- and earns airfreight industry applause
ALAN PEAT
IN ONE of the fastest legislative changes ever, the SA Revenue Service (SARS) has “drastically reduced” the number of vouchers of correction (VOCs) required, and deserves the airfreight industry’s applause, according to Richard Mallabone, MD of Expeditors and Gauteng chairman of the SA Association of Freight Forwarders (SAAFF).
This, he told FTW, followed industry complaints about customs’ latest revision of airway bills. Putting dates and aircraft flight numbers on bills, as required, was inappropriate in cases where pre-clearance was done, said agents, because these could change after the documentation had been submitted.
And, unlike the previous ruling, the agents could no longer correct these entries on the original bill and have them immediately accepted by customs - but had to submit a VOC, and have up to two days delay before the cargo was cleared by customs.
This, said industry, effectively negated airfreight’s speed advantage and was often throwing just-in-time (JIT) delivery timing out of kilter.
But SARS refused to accept this industry standpoint, and they confirmed in September (FTW October 1, 2004) that VOCs were required where a bill had changed or was incorrect.
However, they did make a change - but one which actually threw the cat amongst the pigeons, according to Mallabone’s thinking.
SARS insisted in its September correspondence that the date required in the “flight number and date” field was to be the date of departure, not the date of arrival.
But this put the airfreight industry even further into a state of “utter confusion”, said Mallabone.
Did the date of departure, they asked, refer to the date when the consignment left its source, or the date of departure of the flight for SA?
“Through SAAFF,” said Mallabone, “a whole lot of us lobbied customs about the issue.”
And the authorities listened.
Said SARS: “After further consideration, and following further representations received in this regard from affected persons in the air industry, it has been decided to withdraw the abovementioned correspondence (which defined the requirements for airway bills) with immediate effect so as to not unduly negate the current trade facilitation benefits available through the electronic pre-clearance of goods declarations.”
They replaced their contentious ruling with the following:
l In the case of airfreight it will no longer be compulsory to insert the date in the “flight number and date” field;
l Should the date be inserted and it proves to be incorrect or is amended it will be compulsory to rectify the information by way of a VOC;
l No VOC is required in respect of any change to the estimated date of arrival reflected on the declaration as the date declared is merely an estimate;
l The flight number is compulsory and any change to this information must be corrected by way of a VOC.
“This,” said Mallabone, “is a bold step forward, and customs should be applauded for making the changes.
“What is done now is that no date is required, only the flight number.
“While flight numbers can change and need VOCs, this has drastically reduced the overall number of VOCs required.”
