G/VAL/W/276  
1 October 2015  
(15-5070)  Page: 1/12  
Committee on Customs Valuation  Original: Spanish  
 
  NOTIFICATION UNDER ARTICLE 22 OF THE AGREEMENT ON 
IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTICLE VII OF THE GENERAL 
AGREEMENT ON TARIFFS AND TRADE 1994 
QUESTIONS FROM THE UNITED ST ATES TO COLOMBIA REGARDING 
DOCUMENTS G/VAL/N/1/COL/1  AND G/VAL/N/2/COL/1 
The following communication, dated 25 September 2015,  is being circulated at the request of the 
delegation of Colombia. 
 
_______________ 
 
 
Colombia thanks the United States for its questions regarding the notifications contained in documents G/VAL/N/1/COL/1 and G/VAL/N /2/COL/1 and replies as follows: 
G/VAL/N/1/COL/2- Notification under Articl e 22 of the Agreement on Implementation 
of Article VII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 
ANNEX 1: Ministry of Financ e, Decree No. 111 of 21 Janua ry 2010 partially amending 
and supplementing Decree No. 2685 of 1999 and adopting other provisions. 
Article 4 - Could Colombia please provide us with a copy of Article 128.5 of Decree No. 2685 
of 1999, concerning release of goods? 
Reply: 
Decree No. 2685/1999 "Article 128. Authorization of release  (Article amended by Article 13 of 
Decree No. 1232 of 2001).  
Authorization of release applies in the event of one of the following: 
(..) 5. Where, following the physical or documentary customs inspection: (Paragraph amended by 
Article 4 of Decree No. 111 of 2010). 
5.1.  Doubts are raised as to the declared value of the imported goods or any of the elements 
making up their customs value, due to this value being considered low according to DIAN risk management system indicators; 
5.1.1.  The declarant, within two (2) days of  the inspection, shall submit the supporting 
documents that confirm the declared price; or 
5.1.2.  If, upon the expiry of the period pr ovided for in paragraph 5.1.1, the supporting 
documents have not been submitted or do not confirm the declared value and 
where doubt persists, the declarant shall post a guarantee within the following three (3) days in accordance with Article 254 of this Decree. G/VAL/W/276 
- 2 - 
  5.1.3.  Pursuant to Article 54.3 of the Co mmunity Regulation adopted by Resolution 
No. 846 of the Andean Community of Nations (CAN), where the prices declared are manifestly low and may imply the existence of fraud, the customs authority shall require a guarantee. 
Without prejudice to the foregoing, the declarant may voluntarily choose to post the guarantee 
renouncing the terms provided for in paragraph 5.1. 1. or, where he considers it necessary, freely 
and voluntarily adjust the import declaration to the price actually negotiated. 
5.2.  Doubts are raised as to the declared customs value on the basis of the documents 
submitted or other objective and quantifiable data that differs from the values in the risk management system customs valuation database or the reference prices, and the declarant, within five (5) days of the inspection, submits the supporting documents 
confirming the declared customs value or corrects the import declaration in accordance 
with the inspection report; 
In the circumstances provided for in paragraphs 5. 1 and 5.2, no penalty shall be incurred during 
the inspection process …" 
Director-General of National Customs and Ex cise, Resolution No. 733 of 29 January 2010 
supplementing and amending Resolution No. 4240 of 2000 
- Article 3, Article 4, Article 5(3)(a) and Ar ticle 5(5) refer to reference prices. Could 
Colombia explain these provisions in light of the prohibitions in Article 7 of the CVA? 
Reply: 
Articles 3, 4 and 5 of Resolution No. 733 of 2010 amending Articles 119-1, 171 and 172 of 
Resolution No. 4240 of 2000, which refer to reference prices and regulate Article 128.5 of Decree No. 2685 of 1999, as amended by Article 4 of Decree No. 111 of 2010, are not inconsistent with 
the prohibitions in Article 7 of the WTO Customs Valuation Agreement, inasmuch as they establish 
the procedure to be followed when the customs authority has reasonable doubts about the declared value, under any import modality, be it under that of postal traffic and urgent air 
shipments at the time the goods are introduced into the national customs territory or under that of 
simultaneous control when the importer is preparing to request the release (customs clearance) of the goods and they are subject to physical inspec tion by the customs authority; and the importer 
is provided with full guarantees in order to prove the circumstances of its transaction. 
The reference prices referred to in Colombian customs legislation do not therefore constitute a 
means of substituting value, but are one of th e parameters under the general risk management 
system, which includes various control criteria. 
In cases where they are used, reference prices, wh ich are only applied to certain types of goods, 
are taken as nothing more than a control measure and are developed systematically as an additional element to substantiate doubts regard ing the declared value of imported goods, in 
accordance with Decision 6.1 approved  by the Customs Valuation Committee. 
Where the importer is unable to provide due proof of the declared value to the customs authority 
during the inspection procedure (simultaneous control), it may post a guarantee to secure the release of its goods or freely and voluntarily adju st the price actually paid or payable for the 
goods. 
Once the guarantee has been posted, the case is referred to the body designated to carry out an 
a posteriori value analysis, where, in exercise of the right to due process, the importer will be 
asked to provide further information and/or be visited at its premises, thus affording it the legal 
opportunity to demonstrate to the customs authority that the declared value is that actually paid or payable. 
It is important to point out that reference prices may be used to assess the amount of the 
guarantee that must be paid in order to secure the release of the goods. G/VAL/W/276 
- 3 - 
  It should also be noted that the use of reference prices does not imply the automatic rejection of 
the transaction value of the imported goods. 
- Article 5, paragraph 3 states that "onl y where imports enter through the wharf of 
Puerto Nuevo in Bahía Portete (Guajira) ma y the declarant post a guarantee before 
a dispute regarding value arises." This a ppears to be an unnecessary limitation on 
the use of guarantees. Can Colombia please explain this limitation, particularly in 
light of Article 13 of the CVA? 
Reply: 
Pursuant to Article 13 of the WTO Customs Valuat ion Agreement and to the Decision approved by 
the Technical Committee on Customs Valuation, and in accordance with Article 128.5 of Decree No. 2685 of 1999, as amended by Article 4 of De cree No. 111 of 2010, only where Customs has 
reason to doubt the truth or accuracy of the declared value and the importer fails to provide proof 
of its transaction with supporting documents, is the latter given the option of posting the respective guarantee that will enable it to take  possession of its goods, while the corresponding 
value analysis is being conducted. 
Where a guarantee is required, customs legislation permits the posting of a specific guarantee for 
each valuation dispute or a global guarantee that covers not only valuation issues, but other 
customs-related aspects. This possibility applies to  importers that meet certain requirements, such 
as conducting multiple foreign trade operations. 
The measure in question was included, on a temporary basis, as an exception to the 
above-mentioned rule, solely to ensure the safety  of goods entering national customs territory 
through the wharf of Puerto Nuevo in Bahía Portete (Guajira) and to minimize the risk of loss. This 
measure is applied in view of the fact that this wharf does not have suitable physical or IT infrastructure for conducting customs procedures and cannot guarantee the safe unloading of 
goods. 
It should also be noted that the measure is optional for the importer, which decides whether or not 
to post the guarantee in question, and which must therefore study, in each case, whether its 
goods are exposed to loss during the respective customs procedure. 
Since the introduction of this measure, DIAN has been working with other State entities and 
entities from the region where the wharf is located, which also have competence under each of their functions, to improve the conditions descr ibed above. Once these conditions have been 
rectified, the above-mentioned provision will be amended. 
- Articles 8 and 9 refer to guarantees with  respect to an amount equal to the value 
declared. However, Article 13 of the CVA refers to the guarantee with respect to 
the payment of customs duties for which a good may be liable. Could Colombia 
please explain the basis for guarantees? 
Reply: 
Colombian customs legislation does take into account customs duties for the purposes of the 
posting of guarantees in valuation disputes, as provided for in Article 13 of the WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation. 
Thus, Article 8 of Resolution No. 733 of 2010 esta blishes that, pursuant to the provisions of 
Article 128.5 of Decree No. 2685 of 1999 (valuation disputes during the inspection process) "the 
guarantee shall amount to 100% of the customs du ties that may be generated by the difference 
between the value declared by the importer an d the price determined in accordance with 
Article 172 of this Resolution by the competent official during the inspection" (emphasis added). 
Under Colombian customs legislation, customs duties include the tariff and the sales tax. It should 
also be made clear that, at the time of posting the guarantee, the importer has already paid the 
customs duties on the declared value. For this reason, in the event of a valuation dispute, the 
guarantee must be posted in the amount of 100% of the customs duties on the difference between G/VAL/W/276 
- 4 - 
  the two values (the value declared by the importer and the value used as a reference by the 
competent official). 
G/VAL/N/2/COL/2 Check-list of Issues Information on Implementation and Admini stration of the Agreement on Customs 
Valuation. 
(1)  With respect to paragraph 1(a)(i), Ar ticle 14(3)(a) of the Community Regulation 
implementing Decision No. 571 states that  there are three situations that the 
Customs administration may consider as proof in examining the circumstances of 
the sale. However, the examples set forth in  Note to Article 1, Paragraph 2(3) of 
the CVA, are not an exhaustive list. Could Colombia please explain this apparent 
limitation to three sets of circumstances? 
Reply: 
Article 15 of the Community Regulation adopte d by Resolution No. 1684 of 2014, which is 
currently in force and which replaced Article 14 of the previous Community Regulation, does not 
limit to the three examples indicated in paragraph 2.3 of the Note to Article 1 of the Agreement, 
the situations which the Customs Administration may consider as proof that the price had not been influenced by the relationship, when examining the circumstances surrounding the sale. In addition 
to mentioning those examples, Article 15 makes it clear that any other additional situation may be 
taken into account by the customs authority: " In any event and without being requested by the 
Customs Administration, the importer may request that a study of the circumstances of the sale be conducted with regard to its relations with its foreign suppliers, providing the necessary 
information for this purpose ". 
It also provides that: 
"In examining the circumstances of the sale, any relevant information and documents 
provided by an importer may be utilized and sh all be subject to review and acceptance by 
the Customs Administration ... ". 
The same paragraph also refers to the use of transfer pricing studies to examine the circumstances 
surrounding the sale: 
"… A transfer pricing study may be one source of  such information, in accordance with the 
indications in Commentary 23.1 of the Technical Committee on Customs Valuation. " 
- Article 15 of the Community Regulation  adopted by Andean Community General 
Secretariat Resolution No. 1684 and Articl e 178 of National Customs and Excise 
Directorate (DIAN) Resolution No. 4240/2000 states that the value determined for the imported goods in accordance with Articles 2, 3 and 7 of the WTO Customs 
Valuation Agreement shall not be considered  a test value. Could Colombia please 
explain this provision, in light of Article 1.2(b)(i) of the CVA? 
Reply: 
Given that CVA Article 1.2(b)(i), unlike Article 1.2( b)(ii) and (iii), does not specify which articles 
refer to methods 2 (transaction value of identical goods) and 3 (transaction value of similar goods), there has always been a doubt that these are the methods referred to, and this has not been clarified sufficiently in Advisory Opinio n 7.1, Commentary 10.1 or Explanatory Note 1.1. 
In light of its concern, the National Customs and Excise Directorate (DIAN) will therefore approach 
other Andean Community member countries, thro ugh the General Secretariat of the Andean 
Community of Nations (CAN), with a view to the revision of Article 16 of the Community 
Regulation to Decision No. 571 adopted by Resolution No. 1684 of 2014, in relation to the 
following phrase: " The value determined for the imported goods in accordance with Articles 2, 3 
and 7 of the WTO Customs Valuation Agreement shall not be considered a test value. " G/VAL/W/276 
- 5 - 
  The above is without prejudice to an approach to the World Customs Organization (WCO), if 
considered necessary, in order to obtain a specific ruling on the matter. 
(2)  Article 4 of Decision No. 571 of the Andean Community Commission states that 
"the order of application of the method s indicated in numbers 4 and 5 of the 
preceding Article may be reversed, if re quested by the importer and with the 
consent of the Customs Administration." Could Colombia explain why the consent 
of the customs administration is required where the importer chooses to reverse 
the order of application of the valuation me thods in Articles 5 and 6, given that the 
CVA itself does not provide that the import er's choice to be subject to acceptance 
by the customs authorities? 
Reply: 
Paragraph 3 of Annex III to the WTO Customs Valuation Agreement does give Colombia the right 
to require the Customs Administration's approval of the importers request. It states that:  
"Developing countries which consider that the reversal of the sequential order at the request of the 
importer provided for in Article 4 of the Agreement may give rise to real difficulties for them may 
wish to make a reservation to Article 4 in the following terms: 
"The Government of ... reserves the right to provid e that the relevant provision of Article 4 of the 
Agreement shall apply only when the customs author ities agree to the request to reverse the order 
of Articles 5 and 6." (emphasis added)  
If developing countries make such a reservation,  the Members shall consent to it under Article 21 
of the Agreement."  
Colombia, as a developing country, did make this reservation, as is evidenced by the notification of 
acceptance of 7 April 1995, issued by the World Trade Organization. 
In light of the above and bearing in mind that Colombia forms part of the Andean Community, the 
reservation referred to in paragraph 3 of Annex III to the Agreement is made in Article 4 of 
Decision No. 571, given that the agreement of th e Customs Administration is required when the 
importer requests reversal of the sequential order of Articles 5 and 6. 
(3)  Article 5 of Decision No. 571 of the An dean Community Commission states that "if 
the imported goods or identical or similar imported goods are not sold in the country of importation in the condition as imported, the method indicated in 
number 4 of Article 3 of this Decision shall be followed in accordance with 
Article 5.2 of the WTO Customs Valuation Agreement, whether or not requested by 
the importer, taking into account the Interpretative Note to Article 5 of the 
aforementioned Agreement." (emphasis adde d) Could Colombia please explain this 
provision, in light of Article 5.2 of the CVA, which provides that this option is 
available if the importer so requests? 
Reply: 
Paragraph 4 of Annex III to the WTO Customs Valuation Agreement does give Colombia the option 
to apply the method provided for in number 4 of Article 3, whether or not the importer so requests. It states that: 
"Developing countries may wish to make a reservation with respect to paragraph 2 of Article 5 of 
the Agreement in the following terms: 
"The Government of ... reserves the right to provide that paragraph 2 of Article 5 of the 
Agreement shall be applied in accordance with the provisions of the relevant note thereto whether 
or not the importer so requests." (emphasis added)  
If developing countries make such a reservation,  the Members shall consent to it under Article 21 
of the Agreement."  G/VAL/W/276 
- 6 - 
  Colombia, as a developing country, did make this reservation, as is evidenced by the notification of 
acceptance of 7 April 1995, issued by the World Trade Organization. 
In light of the above and bearing in mind that Colombia forms part of the Andean Community, the 
reservation referred to in paragraph 4 of Annex III to the Agreement is made in Article 5 of 
Decision No. 571, given that it applies whether or not the importer so requests.  
Reference Prices We note there are numerous references and mo difications to resolutions touching on the 
use of reference prices, in particul ar Resolution No. 1684 (Andean Community 
Legislation), Resolution No. 733, and Mini stry Decree No. 111 supplementing Decree 
No. 2685. The various references at times appe ar conflicting as to how reference pricing 
are used. We are troubled both by the appa rent conflicts and by the use of reference 
prices as set out in Resolution No. 733, Arti cle 4, amending Article 171 of Resolution 
No. 4240 of 2000. We note that reference pricing for the determination of customs value is specifically prohibited by Article 7 of the CVA, and any uses of reference prices for risk 
management purposes should be done with that provision in mind. We request further 
information and clarification from Colombia on these apparent contradictions and on 
how Colombia uses or plans to use re ference prices in customs operations. 
Reply: 
As previously mentioned, the reference prices applied by Colombia do not violate the prohibitions 
in Article 7 of the WTO Customs Valuation Agr eement; they merely constitute one of the 
parameters or criteria under the general risk management system, which includes various control 
measures. They are used for comparison with the declared customs value and to request an 
explanation where there are doubts regarding this value, and the importer is provided with full 
guarantees in order to prove the circumstances of its transaction. 
It is therefore reiterated that under Colombian customs legislation, reference prices do not 
constitute a means of substituting value but are us ed for certain types of goods, and their use in 
no case implies the automatic rejection of the transaction value declared for imported goods. 
Could Colombia please provide a copy of Chapter XIV, Section II, of Decree 
No. 2685/1999? 
Reply: 
The following provisions cover the general procedure for customs-related investigations conducted 
by the National Customs and Excise Directorate (DIAN). Articles 507 to 512 and 514 to 520 refer 
specifically to official value revision assessments. 
_______________ G/VAL/W/276 
- 7 - 
  DECREE NO. 2685/99 
CHAPTER XIV 
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE GOVERNING THE IMPOSITION OF PENALTIES FOR 
CUSTOMS OFFENCES, THE DEFINITION OF THE LEGAL STATUS OF GOODS 
AND THE ISSUING OF OFFICIAL ASSESSMENTS 
SECTION II 
PROCEDURE 
Article 507. Special customs demand  (Article amended by Article 16 of Decree No. 4431 
of 2004).  
The customs authority may formulate a special cu stoms demand to propose the imposition of a 
penalty for the administrative customs offence or to draw up an official value correction or revision 
assessment. 
Paragraph . In administrative penalty proceedings or official value correction or revision 
assessment proceedings brought against the user of  foreign trade, the customs agency shall be 
included in the respective proceedings with a view to establishing its responsibility as a result of its 
customs brokerage activities, and the imposition of any relevant penalties shall be proposed. (Paragraph added by Article 7 of Decree No. 2883 of 2008) 
Article 508. Scenario for drawing up the special customs demand  
The special customs demand shall be issued upon completion of the import process or during the 
implementation of audit programmes, as appropriate. 
Article 509. Time-period for drawing up the special customs demand and content thereof  
(Article amended by Article 17 of Decree No. 4431 of 2004).  
Once the alleged commission of an administrative customs offence has been established or the 
reasons for issuing an official assessment have been identified, the customs authority shall have 
thirty (30) days to draw up a special customs demand, which must contain, as a minimum, the 
following information: identity of the person to whom the demand is addressed; a detailed account of the facts or omissions constituting the customs offence or giving rise to the official assessment 
proposal; the rules allegedly violated; the objections of the party concerned, and a description of 
the evidence provided during the inspection and investigation process or in fulfilment of the legal duty to inform. 
Article 510. Notification of and resp onse to the special customs demand  (Article amended 
by Article 29 of Decree No. 2557 of 2007). 
The special customs demand shall be notified in accordance with Articles 564 and 567 of this 
Decree. 
In administrative proceedings initiated to draw up official correction assessment, both the importer 
and the declarant is to be notified. In those pertaining to official value review assessments only the importer shall be notified, unless, in light of  the evidence gathered, the declarant is to be 
included in the proceedings due to the circumstances being those provided for in the third 
paragraph of Article 22 of this Decree. 
The alleged offender's response to the special customs demand shall be submitted within fifteen 
(15) days following service of the demand, and shall include a written statement of its objections 
and a request concerning the evidence it seeks to put forward. G/VAL/W/276 
- 8 - 
  Article  511. Evidentiary  period (Article amended by Article 19 of Decree No. 4431 of 2004). 
Within ten (10) days following receipt of the response to the special customs demand or the 
objection to seizure, the submission of the requested evidence conducive to and effective, relevant and necessary for the clarification of the facts under investigation shall be decreed by reasoned 
order, the evidence not of this nature shall be re jected, and the submission of evidence considered 
relevant and necessary, other than that specified in the special customs demand or notice of seizure, shall be ordered ex officio. 
The same order shall require that the evidence specified in the notice of seizure or special customs 
demand be re-submitted or amplified, where it has not been submitted in due form or is incomplete. 
The order under which the evidence is required shall be notified by publication at court, in 
accordance with Article 566 of this Decree. Where evidence is rejected, an application for review 
shall lie, which shall be filed within three (3) days following the notification and shall be ruled upon within three (3) days of filing. 
The term for the submission of evidence shall be two (2) months, if in the country, or three 
(3) months, if it is to be submitted abroad, and shall run from the time when the order under which it is required became enforceable. 
Paragraph. Where the guarantee substituting the seiz ure and the submission of the requested 
evidence is rejected, the two acts shall be resolved in one single administrative decision against which an application for reconsideration shall lie. 
Article 512. Substantive administrative decision  (Article amended by Article 20 of Decree 
No. 4431 of 2004). 
Where the objection to seizure or the response to the special customs demand is not submitted 
before expiry of the term provided for in the first paragraph of Article 505-1 or the second 
paragraph of Article 510 of this Decree, the customs authority shall have fifteen (15) days to make 
a reasoned substantive decision on the legal status of the seized goods and thirty (30) days to issue the substantive administrative decision regarding the imposition of a penalty, the formulation 
of the official assessment or the closing of the case, where necessary. 
Where the objection to seizure or the response to  the special customs demand is submitted and no 
evidence is ordered or the requested evidence is rejected, the customs authority shall have forty-five (45) days from the day following that on which the objection to seizure was made or the 
response to the special customs demand was given to make a substantive decision on the legal 
status of the seized goods and to issue the substantive administrative decision regarding the imposition of a penalty, the formulation of the official assessment or the closing of the case. 
(Paragraph amended by Article 30 of Decree No. 2557 of 2007). 
Where the submission of evidence is ordered, the time-periods for making the substantive decision 
referred to in the previous paragraph shall be calc ulated from the day foll owing the expiry of the 
time-limits established for the submission of evidence in the preceding Article. 
Paragraph. The time-periods for making substantive decisions do not include notification periods, 
which are provided for in Articles 564 and 567 of this Decree. 
Article 512-1. Direct confiscation (Article added by Article 21 of Decree No. 4431 of 2004). 
Where one of the reasons for the seizure and confi scation of goods provided for in Article 502 of 
this Decree has been identified, in respect of hydrocarbons and their derivatives, liquor or 
cigarettes, or other goods which, regardless of their nature, have a value below or equal to five 
current legal minimum monthly wages, the goods shall be subject to seizure. 
As part of the seizure process, the party concer ned shall provide the documents requested by the 
competent official showing that the goods have b een imported legally. Where such documents are 
not provided, an order shall be issued in respect of the seizure, examination, valuation and direct G/VAL/W/276 
- 9 - 
  confiscation of the goods, which shall contain th e information referred to in Article 504 of this 
Decree. 
The order in respect of the seizure, examination, valuation and direct confiscation of the goods is a 
substantive decision that may only be challenged via the application for reconsideration provided 
for in Article 515 of this Decree, and shall be notified in accordance with paragraphs 3 and 4 of 
Article 563 of this Decree. 
Paragraph . Where, in the event of an application for reconsideration or a request for immediate 
revocation filed against the act of seizure and confiscation, it is determined that the value of the 
seized and directly confiscated goods is higher than the amount of five current legal minimum 
monthly wages, as provided for in the first paragraph of this Article, the party concerned shall be reassigned the time-period for submission of the objection to seizure, and the ordinary procedure 
established in this Decree to define the legal status of the goods shall be applied. 
Article 512-2. Penalty procedure against the customs agency following seizure  (Article 
added by Article 8 of Decree No. 2883 of 2008). 
Following enforcement of the administrative or der for the confiscation of the goods, the 
administrative penalty procedure against the customs agency that has taken part in the operation shall, if necessary, be initiated, with a view to applying the relevant penalties for its customs 
brokerage management. 
In this case, the period of validity of the admi nistrative penalty procedure, as provided for in 
Article 478 of this Decree, shall begin on the date  on which the administrative confiscation order 
was enforced. 
Article 513.  Official correction assessment  
The customs authority may issue an official correction assessment where import declarations 
contain errors in respect of tariff subheadings, rates, exchange rates, penalties, arithmetic 
function, modalities or preferential treatment. 
An official correction assessment may also be drawn up where the customs value of the goods 
differs due to recognized failures in the customs inspection system. 
Article 514. Official va lue revision assessment  
The customs authority may draw up an official value revision assessment where import 
declarations contain errors in respect of f.o.b. va lue, freight, insurance, other costs, adjustments 
and customs value, or where the declared value do es not correspond to the customs value of the 
goods established by the customs authority, in accordance with the rules governing this matter, 
without prejudice to any other penalties applicable under customs valuation provisions. 
Article 515. Application for reconsideration  (Article amended by Article 50 of Decree No. 1232 
of 2001). 
Substantive administrative decisions may be challenged by an application for reconsideration, 
which shall be submitted within fifteen (15) days following notification of the respective decision. 
The term for ruling on applications for reconsideration shall be three (3) months from the date of 
their submission. 
Paragraph . The term for ruling upon an application for reconsideration shall be suspended for the 
duration of the evidentiary period, where necessary. 
Article 515-1. Evidentiary period pertaining  to the application for reconsideration (Article 
added by Article 1 of Decree No. 3329 of 2009). 
In the month following the date of submission of the application for reconsideration or the date of 
its receipt, where the signatory has submitted it to  a body other than the body competent to give 
a decision in accordance with the second paragraph of Article 516 of this Decree, the submission of G/VAL/W/276 
- 10 - 
  the evidence requested in the application brief that is conducive to and effective, relevant and 
necessary for the clarification of the facts under di scussion shall be decreed by reasoned order, the 
evidence not of this nature shall be rejected, an d the submission of evidence considered relevant 
and necessary, other than that specified in the special customs demand or notice of seizure or that 
decreed in the order for evidence issued in the substantive decision procedure, shall be ordered 
ex officio. 
The order under which the evidence is required shall be notified by publication at court, in 
accordance with Article 566 of this Decree. Where evidence is rejected, an application for review 
shall lie, which may be filed within three (3) days following the notification and shall be ruled upon within three (3) days of filing. 
The term for the submission of evidence shall be two (2) months, if in the country, or three 
(3) months, if it is to be submitted abroad, and shall run from the time when the order under 
which it is required became enforceable. 
Article  516. Submission of the application for reconsideration  (Article amended by Article 2 
of Decree No. 3329 of 2009). 
The application may be submitted directly by the person against which the challenged 
administrative decision was issued, or through a special representative. 
The application may be submitted personally to the customs authority to which it is directed or to 
a judge or notary within the time-period provided for in Article 515 of this Decree, with proof of 
identity of the signatory. Where the application is submitted through a special representative, the 
relevant professional lawyer's card shall be shown, and in all cases the fact of personal submission 
of the written application shall be recorded. 
Where it is submitted personally to a judge or notary, the application for reconsideration shall be 
taken to the customs authority or sent to that authority through the official postal network or any 
authorized specialized courier service, within the time-period provided for in Article 515 of this 
Decree. 
In the circumstances described in the preceding paragraph, the customs authority shall forward 
the application to the body designated to rule upon  it, within five (5) days of its receipt. In all 
cases, the time-periods for the conflicted body to rule on the application shall begin to run from the day following the date of its receipt. 
Article 517. Record of the submission of the application  
The official who receives the application shall record, in writing, the date of submission and the 
information identifying the appellant and shall pr ovide the party concerned with a copy of this 
record. 
Article  518. Requirements governing the application for reconsideration 
The application for reconsideration or revi ew shall meet the following requirements: 
(a)  That it be formulated in writing, making specific mention of the reasons for non-conformity. 
(b)  That it be filed within the legal time-period. 
(c)  That it be filed directly by the person against which the challenged decision was issued or by 
a representative or proxy, in which case proof of legal status is required. 
Article 519. Non-compliance with time-periods  (Article amended by Article 22 of Decree 
No. 4431 of 2004). 
The time-periods for making a substantive decision, as provided for in this Chapter, are of a 
peremptory nature and non-compliance therewith shall give rise to positive administrative silence. 
Where the procedure for imposing a penalty has been initiated, the outcome shall be deemed to be in favour of the party subject to the measure. Where the procedure for drawing up an official G/VAL/W/276 
- 11 - 
  assessment has been initiated, the ensuing declar ation shall be final. In cases where goods are 
seized to define their legal status, they shall be handed over to the interested party upon the presentation and acceptance of the legalization declaration and the payment of any relevant customs duties, without payment of a recovery fee. 
There shall be no cause for positive administrative silence where no objection to the seizure has 
been submitted and where the goods concerned ar e those provided for in Articles 228 and 502-1 
of this Decree, to which legalization is not applicable, or those subject to legal or administrative 
import restrictions, unless, in the case of the latter, documentary evidence is provided of 
compliance with the obligation constituting the admi nistrative legal restriction, and, in any case, 
without prejudice to the time-periods provided for making a substantive decision. Disciplinary sanctions shall apply where decisions are taken outside these time-periods. 
Where positive administrative silence is rejected, an application for review may be made under the 
Administrative Disputes Code. 
Furthermore, where the deadline for ruling upon the application for reconsideration has expired 
without the notification of any explicit decision, th e outcome shall be deemed to be in favour of the 
appellant in the terms laid down in the paragraphs above, in which case this shall be declared by the competent authority ex officio or at the request of the party concerned. 
Provided that positive administrative silence is declared during the administrative process for 
defining the legal status of seized goods, the subs tantive decision issued in this regard shall grant 
a period of one month to submit the legalization declaration. Where this period expires without the legalization declaration having obtained clearance, the administrative decision ordering 
confiscation shall become final. 
Article 519-1. Administrative  penalty procedure for imposing penalties on customs 
agencies for serious offences  (Article added by Article 9 of Decree No. 2883 of 2008). 
Once the commission of a serious offence has been established, the customs authority shall have 
twenty (20) days to issue and notify the special customs demand. 
The response to the special customs demand shal l be issued by the customs agency within ten 
(10) days following the notification of the demand. 
Evidence considered conducive to and effective, re levant and necessary for the clarification of the 
facts shall be submitted within fifteen (15) days following the receipt of the special customs demand or the expiry of the response period. 
Within fifteen (15) days following the expiry  of the above-mentioned period, a substantive 
administrative decision shall be issued, against which an application for reconsideration may be filed within five (5) days following its notification. The customs authority shall have one month to 
rule on the application. 
Article 520.  More favourable provision 
Where a provision favouring the party concerned is issued before the customs authority makes a 
substantive administrative decision, the customs authority shall be obliged to apply this provision, 
even if it has not been mentioned in the response to the special customs demand. 
Article 521. Reduction of fines imposed for administrative customs offences 
Without prejudice to the confiscation, where necessar y, of the goods, the fines established in this 
Decree shall be reduced to the following percentages of the value established in each case: 
1. 20%, where the offender voluntarily recognizes, in writing, that it has committed the 
offence, prior to service of the special customs demand; 
2. 40%, where the offender recognizes, in writing, that it has committed the offence, within 
the time-period established for responding to the special customs demand, and; G/VAL/W/276 
- 12 - 
  3. 60%, where the offender recognizes, in writing, that it has committed the offence, within 
the time-period established for filing an appeal against the substantive administrative decision imposing a penalty. 
In order to obtain the penalty reduction provided for in this Article, the offender shall, in each 
case, attach to the written document in which it recognizes having committed the offence, a copy 
of the payment receipt from a bank authorized to take payment for the National Customs and 
Excise Directorate, which confirms that the relevant percentage of the penalty has been paid, as 
well as any higher amounts corresponding to customs duties, where applicable. 
__________