THE Bureau of Customs (BOC) has created a technical working group (TWG) to review the provisions of its suspended advanced manifest system (AMS), according to one of the agency’s officials.
Assessment and Operations Coordinating Group (AOCG) deputy commissioner Atty. Edward James Dy Buco, during a Q&A portion at the recent United Portusers Logistics Summit, said the newly formed TWG, composed of BOC and the private sector, will work jointly to “arrive at an advance manifest system procedure na acceptable and beneficial to all of us.”
Customs Commissioner Isidro Lapeña in a memorandum dated May 29 suspended the implementation of Customs Memorandum Order (CMO) No. 06-2018, which prescribes 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.
Dy Buco said the suspension was in response to the clamor of stakeholders against the new procedure that took effect immediately with the signing May 7 of CMO 06-2018.
In an interview with PortCalls on the sidelines of the summit, Dy Buco said BOC will be talking to the Chamber of Customs Brokers, Inc. (CCBI), which is the private sector member of the TWG.
Asked if BOC is open to inviting other stakeholder organizations, Dy Buco said yes. He added that BOC may also conduct public hearings before implementing AMS again. He said further actions will depend on what is agreed upon during the TWG meeting.
Dy Buco clarified, however, that BOC still intends to implement AMS after issues with the system are addressed.
Temporary suspension
Stakeholders have asked for the temporary suspension of the AMS implementation in order to resolve first the issues with the new procedure.
CCBI in an earlier letter 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 explained that “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,” he added.
Impact on forwarders
In a position paper previously 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, and stated that 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, PMTLAI said, 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,” it added, recommending instead to require consignees to submit these 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 are not privy to the value of the goods agreed upon between the seller and the buyer.
No access to freight charges
On freight charges, PMTLAI requested making this information optional as there are instances when the principal does not share such information to their agents or representatives.
On Section 4.9 (Contents of the Bill of Lading), which requires stating the value of goods, freight charges, and insurance, PMTLAI noted that 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. The association requested that this requirement be optional.
PMTLAI also said the value of goods and insurance is “entirely and exclusively between the shipper and the consignee.”
It added that freight forwarders have no knowledge as to the shipper-consignee arrangement, and proposes that this information be required from the shipper or consignee.
Confusion sown
During a forum organized by PortCalls on May 25, Port of Manila district collector Erastus Sandino Austria noted the “confusion” that developed at 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 have to pay 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 the grounds for imposing a fine of, for example, just P100,000 and not P300,000.
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 (e2m) system, which also requires submitting the electronic manifest. AMS requires the provision of cargo information for use in BOC’s risk management, anti-terrorism, law enforcement, and other related activities. – Roumina Pablo
