read this and related legal terms for further details<\/a>), the object of which is to harmonize the methods and procedures of national customs authorities. The agreement, known formally as the International Convention on the Simplification and Harmonization of Customs Procedures, was adopted at Kyoto, Japan, in May 1973. The convention is divided into two parts, (1) a body of principles which applies to all contracting states, and (2) thirty individual annexes dealing with specific problems or procedures. A contracting state may accept or reject any of the annexes, but most adopt at least one of the thirty.<\/p>\nThe convention includes a review procedure whereby a state must examine, every three years, its national legislation relative to any of the standards or recommended practices against which it has lodged an objection. It is an object of the convention that adhering states seek to implement all of the annexes as soon as feasible.<\/p>\n
List of the Annexes to the Kyoto Convention which have been adopted by the Customs Cooperation Council<\/p>\n
A. I. Formalities prior to the lodgment of the goods declaration<\/p>\n
A. 2. Temporary storage of goods<\/p>\n
A. 3. Formalities applicable to commercial means of transport<\/p>\n
A. 4. Customs treatment of stores<\/p>\n
B. 1. Clearance for home use<\/p>\n
B. 2. Relief from import duties and taxes in respect of goods declared for home use<\/p>\n
B. 3. Reimportation in the same state<\/p>\n
C. l. Outright exportation<\/p>\n
D. 1. Rules of origin<\/p>\n
D.2. Documentary evidence of origin<\/p>\n
D. 3. Control of documentary evidence of origin<\/p>\n
E. l. Customs transit E.2. Transshipment E.3. Customs warehouse E.4. Drawback<\/p>\n
E.5. Temporary admission subject to re-exportation in the same state E.6. Temporary admission for inward processing E.7. Duty-free replacement of goods<\/p>\n
E. 8. Temporary exportation for outward processing<\/p>\n
F. l. Free zones<\/p>\n
F.2. Processing of goods for home use<\/p>\n
F.3. Customs facilities applicable to travellers<\/p>\n
F.4. Customs formalities in respect of postal traffic<\/p>\n
F.5. Urgent consignments<\/p>\n
F.6. Repayment of import duties and taxes<\/p>\n
F. 7. Carriage of goods coastwise<\/p>\n
G. 1. Information supplied by the customs<\/p>\n
authorities<\/p>\n
G. 2. Relationship between customs authorities and third parties<\/p>\n
H. 1. Appeals in customs matters H.2. Customs offences<\/p>\n
(Main Author: William J. Miller)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Kyoto Convention and the GATT Policy Negotiations<\/h2>\n
In relation to the GATT Policy Negotiations, Christopher Mark (1993) provided the following explanation and\/or definition of Kyoto Convention: Formal name is the International Convention on the Simplification and Harmonization of Customs Procedures. An international agreement sponsored in 1973 by the Customs Cooperation Council (Sec. Ill) to harmonize the methods and procedures of national customs authorities. The convention consists of a set of principles, which apply to all signatories, together with 30 individual annexes dealing with various aspects of customs and administrative entry procedures, rules of origin, transshipment, duty drawback, and free trade zones. A signatory may accept or reject any of the annexes, but must adopt at least one of them and must endeavor to implement all of the annexes as soon as feasible.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
An international agreement, sponsored by the Customs cooperation Council (read this and related legal terms for further details), the object of which is to harmonize the methods and procedures of national customs authori…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[21,78,507,5],"tags":[1018,144,604,1019],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawin.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9653"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawin.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawin.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawin.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawin.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=9653"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/lawin.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9653\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawin.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=9653"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawin.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=9653"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawin.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=9653"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}