| Description of Complaint |
The current system of prior notification in writing is inconvenient for users because they require a prompt reply when they want to immediately find out the applicable tax number and tariff for a product. In order to find out the tax number and tariff for a product subject to an imminent contract or deal, importers are now forced to use verbal prior notification on a daily basis while risking an eventual change in the tax number and tariff.
Since a large number of multifunction complicated products are now distributed in the market, some products are difficult to identify as the same as the imports in question under the current system of prior notification in writing. Depending on imports, the government should accept various forms of prior inquiries (through samples, drawings, photos, etc.) and keep records of verbal prior notifications that should be allowed to be used for later identification of imports.
In this respect, any customs house that has given a verbal prior notification on an import should identify the tax number and tariff for the import to promptly implement customs clearance when the importer specifies the date of the verbal prior notification, the instructor and notification details. Any customs house should keep records of inquirers, inquiries, notification details, instructors, etc. and attach such records as written notifications to import declarations by importers. Prior notifications based product samples, drawings, photos, etc. should be treated in the same way.
(Second Opinion)
The current system of prior notification in writing is unfair to importers because it frees customs officials from responsibility in making mistakes with tax number and tariff identifications while forcing importers to exert much time and labor. We are working against time everyday and must identify tariffs on imports promptly. It is effectively impossible for us to spend much time and labor on prior notifications. The current system of prior notification is troublesome. We have been forced to make modifications to inquiries many times in the past and had to spending much time and labor in the end. In fact, we have no choice but to use verbal prior notifications. In the past, we received a verbal prior notification from a customs house saying that an import in question would not be subject to a tariff. When we submitted the import at another customs house for customs clearance, however, the house made the decision to impose a tariff on the import. The import was subjected to ex post facto examination and delivered to a customer and it was eventually not subjected to a tariff. During that process, however, we spent much time and labor preparing written inquiries. Therefore, the government should simplify and accelerate prior notification procedures as much as possible to increase the convenience of the prior notification system.
For example, each customs house should be authorized to make tax number and tariff identifications that are relatively easy. Even for verbal prior notifications, customs houses should keep records of sample products, drawings, photos, etc. and allow importers to submit these records for indicating imports as subjected to prior notifications upon customs clearance.
Even if prior notifications in writing are required, the government should substantially simplify procedures including document requirements by allowing importers to submit product samples, drawings, photos, etc. in place of documents for products whose tax numbers and tariff are easy to identify. The system of prior notification in writing should thus be improved in order to allow importers to make applications for prior notifications more easily and in order to lead customs houses to make prompt decisions and notifications.
It would be a step forward to treat prior notifications by e-mail as valid as those in writing. If the same document requirements as those for the prior notifications in writing are adopted for prior notifications by e-mail, however, the system will be as troublesome as the present one. Therefore, procedures should be simplified for prior notifications by e-mail in order to reduce the burden on applicants.
If an import is too complicated for a prompt identification to be made, the customs house should inform inquirers of the number of days required before an notification and make improvements for faster and simpler procedures.
|
| Details of Measures |
1. The ministry replied as follows:
(1) The system of prior notification in writing is intended to meet inquirers' demands to obtain an official answer. Then customs make a cautious consideration of an inquiry before issuing a reply in writing. When an inquirer actually imports his items, attention will be paid to the official answer document attached by the inquirer (importer) to his import declarations to show his imports have obtained a prior notification. Verbal inquiries, meanwhile, are intended to meet inquirers' demands to promptly obtain an opinion for reference, though not an official one. It is usually given on the spot as an opinion for reference.
(2) As multifunction complicated products are now being distributed, the system of prior notification in writing allows the inquirer to attach, to the inquiry document, samples, drawings, photos, etc. as complementary information on the product in order to make the inquiry statement easier to understand and accurate in such a case where it is difficult to state all the information needed to identify the tax category.
In order to improve the convenience of inquiry procedures under the prior notification system, the ministry is currently considering granting, within fiscal 2003, the same validity as prior notifications in writing to those by e-mail, which are currently treated as opinions for reference like verbal prior notifications, on the condition that a suitable certification system is established.
(3) Prior notifications in writing take more time to be considered than verbal notifications. But customs have been trying to give prior notifications in writing as promptly as possible. The ministry seeks the complainant's understanding and cooperation in this respect.
2. The ministry replied further as follows:
(1) The prior notification system allows importers to accurately calculate the costs due to their prior knowledge of the tariffs applied, enabling them to make sales plans. By attaching inquiry documents for prior notifications and answer documents to their import declarations, importers can promptly receive their cargo at any customs house in Japan since the tax number and tariff of their imports are already identified.
(2) As for definitive tax numbers and tariffs on which prior notifications should be respected upon import, customs houses first identify shapes, components, characteristics, and other details of the products in question and give careful considerations before giving notifications in writing. Therefore, they must receive accurate statements from inquirers about shapes, components, characteristics, etc. Prior notifications in writing that are given in response to written inquiries specifying the details of products may be attached to import declarations at any customs house in Japan, allowing products for import declarations to be identified as those subjected to prior notifications. As explained in the reply dated February 8, 2002, the system of prior notification in writing allows the inquirer to attach, to the inquiry document, samples, drawings, photos, etc. as complementary information on the product in order to make the inquiry statement easier to understand and accurate in such a case where it is difficult to state all the information needed to identify the tax category.
(3) As for verbal inquiries by telephone or through inquirers' visits to customs houses, customs officials instantly give answers as opinions for reference in response to inquirers' requests to promptly get opinions on tariff classification. Therefore, verbal prior notifications differ from the above-mentioned prior notifications in writing in terms of purpose. The complainant is asked to understand that verbal explanations by telephone or through interviews at customs houses may have difficulties in identifying products in some cases.
(4) Customs houses will try to give prior notifications as promptly as possible in response to the submission of minimum data needed. The ministry seeks the complainant's understanding and cooperation in this respect.
|