Skip to Content
avatar image
Former Member

GTS 10.1 - Items arriving into IP stock

Hi,

Hope someone can help us.

We have been told by our business allegedly via the authorities that instead of items arriving into the Customs Warehouse Duty Unpaid we have to declare all unpaid items into IP and then we can move the items to the Customs Warehouse as 50% of arrivals will not be in work. This is under the guise of the UCC changes, has anyone heard of this?

Once we have receipted & declared the item to IP, we have IP stock showing in GTS & stock showing in ERP. Outside of throwing our stock comparison reporting out of line, at worst we would need to move some stock back to the warehouse. As stated previously, if it is not in work it remains our understanding that the item is not permitted to remain in IP.

So far investigated internal document to create warehouse stock which is not permitted as the beginning of an item’s Customs Warehouse life needs to be a fully completed declaration.

Also looked at replicating the declaration into IP as a declaration into the warehouse, this would appear to be quite risky/unsustainable given the amount of variable information on an arrival declaration.

We do have an ability to remove the IP stock to avoid duplication of duty risk if we can create the Customs Warehouse stock. So does anyone have any pointers/advice on generating Customs Warehouse Duty Unpaid stock with a fully complete declaration copying the important information from a declaration into IP?       

Add comment
10|10000 characters needed characters exceeded

  • Get RSS Feed

1 Answer

  • Best Answer
    Oct 06, 2016 at 09:54 PM

    Hi Ian,

    As I understand the UCC,  the business have been badly misinformed or have misunderstood the advice.  There should be no reason why they cannot continue to import goods into the Customs Warehouse.   Under the UCC,  there is now no presumption of eventual export, so Inward Processing may be used more freely than before.

    Rather than try to find system solutions at this stage,  it might be better to re-check the regulations.

    Best regards,

    Dave

    Add comment
    10|10000 characters needed characters exceeded

    • Former Member Dave Willis

      Thanks again Dave,

      I have heard Acita meetings mentioned so presume our business are members. So will be pressing that 2 people are in attendance as is permitted rather than just the one that I believe attends at the  moment.

      Cheers

      Ian.