One of the requirements for gaining accredited client status in terms Section 64E of the Customs and Excise Act 91 of 1964 (“the Act”) is that the person who will administer the accredited client requirements must be fully capable of maintaining an efficient and effective accredited client compliance system. This is confirmed in the second draft of the Customs Control Bill which was released for comment on 18 April. A few of the measures that need to be put in place to ensure compliance are: Accurate tariff • classification of goods cleared for import and export; • Accurate valuation of goods cleared for import and export; • Timeous submission of documents to Customs on queried, detained and stopped shipments; • Fully completed customs clearing instructions; • Timeous submission of acquittal documents; • Strict control of submission of refund claims and following up thereof; • Accurate record-keeping of all rejections, under-entries and other non-conformities. The implementation of such a system takes on added importance when considering that Section 99 of the Act and Sections 682 and 683 of the draft Customs Control Bill hold agents liable for the obligations imposed on principals. A responsible and suitably qualified person should be appointed to ensure compliance, given the serious ramifications of noncompliance. It is suggested that this should be his or her primary responsibility and should take precedence over any other activity. Such a person will have to work closely with other key role players such as: • Quality controller • Refund administrator • Customs manager • Financial director • Clients • SA Revenue Service Does your organisation have a person on board to ensure compliance? Does your organisation have a back-up plan in the absence of the key person? Does your organisation have a specific, uniquely-devised training plan to cultivate such individuals? If you cannot give a confident ‘Yes’ to the above questions, then steps need to be taken to ensure compliance.
Ensuring Customs compliance – do you have a suitably qualified person?
Comments | 0