Güney Kore sonradan kontrolünde şüphe hali ile süreç bitmeden yeni talepte bulunulmaması ekli belge
T.C.
TİCARET
BAKANLIĞI
Uluslararası
Anlaşmalar ve Avrupa Birliği Genel Müdürlüğü
Sayı :E-16934678-724.01.02
Konu :Türkiye-Güney Kore STA - Sonradan
Kontrol
10.01.2023 / 81797965 yazıda ilgi tutulmuştur
12.04.2022 / 73722365
DAĞITIM YERLERİNE
İlgi :08.04.2022 tarihli ve
E-16934678-724.01.02-00073664245 sayılı
yazımız.
İlgide kayıtlı yazımızda, Türkiye-Güney Kore Serbest Ticaret Anlaşması
kapsamında kurulan Gümrük Komitesi'nin son toplantısında, Güney Kore yetkili
makamları tarafından STA çerçevesinde düzenlenen ve ülkemizden Güney Kore'ye
sonradan kontrol sürecinin işletilmesi için gönderilen menşe ispat belgelerinin
sayısında artış olduğu ve son iki yılda gelen taleplerin büyük bir kısmının
tekrarlanan ve aynı ihracatçıya ilişkin farklı zamanlarda gelen sorgular
olduğunun belirtildiği bildirilmiştir.
Güney Kore Gümrük İdaresi'ne tüm ülkelerden gönderilen sonradan
kontrol talepleri
içerisinde ülkemiz taleplerinin payının %70 olması ve taleplerin cevaplanması
için Güney Kore yetkili makamlarının idari kapasitesinin yetersiz olması
nedeniyle konu iki ülke arasındaki ticari ilişkilere zarar verecek boyuta
ulaşmış bulunmaktadır.
Bakan Yardımcımız Sayın Rıza Tuna TURAGAY tarafından 25-26 Nisan
2022 tarihlerinde Güney Kore'ye gerçekleştirilmesi planlanan resmi ziyaret
kapsamında da yüksek sayıda olan sonradan kontrol talepleri önemli bir gündem
maddesini oluşturmaktadır.
Bu çerçevede, sorunun çözümü yönünde Bölge Müdürlüklerimiz
tarafından aşağıda belirtilen hususlara özen gösterilmesi gerekmektedir:
-Ülkemizden Güney Kore'ye gönderilen sonradan kontrol taleplerinin
sayısının azaltılabilmesi için, çok önemli şüphe halinde kontrol mekanizmasının
işletilmesi,
-Aynı göndericiden aynı alıcıya gönderilen aynı cins eşya için
ibraz edilen menşe ispat belgeleri ile ilgili halihazırda devam eden süreç
tamamlanmadan, yeni bir sonradan kontrol talebinde bulunulmaması,
- Sonradan kontrol talep yazılarının ekinde konşimento veya diğer
taşıma belgelerinin kopyaları ve/veya tarih/sayı bilgilerinin bulunmaması
nedeniyle ihracata konu eşya ile bağlantısının kurulamadığı gerekçesiyle, Güney
Kore Gümrük İdaresinin talebi doğrultusunda, sonradan kontrol talep yazılarına
konşimento veya diğer taşıma belgesi fotokopisinin ve/veya tarih/sayısının da
eklenmesi,
-Farklı Bölge Müdürlüklerince aynı göndericiden aynı alıcıya gönderilen
aynı cins eşya için ibraz edilen menşe ispat belgeleri için önceden yapılan sonradan
kontrol taleplerinin takip edilebilmesi için Bölge Müdürlüklerimiz arasında
Güney Kore özelinde bir koordinasyon mekanizması kurulması; konu hakkında
İstanbul Gümrük ve Dış Ticaret Bölge Müdürlüğü'nün koordinasyon görevi görmesi,
bu yazının imzalandığı tarih itibarıyla diğer Bölge Müdürlüklerince Güney
Kore'ye gönderilen sonradan kontrol talep yazılarının birer örneğinin İstanbul
Gümrük ve Dış Ticaret Bölge Müdürlüğü'ne de iletilmesi, böylece taleplerin
takip edilerek tekrarların önüne geçilmesi,
-İstanbul Gümrük ve Dış Ticaret Bölge Müdürlüğünce tüm Bölge
Müdürlüklerince Güney Kore'ye gönderilen sonradan kontrol talep yazılarının
sayı ve tarihlerinin tablolaştırılarak her ayın son mesai günü
[email protected] adresine iletilmesi
önem arz etmektedir.
Türkiye-Güney Kore Gümrük Komitesinin 8 Mart 2022 tarihinde
gerçekleştirilen dördüncü toplantısında kabul edilen bir örneği ekli Sonradan
Kontrol Rehberinde yer alan hususların da Bölge Müdürlüklerince dikkate
alınması gerekmektedir.
Ayrıca, tüm Bölge Müdürlüklerimiz tarafından yapılan sonradan
kontrollerin merkezi bir sistemde takip edilebilmesi ve genel koordinasyonun
sağlanabilmesi amacıyla ortak bir veri ve paylaşım tabanının oluşturulması
yönünde Genel Müdürlüğümüz tarafından bir çalışma başlatılması da
planlanmaktadır. Bu kapsamda olabilecek görüş ve katkılarınıza ayrıca
başvurulacaktır.
Bilgilerini ve gereğini rica ederim.
Hüsnü
DİLEMRE
Genel
Müdür
Ek: Güney Kore - Sonradan Kontrol Rehberi
Dağıtım:
Tüm Gümrük ve Dış
Ticaret Bölge Müdürlükleri
Common Guideline for Origin Verification
of the Free Trade Agreement between
THE REPUBLIC OF KOREA AND THE REPUBLIC OF TURKEY
1.
Main characteristics of the verification procedure
(1)
The
main characteristics of the verification procedure
of Article 25 are twofold: it is a system of
so-called "indirect verification" and it is based on mutual trust between the customs authorities of the Parties.
(2)
"Indirect
verification" means that the customs authorities of the importing Party do not
conduct the verifications themselves but they send a request for verification
to the customs authorities of the
exporting Party and it is for the latter to carry out the verification by
contacting the exporter. The result of the verification is transmitted by the customs authorities of the exporting Party to the customs authorities of the importing Party. The
rationale is that the customs authorities of
the exporting Party, in which the proof of origin (origin declaration) is made out, are best placed for the
verification of that proof because of the proximity to the exporter (knowledge
of the exporter's activities and history, ease of access to the information,
familiarity with the national accounting system, no language barriers). It is
therefore for the customs authorities of the exporting Party primarily to
decide whether the products concerned are originating or not.
(3)
"Verification
of proofs of origin" will be carried out based on mutual trust between the
customs authorities of the Parties. "Mutual trust" herein implies that the customs authorities of the
exporting Party should thoroughly verify the issues submitted by the customs
authorities of the importing Party, and communicate the results of this verification to the customs authorities of
the importing Party, who relies on the results of work carried out by the
customs authorities of the exporting Party. However, the customs authorities of
the importing Party still have the right to request additional information to
the exporting Party if they consider that the reply is not complete enough or
that it does not allow understanding the position expressed by the exporting
Party. The details of which information can be requested by the importing Party
to the exporting Party is further elaborated under sections 2.4.2 (Findings and
Facts) and 2.4.3 (Sufficient Information).
2.
Different steps in the verification procedure
2.1. Launching a
request for verification
(4)
The
Customs authorities of the importing Party may launch a request for subsequent
verification of proofs of origin when they have reasonable doubts as to:
-
the
authenticity of the documents. Example: doubts whether the invoice containing
the origin declaration is a false invoice made up by the importer or the exporter in view of benefitting from preferential
origin;
-
the
originating status of the products concerned. Example: doubts whether the
products meet the origin conferring criteria laid down in Annex II of the
Protocol (the Product Specific Rules);
or
-
the
fulfilment of the other requirements of the Protocol related to proofs of
origin. Example: doubts whether the products were transported directly between
the Parties.
(5)
In addition to cases of reasonable doubt on the above-mentioned elements, the customs
authorities of the importing Party have the possibility to launch a request for
verification for cases selected at random. This covers the cases which do not
fall within the scope of the above 3 elements covered by the reasonable doubt.
(6)
In accordance with Article 23, the discovery of slight discrepancies
between the statements made in the origin declaration and those made in the
documents submitted to the customs authorities for the purpose of carrying out
the formalities for importing the products shall not, ipso facto, render the
origin declaration null and void if it is duly established that such document
does correspond to the products submitted.
Example:
slight discrepancies about address and name of the exporter and importer, etc.
Obvious
formal errors on an origin declaration should not cause this document to be
rejected if these errors are not such as to create doubts concerning the
correctness of the statements made in this document.
Example:
If the exporter has duly completed the declaration of origin in the appropriate
commercial documents in accordance with the domestic law of the exporting Party
and simultaneously added the origin declaration to the invoice of the third
country.
(The
examples referred above in paragraph 6 are just advisory one and not limit
other possible examples.)
(7)
The customs authorities of the importing Party endeavor to provide
importers with opportunities to correct the slight discrepancies and obvious
formal errors of origin declarations described above within the period
specified in the laws and regulations of the importing Party, and not to
request a verification.
2.2. Sending the
request for verification
(8)
The Customs authorities of the importing Party are to send the request
for verification to the customs authorities of the exporting Party responsible
for verifying proofs of origin. The
request will indicate if it is launched at random or on the grounds
of reasonable doubts. Article
25 paragraph 3 provides that the request would indicate, where appropriate, the
reasons for the enquiry.
(9)
Indicating the reasons for the enquiry allows the customs authorities of
the exporting Party to deal with the request in the most efficient way in terms
of costs and administrative burden.
(10)
Especially in case of the requests subject to
reasonable doubts, the Customs authorities of the importing Party shall observe
the following practices to reduce the administrative burden
-
specify
the reasons for the enquiry, where appropriate, among the authenticity of the
documents, the originating status of the products concerned, and the fulfilment
of the other requirements of the Protocol related to proofs of origin, referred
to in sections 2.1(Launching a request for verification).
-
as for
a verification request for the same item by the same exporter, if a similar
request has already been made, wait for the results of the former verification
and to refrain itself from repeatedly making similar requests.
(11)
On the other hand, if the customs
authorities of the importing Party request an enquiry at random, they need not
indicate a reason for the enquiry. In accordance with paragraph 3 of Article
25, however, the proofs of origin or a copy of these documents of the products
subject to the enquiry should be sent to the customs authorities of the
exporting Party.
2.3. Execution of Verification
(12)
Under the system of indirect verification, verification of proofs of origin
made out by exporters in the exporting Party is under the responsibility of
customs authorities of the exporting Party.
(13)
In case of verification of proofs of origin provided by the importer,
the customs authorities of the importing Party would launch a verification
request to the customs authorities of the exporting Party. The customs
authorities of the importing Party would not ask the importer to collect
himself from the exporter the information specified in paragraphs 2.4.2 and
2.4.3.
(14)
Moreover, the
provisions of Article 25 do not provide that the customs authorities of the
importing Party can directly require exporters to provide data or information
to them.
(15)
However, these provisions
do not preclude importers and exporters of both
parties, by mutual consent and on a voluntary basis, from exchanging data or
information with each other and submitting them to the customs authorities of
the importing Party. The exchange or submission of such data are not obligatory
and any refusal to provide the information is not a reason for the denial of
preference without verification. It is not part of the verification process.
2.4. Treatment of Results of
the verification
(16)
The Customs authorities of the exporting Party would inform the customs
authorities of the importing Party about the results of the verification,
including findings and facts, as soon as possible.
2.4.1. Auxiliary communication
means
(17)
The
communication of requests for verification and of the notifications of the
results thereof between customs authorities of both Parties would be made
through conventional postal mail or e-mail. In parallel, customs authorities of
both Parties may use auxiliary means such as electronic mail in order to
swiftly communicate and make sure the requests or the replies reach the
addressee in the relevant Party.
2.4.2. Findings and facts
(18)
The terms "findings and facts" mean that the reply on the verification
provided by the customs authorities of the exporting Party would include some
details on the verification procedure executed by them. The scope of
"findings and facts" is limited to the following elements:
-
the
conclusion on the authenticity of the documents, the originating status of the
products concerned or the fulfilment of the other requirements of the Protocol
;
-
the description
of the product subject to examination and the tariff classification relevant to
the application of the rule of origin;
and
-
information
on the manner in which the examination was conducted (when and how).
2.4.3. Sufficient information
(19)
In case of verification at random, the customs authorities of the importing
Party will not request more information than what is listed in point 2.4.2
(findings and facts) to the customs authorities of the exporting Party.
(20)
In case of verifications on the grounds of reasonable doubts, if the
information provided by the customs authorities of the exporting Party is
considered by the competent authorities of the importing Party insufficient to determine
the authenticity of the documents or the real origin of the products, the
customs authorities of the importing Party may request additional information
to the customs authorities of the exporting Party. The additional information
requested may not go beyond the following list:
-
Where
the origin criterion was 'wholly obtained', the applicable category (such as
harvesting, mining, fishing and place of production);
-
Where
the origin criterion was based on a value method, the value of the final
product as well as the value of all the non-originating used in the production;
-
Where
the origin criterion was based on changes in tariff classification, a list of
all the non-originating materials including their tariff classification (in 2,
4 or 6 digit format depending on the origin criteria);
-
Where
the origin criterion was based on weight, the weight of the final product as
well as the weight of the relevant non-originating materials used in the final
product;
-
Where
the origin criterion was based on a specific processing, a description of that
specific processing that conferred origin to that particular product; and
-
Where
the tolerance rule is applied, the value or weight of the final products and
the value or weight of non-originating materials used in the production of the
final products.
(21)
If a reply does not contain the sufficient information mentioned above for
the customs authorities of the importing Party to determine the authenticity of
the documents in question or the real origin of the products, the requesting
customs authorities shall refuse entitlement to the preference, except in
exceptional circumstances (See section 2.7. on Exceptional Circumstances).
(22)
The customs authorities of the exporting Party will not transmit to the
customs authorities of the importing Party the confidential information whose
disclosure is deemed by the exporter to put at risk its commercial interests.
The non-disclosure of confidential information will not be a sole reason for
the customs authorities of the importing Party to refuse entitlement to the
preference, provided that the customs authorities of the exporting Party will
provide reasons for not transmitting confidential information and prove the
originating status of the good, to the satisfaction of the customs authorities
of the importing Party.
2.5. Deadline for
replying to a request for verification
(23)
Article 25 paragraph 6 stipulates that the results of the verification
must be communicated as soon as possible.
(24)
Article 25 paragraph 7 provides that the importing Party should in
principle refuse entitlement to the preference but only when 2 conditions are
simultaneously met:
-
the
verification request was made based on reasonable doubts;
and
-
there
is no reply within 10 months of the date of the verification request or the
reply does not contain sufficient information to determine the authenticity of
the document in question or the real origin of the products.
(25)
This provision
implies that for cases selected at random for verification the importing Party
cannot refuse the entitlement to the preference without the reply from the
exporting Party.
2.5.1. Deadline in case of verification at random
(26)
Customs authorities of the exporting Party will do their best to reply to
verifications at random within a deadline of 12 months.
2.5.2. Deadline in case of verification at reasonable doubts
(27)
For cases selected at reasonable doubts, the importing
Party shall refuse entitlement to the preference when there is no reply within
10 months of the date of the verification request except in exceptional
circumstances.
2.6. Reversal of the results
(28)
The results of a verification may exceptionally be
reversed by the customs authority of the exporting Party. The reversal of the
original reply will be made within 10 months of the date of the verification
request.
2.7. Exceptional circumstances
(29)
However, even if
the two abovementioned conditions for refusing entitlement to preference are
met, the text of Article 25 paragraph 7 stipulates that granting of
preferential treatment is still possible on the basis of the clause of
"exceptional circumstances".
(30)
Indeed, the
importing Party still has the discretion to decide that there are exceptional
circumstances justifying that the entitlement to preference is not to be
refused as such.
(31)
The exceptional
circumstances include notably the following
situations:
-
The
exporting Party is not in a position to provide a reply to the verification
request submitted by the importing Party when:
a)
accidents
which the exporter could not reasonably have been expected to foresee such as
fire, flooding or other natural disasters, and war, riot, terror, strike and
the like, resulted in partial or complete loss of supporting documents of
origin or delay of submitting those documents.; or
b)
the
reply was delayed by uncontrollable causes such as administrative or judicial
appeal procedure in accordance with the Party's laws and regulations although
the exporter and the customs authority of exporting Party did their due
diligence in complying with obligations under this Protocol.
-
It was
found out that either the request or the reply to the request did not reach
their destination because of mistakes made by the authorities involved;
-
The
request or the reply to the verification request failed to be delivered because
of problems in the communication channels (e.g. change of the address of the
person in charge of the verification, the return of mails caused by
administrative mistakes of the postal authorities, etc.).
2.8. Reminder
(32)
When no reply has
been received yet, it is recommended that the customs authorities of the
importing Party send a reminder to the exporting Party before the end of the 10
months period.
(33)
It is recommended
that the customs authorities of the exporting Party which would not be in a
position to reply within the 10 months deadline would inform the requesting
authority thereof before the expiration of the deadline with an estimation of
how much longer would their verification procedure still have to last and the
reason of the delay of the reply.
2.9. Observation in a
verification
(34)
With the application of
Paragraph 8 of Article 25, the customs officials of the importing Party may be
present as an observer in an origin verification conducted by the customs
authorities of the exporting Party. The only duly authorized officials of the
importing Party may be present at enquiries carried out in the territory of the
exporting Party, and the conditions of the joint inquiry are set by the
exporting Party.