POLICY AND LEGAL FRAMEWORK. The policy framework and entitlements for the Program are based on national laws: The Land Xxxxxxxxxxx Xxx, 0000 (XXX, amended in 1984) the National Policy on Resettlement and Rehabilitation for Project Affected Persons, 2003 (NPRR); and ADB’s Policy on Involuntary Resettlement, 1995. The salient features of Government and ADB polices are summarized below.
POLICY AND LEGAL FRAMEWORK. At present, there do not appear to be any specific legal or policy measures that require or allow border agencies to prepare and publish on the Internet guides of their procedures or required forms and documents. (However, consistent with the TFA measure, the draft Customs Code, if enacted, will require Customs to publish on the Internet, where feasible, such forms, notices, and explanations as may be necessary for persons to comply with the provisions of the customs laws.) As noted in discussion of TFA Article 1.1, the new Foreign Trade law does require the Minister of Commerce and Industry to publish certain lists of information in the Official Gazette or “in such manner or by such means that will, in the Minister’s opinion”, inform interested parties. This provision would appear to authorize Internet publication of the lists of information specified in that law, and suggests that the MoCI should take the lead in ensuring or coordinating the publication of trade-related information. There do not appear to be any formal legal or policy provisions applicable to the government or to individual border authorities concerning Internet publication. There do not appear to be any provisions, for example, concerning common “look and feel” or content of government websites, nor any policy/procedures issued concerning the update of the individual websites and coordination of information among the different border authorities. While some trade related agencies do not appear to have active websites (e.g., Ministry of Health and Human Services; Ministry of Finance), most border agencies do appear to publish information on the Internet. However, to the extent there is Internet publication concerning import/export requirements, border agencies’ information generally appears to be presented in the form of legal acts or regulations available for download, rather than as practical guides.
POLICY AND LEGAL FRAMEWORK. There do not appear to be any formal legal or policy provisions applicable to the government or individual border authorities concerning the establishment of an enquiry point or trade help desk or other import/export information service. Certain legislation does provide obligations on the part of the respective Ministry or government authority to provide specified information to parties on request. This includes, for example, the Foreign Trade law (see discussion under TFA Article 1.1, above), which requires the Minister to provide copies of certain lists of information on request without charge; and the Freedom of Information Act (also discussed under TFA Article 1.1, above) which provides a right to obtain records and documents held by public bodies, subject to a payment of a fee for copying or reproducing the document. Similarly, the draft Customs Code, if enacted, will require Customs to provide information concerning the application of customs laws free of charge on request of an interested person (draft Customs Code, Section 1221).
POLICY AND LEGAL FRAMEWORK. At present, there do not appear to be any formal legal or policy measures to require border agencies to hold regular consultations with their stakeholders. The draft Customs Code, if enacted, would require Customs to hold regular consultations with persons whose activities are covered by the customs laws and other authorities (Section 1222, draft Customs Code).
POLICY AND LEGAL FRAMEWORK. There are no provisions in the Revenue Code or other legislation of Liberia that require or permit Customs or another authority to issue binding advance rulings on questions of tariff classification, country of origin, or other customs treatment of imported goods. The draft Customs Code authorizes Customs to issue binding rulings on questions of tariff classification, country of origin, and other such matters as the Commissioner may prescribe by regulation (Section 1238, draft Customs Code). Such decisions will be binding on Customs and on the applicant, and shall remain binding for such a period as the Commissioner shall prescribe by regulation. The provision requires the Commissioner to establish by regulation the form, content and manner of application and other such matters as necessary for the implementation of a binding rulings program. Although there is no legal basis at present for advance binding rulings, the Liberia Revenue Authority initiated a program in 2013 to provide advance ruling on questions of tariff classification. This reform is described in the following WCO “country experience paper”. 5 5 This paper is available as a download on the WCO website (xxxx://xxx.xxxxxx.xxx/en/topics/wco-implementing- the-wto-atf/atf/advance-rulings.aspx) We were advised by stakeholders that Customs would consider a ruling to be binding both on the applicant and on Customs. We were further advised that Customs charges a fee for the ruling. Regulations, procedures or instructions for ruling requests, such as information and documents required to be submitted to obtain a ruling, the period of validity of a ruling, the use of the ruling in customs clearance, or the amount of the fee, if developed, do not appear to be published in an easily accessible manner. We were not able to confirm if procedures, such as an SOP, had been developed for Customs processing of rulings and administration of a rulings program. (The WCO paper refers to “detailed procedures…” developed by the LBCE Policy Division; these, however, were not available to us and do not appear to be on the LRA website.) Stakeholders advised us that fewer than 10 requests for rulings have been received during the entire life of the program. These stakeholders suggested that a reason for the apparent lack of demand was because all goods imported to Liberia are required to undergo a preshipment inspection, which includes a verification of tariff classification before the goods are shipped. No rulings that...
POLICY AND LEGAL FRAMEWORK. Liberia’s legislation provides for rights of appeal against decisions of customs and other border authorities. With respect to Customs, an administrative appeal procedure is defined in the Revenue Code with respect to certain decisions related to payment of tax (which includes payment of customs duty). In particular, the Code provides taxpayers with the right to appeal to a Board of Tax Appeals, with the following “determinations” made by the Minister- • a decision that there is a deficiency in tax paid for a tax period. • a decision to deny a taxpayer’s claim for a refund or failure to act on a claim for a refund. • other decisions as may be specified in regulations. Sections 59 and 70, Revenue Code. A notice of such determination is required to be provided to the taxpayer (Section 71, Revenue Code). These provisions are understood to provide for a right of appeal against customs duty-related decisions. The Board of Tax Appeals is defined as an independent body made up of five members who are appointed by the President (Section 70, Revenue Code). Under the Revenue Code, the Board of Tax Appeals is required to hold a hearing within six months of date the appeal is made (provisions are also made for emergency hearings), and to make a decision on the appeal within 60 days after the date the hearing is concluded (Section 60, Revenue Code). There does not appear to be any specific provisions concerning the taxpayer’s rights of further appeal in the event these time limits are not observed. Decisions by the Board of Tax Appeals may be appealed to the Tax Court, which has jurisdiction to hear final determinations of assessment of taxes, license fees and other imposts, valuation for tax purposes, and denials of claims for tax refunds (Section 6.2, Judicial Law). It appears also that the Tax Court has jurisdiction over civil penalties that are assessed against the importer or others under the Revenue Code (Section 6.2, Judicial Law). In addition to these tax protests, the Revenue Code also provides an administrative appeal with respect to revocation or suspension of a customs broker’s license. Under this procedure, a broker shall have the right of initial appeal to a hearing officer appointed by the Minister, thereafter to the Minister, and finally to the Tax Court (Section 1500, Revenue Code). The draft Customs Code, if enacted, would clarify and expand rights of appeal with respect to customs decisions. It provides for a right of administrative appeal against an...
POLICY AND LEGAL FRAMEWORK. Liberia does not appear to operate a rapid alert system of the kind described in the TFA measure. Not applicable.
POLICY AND LEGAL FRAMEWORK. There are at present no specific legal or formal policy provisions concerning the right to a second test by Customs or other relevant border authorities (MoCI, Quarantine or Fisheries) as described in the TFA measure (e.g., no provisions concerning procedures to request for a second test, sharing test results with the importer, procedures for resolution of discrepancies between first and second test, use of regional or international laboratories, etc). Under the draft Customs Code, a declarant has the right to request that Customs conduct a second test where the results of the initial test or examination of goods for customs purposes are adverse, and may accept the results of the second test. In addition, the draft Code authorizes the Commissioner General to accredit any laboratory for such purposes, and would require Customs to publish the contact details of such laboratories (Section 1521, draft Customs Code).
POLICY AND LEGAL FRAMEWORK. The Executive Law generally authorizes the head of each Ministry, subject to the approval of the President, to fix just and reasonable fees not otherwise provided by law, for issuing and recording documents and performing services for members of the public. The law further sets out the general principle that a fee will be deemed “just and reasonable” if it is no more than sufficient to compensate the government for the cost of rendering the service for which the charge is imposed (The Executive Law, Section 10.5(2)). That general principle concerning the amount of fees that may be charged is repeated in the new Foreign Trade law, which states -
POLICY AND LEGAL FRAMEWORK. The Revenue Code authorizes the Minister of Finance to prescribe a user fee “by regulation and by a widely circulated notice” but such fee shall be not more than 1.5 percent of the CIF Liberian Port value of imported goods or US$10,000 per item, whichever is less (Revenue Code, Section 1802). No such regulation appears to have been prescribed by the Minister. However, in fact, Customs imposes a user fee of the maximum amount that could be prescribed by the Minister under the Revenue Code. The Revenue Code also authorizes the Minister to prescribe “by regulation and by a widely circulated notice” a user fee on exports, but such fee shall not exceed 2.5 percent of FOB value, in the case of transhipped or unprocessed goods, and 1.25 percent of FOB value in the case of semi-processed goods (Revenue Code, Section 1802).
