PortCalls
The Philippines only shipping and  transport guide.
 

::Opinion::

Across Borders | DMAP Perspective | Did you Know? | In Their View | ITinerary
Narrow Channel | Next Wave l PISFA at Work

Across Borders takes a close look at world trade and customs issues. Articles are written by Atty. Agaton Teodoro O. Uvero, an international trade and customs specialist, and a licensed customs broker. He is also a partner in the Law Office of David Leabres Uvero Gaticales Samson Mosquera


 

You are now viewing: Across Borders Archives : 2005 Q2

 


*100 Companies Audited by Customs Since June 2004 (Nov 7, 2005)

*Penalty for Misdeclaration in the SDV RECENTLY (Oct 26, 2005)

*Duty Drawback on Exports (Sept 26, 2005)

*WTO Trade Facilitation Proposals (Sept 12, 2005)

*Basis for Seizure and Forfeiture of Imports (Sept 06, 2005)

*Selecting Your Customs Broker (August 29, 2005)

*Basis for Seizure and Forfeiture of Imports (August 24, 2005)

*WTO Review of RP's Import and Export Policy (July 18, 2005)

*New Rules for Exporters under AFTA (July 04, 2005)

*Liberializing the Distribution Sector under the WTO (June 20, 2005)

*Why Companies Are Not Ready for Customs Audit (June 06, 2005)

* Misconceptions about RA 9280 (2) (April 11, 2005)

* Latest Developments in ASEAN (April 25, 2005)

* Foreign Currency Risks in International Trade (May 9, 2005)


100 Companies Audited by Customs Since June 2004

100 Companies Audited by Customs Since June 2004, more than 100 companies have been audited by the Post Entry Audit Group (PEAG) of the Bureau of Customs. And curiously, many importers are still unaware that customs has long been empowered to conduct audit of import transactions within three years from date of importation. In many public seminars, a consistent question is why customs needs to conduct an audit when documents are already inspected or reviewed, albeit superficially, upon importation. The Audit Paradigm. We have consistently stated that the PEA system is a modern methodology which allows customs to focus its scarce resources on the risk assessment of importations (e.g. contrabands and misdeclared importations) and allow the release of most of the importations without physical inspection and verification of what has been declared. For example, customs appraisers do not always verify the value declared in the import declarations as against actual remittances or payments to suppliers. Neither do custom examiners conduct physical inspection to confirm the quantity and description of goods upon importation. The verifications can now be made post entry, or after goods are cleared from customs, by means of a review of import and related business records. Of course, the audit will not only involve a single import transaction but will start with a sampling of import records covering a certain period of time. In case compliance issues are found on the sample transactions, customs may conduct a full audit over all import transactions made on the selected period. Preparing for Audit. There are yet no official customs reports on the manner by which the compliance audits are being conducted. Customs has likewise been suspiciously silent on the general findings made on these audits. There are many speculations on how the audit is being conducted and many importers fear that the audit is more of a shakedown on smugglers. These speculations, however, seem to be contradicted by the fact that many of the auditees are very large local companies as well as multinational companies. For the top 1,000 importers, it is not a question of whether the company will be audited but rather a question of when. We have provided in the succeeding discussions the main areas for customs audit preparation. Customs Broker Selection. Customs brokers are the importers' first line of defense. Most importers look at customs operations from a logistics perspective; rarely do companies look at the compliance requirements for their import operations. Most of the functions in import operations are outsourced to custom brokers and companies seldom verify the correctness and completeness of what is being declared to customs. On the other hand, customs brokers are more focused on clearance operations and, in practice, do not focus on the level of compliance in its customs operations. That being the case, companies should therefore ensure that the customs brokers not only release the imported goods in the most efficient and fast manner but also in a compliant manner. One suggestion we usually make is for importers to check on the reputation of the customs brokers with customs considering that most importers and customs brokers who play the field, so to speak, are known to customs. Internal Controls and Procedures. Another area that importers should focus on is the provision for internal controls and procedures in its import operations. The controls and procedures should have the following purposes: a) ensure that tax and duty calculations are correct; b) confirm the correctness and accuracy of declarations made under oath in the import entry (IEIRD) and the supplemental declaration on valuation (SDV); c) verify that tax and duty payments are actually received by customs; and d) import records are provided to the importer for record keeping purpose. In general, these controls and procedures must be provided in writing and must be applied to operations by both the import staff and the customs brokers. The written manual must be simple enough for easy understanding but should, however, address the above purposes. For the more sophisticated companies, part of the controls and procedures provided is a system commonly known as Customs Compliance Review (CCR). CCR is basically a system where external customs and trade experts conduct a third-party audit of the company's import transactions. This will involve, among others, identifying possible compliance issues, risk areas or duty savings opportunities and, at the same time, providing recommendations to address the specific compliance issues and risks. Record Keeping Practices. The PEA system provides for penalties for (1) failure to keep import and other related business records as provided in CAO 4-2004 and (2) for failure to give customs auditors access to those records. For many companies, the absence of import and related records (financial and accounting information) is already a given problem and this should be addressed immediately. For other companies, the records are normally available but are not easily accessible to customs. Based on our experience, most companies' record-keeping systems are typically tooled for BIR and internal audit, and not for customs audit. To illustrate, customs normally makes a reference to the entry number generated by Automated Customs Operating System (ACOS) when conducting its audit. On the other hand, importers have their own reference system for their import transactions (e.g. shipment number, purchaser order number). To be audit-ready, it is not enough that the records are available but more importantly, the record-keeping system must make the records easily accessible to customs. A licensed customs broker, the writer is an international trade and customs consultant and a lecturer of Ateneo Graduate School of Business and International Trade Centre (UNCTAD/WTO) on Purchasing and Supply Chain Management. Please contact agatonuvero@yahoo.com for your comments or questions.

Back to Top
Penalty for Misdeclaration in the SDV RECENTLY

Penalty for Misdeclaration in the SDV RECENTLY, there have been reports in some major dailies about the ongoing customs investigation against a multi-national com-pany for alleged undervaluation and supposed misdeclaration in the Supplemental Declaration on Valuation (SDV), a document submitted together with the import entry for every importation. Accordingly, the company has been found to have made false declarations in the SDV and hence, company officials can be held liable for fine, imprisonment or both. Under customs rules and regulations, importers are responsible for ensuring the accuracy and completeness of declarations (import entry and SDV) to customs and any misdeclaration, whether erroneous or fraudulent, exposes the importer to possible fines and penalties, including criminal prosecution. In practice, importers have always relied on their customs brokers for making declarations in the import entries. The submission of an SDV for every importation has only been required in 2000, when the country converted to the WTO Transaction Value (TV) system. For years, many importers have been penalized for misdeclarations made in the import entries, whether by omission or with intent. The recent news report, if true, is alarming because this is the first time that a company is going to be charged with false declarations in the SDV. What is the SDV? The SDV is basically a single-page document required to be submitted together with every import entry. It contains information requests which the customs broker and importer must fill out and sign prior to submission. The document clearly states that any "false or inaccurate declaration is considered a serious crime and punishable by fines, imprisonment or both". The document itself specifically requires the following: a) Are the buyer and seller related under the Transaction Value (TV) System (Section 201, TCCP)? b) Did the relationship influence the price? c) Does the transaction value of the imported goods closely approximate the value established under the TV system? d) Are there any restrictions as to the disposition or use of the goods by the buyer? e) Is the sale or price subject to some conditions or considerations for which a value cannot be determined with respect to the goods being valued? f) Are there royalties or license fees related to the imported goods payable either directly or indirectly as a condition of sale? g) Is the sale subject to any arrangement under which part of any proceeds from subsequent resale, disposal or use accrues directly or indirectly to the supplier? Additionally, information is also required in regards to (a) selling commissions, (b) packing and transport costs, and (c) goods and services supplied by the buyer free of charge or at a reduced price for use in connection with production and sale for export of the imported goods. To most importers and even brokers, these information requirements are very technical in nature and very difficult to answer. Moreover, the purpose of the information required does not seem to be properly explained. Transaction Value Defined. The basis of the information required in the SDV is found in the rules on customs valuation specifically provided in Section 201, TCCP and in the implementing rules (e.g. CAO 4-2004). Under the TV system, the dutiable value of an imported article is the "transaction value, which shall be the price actually paid or payable for the goods when sold for export to the Philippines". Stated otherwise, the primary basis for determining the customs value is the price paid or payable for the imported goods being valued. CAO 4-2004 provides that in determining the dutiable value certain adjustments may be made to the "price actually paid or payable" if not yet included in the invoice price. These adjustments are as follows: (a) commissions and brokerage fees (except buying commissions); (b) cost of containers; (c) cost of packing; (d) assists; (e) royalties and license fees; (f) subsequent proceeds that directly or indirectly accrue to the supplier; (g) cost of transport to the port of entry; (h) loading and handing charges to the port of entry; and (i) cost of insurance. The information as to possible adjustments to the invoice price is what is being required in the SDV. The questions provided therefore directly impacts on the determination of the dutiable value for purposes of tax and duty calculation. Penalty for False Declarations. The information requirements in the SDV clearly impacts on how customs treats the acceptability of the declared value and on whether certain additions may be made on said declared value. Any false or inaccurate declarations in the SDV obviously impacts on the final determination of the taxes and duties payable. In practice, it is not uncommon for many companies and customs brokers to just answer all the questions in the negative and to simply not verify the accuracy or completeness of such declarations. Unfortunately, the declarations directly impact on the valuation treatment of the goods being valued. Worse, any false or inaccurate declaration exposes the importer and customs broker to possible administrative and criminal sanctions. The ongoing customs investigation should therefore serve as a warning to both importers and customs brokers that they should ensure the declarations in the SDV are accurate and complete and that the signatures therein are genuine and authorized. Failing that, they are at great risk for administrative and criminal penalties. A licensed customs broker, the writer is an international trade and customs consultant and a lecturer at the Ateneo Graduate School of Business and International Trade Centre (UNCTAD/WTO) on Purchasing and Supply Chain Management. Please contact agatonuvero@yahoo.com for your comments or questions.

Back to Top

Duty Drawback on Exports

PEZA rules generally require that companies export at least 70% of their export produc-tion to qualify for registration in an export proces-sing zone. Many companies, however, export less than 70% of their production and thus, pay taxes and duties for imported raw materials subsequently utilized for export production. How can the company prevent the payment of taxes and duties on those export materials or, if paid, how will it secure the refund for such payment? Below is a discussion on securing duty drawback available upon exportation of finished products manufactured from previously imported raw materials (which were subject to duty payments). Section 106, TCCP. The provisions of Section 106(c) of the Tariff and Customs Code (TCCP) as amended, provide the basis for allowing drawback on duties paid on imported raw materials upon exportation of products manufactured from such previously imported materials.

The requirements under the above-mentioned section are as follows:

a) Payment of duties on imported raw materials; b) Actual use of such materials in the production or manufacture of the products exported; c) Exportation made within 1 year after importation of such materials; and d) Application or claim for drawback filed within 6 months from date of exportation. Procedures and Documents Required.

There are basically two major stages for claiming duty drawback, to wit: a) Pre-Qualification and Registration; and b) Filing and Processing of Drawback Claims Prior to the actual filing and processing of drawback claims, the company must first register with the One Stop Shop (OSS) Center of the Department of Finance (DoF) by submitting the following documents attached to the registration form: a) SEC, BIR and BOI registration b) Corporate Secretary's Certificate as to the company's authorized representatives/signatories to transact with the OSS Center (including alternate signatories with their respective specimen signatures) c) Certified true copies Income Tax Returns and Audited Financial Statements d) Profile of major suppliers e) Profile of major buyers/customers f) Clearance from the Bureau of Customs (BoC) for no pending account/administrative case with any BOC ports g) Clearance from the Bureau of Internal Revenue certifying that the company has no outstanding tax liability The pre-qualification procedure is part of the annual mandatory pre-qualification for all claimants conducted by the OSS Center. Once the company passes the evaluation, the Center shall issue a qualification certificate, which shall be used as basis for transacting with the Center. Upon completion of the above documents, the same shall be submitted to the Center for pre-screening and processing. The OSS Center shall send a written communication to the applicant as to the status of the application and the date of release of the qualification certificate, if favorably acted upon. Filing and Processing of Drawback Claims.

The following documents are required to support an application for drawback claims: a) Proof of Importation (e.g. Import Entry Declaration, BoC Official Receipts, Commercial Invoice and Packing List and Bill of Lading or Airway Bill) b) Proof of Exportation (Export Declaration, Export Sales Invoice, Billing of Lading and Shipment Information Slip) c) Proof of Exportation d) Formula of Manufacture duly approved by DOST-ITDI e) BoC Computation Table using Regular Scheme f) Schedule of Raw Materials Usage g) Schedule of Importation Going Forward.

To avail of duty drawback, the following activities must first be performed prior to claiming duty drawback on exportations: a) Registration application with the OSS Center; b) Confirmation of capability to file, support and process the duty drawback claim (e.g. securing the Shipment Information Slip prior to exportation); c) Preparation and approval of the Formula of Manufacture by DOST-ITDI; and d) Preparation of the documents necessary to support the initial application based on the formats provided by the OSS Center (e.g. BoC Computation Table using Regular Scheme, Schedule of Raw Materials Usage and Schedule of Importation). Because of the voluminous documents required, some of the processes mentioned above can be tedious and burdensome. Companies must therefore ensure that a checklist of documents has been prepared and completed before making any of the submissions. A licensed customs broker, the writer is an international trade and customs consultant and a regular lecturer on logistics, customs and cross border trade.

Please contact agatonuvero@yahoo.com for your comments or questions.

Back to Top

 

WTO Trade Facilitation Proposals

THE World Customs Organization (WCO) recently published a list of proposals to the World Trade Organization (WTO) to pro-mote facilitation in the trade of goods across international borders. WCO and WTO Cooperation. As an intergovernmental organization with 168-member countries, the WCO is well aware of its responsibilities in terms of disseminating information regarding its instruments and work as a means of assisting WTO Members. Considering that the proposals are undergoing negotiations, the publication of the list is not intended to prejudge the negotiations and their outcomes.

The aim is to help secure consistency between the work of the WTO and WCO and to promote inter-agency cooperation between the two organizations. Recognizing the impact of the customs service on the social and economic development of a country, the WCO has been at the forefront of customs development work since its inception in 1952. It has worked with its member countries to initiate discussions on and the identification of best customs practices, the development of instruments and standards, and the provision of technical support to those members who lack capacity in terms of engagement and implementation.

Major Works of the WCO. Among its major works are the HS Convention, the Revised Kyoto Convention and most recently, the Framework of Standards to Secure and Facilitate Global Trade. The HS Convention (International Convention on the Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System, which entered into force in January 1988) aims to facilitate international trade, facilitate trade statistics related work, reduce the expense incurred by re-describing, reclassifying and recording internationally traded goods, and facilitate the standardization of trade documentation and the transmission of data.

The revised Kyoto Convention (International Convention on the Simplification and Harmonization of Customs Procedures [amended in June 1999]), on the other hand, is intended to contribute more directly to trade facilitation. A more recent WCO product, the Framework of Standards to Secure and Facilitate Global Trade (adopted in June 2005) encompasses the important customs task of securing international trade as well as trade facilitation. It presents a blueprint of the future customs, realizing the two-fold objectives of better facilitation and security. These objectives, while they may appear to be conflicting, are in fact consistent and mutually supportive.

WTO Trade Facilitation Agenda. The WTO placed trade facilitation on its agenda in 1996 and started negotiations in 2004. The agenda specifically recognizes as one of the negotiation modalities the relevant work of the WCO. There have been quite a significant number of proposals submitted to the WTO Negotiating Group. A number of these proposals refer to the instruments and work of the WCO. List of Proposals for Trade Facilitation.

Below is a list of the proposals for the trade facilitation agenda currently being negotiated in the WTO. a) Publication and Availability of Information (e.g. Publication and Notification of Trade / Penalty Regulations; Internet Publication; Inquiry and Information Centers) b) Time Period between Publication and Implementation c) Consultation and Commenting on New and Amended Rules d) Advance Rulings e) Appeal Process f) Fees on Exportation and Importation g) Formalities in Exportation and Importation h) Prohibition of Consular Transaction Requirement i) Border Agency (inter-agency) Coordination j) Release and Clearance of Goods (Simplified Release) k) Objective criteria for Tariff Classification l) Matters Related to Goods in Transit m) Customs Cooperation / Information Exchange What to Expect. Developments and changes in the customs and trade front will come from many places.

Obviously, the WTO negotiations on the trade facilitation agenda will take many more years. Even then, we expect changes as a result of the unilateral efforts of the Philippine government and the Bureau of Customs. Moreover, efforts are being pushed by the private sector as well as regional trading blocs particularly ASEAN. We also see numerous technical assistance programs from the EU, US and Japan to promote trade facilitation at the border. EU in particular is pushing for the implementation of a one-stop shop service at the border, otherwise known as the Single Window. For the trading and transport community, what we should expect is a more simplified and transparent rules and procedures at the border.

Customs online capabilities will be enhanced, allowing logistics providers and importers to directly lodge entry online and clear goods without any human interface and the least cost. This in particular will come earlier, with the ongoing P500-million computerization program presently being implemented at the Bureau of Customs. Part of the program is the migration from the present customs automated system to the more modern AsycudaWORLD. Lesser Work Force. With automation, however, we will unfortunately find out that most of the work force involved with customs clearance will become redundant.

Logistics companies with greater online facilities will be forced to retrench staff involved in customs documentation and clearance. Companies solely engaged in customs clearance will become obsolete as a result of the importer's new capability to directly transact with customs. Logistics companies will continue to consolidate and we will see more mergers and acquisition in the industry. A licensed customs broker, the writer is an international trade and customs consultant and a regular lecturer on logistics, customs and cross border trade. Please contact agatonuvero@yahoo.com for your comments or questions.

Back to Top

Basis for Seizure and Forfeiture of Imports

UNDER customs laws and regulations, a Warrant of Seizure and Detention (WSD) may be issued against an imported article for violation of tariff and customs laws. Prior to the issuance of a WSD, a shipment is normally first 'alerted" and in case of positive findings, a WSD subsequently issued. The issuance of a WSD will now result in the conduct of a forfeiture proceeding against the imported article. If the importation has been found to have indeed violated any tariff and customs law, said article will then be forfeited in favor of the government, without prejudice to the filing of administrative and criminal actions against the importer.

Similarly, customs rules expressly provide that foreign articles openly offered for sale may be seized for failure to show evidence of payment of duties and taxes. Undervaluation, Misclassification and Misdeclaration. Importers have the primary obligation to ensure that its customs declarations are complete and accurate. Failing that, the importer may be deemed to have committed an undervaluation, misclassification or misdeclaration in its import entry declaration.

Section 2503 of the Tariff and Customs Code of the Philippines (TCCP), which provides that "an undervaluation, misdeclaration in weight, measurement or quantity of more than 30% between the value, weight, measurement or quantity declared in the entry and the actual value, weight, quantity or measurement shall constitute a prima facie evidence of fraud penalized under Section 2530 of this Code: Provided, further, That any misdeclared or undeclared imported article/item found upon examination shall ipso fact be forfeited in favor of the Government to be disposed of pursuant to the provisions of the Code." The same section further provides for administrative and criminal sanctions against the importer "if the undervaluation, misclassification or misdeclaration in the import entry is intentional". Alert Orders.

An Alert Order is normally issued based on "derogatory information" or suspected violation of customs laws, rules and regulations by a particular shipment. The issuance of the order will have the following implications: a. require the spot-checking or 100% physical examination of subject shipment; and b. warn concerned customs officials to exert extra diligence in examining the shipment and reviewing the import documents, The order must be issued by authorized customs officials (Commissioner, Dep. Comm., IEG, District Collector, Chief, ESS and Chief, CIIS) and must be recorded with the Office of the Customs Commissioner and affixed with the appropriate dry seal. An Alert Order may result in any of the following findings and recommendations: a. issuance of a Warrant for Seizure and Detention (WSD); b. payment of additional taxes and duties including fine; or c. lifting of the order. Warrant of Seizure and Forfeiture (WSD). The issuance of a WSD shall involve the lawful taking or possession of the imported article by customs and the seized property shall now be subject to forfeiture. A WSD is issued only by the District Collector upon determination of probable cause (violation of customs laws, rules and procedures).

Upon issuance of a WSD, the District Collector must: a. report the seizure to the Customs Commissioner and the Chairman of the Commission on Audit b. notify the importer in writing; and c. prepare a description, appraisal and classification of seized property. Remedies in Forfeiture Proceedings. In the course of the forfeiture proceeding and when there is no prima facie evidence of fraud, an importer may secure the release of goods upon posting of a cash bond subject to approval of the Commissioner. Section 2307, TCCP provides the manner by which an importer may offer to settle the case, when there is no fraud involved, as follows: a. When the case is pending, by way of payment of fine not lower than 20% but not exceeding 80% of the landed cost of the imported article; or b. In case of forfeiture, by way of payment for the domestic market value of the seized article.

In other words, the importer must first prove that the violation was not intentional and fraudulent in order that the remedy of settlement by fine or redemption will be available. A ruling allowing settlement will be subject to the approval of the Commissioner of Customs. Wrongful Issuance of a WSD. In case a WSD is wrongfully issued, the District Collector may withdraw the WSD. This rarely happens though. If a WSD has indeed been wrongly issued, a common remedy for importers is to file a motion to quash the WSD for lack of probable cause.

The motion is simply a formal request for the withdrawal of the WSD based on legal and technical grounds. The author is an international trade and customs consultant, and a licensed customs broker. He is also a regular lecturer on logistics, customs and international trade. Please contact aouvero@dlugms.com or (632) 4050021 / 29 for your comments.

Back to Top

Selecting Your Customs Broker

THERE are basically two arguments why importers have to be careful when selecting its customs brokers. One, customs has increasingly become stricter in implementing its rules resulting in hefty fines for numerous companies. These fines become part of the revenue collected by government. Secondly, the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) has likewise been very aggressive in conducting audits of the VAT declarations on import transactions.

As we have always mentioned, customs operations is a high-risk activity for importers and there are many reasons for this. The rules of the game has changed, and continue to change, putting importers at a high risk of committing errors in what is being declared to customs. The VAT payments made to customs are not always consistent with the VAT declarations submitted to BIR. Most if not all importers look at customs operations as a mere logistics activity, without regard for indirect tax compliance.
Role of Customs Brokers. For importers, customs brokerage is high impact service and is integral to the supply chain. While there are numerous customs brokerage firms willing to provide its service, the selection of a business partner is most important to importers for the following reasons:

a) To provide customs clearance and related services (e.g. transport service);
b) To ensure complete and correct declarations to customs;
c) To ensure compliance with import rules and regulations issued by customs and all other government agencies; and
d) To assist the company in providing complete and correct VAT declarations to BIR.

General Criteria for a Customs Broker. As a general rule, there are two (2) main factors for appraising customs broker as a business or professional entity:

a) Capability
b) Motivation

A service provider must not only be capable but must also be motivated to work. The presence of these two factors will normally ensure good performance. Motivation is normally assessed by looking at the following:

a) the value of company's business to the customs broker; and
b) the overall attractiveness of the business to the customs broker.

Assessing the Customs Broker Service. There are four key areas for appraising a particular "service":

a) Quality
b) Cost or Price
c) Availability of the Service
d) Service Responsiveness

As a unique service and based on Philippine practices, a customs broker must likewise have the following qualifications:

a) It must have the necessary technical competence.
b) It must maintain good relationships with customs.

The reason for this is that customs is a dynamic field and that customs rules provide very stiff penalties for errors committed in the declarations. The rules affecting valuation and classification are based on international conventions and agreements.

Based on existing practices, customs will normally be lenient in applying the rules if the customs broker maintains good "relationship" with customs. On the other hand, we have seen many times how customs suddenly becomes strict with the rules, resulting in the seizure of the shipment or the imposition of fines. It will only need one serious error in customs clearance to destroy a record of good performance.

Making the Final Decision. Once a short list of suppliers is made, an importer must also look at the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats involving each prospective customs broker. Before making the final decision, the importer must ask itself the following questions:

a) Is the customs broker capable (organization and finance)?
b) Is the customs broker motivated?
c) Will the customs broker provide the right service (quality, cost, availability and service responsiveness)?
d) Is the customs broker technically competent to address the growing compliance requirements of customs, BIR and other government agencies?
e) Does the customs broker have good relations with customs?
f) Do the business practices of the customs broker adhere to good corporate governance and business ethics?

A licensed customs broker, the author is an international trade and customs consultant and a regular lecturer on logistics, customs and cross border trade. Please contact agatonuvero@yahoo.com for your comments or questions.

Back to Top

Basis for Seizure and Forfeiture of Imports

UNDER customs laws and regulations, a Warrant of Seizure and Detention (WSD) may be issued against an imported article for violation of tariff and customs laws. Prior to the issuance of a WSD, a shipment is normally first 'alerted" and in case of positive findings, a WSD subsequently issued. The issuance of a WSD will now result in the conduct of a forfeiture proceeding against the imported article.

If the importation has been found to have indeed violated any tariff and customs law, said article will then be forfeited in favor of the government, without prejudice to the filing of administrative and criminal actions against the importer.

Similarly, customs rules expressly provide that foreign articles openly offered for sale may be seized for failure to show evidence of payment of duties and taxes.

Undervaluation, Misclassification and Misdeclaration. Importers have the primary obligation to ensure that its customs declarations are complete and accurate. Failing that, the importer may be deemed to have committed an undervaluation, misclassification or misdeclaration in its import entry declaration. Section 2503 of the Tariff and Customs Code of the Philippines (TCCP), which provides that

<i>"an undervaluation, misdeclaration in weight, measurement or quantity of more than 30% between the value, weight, measurement or quantity declared in the entry and the actual value, weight, quantity or measurement shall constitute a prima facie evidence of fraud penalized under Section 2530 of this Code: Provided, further, That any misdeclared or undeclared imported article/item found upon examination shall ipso fact be forfeited in favor of the Government to be disposed of pursuant to the provisions of the Code."</i>

The same section further provides for administrative and criminal sanctions against the importer "if the undervaluation, misclassification or misdeclaration in the import entry is intentional".

Alert Orders. An Alert Order is normally issued based on "derogatory information" or suspected violation of customs laws, rules and regulations by a particular shipment. The issuance of the order will have the following implications:

a. require the spot-checking or 100% physical examination of subject shipment; and
b. warn concerned customs officials to exert extra diligence in examining the shipment and reviewing the import documents,

The order must be issued by authorized customs officials (Commissioner, Dep. Comm., IEG, District Collector, Chief, ESS and Chief, CIIS) and must be recorded with the Office of the Customs Commissioner and affixed with the appropriate dry seal.

An Alert Order may result in any of the following findings and recommendations:

a. issuance of a Warrant for Seizure and Detention (WSD);
b. payment of additional taxes and duties including fine; or
c. lifting of the order.

Warrant of Seizure and Forfeiture (WSD). The issuance of a WSD shall involve the lawful taking or possession of the imported article by customs and the seized property shall now be subject to forfeiture. A WSD is issued only by the District Collector upon determination of probable cause (violation of customs laws, rules and procedures). Upon issuance of a WSD, the District Collector must:

a. report the seizure to the Customs Commissioner and the Chairman of the Commission on Audit
b. notify the importer in writing; and
c. prepare a description, appraisal and classification of seized property.

Remedies in Forfeiture Proceedings. In the course of the forfeiture proceeding and when there is no prima facie evidence of fraud, an importer may secure the release of goods upon posting of a cash bond subject to approval of the Commissioner. Section 2307, TCCP provides the manner by which an importer may offer to settle the case, when there is no fraud involved, as follows:

a. When the case is pending, by way of payment of fine not lower than 20% but not exceeding 80% of the landed cost of the imported article; or

b. In case of forfeiture, by way of payment for the domestic market value of the seized article.

In other words, the importer must first prove that the violation was not intentional and fraudulent in order that the remedy of settlement by fine or redemption will be available. A ruling allowing settlement will be subject to the approval of the Commissioner of Customs.

Wrongful Issuance of a WSD. In case a WSD is wrongfully issued, the District Collector may withdraw the WSD. This rarely happens though. If a WSD has indeed been wrongly issued, a common remedy for importers is to file a motion to quash the WSD for lack of probable cause. The motion is simply a formal request for the withdrawal of the WSD based on legal and technical grounds.

The author is an international trade and customs consultant, and a licensed customs broker. He is also a regular lecturer on logistics, customs and international trade. Please contact aouvero@dlugms.com or (632) 4050021 / 29 for your comments.

Back to Top

WTO Review of RP's Import and Export Policy

The WTO Secretariat issued last month (June 7, 2005) a Trade Policy Review of the Philippines. Part of the agreements entered under the WTO is that member countries shall be transparent with their trade policies and, as such, will be subject to review under the Trade Policy Review Mechanism to ensure compliance with commitments under the WTO.

The policy review is the third for the Philippines since the time it acceded to the WTO. The report covers the trade policy and practices of the Philippine government covering trade in goods and services. It also examines such practices and describes the country's trade policy-making institutions and the macroeconomic situation.

A specific section of the review refers to trade measures affecting import and export. What are the findings of the WTO secretariat regarding these measures affecting import and export in the Philippines?

By and large, the findings and observations in the review should provide the trading community with a clear insight on present government trade practices as well as future policy direction for export and trade in the Philippines.

General Observations. Among the general findings of the review are the following;

a. Import barriers remain a major impediment to freer trade.

b. Tariff remains substantial although declining. Since late 2003, tariffs have risen from an average MFN tariff rate of 5.8% in 2003 to 7.4% in 2004.

c. Non-tariff barriers particularly relating to licensing and permits affect a number of goods (e.g. sanitary and health measures).

d. Trade remedy measures (dumping and safeguards) have been adopted based on the WTO agreements.

e. International technical standards have slowly been incorporated into national standards and technical regulations.

f. Tax and non-tax incentives for exports exist (e.g. duty exemptions, drawbacks, export-processing zones, and tax relief).

Measures Affecting Imports. Among the more important findings on measures affecting imports are as follows:

a. The Philippines has plans to accede to the WCO's Revised Kyoto Convention, albeit with certain reservations.

b. On customs procedures, it is reported that about 80% of importations are subjected to the red lane. The reason for this is the alleged serious smuggling problem and scarce customs resources.

c. Rules of origin apply to importations availing of preferences under AFTA CEPT. No rules required for MFN imports.

d. In relation to applied tariffs, there is a consistent application of higher tariffs on processed items than on semi-processed goods and raw materials, albeit with bias towards higher protection for agricultural than manufactured goods. Still, the general direction is towards the development of the manufacturing sector.

e. Since late 2003, the government has gradually increased the MFN average tariff rate.

f. Tariff quotas remain on 14 product categories involving some 60 tariff lines. Administration of the quota system is a complex system.

g. The Philippines' sanitary and phytosanitary regime seems strict. Imports of agricultural products, live animals, plants, fish, their products and by-products must be accompanied by a sanitary, phytosanitary or health certificate from the country of origin, and are subject to inspection upon arrival.

Measures Directly Affecting Exports. Below are some of the more important findings on measures affecting exports from the Philippines:

a. Exports are covered by an Export Declaration (ED), filed by the exporter (or representative) with the BOC or electronically, through one-stop export documents centers.

b. Regulated exports require export clearance while certificates of origin are required for exports under the GSP and AFTA CEPT. Other permits and licenses are required for regulated exports.

c. Duty drawbacks, refunds or exemptions are allowed on imported materials manufactured for export or through the CBW scheme.

d. PEZA and other free trade zones provide incentives, including tax and duty exemption on imported articles introduced into the zone and exported after further processing.

The author is an international trade and customs consultant, and a licensed customs broker. He is also a regular lecturer on logistics, customs and international trade. Please contact aouvero@dlugms.com or (632) 4050021 / 29 for your comments.

Back to Top

New Rules for Exporters under AFTA

IN our article written last April 25, 2005, we mentioned the fact that the ASEAN Economic Ministers have endorsed new rules of origin for products availing of the preferential tariff rates under CEPT. While the new rules of origin should have taken effect January 2005, the "Implementing Guidelines for Partial Cumulation under ASEAN Cumulative Rules of Origin" for the implementation of Rule 4(b) of the new rules was endorsed only on April 26, 2005 during the ASEAN Economic Ministers (AEM) Retreat.

As a whole, the new rules intend to provide new standards in the method for calculating local/ASEAN content and guidelines for costing methodologies and the treatment of locally-procured materials. It also provides new procedures for verifying local/ASEAN content calculation.

For many exporters, the common question is how these new rules will impact on companies exporting to ASEAN countries.

Background. Under AFTA-CEPT, there is a set of rules to determine the country of origin of a product for purposes of availing of the special rates. The rule on country of origin is based on the concept of "substantial transformation", which assigns origin to the country where the last substantial transformation occurred. Substantial transformation may be roughly defined on the basis of a change in tariff heading, achieving a threshold of proportion of value-added, or on the basis of certain manufacturing processes. Another basis under AFTA CEPT is a 40% threshold level of the value of the product.

As previously mentioned, what is most important with the new rules is that they now allow the cumulation of materials with less than 40% but more than 20% ASEAN content for purposes of computing the local content of the final product. Apparently, this was not allowed under the old rule, which was based on the "all or nothing" principle.

Rule 4(b), AFTA CEPT Rules of Origin. Rule 4(b) of the "Rules of Origin for the CEPT Scheme for AFTA" provides as follows:

Rules 4. Cumulative Rule of Origin.

(a) Products which comply with origin requirements provided for in Rule 1 and which are used in a Member State as inputs for a finished product eligible for preferential treatment in another Member State shall be considered as products originating in the Member State where working or processing of the finished product has taken place provided that the aggregate ASEAN content of the final product is not less than 40%.

(b) If the material has less than 40 percent ASEAN content, the qualifying ASEAN content shall be in direct proportion to the actual domestic content provided that it is equal to or more than the agreed threshold of 20%.

Implementing Guidelines. For the past several months, the export division of the Bureau of Customs has been receiving a lot of inquiries as to the implementation of the new rules on cumulation. In fact, customs officials were quite surprised that new rules have in fact been issued and no formal endorsement has been made to customs by the Philippine representatives to ASEAN. Thus, for several months, both customs and exporters have been in a quandary as to the application of the new rules on cumulation.

With the issuance of the implementing guidelines, many of the issues and concerns on the implementation of the cumulative rules should have been addressed. The implementing guidelines for the implementation of Rule 4(b) of the AFTA CEPT Rules of Origin are provided below:

Implementing Guidelines for Partial Cumulation under ASEAN Cumulative Rules of Origin

(a) to be considered for partial cumulation, the local/ASEAN content of the materials, parts or produce originating from the country of last manufacture should not be less than 20%;

(b) the formula to be used in the calculation would be similar to the formula for calculating the 40% local/ASEAN content;

(c) no CEPT preference shall be extended by the importing member country for that particular intermediate good;

(d) the export of the intermediate good shall be accompanied by a valid CO Form D duly prominently marked or stamped "FOR CUMULATION PURPOSES ONLY";

(e) the relevant sections of the Operational Certification Procedures, including Rule 17 on verification, shall be applicable to CO Form Ds issued for partial cumulation purposes.

Next Steps for Exporters. For exporters who have previously not qualified for tariff preference under AFTA CEPT, a review of costing methodologies should be forthcoming. If previous costing methodologies failed to qualify under 40% local/ASEAN content requirement by a few percentage, the cumulation of materials, parts and products with more than 20% but less than 40% local/ASEAN content may result in reaching the 40% threshold. In addition, those barely above the 40% threshold may add additional percentage points to cover for possible variables such as currency fluctuations or price increase of inputs.

The author is an international trade and customs consultant, and a licensed customs broker. He is also a regular lecturer on logistics, customs and international trade. Please contact aouvero@dlugms.com or (632) 4050021 / 29 for your comments.

Back to Top


Liberializing the Distribution Sector under the WTO

ABOUT two weeks ago, the Philippine government proposed the opening of six service sectors to foreign investment as part of its commitment to the WTO under the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). The announcement was made mainly because of the May 31 deadline for developing countries to submit their revised list of service sectors to be liberalized. Accordingly, the service sectors to be liberalized are:

(a) computer and computer-related services
(b) construction services
(c) distribution services (commission agents' services)
(d) energy services
(e) environmental services (sewerage)
(f) tourism services

The Philippines previously committed to liberalize the financial, communication, tourism and transport services. With the opening of the mining industry to foreign industry, the government has excluded certain sectors from the initial list.

To many, what is the implication of this commitment to both the trading community and the service sector industry? What is the concept of "trade in services"? What is included in the definition of distribution services / commission agent?

WTO Agreement on Trade in Services. A common misconception is that the agreements under the WTO only involve the trade in goods. Unfortunately, the WTO is a general agreement covering both trade in goods and services. It operates a system of trade rules resulting from decades of negotiations and agreements among trading countries. From the original 15-point agenda in 1986, the present set of agreements now covers over 30 items ranging from customs valuation and intellectual property to maritime, telecommunication and financial services. The agreements are essentially contracts that bind the countries in regards to their trade policies.

As a background, the various agreements, annexes, decisions and understanding under the WTO framework are generally categorized in four main areas:

(a) umbrella agreement creating the WTO;
(b) agreements on three broad areas of trade (goods, services and intellectual property);
(c) agreement on dispute settlement; and
(d) agreement on trade policy review.

The agreements on trade cover three main areas. The main agreement governing trade in goods is covered by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). The main agreement for trade in services is the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) while that for intellectual property is the agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS).

Liberalizing the Service Sectors. Under the WTO framework, the GATS contains the broad principles governing trade services in the following sectors: movement of natural persons, air transport and shipping, financial services and telecommunication

In addition to the general agreement, there are additional extra agreements and annexes together with list of commitments of individual countries. Part of the GATS therefore is the individual commitment of all member countries of the WTO on service sectors to be open to foreign investment or ownership. These commitments by individual countries under GATS state how much access foreign service providers can have for specific services and which sectors are disallowed to foreigners or are not given the "most favored-nation" principle of non-discrimination.

As mentioned, the Philippine government has committed to liberalizing the distribution service (commission agent service). Stated otherwise, the government has committed to open this area of distribution service to foreign players. Foreign nationals will have the same rights as Filipinos to engage in this sub-sector.

While the timelines and exact details of the Philippine commitment to liberalize the service sectors are yet to be negotiated and finalized, the six identified service sectors should now take extra attention with regard to future developments in this area of international negotiations.
Implication to the Trade Distribution Industry. The concept of distribution covers services such as distributing products, commission agents' services, wholesaling, retailing, franchising, sales away from a fixed location, as well as related subordinated activities, such as inventory management or repair and maintenance services. Related to the concept of distribution are services such as rental and leasing services, air courier services, freight forwarding, and packing services. Within the WTO negotiation framework, "distribution sector" specifically refers to commission agents' services, wholesale trade services, retailing services and franchising.

While the commitment to liberalize the distribution sector is supposedly limited to the commission agents' services, we have yet to see the details of what has really been committed under the WTO framework. It may be that this initial commitment is a first step towards liberalizing the other areas of the distribution industry.

We have to be reminded that the WTO framework supports the liberalization of sectors that have previously disallowed foreign players. While air transport and shipping are already governed by the broad principles of GATS, the distribution sector is part of the ongoing new services negotiations and future agreements will likely impact on the domestic industry.

The author is an international trade and customs consultant, and a licensed customs broker. He is also a regular lecturer on logistics, customs and international trade. Please contact aouvero@dlugms.com or (632) 4050021 / 29 for your questions.

Back to Top

Why Companies Are Not Ready for Customs Audit

THE Bureau of Customs (BoC) has of late issued another set of Audit Notification Letters (ANLs) pursuant to the Post Entry Audit (PEA) system provided under RA 9135 and its implementing rules. Previously, the issuance of ANLs was focused on the Top 1,000 importers, most of which are big local traders and multinational companies (MNCs). One interesting development with the recent issuances is the focus on both the Top 1,000 companies as well as on industry groups.

Present State of Play. In the first quarter of this year, we had the opportunity to provide assistance in a foreign-funded technical assistance program to assess current operations of the PEA system. During this time, we interfaced with both the PEA Group and some of the auditees. Similarly, we had the opportunity to assist companies in preparing themselves for customs audit.

In the meantime that customs has been aggressively implementing the PEA system, many companies are at a loss on how the customs audit is being conducted and how they can prepare for such an audit.

What are the specific issues involved in an audit? What are the records subject to customs audit? How are customs audits related to ongoing BIR audits on VAT declarations on importations? How does customs conduct the audit?

Compliance Issues. Based on what we have seen, customs will basically look at whether taxes and duties have been properly paid on importations. In relation to this, customs auditors will look at the following concerns, among others:

a. Availability of Import Records and Financial Records to support the declarations to customs and the payments made to suppliers;

b. VAT payments to customs as against VAT declarations to BIR;

c. Inventory Costs of importations verified against declarations to BIR;

d. Value declarations as against actual remittances to suppliers;

e. Tariff Clas-sification and Duty Rates of importations;

f. Quantity Dis-crepancies between Declared Customs Volumes as against Actual Records;

g. Eligibility to Avail of Tariff Preference, Duty Drawbacks and Tariff Exemptions;

h. Liquidation of Customs Bonded Warehouse Materials;

i. Payment of Correct Duties and Taxes on Materials Procured from PEZA and other Free Trade Zone (e.g. Clark and Subic) entities; and

j. Availability of permits and licenses on regulated impor-tations.

In addition to the above issues, customs will look at the "audit readiness" of the company in terms of record keeping. Contrary to the usual notion that the "records" refer simply to import records, customs will actually look at all and any records that relate to declarations to customs. That is the logic behind the voluminous records being requested by customs. Customs will also look at the internal company controls and procedures to assess the level of risks in the company's trading transactions.

Present Situation of Companies. In many of the companies that we have interfaced, many have the basic problem of not maintaining their records of importations. This is obviously an immediate problem for companies being presently audited considering that failure to keep records of importations makes the company liable to a 20% penalty based on the value of importations without records. In addition to the absence of import records, many companies have a problem locating and accessing the necessary financial and accounting information to support the value declarations to customs.

Even for companies that pride themselves to have compliant practices and the best record keeping practices, most if not all are not ready for a customs audit. A company's record keeping and audit best practices are normally fine tuned to address the requirements of an internal revenue audit but not a customs audit. Customs audit is certainly different from a BIR audit. The records and information required by customs are totally different from the requirements of BIR.

How Do You Prepare? Companies must first ensure that import records (e.g. import entry, commercial invoice, packing list, bill of lading) are kept within three years from importation. Additionally, companies must ensure that financial and accounting records for value declarations to customs are not only available but also readily accessible to customs.

Secondly, companies must ensure that their import transactions are compliant with customs rules and regulations. This poses a problem to many for three main reasons: (1) companies look at customs operations more from a logistics perspective rather than from an indirect tax compliance concern; (2) customs operations are normally outsourced to logistics companies mostly not concerned with compliance issues; and (3) companies do not have internal knowledge and competence for ensuring customs and trade compliance.

The author is an international trade and customs consultant, and a licensed customs broker. He is also a regular lecturer on logistics, customs and international trade. Please contact aouvero@dlugms.com or (632) 4050021 / 29 for your questions.

Back to Top

Misconceptions about RA 9280 (2)

THERE seems to be only two positions on RA 9280 - those for it and those against. Obviously, most licensed customs brokers support the law while those engaged in corporate practice are mostly against it. To date, there are still various conflicting interpretations as to RA 9280 and its implementing rules and regulations (IRR).

This two-part series does not intend to answer all the questions given the varying interpretations of the law. What we intend to do is to clarify the issues and hopefully, provide readers with inputs to help them make their own informed decisions and not simply rely on hearsay and biased views.

Below is a continuation of the frequently asked questions and our suggested answers and opinions (which we hope is as objective as we can be):

What happens when the IRR of RA 9280 takes effect on March 27, 2005? Upon effectivity of the IRR of RA 9280, the public should in general be bound by its provisions and any violation may result in possible administrative complaints (for licensed customs brokers) and/or criminal complaints (for both professional and non-professional).

This is certainly a very sensitive issue. For those who believe that RA 9280 and its IRR expressly prohibit existing corporate practice, there seem to be a lot of ongoing violations of the law. For one, licensed individuals allowing themselves to continue as principal or alternate brokers of corporations may be in violation of the law.

Secondly, customs personnel and officials allowing corporate practice may also be deemed to have violated the law. Of course, there are contrary opinions to the above and this is not as easy and simple as it looks.

The Bureau of Customs (BoC) has already issued numerous memoranda effectively allowing continued operation of corporations pending issuance of its Customs Administrative Order (CAO).

On the other hand, there are reports that the draft CAO expressly prohibits corporations from registering with the BoC as a customs broker. While most companies have already renewed their registration with customs and even as they have prepared their own contingency plans, much is at stake on the issuance of the CAO.

What are the penalties for violating RA 9280 and its rules? Persons violating RA 9280 and its rules may be found liable administratively and criminally. For licensed customs brokers, an administrative case may be filed before the Professional Regulatory Board (PRB) and in case of positive findings, the professional license of the individual may be suspended, revoked or cancelled.

The administrative case may be filed separately from the criminal case to be filed in the regular courts. A criminal case may result in fines and/or imprisonment. For non-licensed individuals deemed to have violated RA 9280 and its rules, a criminal complaint may be filed in court and the penalty may similarly involve fines and/or imprisonment.

What are the new requirements to practice the Customs Broker profession? Under the rules, the PRB is tasked to supervise the customs broker profession and is authorized to issue the certificate of registration and professional identification cards. We should wait for the guidelines to be issued by the PRB on the issuance of the certificate of registration of professional identification cards.

What is important to note is that in the future, licensed individuals will not be allowed to register with BoC without such documents. While the issuance of such documents is a matter of course, it would seem that the PRB, in the exercise of its power of supervision, may not issue the same on valid grounds, for example, if there is an existing administrative or criminal complaint against the individual for violation of RA 9280.

What is the continuing professional education for customs brokers? Many professionals registered with the Professional Regulation Commission (PRC) are required to have continuing professional education as a requirement for being allowed to continue practicing the profession.

For lawyers, the Supreme Court requires all lawyers to finish 36 units/hours of professional education every three years. We expect a similar program for customs brokers to be provided soon. The PRB should be issuing rules and guidelines soon to implement the continuing education program.

What is the role of the Bureau of Customs as far as customs brokers are concerned? The Bureau of Customs obviously retains its administrative power and functions over customs operations and as such, customs brokers practicing their profession can be subject to supervision and control by the BoC in so far as the practice will impact on revenue collection and compliance with customs laws and regulations. For one, the BoC retains its power to conduct audit of customs brokers under RA 9135.

Also, to ensure the protection of revenues and compliance with customs laws, BoC may subject customs brokers to additional rules. For example, customs may require customs brokers to submit periodically additional information and records in regards to importations being cleared with customs. In the future, we foresee both importers and customs brokers being subject to reportorial requirements, similar to the requirements made by BIR.

How much should Customs Brokers charge as Professional Fees? Both RA 9280 and its IRR are silent on the rates for professional fees. However, the code of ethics for customs brokers requires that professional fees be charged on the basis of the standard rates adopted by the PRB.

Accordingly, the PRB has adopted the CAO on customs brokerage charges as the standard for professional fees. The issue here is whether the standard rates are mandatory and whether failure to charge such rates constitutes unethical practice which is a ground for possible revocation or cancellation of the license if an administrative complaint is filed.

While the wording in the code of ethics indicates that the standard rates are mandatory, there are some who are of the opinion that the non-application of rates is not necessarily unethical and as such, the rates should only serve as a guide.


Back to Top

Latest Developments in ASEAN


AS a result of the failure of WTO members countries to enter into major agreements during the ministerial meeting in Cancun, Mexico two years ago, the focus of many countries and regional groupings have been towards bilateral and regional trade arrangements.

These arrangements ostensibly will impact on the trading community in the short and medium term. In the Asia-Pacific region, many of the trade negotiations involve the ASEAN member countries and the major trading countries of Asia. Specifically, the regional agreements between ASEAN and the big three Asian countries (China, Japan and Korea) are in various stage of negotiations or implementation.

The RP-China bilateral trade agreement is now being implemented, with the early harvest program soon to be implemented. The RP-Japan agreement is scheduled for approval by September this year. For ASEAN, efforts continue towards further reducing tariffs for goods and harmonizing rules governing trade in services. While China and India have become growth engines, attracting most of the foreign direct investments in the region, ASEAN remains attractive with its 520 million inhabitants and with a total GDP of US$700 billion. AFTA-CEPT.

As a background, ASEAN Free Trade Area (AFTA) involves the removal of obstacles to free trade among the 10-member states of ASEAN. It includes the lowering of tariff rates and the removal of quantitative restrictions and other non-tariff barriers that limit or prevent the entry of imported goods. While the intent of AFTA is create an integrated market for ASEAN's half billion people, the ultimate objective is to increase the region's competitive edge as a production base for the world market.

The main instrument for making ASEAN a free trade area is the Common Effective Preferential Tariff Scheme (AFTA-CEPT), which hopes to reduce intra-regional tariffs and remove non-tariff barriers. For the ASEAN 5 (RP, Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia and Singapore), 99% of products lines in the inclusion list are already in the 0-5% duty rates.

The rest of ASEAN like Cambodia, Myanmar, Laos and Vietnam have 80% of their products moved to inclusion list; with 66% of those in the list already in the 0-5% range. Japan, US and the EU remain as the largest trading partners of ASEAN, with Japan as the largest source of imports. Intra-ASEAN trade has increased 4.2% (export) and 1.6% (imports) in 2003. New Rules of Origin. Under AFTA-CEPT, there is a set of rules to determine the country of origin of a product for purposes of availing of the special rates.

To prevent transshipment of goods originating from non-ASEAN states, it is not enough that the goods were exported from a member state. The rule on country of origin is based on the concept of "substantial transfor-mation", which assigns origin to the country where the last substantial transformation occurred. Substantial transformation may be roughly defined on the basis of a change in tariff heading, achieving a threshold of proportion of value-added, or on the basis of certain manufacturing processes. The basis of substantial transformation is a 40% threshold level of the value of the product. For products availing of the preferential tariff rates under CEPT, a new rules of origin has been issued with effect from January 2005.

The new rules intend to provide new standards in the method for calculating local/ASEAN content and guidelines for costing methodologies and the treatment of locally-procured materials. It also provides new procedures for verifying local/ASEAN content calculation.

What is most important with the new rules is that it now allows the cumulation of materials with less than 40% but more than 20% ASEAN content for purposes of computing the local content of the final product. Apparently, this was not allowed under the old rule, which was based on the "all or nothing" principle. In addition to the new rules of origin, special substantial transformation rules have been issued for several product sectors (e.g. wheat flour, iron and steel). ASEAN+3.

The ongoing regional trade negotiations between ASEAN and the three major trading countries in Asia (Japan, China and Korea) will involve a wide-ranging area for economic cooperation, including trade and investment. The trade agreements are ongoing with plans for early harvest programs. Already, there are discussions on the prospects of creating an East Asia Free Trade Area in the not so distant future. According to studies, the US will potentially be the biggest loser once ASEAN+3 evolves into a fully integrated common market. AEC - The Future of ASEAN.

The ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) is one of the three pillars under the ASEAN Community concept, which includes the ASEAN Security Community (ASC) and the ASEAN Socio-Cultural Community (ASCC). With the prior establishment of the building blocks towards ASEAN economic integration, the movement towards an AEC by 2020 is the most logical step in the economic ladder. Policy makers foresee an AEC established towards the direction of an "FTA plus" arrangement. An FTA Plus arrangement is basically a zero-tariff free trade agreement with additional benefits akin to a common market.

Most of the initiatives toward the creation of the AEC are to be submitted by end of this year. Even as these initiatives are being finalized, the various building blocks for economic integration are being established not only for ASEAN but for the major trading countries of East Asia.


Back to Top

Foreign Currency Risks in International Trade


FOR importers and exporters, the foreign currency risk involved in trading goods across borders is quite difficult to understand and manage. The risk of loss while imported articles are in transit is easily managed by securing a marine insurance coverage. In case of foreign currency fluctuations, what are the risks and how exactly do you manage them?

To illustrate, a local company which sells its goods locally buys its articles from the US. The imported article is normally denominated in US dollars. At the time the importer ordered the goods from the US, the exchange rate was PhP54 per US dollar. The goods arrived two weeks later and by then the exchange rate was PhP56 per US dollar. Obviously, the importer will pay more in Philippine peso to the supplier. In addition, the importer will have to pay higher taxes and duties considering that the dutiable value will be higher when converted to Philippine peso.

How will the importer recover the higher cost of the imported goods? Normally, the importer will sell the goods at a higher price to recover the higher cost. But this is not always the case. If the importer has previously agreed to sell the goods to a buyer at the old price, the importer will certainly have to incur the added costs as a result of the depreciation of the Philippine peso. In many instances, the importer is likewise unable to increase its price due to stiff competition from sellers of similar goods. How will the importer manage the foreign currency risks inherent in international trading transactions?
Background of Foreign Exchange. Prior to 1984, the Philippines was using a managed float system for its foreign currency exchange, effectively allowing the peso to trade 4.5% below and above the guiding rate set by the Central Bank (CB). In other words, while the exchange rate is allowed to float, it is not allowed to fluctuate beyond the 4.5% range. In 1984, the CB liberalized the foreign exchange market. This resulted in local banks being allowed to trade foreign currency among themselves based on prevailing market conditions and without government intervention.

By 1993, the exchange rate stood at PhP25 to a dollar. The exchange rate remained quite stable until the regional crisis in 1997 which resulted in an exchange rate of PhP40 to a dollar by 1998.
Foreign Currency Risks. There are many types of foreign currency risks but the most typical involves transaction risks in international trade. We have illustrated this in our example above where the peso depreciated from the date the import order was placed to the date of payment to the supplier. It may happen also that the peso appreciates during that period, in which case the importer gains as a result in the lower peso price payable to the supplier and the lower duties and taxes.

For international traders, there are other risks involved. One would be the translation risks involved when a local company has international businesses which would be reported locally. The earnings overseas may increase or decrease when translated to the Philippine peso.

Strategic Risks for Exporters. The other kind of risk refers to strategic exposures that may result from foreign currency changes in other markets. To illustrate, many governments particularly the US is of the position that the Chinese currency is undervalued such that its exports are a lot cheaper than exports from other countries. If China will appreciate its currency, its exports will be priced a little higher such that other countries may be able to compete more.

For international traders, both exporters and importers, foreign currency risks impact not only on specific trading transactions but also on how the company will conduct its purchase and supply strategy both in the medium and long term. For exporters in particular, foreign currency risks will impact not only on the cost of imported raw materials but also on how it will price its goods in the export market. Pricing the goods in the export market not only depends on the costs of inputs but also on the pricing of competitive products from other export markets, particularly China.
Certainly, managing foreign currency risks is a lot more complicated for exporters than for importers who are simply doing business exclusively for the domestic market.

Shifting the Risk Offshore. An importer selling exclusively in the domestic market certainly will not concern itself with currency risks in the export market.

Still, an importer generally has two ways to manage its foreign currency risks. The first strategy is to shift the risk offshore by agreeing with the supplier that the selling price is in peso even if it will be converted to US dollar at the prevailing exchange rates upon payment. To illustrate, the importer can negotiate to buy the goods at PhP100 per piece. Upon arrival of the goods, the supplier will pay the supplier by exchanging the PhP100 into US dollar based on prevailing rate and remitting the converted amount. In this particular case, the risk is transferred to the supplier and the seller may gain or lose from the currency fluctuation depending on the prevailing exchange rate at the time of payment.

Forward Transactions. A second strategy is for the importer to buy foreign exchange through forward transactions instead of buying "on the spot". Forward transactions refer to an agreed sale of a foreign exchange to be made more than two business days away and at some specified future date. To cover the foreign currency requirements of an importation, an importer may agree with a bank for the latter to provide the foreign currency at a certain date (to