month. “I would also want to urge the freight industry to embrace as a culture and operation ethos integrity, voluntary compliance, relevant competencies, and information technology.

“Missing these industry risks is being packed into the dustbin of history as you become irrelevant and classified as non-tariff barriers.” he said. Mr Kuzvinzwa added that ZIMRA was also in the process of putting in place a border agency single window through ASYCUDAworld. He said all border agencies would be connected to the workflow process through ASYCUDAworld to ensure that respective mandates are coordinated and streamlined.

“Discussions are at an advanced stage with other border agencies on the implementation of the single window and Beitbridge has been selected to pilot the programme with ZIMRA providing computer workstations at their respective offices,” he said.

Source: The Herald (Zimbabwe)

Related articles