Sars compromise gets short shrift

SA Revenue Service has proposed a mandatory advance customs clearance of goods three days before their arrival at the first port of entry in what Sars chief officer of legal and policy Kosie Louw said was a “spirit of compromise” in the ongoing inland ports saga. Goods consigned to inland terminals such as City Deep would be released conditionally, he said. But this supposed olive branch that Sars has extended to the freight and logistics industry by guaranteeing that inland ports, including Johannesburg’s City Deep, can continue, is actually a rather withered stem, according to Pat Corbin, past president of the Johannesburg Chamber of Commerce and Industry (JCCI). This followed a welter of loud complaints from the freight industry about the proposals in the draft Customs Control Bill about the new requirement for a full clearance certificate at ports of entry. This, said complainants, would cause congestion and disrupt the legal contracts of sale and carriage between importers and sellers. It would also have dislodged City Deep from its role as an inland port. This was just after the Gauteng Department of Roads and Transport had announced an allocation of R122 million over the next three years for upgrading the roadworks surrounding the inland port, with Transnet to invest R900 million in upgrading the City Deep terminal and the railway sidings. But Corbin rejected Sars' compromise. “The status and function of inland ports will still change materially if the tabled Customs Bill is not amended,” he told FTW. “Any customs requirement that calls for input from the importer before containers can move out of the coastal-port will result in the exporter generated contract of carriage (and thus the manifest) terminating at the coastal port.” The effect of this, according to Malcolm Hartwell, master mariner and director of the legal firm, Norton Rose Fulbright, is that shipping lines will refuse to issue through bills of lading to Johannesburg because they, the shipping lines, will not be able to determine when the cargo can be cleared through the seaport. It is because customs – for inspection or other reasons – and the importer are able to delay or prevent the inland movement, that international trade changes hands, at the latest, at the customs border, according to Corbin. And this border, according to the draft Customs Bill, will be the port of entry. “The importer then has to comply with the customs and shipping line requirements before the box can be released for on-carriage,” said Corbin. Effectively this will eliminate the concept of inland ports. And the multi-modal option under which City Deep and other inland ports have been operating for the last 36 years, and which have been internationally promoted, will no longer be available, according to Corbin. “This,” he added, “will increase the cost and complexity of our international trade.” He also pointed out that an extensive impact assessment study (IAS) was generated in 2007 when there was a National Economic Development and Labour Council (Nedlac) impasse on this issue. “The report provided overwhelming evidence to support the retention of our inland ports as international gateways,” he said. At the same time, he added, the World Customs Organisation (WCO) is busy promoting the concept of inland ports on that same gateway principle. But at least there will be time for the complainants’ cases to be assembled in a more complete form after the previous fourday rush they had to submit objections before the original deadline. Thaba Mufamadi, chairman of parliament’s standing committee on finance (SCoF), said that they had decided to postpone deliberations on the two draft customs-related bills until next year to allow importers and the freight forwarding industry more time to comment on the proposals. He instructed stakeholders to make their submissions to Sars by December 15. INSERT & CAPTION The industry appears to still have great reservations about the amended Customs Bill. – Malcolm Hartwell