NEW CUSTOMS UNDERSTANDING

Hüseyin Cahit SOYSAL
Board Member

Not that long ago, 50 years ago, the understanding of customs and customs officials was different all over the world. Customs were official institutions that everyone feared and entered with hesitation. In this administration, which also had law enforcement authority, you had to act very politely and politely in order to follow up on business. Otherwise, it would have been impossible to get a referral from the administrator. You had to find the relevant inspection officer, politely convey your request, and wait for the officer's time to complete the procedures. This historical perspective provides a deeper understanding of the current customs practices in Turkey.

The economy did not have a race against time cycle like today. For example, according to Customs Law No. 1615, which was in force until 2000, your goods could wait four months before and two months after registration at the temporary storage place. After the goods arrived, you had to rush to Ankara, get an import permit from the Ministry of Commerce, apply to the Central Bank with this import permit, and wait for the bank bureaucrats to have a pleasant time allocating your foreign currency in the license amount. Because foreign currency was not a medium of exchange but state property. You wouldn't see currency floating around. If you accidentally found 5 US dollars in your pocket during a body search, a lawsuit would be filed against you, which may include a prison sentence, by the provisions of the "Law on the Protection of the Value of Turkish Currency" No. 1567.

Turkey of the 2020s is now integrated with the world and has become an important actor in global trade. The "export-led growth model" and the "transition to convertibility" policies initiated in 1984 made a significant contribution to this. The Customs Union, established between Turkey and the European Union in 1996, is a testament to the importance of international trade agreements and revealed the necessity of harmonizing customs legislation and customs practices with the European Union.

In our age, country economies have become so interdependent that if the global supply chain is interrupted for any reason, the possibility of significant decreases in production and global national income level has increased. This underscores the importance of legal regulations that minimize the retention of goods in customs areas, a direct result of the impact of global trade on customs procedures.

In this area, mentioning the customs legislation regulations made in Turkey is helpful.

The 1st paragraph of Article 69 of the Customs Law No. 4458, which came into force in 2000, was regulated as follows: "Provided that the conditions for the goods to be subject to the relevant regime are met and the goods are not subject to prohibitive or restrictive measures, the customs administrations may check the information in the declaration after registration or certain In such cases, they deliver the goods without checking. However, in cases where the examination of the declaration cannot be completed within a reasonable period, and there is no need for the goods to be present during this examination, the goods are delivered."

The provision of the article clearly states: "Dear customs administration, you cannot keep the goods in the customs area for arbitrary reasons. If there is no prohibition or restriction on the item, complete your transactions within a reasonable time. If your investigations are not completed within a reasonable period, disrupt economic activities and return the goods to the owner. "Complete your reviews and transactions on the document later."

This provision, reflected in Turkey from the European Union Common Customs Code, is a revolution in Turkey. But the extent to which the spirit of this provision has been adopted is a separate matter of debate.

A provision containing further innovation is included in Article 181 of the Customs Regulation, titled "controls to be carried out by other institutions." Paragraph 5/b of the article is regulated as follows: "Provided that the relevant institutions make regulations in their legislation, the goods, temporary storage places, and warehouses to be controlled by the relevant institutions within the scope of subparagraph (a) shall be processed within the scope of the relevant regime provisions, starting from the day following the date on which the obligations stipulated by the customs legislation are fulfilled." It can be kept for more than three business days. In monitoring the specified period, the date on which the provisions of the relevant regime have fulfilled the obligations stipulated by the customs legislation is notified electronically to the relevant institution and the obliged party. Suppose no notification is made by the relevant institution to the customs administration or authorized customs consultant where the customs procedures of the goods are carried out within this period. In that case, customs surveillance is terminated upon the importer's request or his representative's request. "If otherwise is notified, customs surveillance on the goods continues for the period specified by the relevant institution."

In other words, the customs administration entrusts the relevant institution with a significant responsibility regarding the provision of this article. The institution is given a clear mandate: 'You have checked the goods within 3 days, if you cannot do it, I will deliver the goods to the owner.' Undoubtedly, the relevant institution has the right to stop the operations if there is a common reason such as 'this item is likely to cause environmental pollution', 'it emits radiation', or 'it will be used in the production of weapons or explosives'. The important thing is to eliminate the causes of 'arbitrary delay' and ensure the smooth functioning of the customs process.

In developed economies, customs controls are now carried out with this method. The adoption of the 'basic principle' for customs administrations or other relevant public institutions to complete border checks within a certain period of time and to deliver the goods to the owner when they realize that they cannot complete them is crucial in avoiding serious disruptions in the supply chain. This principle underscores the importance of your role in ensuring the smooth flow of goods. When such a need arises, the principle of conducting inspections as field controls (domestic controls) rather than 'border controls' (customs controls) is generally accepted, further highlighting the significance of your role.

On the other hand, the legislative provisions determining the "period for customs controls" have recently been reflected in our national legislation.

Subparagraph 2 of Article 183 of the Customs Regulation titled "Document control" states, "If the officer assigned to control the declaration detects a serious difference between the declaration and the attached documents during his examination and deems it necessary to carry out the examination, the date and time referred to him by the system shall be determined." He/she shall notify the chief administrative officer of this matter within twenty-four hours at the latest. Suppose the administrative chief deems the inspection appropriate. In that case, the relevant chief transfers the declaration to the officer in charge of the examination, and this officer finalizes the procedures. It contains the provisions: "If the examination is not deemed appropriate by the supervisor, the procedures are continued from where they left off by the officer previously assigned to control the declaration." In other words, the inspection officer on duty on the yellow line cannot arbitrarily keep the declaration he has examined; if he says, "This item must be inspected," he has to report this to the administrative chief within 24 hours at the latest, not days later. It is said that the chief administrative officer either finds the request appropriate and sends the declaration to the inspection officer on duty on the red line or gives instructions to complete the procedures on the yellow line.

In the 4th paragraph of the 67th article of the Regulation on the Facilitation of Customs Procedures (GİKY), titled "Customs procedures of goods within the scope of on-site customs clearance permit in exports," it is stated that "By the third paragraph after the declaration is notified to the customs administration by the declarant that the export goods are ready to be exported, within thirty minutes the declaration shall be checked, and The declarant will be notified electronically by the customs administration that he/she will be subject to the type of It is stated in the 8th paragraph that "The inspection process to be carried out by the sixth and seventh paragraphs is initiated by visiting the company's on-site customs clearance permit facility for export within a maximum of three hours following the notification of the type of control carried out by the fourth paragraph. However, suppose this period is not sufficient for the on-site customs clearance permit holder to go to the facility where the goods are located and inspect the customs directorate authorized for the facility where the goods are located due to workload or force majeure. In that case, the relevant customs director is authorized to extend the period by stating the reason. In case of delays in export due to reasons arising from the on-site customs clearance permit holder, the period, including the additional period stipulated in this paragraph, is not considered. If the inspection process is not started within three hours following the notification that the goods will be inspected and the relevant customs director extends this period under the conditions specified in this paragraph, the inspection process will be started within three hours following the beginning of the next business day at the latest.

In other words, the administration is instructed that "as the administration, you will decide within half an hour whether the on-site customs clearance goods will be subject to document control or physical control for export, and you will complete the inspection within three hours." If these deadlines are not complied with, it is stated that "you will receive additional time by stating the reasons." Thus, the customs administration has to complete the procedures without keeping the goods for on-site customs clearance in exports for more than a day.

The 10th paragraph of Article 84 of the GIKY, titled '"Customs transactions of goods within the scope of authorized sender authority,'" and Article 111 titled '"Breaking the seal of the transport vehicle and taking the goods processed within the scope of authorized consignor authority to the safe storage area'", which includes the '"permitted consignee' provisions, are key" provisions. They are also included in the 3rd paragraph of the article.

Article 104 of GIKY determines the "control type notification period for goods within the scope of authorization at the authorized buyer facilities." Accordingly, "(1) Following the notification to the customs administration that the goods located in the secure storage area or secure parking area are intended to be imported, the maximum period within which the customs administration will notify the authorized buyer to which type of control the declaration will be subjected to by Article 115 is determined by the regional directorate that issued the certificate. (2) The period specified in the first paragraph can be at most two hours. (3) If a change is made within the period determined by the first paragraph, this change is stated in the permit and notified to the authorized person." The same provision is also included in the first three paragraphs of Article 128 of GIKY, titled "Period regarding the notification of control type of goods within the scope of on-site customs clearance permit in imports."

It's important to note that the authority to determine the time to which the goods in the safe storage area of ​​the authorized buyer will be directed is given to the regional directorate, not the customs directorate. It is stipulated that this period cannot exceed two hours.

On the other hand, another regulation that facilitates the procedures is the regulation on laboratory analysis, after specifying which goods will be sent for laboratory analysis in the first paragraph of Article 196 of the Customs Regulation, titled "Goods to be subjected to laboratory analysis," in paragraph (a) of the 2nd paragraph referring to the "List of Goods to be Subjected to Laboratory Analysis" in Annex-23. "If the goods specified in paragraphs (b) and (c) of the first paragraph come to the officer in charge of inspection for document control, the content of the declaration will not be sent to the laboratory analysis. In addition, if it is possible to determine the customs tariff statistical position of the goods in the list in Annex-23, there is no need for the officer in charge of inspection to send the goods for laboratory analysis. In other words, the officer is instructed to "If you can detect the GTIP of the goods with the naked eye, send them to the laboratory for analysis."

In clause (b) of the 2nd paragraph, it is stated that "Except for the goods specified in the clause (a) of the first paragraph, there is no difference in the documents determining the characteristics of the goods whose import is continuous, the sender, the receiver and the origin are the same, and the distinctive phrases on these documents and the goods and the declaration registration date. Suppose the date and number of the analysis report, which dates back at most one year, is declared in box 44 of the declaration. In that case, the previous analysis will be considered and will not be sent for laboratory analysis again. However, if the computer system determines the type of control of the declaration as red line full inspection, the obliged party will not be allowed to benefit from this facility.

Thus, the operations of businesses that constantly bring the same chemicals and put them into production are facilitated. The guidance of risk analysis is adhered to.

While such a facility was not foreseen for the analyses carried out in laboratories authorized by the Ministry as "accredited laboratories," with the amendment to the regulation published in the Official Gazette No. 31086 dated 01.04.2020, paragraph (d) added to the 2nd paragraph of Article 196 and the "specified in paragraph (b)" If the analysis of the goods with the characteristics cannot be carried out in the customs laboratory, and if it is done in accredited laboratories other than the customs laboratory deemed appropriate within the scope of the first and second paragraphs of Article 201, the goods will be re-laboratory analyzed by taking into account the analysis reports prepared by these laboratories and dating back at most one year as of the declaration registration date and not sent. However, suppose the computer system determines the type of control of the declaration as red line full inspection. In that case, the obliged party will not be allowed to benefit from this facility," is included in the legislation.

To become an essential actor in the global economic model, we can turn these regulations imposed by the system into slogans for customs administrations under the following headings:

• The deadlines in the law are binding not only for customs officials but also for you.
• Your attempt to protect the state's rights should not turn into a tool to undermine the economy.
• Protect the public's rights, but do not harass the merchants with unnecessary transactions.
• Avoid repeat operations that do not produce different results.
• Remember, a waste of time is a waste of money for businesses.