Freight & Trade Alliance (FTA) is a member of the Australian Border Force (ABF) Trade and Goods Compliance Advisory Group (CAG). ABF has now provided responses to questions raised by industry representatives via CAG regarding compliance monitoring statistics and related reporting obligations.
A summary of the advice provided is outlined below for member awareness.
Export reporting and the Compliance Monitoring Program (CMP)
ABF has confirmed that the primary purpose of the Compliance Monitoring Program (CMP) is to estimate revenue leakage in the import declaration process and provide assurance regarding the accuracy of Customs Value, Customs Duty and GST reporting.
While a small sample of export declarations was previously reviewed under the CMP, assessment of export declarations has been suspended. As a result, no export data is currently available for reporting in the Goods Compliance Update (GCU).
ABF noted that export compliance continues to be managed through other mechanisms. Export data must be accurate and complete, and where information is insufficient, goods may be held until correct details are provided.
CMP import data will continue to be reported in future GCUs.
Gross Weight reporting – Sea Cargo Reports
ABF has confirmed that gross weight is detailed in the Approved Statement (Schedule 1, items 41 and 42) for Sea Cargo Reports under the Customs Act 1901.
Whether a field is legally required depends on the wording of the Approved Statement and the factual circumstances (for example, containerised versus non-containerised cargo).
ABF also advised that inconsistencies between ICS functionality and Approved Statements are currently under review. Importantly, the fact that ICS may technically allow submission without certain fields being completed does not remove the legal obligation to provide required information.
Members are reminded that previous guidance on gross weight reporting was published in the Winter 2021 and December 2023 editions of the Goods Compliance Update.
Delivery address requirements in Import Declarations (FID)
ABF reiterated that imported goods must be entered in accordance with section 68 of the Customs Act 1901 and that Import Declarations must include the delivery address identifying where the goods are finally destined.
The Approved Statement requires the delivery address to reflect the final destination of the goods. Entry of intermediary addresses (such as depots or logistics providers) is generally not appropriate, except in limited circumstances where a single consignment will be distributed to multiple customers of the same importer.
ABF clarified that:
- A single consignment consists of goods shipped from one consignor to one consignee and may include multiple packages.
- Multiple containers forming part of a single order from one overseas supplier to one consignee are generally considered a single consignment and require one cargo report and one import declaration.
- In such cases, it may be appropriate to report the importer's primary address or a logistics service provider warehouse where deconsolidation occurs.
- Where separate franchisees (as separate consignees) place individual orders, each may constitute a separate consignment requiring separate import declarations and delivery addresses.
ABF encourages importers and customs brokers to review cargo reporting and clearance requirements outlined on its Business Models webpage, noting that different reporting obligations may apply depending on the commercial structure. Accredited Australian Trusted Traders may also have access to consolidated cargo clearance arrangements.
ABF has indicated that compliance action may be undertaken where delivery address details are inaccurately reported.
International benchmarking of compliance monitoring
In response to queries regarding benchmarking error rates with other jurisdictions, ABF advised that none of the nine countries consulted operate a structured statistical sampling program equivalent to Australia's Compliance Monitoring Program.
While some jurisdictions rely on risk-based targeting or post-clearance audit models, ABF has not identified any international partner operating a structured compliance monitoring program comparable to Australia's CMP framework.
FTA will continue to raise operational and compliance matters through CAG and provide updates to members as further information becomes available.