1. 2012 AFACT Meeting CSC Report at StC Meeting Tehran, Iran 1 Dr. Eva Yi-Yuan Yueh, Chair 19 November 2012

2. 2 Works Conducted by CSC, 2011-12 1.CSC Promotion activities 2.Survey for building up AFACT repository

3. 3 CSC Promotion activities (1/2)  10 full materials of 2011 eASIA Award Shortlist Projects:  Published on AFACT Website  Hyper-linked with ESCAP website  ECO website (in process of communication)  UN/CEFACT website (subject to the result of communication by Dr. Ajin)

4. 4 2011 eASIA Award Shortlist CSC Promotion activities (2/2)

5.  Collect typical questions which are frequently asked by practitioners when planning single window or trade facilitation  Design a form indicating suggested major items whose information will be collected and translated by HoDs. Some definitions and explanations need to be supplemented for clarification  NSW service framework, & system architecture, if developed  Customs declaration processes and documents involved (the title of documents only)  Title of regulation amended to cope with the operation of NSW  List of MIGs developed for B2B, B2G and G2G data exchange based on the harmonized national dataset 5 Actions Building up Repository based on Conclusions of Kish Meeting

6.  Survey for collecting information for the AFACT repository of single window and trade facilitation  Disseminated an open-ended questionnaire to all AFACT HoDs on 25 September, 2012  Collected replies after 31 October, 2012. There were Japan, Korea, and Chinese Taipei responded  The repository will be continually built up by collecting responses from other AFACT members. Therefore, AFACT Secretariat needs to keep reminding members to reply  For those members not yet planned or implemented SW, could provide information regarding practices of electronic customs declaration 6 Survey Status

7.  5 most frequently asked questions(FAQs) when planning single window or trade facilitation, which involve problems encountered and imply the motivations  A list of major legislation or amendment of existing regulations for SW implementation  The characteristics of the national dataset after harmonizing with other int’l standards, e.g. WCO DM v3.0, UN/CEFACT CC10b, etc.  The major and minor source of international standards to harmonize with your existing dataset of message  How much is the percentage your national dataset fully compliant with the major source of international standard  The most difficult part experienced in the process of data harmonization  A list of locally published or under development of MIGs for SW message exchange, service framework & system architecture of SW, customs declaration processes and message involved, regulation of advanced cargo information report 7 Survey questions for building up AFACT repository

8. 8 AFACT Repository 1.Most frequently asked questions(FAQ) 2.A list of major legislation or amendment 3.The characteristics of the national dataset 4.A list of published or under development of MIGs 5.Service framework and system architecture of SW 6.Customs declaration processes & message involved 7.Regulation of advanced cargo information report

9. 1. FAQs Totally 15 questions collected from J, K, and CT:  Japan: How much the cost will each gov’t agency need to cover to implement/operate the SW system?  Korea: Each agency has implemented and operated individual systems in an efficient manner. What is the rationale behind the need for additionally implementing the Single Window system to replace the existing declaration form processing systems?  Chinese Taipei: If the cost of operating Single Window services and maintaining its infrastructure cannot be balanced by charge from the users, how much annual budget needs to be allocated by the gov’t dept concerned in order to keep the SW running smoothly? 9 An example from each member

10. 2. New Regulations or Amendments 10 Examples:  Japan:Customs authority amended the article 1 of "Act on Special Provisions for Customs Procedure by Means of Electronic Data Processing System“  Korea:Legal grounds for sharing information with other countries in reciprocal conditions were specified in accordance with Paragraph 3 (information exchange) of Article 255 of the Customs Act.  Chinese Taipei:Chinese Taipei’s Customs authority amended the Article No. 10 of the Customs Act to provide legitimate base for SW operation.

11. 3. Characteristics of the national dataset (1/3)  Major Source of Int’l Stds to harmonize  Japan:Some are based on UN/EDIFACT  Korea:Despite the fact that the Korea Customs Administration has employed WCO DM as the standard for implementing Single Window, UN/CEFACT and some domestic standards are also being applied to items that do not exist in the DM  Chinese Taipei:WCO Data Model V3.0 was the major source, whereas UN/CEFACT CC10a was the second one to map with 11

12.  Percentage of National Dataset fully compliant  Japan: Not available  Korea: Comparing the WCO DM with 819 items of key forms used by the KCA found that 68.5% of the items identical with WCO DM, 6.5% were similar (some definitions, codes, etc. were similar), and 25% were unique (items only existing in our e-documents)  Chinese Taipei: Totally 478 Data Elements for 51 messages, among which 314 mapped to WCO DE (66%) with remarks on some data elements for the local needs, 164 added by TW as required (34%) 12 3. Characteristics of the national dataset (2/3)

13.  Difficulties Encountered in Harmonization  Japan: Though using international standards, the actual details often vary depending on each country. To set the details took some effort  Korea: There are a host of difficulties resulting from differences between the work processes suggested by the WCO DM and KCS, resulting differences in the structures of e-documents, some methods that are only available in Korea for processing data, codes, etc  Chinese Taipei: The business process kept changing during the period because of BPR to meet the requirement of advanced shipment report and other changes to customs declaration regulations 13 3. Characteristics of the national dataset (3/3) An example from each member

14. 4. Published or under development of MIGs  Japan: All EDI based, e.g., CUSRES(Customs response message), CUSREP(Customs conveyance report message), CUSCAR(Customs cargo report message), etc.  Korea: Totally 678 e-Documents used for customs declaration developed by various governmental agencies. Some are EDI-based, some XML-based, some two formats compatible  Chinese Taipei 36 customs XML-based MIGs, all WCO DM 3.0 compatible and EDI-based MIGs mapped 36 customs XML-based MIGs, all WCO DM 3.0 compatible and EDI-based MIGs mapped 15 license/permission application MIGs, all WCO DM 3.0 compatible and EDI-based MIGs mapped 15 license/permission application MIGs, all WCO DM 3.0 compatible and EDI-based MIGs mapped 14

15. 5. Service framework and system architecture (1/4) 15 Japan

16. 16 Korea 5. Service framework and system architecture (2/4)

17. 17 Chinese Taipei SW Framework 5. Service framework and system architecture (3/4)

18. 18 Chinese Taipei Service of SW 5. Service framework and system architecture (4/4)

19. 6. Declaration Processes (1/5) 19 Japan: Naccs_Air

20. 20 Japan: Naccs_Sea 6. Declaration Processes (2/5)

21. Korea: Export/import process and files 21 6. Declaration Processes (3/5)

22. 22 6. Declaration Processes (4/5) Chinese Taipei: part of clearance for export

23. 23 AcceptDeclaration C1 Exam C2 C3 Classification& Valuation Summit Declaration Duty Collection Release ShipmentPick-up Payment Custom s Declaration Necessary customs declaration documents: C1: No document needed C2: Import declaration report with attachment of Bill of Lading, Invoice, packing list. P/L and other necessary license and/or permission documents may be submitted afterward, prior to shipment release C3: Amended import declaration report and other documents as in C2 Exam C1 Exemption from Documentation and Examination C2 Document Review C3 Document Review and Physical Examination prior to Valuation C4 Doc Review and Physical Valuation prior to Exam(Shipment release in wh) One example 6. Declaration Processes (5/5) Import Cargo Clearance Process of Chinese Taipei

24.  Japan :  The Advance Filing Rules will be implemented in March 2014  Which require a vessel operator or a NVOCC to electronically submit to the Customs info on maritime container cargoes to be loaded on a vessel intended to entry into a port in Japan, in principle no later than 24 hours before departure of the vessel from a port of loading 24 7. Advance Cargo Info Report (1/4)

25.  Korea  Shipping Invoice Submission Scheme was implemented by the Customs Administration in 2012  Sea-freight import (Default)24H before loading cargo at its shipping port (Default)24H before loading cargo at its shipping port (Close-range regions)Prior to departure of the vessel (Close-range regions)Prior to departure of the vessel (Bulk cargo)4H before entry of the vessel (Bulk cargo)4H before entry of the vessel  Sea-freight export (Default)same as import (Default)same as import (Close-range regions)Before loading cargo onto the vessel or 30 minutes before departure (Close-range regions)Before loading cargo onto the vessel or 30 minutes before departure (Bulk or transshipment)Prior to departure of the vessel (Bulk or transshipment)Prior to departure of the vessel (Export items to be declared on board) Within 24H after departure of the vessel (Export items to be declared on board) Within 24H after departure of the vessel 25 7. Advance Cargo Info Report (2/4)

26.  Korea  Air-freight import (By default)4H before entry of the aircraft (By default)4H before entry of the aircraft (Close-range regions)Prior to departure of the aircraft from its shipping airport (Close-range regions)Prior to departure of the aircraft from its shipping airport (Express cargo)1H before entry of the aircraft (Express cargo)1H before entry of the aircraft  Air-freight export Submission shall be finalized before loading cargo on to the aircraft or 30 minutes before its departure Submission shall be finalized before loading cargo on to the aircraft or 30 minutes before its departure 26 7. Advance Cargo Info Report (3/4)

27.  Chinese Taipei  Sea-freight export manifest: The export manifest should be reported 24 hours before the shipment is loaded on the export vessel. The export manifest (message N5202 907) should be submitted to the Single Window by the transportation carrier (or his service agent) through transmission of the VAN service provider, which will be accepted by the Customs and operated accordingly.  Sea-freight export customs declaration: The shipper or his outsourced customs broker needs to submit the formal export customs declaration report (message N5203) through VAN to the Single Window 1 hour before the cargo/shipment arrives at the customs control zone, which will be received and handled by the Customs accordingly. The Customs Control Zone covers container yard and warehouse for the in-land and port shipment.  Air-freight export manifest: The shipper or his outsourced customs broker needs to transmit the message of export manifest N5202 to the Customs via Single Window with VAN’s service 30 minutes before the aircraft departs.  Air-freight export customs declaration: The shipper or his outsourced customs broker needs to submit the message of export declaration N5203 to the Customs via Single Window with VAN’s service 1 hour before the container/goods arrives in the control Zone. 27 7. Advance Cargo Info Report (4/4)

28. 1 Thank you!

29. 29 I. CSC Survey period: July. 2 ~ Aug.10 2010 –Resources Needed from Overseas Experts, Thailand, Mongolia –Resources Provided to Members, Chinese Taipei, Iran II. eCOO Survey period: 21 Jan. ~15 Feb. 2011 –Role players involved in the value chain –Annual statistics of COO –Data elements required for application for COO –Time to be taken, averagely, to process the COO –Legal issues involved in eCOO –Security issues involved & level of IT security required –IT infrastructure for issuing, transmitting, and archiving –Countries/economies are on the high priority list that the COO authority of your country/economy intends to exchange eCOO with –Mongolia, Pakistan, Iran, Chinese Taipei Works Conducted by CSC-1

30. 30 Summary - Training Survey Few responses to the survey Funding issues –For HoD whose country/economy wants to make request to the AFACT Secretariat for training/consultancy by the overseas experts arranged by AFACT Secretariat Accommodation (4 star ht’l or equivalent), local transportation, venue, food, and other relevant expenses –For AFACT Secretariat to fund international flight and visa application –Experts, instead, need extra compensation for the time spent AFACT Webpage for e-Learing of eBusiness and trade facilitation – Source of e-Learning materials – Facility provided by AFACT Secretariat Collaboration with UNESCAP –UNNExT

31. 31 Collaboration with UNNExT Share with AFACT the existing training materials on the AFACT Website -- Training-of-Analysts Workshop on BPA for Trade Facilitation Sharing with AFACT the existing guides on the AFACT Website -- Business Process Analysis (BPA) Guide for Simplification of Trade Procedures -- UNNExT Briefs on “Towards a Single Window Trading Environment” -- Data Harmonization Guide (2011) -- Regional study on “Improving regional Trade Procedures” (2011) Joint training programs held in EDICOM and at some AFACT member countries/economies Joint work on tools and guidelines development

32. Summary of Survey Findings-eCOO 32 Lack of responding to the survey, only 4 members joined, i.e. Mongolia, Pakistan, Iran, and Chinese Taipei. Certificate of Origin is very negotiation oriented between trading countries based on bi-lateral trading agreement.  Whether or not required for COO document by the importing country  Whether or not mandatory for exporters to submit COO document while declaring customs Except for CT all three members still issue paper/electronic certificate of origin, but can be applied through Internet. In CT the exchange volume of eCOO message is still very small, referring to the case between Korea and CT, due to the dual system (either eCOO messaging or paper/electronic document submission)

33. 33 Single Window Survey in AFACT Economies I. Single Window Survey in AFACT Economies  Purposes: To find out the status of practices with respect to single window in AFACT members  The questionnaire form V1.0 was designed by the Vietnamese team for Taskforce Team  Survey period: 27 February~, 9 May ~ 31 August 2011  8 members replied : Chinese Taipei (CT), Iran(IR), Japan (JP), Korea(KR), Mongolia(MN), Pakistan(PK), Thailand(TH), Viet Nam(VN) Works Conducted by CSC-2

34. 34 SW Survey Subject Items 1. Legal and Policy Framework for Single Window (SW) - Policy -Law/Act -Legal Texts under Law/ Act - Others 2. Agencies responsible for steering/ leading/ managing/ coordinating SW 3. Agencies/institutions responsible for organizing and implementing SW 4. Agencies/institutions providing SW (or e-Customs) Services 5. Names of procedures (Services) of SW/ e-Customs system 6. Standards in SW (or e-Customs services) 7. Other documents related to SW (or e-Customs Services) - Slides with contents of SW or e-Customs services) - Brief on Framework and legal issue on NSW - Customs Infrastructure with respect to IT software and hardware