The Philippine Bureau of Customs (BOC) has suspended the implementation of Customs Memorandum Order (CMO) No. 06-2018, which requires the electronic submission of cargo manifest to the agency’s new Advanced Manifest System (AMS).
Customs Commissioner Isidro Lapeña in a memorandum dated May 29 and signed on May 30 ordered the suspension “until further notice” in the interest of service and “to further test the readiness” of the system.
CMO 06-2018, signed on May 7 and effective immediately, had prescribed the operational guidelines for submitting in BOC’s AMS the advance manifest and other required documents by foreign carriers, shippers, consignees, accredited cargo-surveying companies, and authorized agents.
Stakeholders have asked for the temporary suspension of the order’s implementation in order to resolve first issues with the new procedure.
The Chamber of Customs Brokers, Inc (CCBI) in a letter had asked Lapeña to defer the CMO, citing in particular Section 4.10, which states: “The carrier or its authorized agent shall obtain from the shipper the Commercial Invoice and Packing List for submission in searchable PDF to the Bureau’s Advance Manifest System at least twenty-four (24) hours prior to the arrival of the vessel or aircraft.
“The consignee shall be held liable for non-compliance of the shipper and may be subject to the payment of imposable fines in accordance with existing customs laws and regulations without prejudice to whatever legal recourse the BOC may pursue against eh delinquent consignee.”
In seeking the deferment, CCBI president Atty. Ferdinand Nague noted, “The shipper and the consignee do not have a principal-agent relationship so as to bind one party to the misdeed or failure of the other. It would be highly unfair to penalize the consignee over a matter it has no full control of.
“Moreover, since this CMO provides for a penalty provision for non-compliance, the same should have the approval of the Secretary of Finance and with prior public consultation.”
A broad range of concerns
In a position paper sent to BOC, Philippine Multimodal Transport and Logistics Association Inc. (PMTLAI) made a similar request “considering the many concerns and need for clarification in the CMO.”
PMTLAI also took note of Section 4.10, stating that the collection of commercial invoice and packing list from the consignees “will pose an unnecessary and heavy administrative work to the forwarders.”
“More importantly, the forwarders have no legal basis or right to demand these commercial documents, for the simple reason that we are not parties to these contracts. Equally important is the fact that shippers are not principals of the consignees, inasmuch as the consignees are not agents of the shippers. Therefore, it would be the height of injustice to penalize or impose a fine to the consignee for the neglect or omission of the shipper.”
PMTLAI instead recommended that consignees be required to submit such documents directly to AMS.
On Section 4.6, which requires including the value of goods and freight charges as additional information in the manifest, PMTLAI noted that “forwarders, even international freight forwarders, are not parties to the purchase of goods” and therefore not privy to the value of the goods as agreed upon by the seller and the buyer.
On the subject of freight charges, PMTLAI requested that this information be made optional as there are instances when the principal does not share such information to their agents or representatives.
The association also noted that the requirement for the provision of the B/L (with such information as value of goods, freight charges, and insurance, among others) under Section 4.9 (Contents of the Bill of Lading) be made optional. PMTLAI noted it is the principal or the non-vessel operating common carrier (NVOCC) at origin that issues the B/L, and that the B/L cannot be provided by the freight forwarder.
PMTLAI also said the value of goods and insurance is “entirely and exclusively between the shipper and the consignee.”
It added freight forwarders have no knowledge as to the shipper-consignee arrangement, and proposes that this information be required from the shipper or consignee.
Confusion among port users
During a forum organized by PortCalls on May 25, Port of Manila district collector Atty Erastus Sandino Austria noted the “confusion” at the port level over how to apply the penalties under the CMO. The order states that those that fail to provide the required information within the prescribed period would be subject to the payment of imposable fines prescribed under Section 1412 (Failure to supply advance and requisite manifests) of the Customs Modernization and Tariff Act.
Under Section 1412, failure to transmit the electronic manifest within the time prescribed by BOC prior to the arrival of the carrying vessel or aircraft at the port of entry will make the owner, operator, or agent of the vessel or aircraft liable for a fine of not less than P100,000 but not more than P300,000.
However, Austria said there is no rule yet on how to calculate the exact penalty.
CMO 06-2018 is pursuant to Customs Administrative Order (CAO) No. 01-2016, which requires the advance submission of cargo information to provide the BOC more time to assess incoming cargoes.
The new system allows qualified importers or their authorized representatives to process in advance the goods declaration before the shipment arrives and to determine the pre-assessed customs duties, taxes, other charges, and other documentary requirements.
AMS is different and separate from BOC’s electronic-to-mobile system, which also requires the submission of the electronic manifest. Cargo information provided to AMS will be used in BOC’s risk management, anti-terrorism, law enforcement, and other related activities. – Roumina Pablo
