Origin and Preference — SADC, COMESA and AfCFTA in Practice

Every consignment that crosses a Zimbabwean border carries, in addition to its physical description and its declared value, an invisible attribute that can change the duty payable by tens of thousands of dollars: its origin. Origin is the economic nationality of goods — the country in which they were grown, produced or manufactured. Under Section 88 of the Customs and Excise Act [Chapter 23:02], the country of origin of any manufactured goods is, for the purposes of the Act, the country in which the last process of manufacture has been performed. That deceptively simple rule is the doorway to the entire subject, because origin determines which column of the Tariff Handbook a clearing agent reads, whether an anti-dumping or countervailing measure bites, whether an import control or a Multilateral Environmental Agreement prohibition applies, and — most importantly for the trader — whether the goods qualify for a preferential (reduced or zero) rate of duty under a trade agreement.

Having mastered Tariff Classification (which tells us the rate applicable to a product) and Customs Valuation (which tells us the base to which that rate is applied), we now turn to origin and preference, which together decide which rate applies in the first place. Classification answers "what is it?"; valuation answers "what is it worth?"; origin answers "where is it from, and does that 'where' earn it a discount?". The three combine in the duty computation: duty = Customs Value (from valuation) × tariff-line rate (from classification, selected by origin).

The legal architecture has three layers. First, the domestic statute: Section 88 (origin = last process of manufacture), Section 89 (the "specified country content" rule governing when goods qualify for the lower agreement rates — unmanufactured goods must be wholly grown or produced in the country; manufactured goods must undergo their last process there and meet a prescribed local-content percentage or a prescribed process), and Section 85 (which defines local content as the percentage of factory cost represented by direct labour plus locally sourced materials). Second, the agreements framework in Part IX (Sections 99–103): the President may conclude customs agreements (Section 99), they must be published and laid before Parliament for approval within thirty sitting days (Section 100), regulations may be made to give them effect (Section 101), and — critically — an agreement and its regulations prevail over anything inconsistent in the Act (Section 102). Third, the subsidiary regulations and the agreements themselves: regulation 25 of the Customs and Excise General Regulations (the project copy is "Customs General Regulations — 2021") makes proof of origin a precondition for the lower rates, prescribing Form 61 or 65 for the Botswana/Malawi bilateral agreements, the COMESA certificate for COMESA, and Form 60 for any other country; and the COMESA regime (SI 244 of 2000, suspending duty on COMESA-originating goods that satisfy Annex IV / Article 48 of the COMESA Treaty) and the SADC Trade Protocol (Annex I, Rules of Origin) supply the substantive origin tests.

The two preference regimes a Zimbabwean officer meets most often are COMESA and SADC. COMESA uses five independent origin criteria — a good qualifies if it meets any one: (i) it is wholly produced in a Member State; (ii) the c.i.f. value of foreign materials does not exceed 60% of the total cost of materials used; (iii) it attains value added of at least 35% of the ex-factory cost; (iv) it undergoes a change of tariff heading from the non-originating inputs; or (v) it is a Council-designated good of particular economic importance with at least 25% value added. SADC requires that goods be consigned directly and either be wholly produced (Rule 4 of Annex I) or be sufficiently worked or processed to satisfy the product-specific rules in Appendix I (with a 15% value tolerance for de minimis non-originating materials, except for HS chapters 50–63, 87 and 98). Older bilateral agreements survive — notably the Zimbabwe/Malawi agreement (minimum local content 25% of ex-factory cost, certificate Form 61) and the Zimbabwe/Botswana agreement (certificate Form 65) — alongside newer instruments: the EU and UK interim Economic Partnership Agreements and the continental AfCFTA.

Three doctrines run through every regime and must be internalised. The direct-consignment rule requires goods to travel directly from the exporting Member State to the Zimbabwean consignee (transit through third countries is tolerated only for genuine geographic necessity), and exists to prevent trade deflection — the laundering of non-originating goods through a preference partner. The cumulation (successive-processing) rule treats the Member States as a single territory, so materials originating in one partner and further worked in another are deemed to originate where the last economically justifiable process occurred. And processes not conferring origin — simple packing, labelling, mixing, dismantling, slaughter and the like — never create origin, no matter how many are combined. Where preference is claimed but the certificate of origin is missing or incomplete, the officer does not simply refuse; Section 44(1)(f)(iii) proviso (i) allows release against a deposit equal to the preferential margin (the difference between the general rate and the preferential rate) pending production of a valid certificate.

For the duty cascade, preference operates at Step 4 only — it reduces the tariff-line rate, not the Customs Value. The downstream levies follow automatically: surtax (where listed), excise (where applicable), and VAT on importation under Section 6(1)(b) read with Section 12 of the VAT Act [Chapter 23:12], whose base is Customs Value plus customs duty but excluding surtax, charged at the standard rate of 15.5% with effect from 1 January 2026. Note that SI 244 of 2000 suspends duty (and surtax) on COMESA-originating goods but expressly does not extend to goods subject to excise duty, and the suspension is reciprocal — it applies only to Member States that grant equivalent preference to qualifying Zimbabwean exports. Finally, the burden of proof matters: under the Act the onus of proving origin or local content lies on the importer or owner, not on ZIMRA, and a false claim to origin is treated as a serious offence attracting seizure and the smuggling/false-declaration penalties. Zimbabwe has now modernised the proof itself: by ZIMRA Public Notice 59 of 2024, the electronic Certificate of Origin (eCoO) went live on 1 September 2024 under the National Single Window, covering COMESA, SADC, the EU and UK iEPAs and the bilaterals, in line with the WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement and the Revised Kyoto Convention.

Origin is the third pillar of customs assessment, standing beside classification and valuation. To see why it matters, imagine two identical consignments of cotton T-shirts arriving at Beitbridge on the same truck. They are physically the same goods, classified to the same HS subheading 6109.10.00 (T-shirts of cotton), with the same Customs Value of USD 10,000. One was manufactured in South Africa; the other in China. The South African consignment, if accompanied by a valid SADC certificate of origin and meeting the product-specific rule for textiles, may enter at a preferential rate — potentially free of customs duty. The Chinese consignment pays the general rate of 40% plus US$3 per kilogram. On a single truckload, origin is the difference between a duty bill of zero and a duty bill running into thousands of dollars. The goods are indistinguishable; their economic nationality is everything.

This is why origin is not a clerical afterthought but a substantive assessment in its own right, and why ZIMRA's enforcement interest in origin is intense. Origin fraud — falsely claiming that Chinese goods are South African, or routing goods through Zambia to dress them in COMESA clothing — is one of the most lucrative forms of customs evasion precisely because the saving is the entire preferential margin. The whole apparatus of certificates, registration, verification, direct-consignment and cumulation rules exists to make that fraud difficult and detectable.

What "origin" means and why it is not the same as "where it was bought"

A fundamental confusion to dispel at the outset: origin is not the country of purchase, the country of shipment, or the country of the seller's residence. A Zimbabwean importer may buy goods from a trader in Dubai, have them shipped from a warehouse in Durban, and pay an invoice issued by a company registered in Mauritius — yet if the goods were manufactured in India, their origin is India. Origin attaches to the physical economic history of the goods (where they were grown, extracted, produced or last substantially transformed), not to the commercial or financial arrangements surrounding their sale. The ZIMRA training materials capture this in the standard examination distinction: country of origin is "the country where goods were grown, produced or subjected to their last process of manufacture" — not the country where the producer is resident, nor the country of export.

A related subtlety concerns waste and scrap. The origin of waste generated during manufacture is the country in which it was generated in the process of manufacture — not where the raw material was originally grown or produced. This matters for, say, copper scrap or textile cuttings exported from Zimbabwe.

Two distinct questions: non-preferential origin and preferential origin

The discipline of origin actually answers two different questions, and a competent officer always knows which one is in play:

1. Non-preferential origin — "where is this from, for the ordinary purposes of the Act?" This origin is needed even when no preference is claimed: to apply anti-dumping duties (Section 90) or countervailing duties (Section 92) that target goods from a particular country; to enforce import or export controls and prohibitions (including country-specific sanctions, Multilateral Environmental Agreement restrictions, and strategic/CBRN controls); to compile accurate trade statistics; and to mark goods correctly. Non-preferential origin is governed by the simple Section 88 rule (last process of manufacture) and the general-knowledge / declaration methods.

2. Preferential origin — "does this 'where' earn a reduced rate under a trade agreement?" This is a much stricter enquiry, governed by Section 89 and the specific rules of origin in each agreement (COMESA Annex IV, SADC Annex I, the bilaterals, the EPAs, AfCFTA). Preferential origin is harder to earn precisely because it confers a benefit, so the agreements lay down detailed quantitative tests (local content / value addition percentages, change of tariff heading, product-specific working) and demand documentary proof (the certificate of origin) and procedural discipline (direct consignment, prior registration of the exporter).

The remainder of this lesson treats both, but the centre of gravity — and the centre of ZIMRA's daily work and enforcement — is preferential origin.

Where origin sits in the customs sequence

Origin is logically prior to the selection of the duty rate. The clearance flows: classify the goods (Tariff Classification module) to find the heading and the set of possible rates (general/MFN versus the various preferential rates); value the goods (Customs Valuation module) to fix the base; then determine origin to choose which of the possible rates actually applies; and only then compute the duty (the Calculation of Duty module that follows). Origin therefore acts as the switch that routes a classified, valued consignment into either the full-rate channel or a preference channel. Get origin wrong and the entire computation is wrong, even if classification and valuation were impeccable.

Origin and preference are governed by a layered framework: the domestic statute and its definitions; the Part IX machinery for international agreements; the subsidiary General Regulations on proof of origin; and the agreements themselves (COMESA, SADC, the bilaterals, the EPAs and AfCFTA) with their annexed rules of origin. Each cited provision below traces to the source documents.

B.1 The domestic statute — Sections 85, 88 and 89 of the Customs and Excise Act [Chapter 23:02]

Section 88 (Determination of origin of manufactured goods) is the cornerstone. It provides, in full, that "For the purposes of this Act, the country of origin of any manufactured goods shall be the country in which the last process of manufacture has been performed." This is Zimbabwe's general (non-preferential) origin rule. Two points of construction: it speaks of manufactured goods (the origin of unmanufactured goods — minerals, crops, live animals — is simply where they were grown, extracted or raised); and it fixes on the last process of manufacture, not the last any process. A process that is not a genuine process of manufacture (mere packing, labelling, sorting) does not move origin — a principle the agreements spell out in detail as "processes not conferring origin".

Section 89 (Specified country content of goods subject to lower rates of duty than in customs tariff) is the gateway to preference. It provides that where goods are, because of their origin, subject to lower rates of duty than those set out in Part II of the customs tariff, those lower rates are allowed only:

• (a) in the case of unmanufactured goods, where they have been wholly grown or produced in that country; and
• (b) in the case of manufactured goods, where they have been subjected to their last process of manufacture in that country and either (i) have such local content in relation to that country as may be prescribed, or (ii) have been subjected in that country to such process of manufacture as may be prescribed for the class of goods.

Subsection (2) authorises regulations on how and by whom local content is determined and what information importers must supply. Subsection (3) is pivotal for the agreements: if a preference, rebate or remission is granted under an agreement, the local-content conditions may be fixed by special provision in that agreement; only where the agreement is silent does the default in subsection (1) apply. This is the hinge that lets COMESA'Section 35%/60% tests and SADC's product-specific rules govern instead of any domestic default.

Section 85 (Interpretation in Part VIII) supplies the definitions that make Section 89 operable. "Local content", in relation to goods manufactured in a particular country, means "such percentage of the factory cost of such goods in their finished condition as is represented by the cost of — (a) the direct labour involved in the manufacture of the goods; and (b) any materials which were grown, produced or manufactured in the country concerned and which were used in the manufacture of the goods." "Factory cost" means the cost of the goods in their finished condition calculated in the prescribed manner. And the Part clarifies that a reference to goods that have been "produced" is a reference to goods that have not been subjected to any process of manufacture — i.e. primary products. These definitions explain why the percentage tests are always expressed against factory cost / ex-factory cost, and why only local labour and local materials count toward local content.

For completeness, Section 87 (classification) — covered fully in the Tariff Classification lesson — interacts with origin because the "change of tariff heading" criterion and the product-specific rules are expressed in HS terms; and Sections 90–93 (anti-dumping and countervailing duties) are origin-dependent measures pointing the other way — they increase duty on goods of a targeted origin rather than reducing it.

B.2 The agreements machinery — Part IX, Sections 99–103

Preferences exist because Zimbabwe has entered into trade agreements, and Part IX is the constitutional plumbing that gives those agreements domestic legal force.

• Section 99 (President may enter into customs agreements) empowers the President to conclude conventions, treaties, agreements or arrangements providing for, among other things, concessions as to or exemptions from duties on goods grown, produced or manufactured in, or imported from, the other party's territory, in consideration of reciprocal privileges for Zimbabwean goods; compensatory payments; arrangements for importation, removal and exportation; and import/export prohibitions or licensing. The reciprocity principle is built into the statute itself.
• Section 100 (Agreements to be published) requires every such agreement to be published in the Gazette and brought into force by Presidential notice; where a broader convention contains relevant provisions, a Gazette notice identifies them and states where the text may be inspected. Crucially, the Minister must lay the agreement before Parliament, and if Parliament does not approve it by resolution within thirty sitting days, the agreement ceases to have force at the end of that thirtieth sitting day. This mirrors the confirmation discipline applied to the Tariff Notice itself.
• Section 101 (President may make regulations to give effect to agreements) authorises implementing regulations.
• Section 102 (Provisions of agreements and regulations to prevail when inconsistent with this Act or any other law) is the supremacy clause: an agreement, and any regulation relative to it, has force and effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent in the Act or any other law. Subsection (2) adds a default origin condition — where an agreement allows concessions for goods "manufactured" in the partner's territory but specifies no manufacturing requirement, the goods are treated as manufactured there only if the Section 89(1)(b) local-content test is satisfied.
• Section 103 (President may suspend, rebate or remit duties payable under agreement) lets the President extend a suspension, rebate or remission granted under Section 120 to any corresponding special agreement rate.

Together these sections explain why an officer may lawfully charge less than the rate printed in Part II of the Tariff Handbook: because a Part IX agreement, given effect by regulation and prevailing under Section 102, says so.

B.3 The subsidiary regulations — regulation 25 of the General Regulations (2021)

Regulation 25 (Certificates of origin for lower rates of duty) converts the statutory entitlement into a documentary precondition. It provides that where a claim to rates lower than those in the customs tariff or the Surtax Tariff Notice is made because of origin, the lower rates shall not be granted unless the claimant produces the appropriate certificate of origin:

• (a) for goods under the Customs Agreement between Zimbabwe and the Governments of Botswana and Malawi — a certificate of origin in Form No. 61 or 65 as the case may be, completed and signed by the manufacturer or producer;
• (b) for goods under the Treaty establishing the Common Market for Eastern and Southern African States (COMESA) — a certificate in the form prescribed in the Treaty, completed and signed by the exporter or his authorised representative and authenticated by the designated authority in the country of export;
• (c) for goods from any other country — a certificate of origin in Form No. 60, or any other certificate approved by the Commissioner, completed and signed by the supplier or manufacturer;

and the claimant must supply such information on factory or manufacturing cost and local content as the Commissioner requires to establish qualification. A proviso allows the Commissioner, in his discretion, to dispense with the certificate for goods imported for private use and not for trade or commercial purposes — a practical concession for travellers and personal imports.

Regulation 25 thus does three things: it makes the certificate the price of admission to preference; it tells the officer which form to demand for each regime; and it reserves ZIMRA's right to interrogate the underlying cost build-up rather than take the certificate on trust.

B.4 COMESA — SI 244 of 2000 and the COMESA Treaty rules of origin

The COMESA preference is delivered domestically by the Customs and Excise (Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa) (Suspension) Regulations, 2000 — SI 244 of 2000, made under Section 235 as read with Section 120 of the Act, in operation from 31 October 2000. Its operative rule (regulation 3) is that the duty on goods produced or manufactured in the territory of Member States which comply with the rules of origin set out in Annex IV of the COMESA Treaty (read with Article 48 of the Treaty) is wholly suspended. Three limits are written into the SI itself: the suspension applies only to goods from Member States that grant the same level of preference to qualifying Zimbabwean exports (reciprocity); it does not apply to goods subject to excise duty in Zimbabwe; and "duty" for this purpose means tax or surtax and charges of equivalent effect but not sales tax, excise duty or similar internal taxes. The COMESA Treaty was concluded at Kampala on 5 November 1993 and entered into force on 8 December 1994.

The substantive COMESA rules of origin (in the Protocol on Rules of Origin, Annex to the Treaty) are examined in section C. In outline, a product originates in a Member State if it satisfies any one of five independent criteria and is directly consigned.

B.5 SADC — the Trade Protocol, Annex I (Rules of Origin)

The SADC Protocol on Trade (concluded under the SADC Treaty; Article 12 of the Protocol provides that the rules of origin for eligible products are set out in Annex I, and Article 34 governs amendment) supplies the SADC preference. Annex I lays down: Rule 2 (goods originate if directly consigned and either wholly produced (Rule 4) or sufficiently worked or processed under the product-specific list in Appendix I), with a 15% ex-works value tolerance for non-originating materials (excluded for HS chapters 50–63, 87 and 98) and full cumulation treating the Member States as one territory; Rule 3 (processes not conferring origin); and Appendix II (the form of the SADC certificate of origin). A special derogation for textiles of HS chapters 50–63 exported to SACU by the MMTZ countries (Malawi, Mozambique, Tanzania, Zambia) appears in column 4 of the Appendix I list.

B.6 The bilateral agreements and the newer instruments

Zimbabwe retains a network of older bilateral trade agreements, each with its own rules of origin and certificate, given effect by SI:

• Zimbabwe/Malawi — SI 103 of 1995; minimum local content of 25% of ex-factory cost; certificate Form 61.
• Zimbabwe/Botswana — SI 192 of 1988; certificate Form 65.
• Zimbabwe/Mozambique — SI 33 of 2005.
• Zimbabwe/Namibia — SI 156A of 1993.

Newer instruments, all administered through the eCoO platform since 1 September 2024, include the European Union interim Economic Partnership Agreement (iEPA), the United Kingdom iEPA, and the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA). The precise rules of origin thresholds and certificate formats for the EPAs and AfCFTA are set by those instruments and their origin annexes.

We build the concepts from the ground up: first the reasons origin is determined and the methods of determining it; then the core distinction between wholly produced and substantially transformed goods; then each preference regime's tests in detail, with their formulae; and finally the three cross-cutting doctrines (direct consignment, cumulation, processes not conferring origin) and the certificate machinery.

C.1 Why we determine origin, and how

The ZIMRA training canon gives the practical reasons we determine origin: to calculate the correct duty (origin selects the rate); to effect controls (prohibitions, restrictions, anti-dumping, MEAs are origin-specific); to protect the fiscus against being cheated; to determine the true country of supply; and to remain alert to false declarations. The lawful methods of determining origin are: (1) calling for a certificate of origin (the statutory and regulatory method under reg 25); (2) asking the importer to make a proper declaration; (3) conducting a physical examination of the goods (markings, "made in" labels, packaging); and (4) accepting origin as declared where the importer is not claiming preference (because no benefit turns on it, the standard of proof is lower). Note carefully that the use of mere general knowledge is not an accepted method — origin is a matter of evidence, not assumption.

Two terms now defined for use throughout. A certificate of origin (CoO) is a formal document, issued or authenticated by a designated authority in the exporting country, attesting that the goods conform to the specific rules of origin of a trade agreement; it is the evidentiary key to preference. The preferential margin is the difference between the general rate of duty and the preferential rate — i.e. the saving that preference delivers, and the amount at risk if a preference claim is fraudulent.

C.2 The two routes to origin — wholly produced versus substantially transformed

Every rules-of-origin system in the world rests on one binary. Goods either:

1. Are wholly produced (wholly obtained) in a single country — they contain no imported (non-originating) materials; or
2. Incorporate imported materials but were substantially transformed in the claiming country — enough work was done there to confer a new economic nationality.

Wholly produced goods are the easy case. The COMESA Protocol's Rule 3 list (mirrored in the SADC Annex I Rule 4 list) defines them as, among others: mineral products extracted from the ground or sea-bed of the Member State; vegetable products harvested within it; live animals born and raised within it; products obtained from live animals within it; products of hunting or fishing conducted within it; products taken from the sea, rivers and lakes by a vessel of the Member State; goods manufactured in a factory of the Member State exclusively from those wholly-produced products; used articles collected there fit only for raw-material recovery; and scrap and waste from manufacturing operations within it. The unifying idea: nothing foreign is embodied in the good. Zimbabwe's tobacco, its chrome and platinum ore, its horticultural exports (mange-tout, citrus, cut flowers) and its raw cotton are classic wholly-produced goods.

Substantial transformation is the hard case and where the technical rules do their work. Because a good may pass through several countries — Brazilian cotton spun into yarn in India, woven into fabric in China, cut and sewn into shirts in South Africa — the law needs a test for how much working in the last country is enough to make it "South African" for preference. The agreements use three families of test, and a regime may use one or several:

• A value test — either a maximum allowance for foreign (non-originating) material content (e.g. COMESA's "c.i.f. value of foreign materials not exceeding 60% of total material cost"), or a minimum domestic value-addition percentage (e.g. COMESA's "at least 35% value added of ex-factory cost", or the Malawi bilateral's "25% of ex-factory cost").
• A change-of-tariff-heading (CTH) test — the finished good must be classifiable under a different HS heading from the non-originating inputs (e.g. polyethylene granules of one heading transformed into plastic sheeting of another).
• A specific-process test — the good must undergo a particular manufacturing operation prescribed for its class (the basis of SADC's product-specific Appendix I list).

C.3 COMESA rules of origin in detail

Under the COMESA trade regime a product is considered originating in a Member State, qualifying for preferential (in Zimbabwe's case, wholly suspended) duty, if it is directly consigned and satisfies any one of five independent criteria (Rule 2 of the Protocol on Rules of Origin):

1. Wholly produced in a Member State (the Rule 3 list above).
2. Material-content criterion — produced in the Member States and the c.i.f. value of any foreign materials does not exceed 60% of the total cost of all materials used in production. (The ZIMRA module sometimes phrases the cap against "ex-factory cost"; the authoritative Protocol text refers to total cost of materials.)
3. Value-added criterion — produced in the Member States and attaining value added of at least 35% of the ex-factory cost.
4. Change-of-tariff-heading criterion — produced in the Member States and classifiable under a tariff heading other than that of the non-originating materials used.
5. Goods of particular economic importance — designated as such by the Council of Ministers and containing not less than 25% value added, notwithstanding the 35% rule.

The Imported Material Content (IMC) formula. To test the material-content criterion, compute the imported content as a percentage of total material value:

IMC = (c.i.f. value of imported materials / total value of all materials used) x 100

If the IMC is 60% or less, the criterion is satisfied. Worked illustration (from the ZIMRA module): a life-jacket manufactured in Zambia uses Zambian reflective material 700, Malaysian kapok stuffing 500, Zimbabwean nylon 50, Zambian labour 200, electricity 150 and Zambian factory rent 100. For the material-content test we count only materials: total materials = 700 + 500 + 50 = 1,250 (labour, electricity and rent are not "materials"). The only foreign (non-COMESA) material is the Malaysian kapok of 500. IMC = 500 / 1,250 × 100 = 40%. Because 40% ≤ 60%, the life-jacket qualifies on the material-content criterion.

The value-added formula. To test the 35% (or 25%) criterion:

Value Added = ( (Ex-factory cost - c.i.f. value of imported materials) / Ex-factory cost ) x 100

where value added is defined as the difference between the ex-factory cost of the finished product and the c.i.f. value of imported raw materials, expressed as a percentage of ex-factory cost, and ex-factory cost is the total cost of producing the finished article up to the point it leaves the production floor ready for sale. Worked illustration (from the ZIMRA module): a good has British (non-COMESA) material 2,000, Malawian material 200, Malawian labour 300, foreman's wages 100, imported electricity 50 and imported grease 20 — ex-factory cost = 2,670; the only c.i.f. imported material counted here is the British material 2,000. Value added = (2,670 − 2,000) / 2,670 × 100 = 25.09%. Because 25.09% is below 35%, the good does not qualify on the value-added criterion (though it might still qualify under another criterion such as CTH).

The COMESA Simplified Trade Regime (STR). To bring informal cross-border traders into the preference net, COMESA created a Simplified Trade Regime for consignments valued at up to US$1,000. The trader completes a Simplified COMESA Certificate of Origin and a Simplified Bill of Entry; the goods must appear on the agreed common list of eligible products; and the simplified CoO is issued by customs at the exit point in the country of export. The STR is the small-trader's gateway to COMESA preference at posts such as Chirundu, Forbes/Mutare and Nyamapanda.

C.4 SADC rules of origin in detail

The SADC test (Annex I, Rule 2) requires that goods be consigned directly from an exporter in one Member State to a consignee in another, and satisfy any one origin rule. Direct consignment is compulsory — it is a gateway condition for every SADC claim, not an alternative criterion. The origin rules are:

• Wholly produced in a Member State (Rule 4 list, materially the same as COMESA's wholly-produced list).
• Sufficiently worked or processed — goods manufactured from non-originating materials that have undergone the product-specific working set out in the Appendix I list. This is the defining feature of SADC: rather than a single across-the-board percentage, SADC uses a product-by-product list. The Appendix has, for most goods, three columns (Column 1 = HS heading; Column 2 = description of goods; Column 3 = the working or processing that confers origin) and a fourth column prescribing the rule for textiles of HS chapters 50–63 of MMTZ origin (Malawi, Mozambique, Tanzania, Zambia). The officer therefore classifies the item first, then reads the rule against that classification to see what working confers origin.

Two important SADC refinements:

• Value tolerance (de minimis). Non-originating materials that, under the Appendix I list, should not be used may nevertheless be used provided their total value does not exceed 15% of the ex-works price of the product, and provided no maximum-value percentage in the list is breached. This tolerance does not apply to products of HS chapters 50–63, 87 and 98 (textiles, vehicles and certain special categories), which must meet their rules strictly.
• Cumulation. For the purposes of Annex I the Member States are treated as one territory: raw materials or semi-finished goods originating in any Member State and further worked in one or more others are deemed to originate in the Member State where the final processing or manufacture takes place.

A notable SADC exclusion: agricultural products obtained wholly or partly from food aid, monetisation, or similar non-commercial assistance are not eligible for any SADC preference, however processed.

C.5 The bilateral agreements

The pre-COMESA/SADC bilateral agreements remain in force and an officer must recognise them. The Zimbabwe/Malawi Customs Agreement (SI 103 of 1995) grants preference where goods are wholly produced in Malawi or manufactured there with minimum local content of 25% of ex-factory cost, proven by certificate Form 61. The Zimbabwe/Botswana agreement (SI 192 of 1988) uses certificate Form 65, with the Botswana certificate showing whether the goods are grown/wholly produced or manufactured. The Zimbabwe/Mozambique (SI 33 of 2005) and Zimbabwe/Namibia (SI 156A of 1993) agreements complete the bilateral set. Where two regimes could apply to the same goods (e.g. a SADC member that is also a bilateral partner), the importer claims under whichever delivers the better preferential margin, subject to that regime's rules and certificate.

C.6 The three cross-cutting doctrines

Direct consignment. Goods must travel directly from the exporting Member State to the Zimbabwean consignee. Transit through a third country is tolerated only where geography compels it (e.g. landlocked routings) and the goods remain under customs control and are not entered for commerce in the transit country. The rationale is to prevent trade deflection — the practice of routing non-originating goods through a preference partner to "launder" them into apparent origin. The ZIMRA examination answer is explicit: the direct-consignment rule exists "to avoid trade deflection" and to "avoid substitution of the goods and further processing of the goods" en route.

Cumulation (the successive-processing rule). Where goods are successively processed within the bloc, origin is the country in which the goods were subjected to their last economically justifiable process of manufacture. Cumulation rewards regional value chains: a fabric originating in Zambia, made into a garment in Zimbabwe, is treated as wholly regional and the finished garment originates in Zimbabwe. This is the doctrinal embodiment of "the Member States as one territory".

Processes not conferring origin. No matter how described, certain operations are insufficient to confer origin: simple packing, repacking, bottling and retail packaging; changes of packing and breaking up or assembly of consignments; operations merely to preserve goods in transit (ventilation, drying, freezing); mere dilution, blending and simple mixing; simple assembly or combining; minor finishing (simple dyeing, printing, ironing, labelling); dismantling; repairs, washing, sterilisation; testing, sorting, grading; marking and labelling; and the slaughter of animals. A combination of two or more such insufficient operations still does not confer origin, and all operations carried out in the Member State are considered together when judging sufficiency. Any operation whose sole objective is to circumvent the rules is disregarded.

C.7 The certificate of origin and exporter registration

To enjoy preference under the bilateral, COMESA or SADC regimes, a manufacturer must first register its products with ZIMRA so that they appear in the origin folio (the register of products approved to be exported under preference). The registration process (per the ZIMRA module) runs: the manufacturer submits an application (three copies for the Botswana agreement, two for COMESA and SADC); the officer opens files and issues an information sheet of requirements; the client submits the requirements; the officer verifies by a physical visit to the factory, discusses findings, and (if satisfied) writes a memorandum to HQ International Affairs recommending registration; HQ checks the file (including, where the exporter is not the manufacturer, the manufacturer's authority to export), and on approval issues a reference number that must be quoted on all certificates of origin and circulates an origin ruling listing the products eligible for preference. The target turnaround is seven to fourteen working days. The reciprocal process in other Member States produces the lists of their registered exporters, which ZIMRA uses to validate incoming claims.

The certificate itself must be completed and signed by the grower, producer or manufacturer. On Forms 60/61 the declaration is in two parts — Part A for goods grown or produced, Part B for manufactured goods — and for manufactured goods three statements are required: the process of manufacture, the percentage of local content, and confirmation that the percentage was calculated in the prescribed manner. Since 1 September 2024, under ZIMRA Public Notice 59 of 2024, certificates are issued electronically (eCoO) through the National Single Window for COMESA, SADC, the EU/UK iEPAs and the bilaterals — paperless, harder to forge, and consistent with the WTO TFA and Revised Kyoto Convention.

This is the end-to-end clearance of a consignment on which preference is claimed, traced through ASYCUDA World and the documentary controls.

1. Pre-arrival — exporter registration and certificate issue. Long before the consignment moves, the foreign manufacturer must be registered for preference in its own country and the goods must appear on the eligible-products list. The exporter obtains the appropriate certificate of origin — a COMESA certificate (authenticated by the designated authority), a SADC certificate (Appendix II form), or a bilateral Form 61/65 — now typically as an eCoO. The certificate must quote the exporter's origin reference number and, for manufactured goods, the process of manufacture and local-content percentage.

2. Classify and value first. On arrival, the clearing agent classifies the goods to the correct HS heading (this drives which Appendix I product-specific rule or rate column applies) and establishes the Customs Value (VDP) under the valuation rules. Origin cannot select a rate until the heading and base are fixed.

3. Lodge the Bill of Entry in ASYCUDA World with the correct CPC. The agent captures the SAD (single administrative document, locally Form 21) in ASYCUDA World, selecting the Customs Procedure Code (CPC) for home consumption under the relevant preference regime. The CPC is decisive — it is the field that tells the system to apply the preferential rate rather than the general rate, and an error here means the system assesses full duty. The country of origin and country of consignment fields must be completed accurately and consistently with the certificate.

4. Attach the supporting documents. The declaration must carry: the commercial invoice; the packing list; the transport document (Bill of Lading for sea, Air Waybill for air, consignment note/CMR for road); and — the document that unlocks preference — the valid certificate of origin (eCoO reference or hard copy). For commercial imports the officer checks that the invoices and consignment notes are attached, the certificate of origin is present where reduced rates are claimed, the local content is indicated, and the goods appear in the origin folio.

5. System risk-targeting — Green, Yellow or Red lane. ASYCUDA World routes the declaration: Green (released without intervention), Yellow (documentary check — the officer scrutinises the certificate of origin, the invoice and the consignment route for direct consignment), or Red (physical examination — the officer also inspects markings and "made in" labelling against the origin claimed). Preference claims, because of their fraud risk, frequently attract Yellow or Red treatment.

6. Verify origin and direct consignment. The officer confirms: the certificate is valid, complete and authenticated; the exporter and product are registered (reference number quoted); the goods were consigned directly (the transport documents show no commercial interruption in a third country); and the goods match the description and tariff on the certificate.

7. Handle a missing or defective certificate. If no certificate of origin is attached, preference is denied and full duty assessed. If only a copy is attached, or the certificate is incomplete, the officer does not refuse outright: under Section 44(1)(f)(iii) proviso (i) he calls for a deposit equal to the preferential margin (general rate minus preferential rate) and releases the goods, the deposit being refunded when a valid original certificate is produced within the allowed time. If fraud is suspected, the officer withholds delivery, takes copies of the Bill of Entry, invoice and certificate, and refers them to HQ Origin section for investigation. If a false claim to origin is established, the goods are seized and the matter proceeds as a seizure/false-declaration offence.

8. Assess the duty cascade and pay. With origin confirmed, the system applies the preferential rate at Step 4 of the cascade, then surtax, excise (remember COMESA suspension does not cover excisable goods), and VAT on importation on the duty-paid value. The declarant pays to ZIMRA.

9. Release and post-clearance obligations. The goods are released. The importer retains all origin documents for the statutory record-keeping period because origin is a prime target of post-clearance audit (PCA) — ZIMRA may, after release, re-examine whether the preferential rate was correctly claimed and recover the preferential margin (plus penalties and interest) if it was not. The exporting authority may also be asked to verify the certificate through the agreement's mutual-administrative-assistance machinery.

The single most important quantitative lesson here is that preference changes only the duty rate (Step 4); it does not change the Customs Value, and the downstream levies recompute off the reduced duty. We show this with a side-by-side preferential-versus-non-preferential computation, then add the two origin-qualification calculations (IMC and value added) that decide whether preference is even available.

All figures use the standard cascade order and the VAT standard rate of 15.5% in force from 1 January 2026 (VAT Act [Chapter 23:12] Section 6(1)(b) read with Section 12), with the VAT base being Customs Value + customs duty, excluding surtax.

E.1 Side-by-side duty computation — SADC-originating versus non-preferential

Facts. A Harare retailer imports a consignment of men's cotton T-shirts, classified to HS 6109.10.00 (confirmed in the Tariff Notice SI 203 of 2022 at a general rate of 40% plus US$3 per kilogram), net weight 400 kg. The goods are invoiced FOB USD 8,000; insurance USD 200; freight to Beitbridge USD 800. Consignment A is manufactured in South Africa and carries a valid SADC certificate of origin, the goods meeting the Appendix I textile rule; Consignment B is manufactured in China (non-preferential). Assume, for this illustration, that the SADC preferential rate for this line is free (0%).

Step 1 — FOB. USD 8,000 (already in USD; no conversion required). Step 2 — Build CIF. CIF = FOB 8,000 + insurance 200 + freight 800 = USD 9,000. Step 3 — Valuation adjustments → Customs Value (VDP). No further First Schedule additions on these facts, so Customs Value = USD 9,000 for both consignments. (Origin does not alter the Customs Value.)

Now the paths diverge at Step 4.

Cascade line	Consignment A — SADC origin	Consignment B — non-preferential (China)
Customs Value (VDP)	USD 9,000.00	USD 9,000.00
Step 4 Customs duty	0% → 0.00 (ad valorem) + specific US$3/kg × 400 kg waived under preference → 0.00	40% × 9,000 = 3,600.00 + US$3/kg × 400 kg = 1,200.00 → 4,800.00
Step 5 Surtax (if listed)	0.00	0.00 (assume none on this line)
Step 6 Excise (if applicable)	0.00	0.00
Step 7 Duty Paid Value (VAT base = CV + duty, excl. surtax)	9,000.00 + 0.00 = 9,000.00	9,000.00 + 4,800.00 = 13,800.00
Step 8 VAT on import @ 15.5%	15.5% × 9,000 = 1,395.00	15.5% × 13,800 = 2,139.00
TOTAL PAYABLE TO ZIMRA	USD 1,395.00	USD 6,939.00

The preferential margin on these facts is the duty difference, USD 4,800.00, and because VAT recomputes off the lower duty-paid value, the total saving is USD 5,544.00 (6,939.00 − 1,395.00). This is precisely the amount at stake in any origin-fraud investigation on this consignment, and the deposit ZIMRA would call for under Section 44(1)(f)(iii) proviso (i) if the SADC certificate were missing or incomplete would be the preferential margin of USD 4,800.

E.2 Qualifying calculation — the COMESA material-content (IMC) test

Facts. A Zambian factory manufactures life-jackets and seeks COMESA origin. Material inputs: Zambian reflective fabric 700, Malaysian kapok stuffing 500, Zimbabwean nylon 50. (Labour 200, electricity 150 and rent 100 are not materials and are excluded from this test.)

Total value of materials = 700 + 500 + 50 = 1,250
Foreign (non-COMESA) materials = Malaysian kapok = 500
IMC = (500 / 1,250) x 100 = 40%

Because the imported-material content of 40% does not exceed the 60% ceiling, the life-jackets satisfy the COMESA material-content criterion and (subject to direct consignment and a valid COMESA certificate) enter Zimbabwe with duty wholly suspended under SI 244 of 2000 — though import VAT at 15.5% still applies on the duty-paid value (which, with zero duty, equals the Customs Value), and the suspension would not apply if the goods were excisable.

E.3 Qualifying calculation — the COMESA value-added test

Facts. A finished good is built from: British (non-COMESA) material 2,000; Malawian material 200; Malawian labour 300; foreman's wages 100; imported electricity 50; imported grease 20. Ex-factory cost = 2,670. The only c.i.f. imported material is the British 2,000.

Value Added = ((2,670 - 2,000) / 2,670) x 100 = 25.09%

At 25.09%, the good falls short of the 35% value-added threshold and does not qualify on that criterion. The lesson: a single failed criterion is not fatal — the manufacturer should test the other four COMESA criteria (is it wholly produced? does it meet the 60% material ceiling? does it change tariff heading? is it a Council-designated good of economic importance needing only 25%?). Only if it fails all five is COMESA preference unavailable.

E.4 Qualifying calculation — the Malawi bilateral (25% of ex-factory cost)

Facts. Under the Zimbabwe/Malawi agreement (SI 103 of 1995), the minimum local content is 25% of ex-factory cost. Take a Malawian-manufactured good with ex-factory cost USD 1,000, of which imported (non-Malawian) materials are USD 780. Local content (direct Malawian labour + Malawian materials) = 1,000 − 780 = USD 220, i.e. 22% of ex-factory cost. Since 22% is below 25%, the good does not qualify for Malawi preference and must enter at the general rate; Form 61 could not properly be issued for it. Raising the Malawian content by USD 30 (to 25%) would tip it into qualification — illustrating how the local-content rule actively shapes regional sourcing decisions.

Origin and preference touch every class of trader, but the documentary burden and risk profile differ sharply across groups.

Individual travellers and personal importers. A returning resident or visitor bringing personal goods rarely engages preferential origin at all: under the proviso to regulation 25, the Commissioner may dispense with the certificate of origin for goods imported for private use and not for trade. Such travellers clear under the Travellers' Rebate machinery (a separate module) rather than claiming COMESA/SADC preference. The practical message for officers: do not demand a SADC certificate from a family returning from Musina with household goods — origin proof is a commercial discipline. Where, however, a "traveller" is in truth running commercial quantities (a common Beitbridge and Plumtree abuse), the dispensation falls away and full origin proof — or full duty — is required.

Small cross-border traders. This is the natural home of the COMESA Simplified Trade Regime (STR). A trader moving goods worth up to US$1,000 that appear on the agreed common list completes a Simplified COMESA Certificate of Origin and a Simplified Bill of Entry, with the CoO issued by customs at the export-side post. At Chirundu (a one-stop border post), Forbes/Mutare and Nyamapanda, the STR lets informal traders in groceries, hardware and clothing access COMESA preference without the full registration and certification apparatus. The compliance threshold is deliberately low to formalise trade that would otherwise evade controls.

SMEs in cross-border manufacturing and retail. A Zimbabwean SME — say a Bulawayo furniture maker exporting to Zambia, or a Harare food processor importing inputs from South Africa — must engage the full regime: register its products for preference (the seven-to-fourteen-day HQ process), keep precise factory-cost and local-content records to satisfy the value tests, and ensure direct consignment. For an SME the local-content arithmetic is a genuine business-design question: sourcing one more input regionally rather than from outside the bloc can flip a product from non-qualifying to qualifying, as the Malawi 22%-versus-25% example showed. SMEs are also the group most often caught out by CPC errors in ASYCUDA that silently assess full duty on goods that in fact qualified.

Large corporates. Mining houses, manufacturers and supermarket chains clearing through Beitbridge, Plumtree and Forbes move high volumes where the preferential margin aggregates into very large sums, so they typically operate sophisticated origin-management functions, hold Authorised Economic Operator (AEO) status for faster clearance, and are the principal subjects of post-clearance audit on origin. For a supermarket chain importing thousands of SADC-origin grocery lines, a systematic origin error (wrong certificate, broken direct consignment) replicated across months can generate a PCA assessment in the millions. Corporates also feel the anti-dumping/countervailing side of origin most: a steel or cement importer must watch whether goods of a particular origin attract a measure under Sections 90–93.

Zimbabwean reported customs-origin litigation is sparse; the field is governed principally by statute, the agreements and ZIMRA practice, with disputes resolved administratively (officer → Commissioner) and on appeal to the Fiscal Appeal Court [Chapter 23:05]. Where origin disputes reach the courts they usually turn on valuation or classification facts that feed the origin question, or on the adequacy of the certificate and the burden of proof. Two anchoring points, and persuasive foreign authority, are worth stating; foreign decisions are non-binding in Zimbabwe.

The statutory onus. The Customs and Excise Act places the onus of proving the country of origin or local content on the owner or importer, "and not upon an officer". This is the single most important "case-law-equivalent" proposition in the field: in any dispute, the trader who claims preference must prove qualifying origin; ZIMRA need not disprove it. A certificate that is incomplete, unauthenticated, or unsupported by factory-cost evidence simply fails to discharge that onus, and preference is lost.

Classification feeds origin (persuasive, non-binding). Because the CTH criterion and the SADC Appendix I rules are expressed in HS terms, the classification jurisprudence applies. The South African Appellate Division decisions commonly cited in the ZIMRA syllabus — Secretary for Customs and Excise v Thomas Barlow & Sons Ltd 1970 (2) SA 660 (A) (the three-stage classification enquiry) and International Business Machines v Commissioner for Customs and Excise 1985 (4) SA 852 (A) (classification by objective characteristics) — are persuasive only but illuminate how a Zimbabwean tribunal would decide whether a "change of tariff heading" has occurred.

Trade-deflection and substantial-transformation principle (persuasive). International and regional jurisprudence (WTO and EU/ECJ authority on substantial transformation, and SACU/SADC tribunal practice) consistently holds that minimal operations cannot confer origin and that direct-consignment and anti-circumvention rules will be enforced against artificial routing. These illustrate the principle behind Rule 3 (processes not conferring origin) and the direct-consignment doctrine; they are non-binding but persuasive on how Zimbabwe's equivalent rules should be construed. Where no on-point Zimbabwean case exists, the governing authority is the statute and the agreement text itself, not an invented citation.

• Confusing country of consignment with country of origin. Declaring goods as originating in the country they were shipped from (e.g. South Africa, because the truck loaded in Durban) when they were manufactured elsewhere (e.g. China). Origin follows the last process of manufacture (Section 88), not the loading point.
• Claiming preference without a valid certificate. Preference is denied outright if no certificate is attached; an incomplete certificate or a mere copy triggers a deposit equal to the preferential margin under Section 44(1)(f)(iii) proviso (i), not automatic acceptance. Traders who treat the certificate as a formality lose the benefit.
• Wrong CPC in ASYCUDA. Selecting a general-consumption CPC instead of the preference CPC causes the system to assess full duty even though the goods qualify — a silent, costly error that surfaces only on reconciliation or PCA.
• Breaking direct consignment. Routing goods through a third country where they are entered for commerce, split, or further worked destroys the direct-consignment chain and the preference — and looks like trade deflection, attracting investigation.
• Counting the wrong items in the value tests. Including labour, electricity or rent as "materials" in the COMESA material-content (IMC) test (which counts materials only), or conversely forgetting that they do count toward value added. The two formulae use different bases (total material cost versus ex-factory cost) and must not be conflated.
• Treating insufficient processing as origin-conferring. Believing that packing, labelling, simple assembly, dilution, or slaughter confers origin. Rule 3 (SADC) / Rule 5 (COMESA) lists these as insufficient, and combining several insufficient operations still confers nothing.
• Over-reading the SADC 15% tolerance. Applying the de minimis tolerance to textiles (HS 50–63), vehicles (HS 87) or chapter 98 goods, where it is expressly excluded.
• Ignoring the excise and reciprocity carve-outs in COMESA. Assuming SI 244 of 2000 zero-rates everything COMESA-origin. It does not cover excisable goods, and it is reciprocal — it applies only vis-à-vis Member States that grant equivalent preference to Zimbabwean exports.
• False origin claims. Forging or "borrowing" certificates, or mislabelling goods' origin, is treated as a false declaration / smuggling offence: the goods are seized and penalties follow. Because the gain equals the full preferential margin, this is a priority ZIMRA enforcement and post-clearance-audit theme.
• Poor record-keeping. Failing to retain factory-cost build-ups, certificates and transport documents for the statutory period, leaving the importer unable to discharge the onus of proof when PCA revisits a preference claim years later.

Work through the questions one at a time. Choose an answer and it is graded immediately, with an explanation and the provision it comes from. Your progress is saved, so you can stop and resume.

• Origin is economic nationality, set by the last process of manufacture. Under Section 88 of the Customs and Excise Act [Chapter 23:02], the origin of manufactured goods is the country of the last process of manufacture — never the country of purchase, shipment or invoicing.
• Two origins, two standards. Non-preferential origin (for controls, anti-dumping, statistics) is governed by the simple Section 88 rule; preferential origin (for reduced/zero duty) is governed by Section 89 and the agreement-specific rules, and is harder to earn because it confers a benefit.
• Section 89 is the gateway to preference: unmanufactured goods must be wholly grown or produced; manufactured goods must undergo their last process in the country and meet a prescribed local-content percentage or process — with Section 89(3) letting the agreement set its own test, and Section 85 defining local content as direct labour plus local materials as a percentage of factory cost.
• Part IX (Sections 99–103) gives agreements their force, and Section 102 makes an agreement and its regulations prevail over inconsistent provisions of the Act — which is why an officer may lawfully charge less than the printed tariff rate.
• Proof is mandatory: regulation 25 makes a certificate of origin the precondition for the lower rate — Form 61/65 for the Botswana/Malawi bilaterals, the COMESA certificate for COMESA, Form 60 for other countries — with a dispensation for private (non-commercial) imports.
• COMESA = five independent criteria (wholly produced; foreign materials ≤ 60% of material cost; value added ≥ 35% of ex-factory cost; change of tariff heading; or Council-designated economic-importance goods with ≥ 25% value added), delivered domestically by SI 244 of 2000, which wholly suspends duty but excludes excisable goods and is reciprocal.
• SADC = direct consignment + wholly produced or sufficiently worked under the Appendix I product-specific list, with a 15% value tolerance (excluded for HS 50–63, 87, 98) and full cumulation.
• Three doctrines govern every regime: direct consignment (defeats trade deflection), cumulation (rewards regional value chains by fixing origin at the last economically justifiable process), and processes not conferring origin (packing, labelling, mixing, slaughter and the like never create origin, even in combination).
• Preference acts only at Step 4 of the cascade — it reduces the rate, not the Customs Value — but the saving cascades because VAT on importation (Section 6(1)(b)/Section 12 VAT Act, 15.5% from 1 January 2026) recomputes off the lower duty-paid value.
• The onus of proving origin is on the importer, a false origin claim is a seizable offence, and origin is a prime post-clearance-audit target — now policed through the electronic Certificate of Origin (eCoO) live since 1 September 2024 (PN 59 of 2024) under the National Single Window, consistent with the WTO TFA and Revised Kyoto Convention.
• Big picture: rules of origin are the instrument through which Zimbabwe converts its regional-integration commitments (COMESA, SADC, AfCFTA, the EU/UK iEPAs) into real tariff preferences while protecting the fiscus against deflection — the bridge between trade policy and revenue administration.

Table 1 — The preference regimes at a glance

Regime	Instrument	Core origin test(s)	Certificate / form	Domestic effect	Key carve-outs
COMESA	COMESA Treaty (Annex on Rules of Origin, Art 48); SI 244 of 2000	Any one of five: wholly produced; foreign materials ≤ 60% of material cost; value added ≥ 35% ex-factory; change of tariff heading; economic-importance good ≥ 25% VA	COMESA certificate (Treaty form), authenticated by designated authority; STR simplified CoO ≤ US$1,000	Duty wholly suspended	Excludes excisable goods; reciprocal; direct consignment compulsory
SADC	SADC Protocol on Trade, Annex I	Direct consignment and (wholly produced or sufficiently worked per Appendix I product-specific list)	SADC certificate (Appendix II form); eCoO	Preferential phase-down rates	15% value tolerance (not HS 50–63, 87, 98); food-aid agricultural goods ineligible
Zimbabwe/Malawi	SI 103 of 1995	Wholly produced or ≥ 25% local content of ex-factory cost	Form 61	Bilateral preferential rate	Direct consignment
Zimbabwe/Botswana	SI 192 of 1988	Wholly produced or manufactured per agreement	Form 65	Bilateral preferential rate	Direct consignment
Other / EPAs / AfCFTA	EU iEPA; UK iEPA; AfCFTA; other bilaterals	Per instrument's origin protocol	Form 60 or instrument-specific; eCoO	Per instrument	specific thresholds

Table 2 — The two COMESA value tests compared

Feature	Material-content (IMC) test	Value-added test
Criterion	Foreign materials ≤ 60%	Value added ≥ 35% (or ≥ 25% for economic-importance goods)
Base of the percentage	Total cost of all materials used	Ex-factory cost of the finished good
Formula	(c.i.f. foreign materials ÷ total materials) × 100	((ex-factory cost − c.i.f. foreign materials) ÷ ex-factory cost) × 100
Counts labour / overheads?	No — materials only	Implicitly yes (they raise ex-factory cost)
Pass condition	Result ≤ 60%	Result ≥ 35% (or 25%)

Diagram 1 — Origin and preference decision flow

flowchart TD
 A[Goods arrive and are classified and valued] --> B{Is preference being claimed}
 B -->|No| C[Apply general or MFN rate - origin only for controls and statistics]
 B -->|Yes| D{Valid certificate of origin attached}
 D -->|No| E[Deny preference - assess full duty]
 D -->|Copy or incomplete| F[Call for deposit equal to preferential margin under Section 44 proviso]
 D -->|Yes| G{Directly consigned from Member State}
 G -->|No| E
 G -->|Yes| H{Wholly produced in Member State}
 H -->|Yes| K[Origin confirmed - apply preferential rate]
 H -->|No| I{Meets a substantial-transformation rule}
 I -->|COMESA: 60% materials or 35% VA or CTH or 25% economic good| K
 I -->|SADC: Appendix I product rule with 15% tolerance| K
 I -->|Fails all tests| E
 K --> L[Compute duty at Step 4 then surtax excise and VAT on import]
 F --> L
 C --> L
 L --> M[Pay release and retain records for post-clearance audit]

Diagram 2 — Determining origin: wholly produced versus substantial transformation

flowchart TD
 A[What is the economic history of the goods] --> B{Any imported non-originating materials}
 B -->|None| C[Wholly produced - Rule 3 COMESA or Rule 4 SADC]
 B -->|Some| D[Test substantial transformation]
 D --> E{COMESA criteria met}
 D --> F{SADC Appendix I rule met}
 E -->|Any one of five| G[COMESA originating]
 F -->|Product-specific working done| H[SADC originating]
 E -->|None| I[Not originating - general rate]
 F -->|Not done| I
 C --> J[Originating in that country]

Statutes and sections — Customs and Excise Act [Chapter 23:02] - Section 85 — interpretation in Part VIII; defines "local content" (percentage of factory cost from direct labour plus locally grown/produced/manufactured materials), "factory cost", and "produced" (not subjected to manufacture). - Section 88 — country of origin of manufactured goods = country of the last process of manufacture. - Section 89 — specified country content for goods subject to lower (agreement) rates: unmanufactured goods wholly grown/produced; manufactured goods last-processed in-country plus prescribed local content or process; Section 89(3) allows the agreement to set its own conditions. - Sections 90–93 — anti-dumping and countervailing duties (origin-targeted measures). - Sections 99–103 (Part IX, Agreements) — Section 99 President may enter customs agreements (reciprocity); Section 100 publication and 30-sitting-day parliamentary approval; Section 101 implementing regulations; Section 102 agreements prevail over inconsistent law; Section 103 President may extend a Section 120 suspension/rebate to an agreement rate. - Section 44(1)(f)(iii) proviso (i) — release on deposit equal to the preferential margin where the certificate of origin is missing or incomplete. - Onus-of-proof provision — burden of proving country of origin or local content lies on the owner/importer, not the officer. - VAT Act [Chapter 23:12], Section 6(1)(b) read with Section 12 — VAT on importation; base = Customs Value + customs duty (excluding surtax); standard rate 15.5% from 1 January 2026.

Regulations and Statutory Instruments - Customs and Excise General Regulations (project copy "Customs General Regulations — 2021"), regulation 25 — certificates of origin as a precondition for lower rates; Form 61/65 (Botswana/Malawi), COMESA Treaty certificate, Form 60 (other); factory-cost/local-content information; private-use dispensation. - SI 244 of 2000 — Customs and Excise (COMESA) (Suspension) Regulations: wholly suspends duty on COMESA-origin goods complying with the Treaty rules of origin; excludes excisable goods; reciprocal; in force 31 October 2000. - SI 103 of 1995 (Zimbabwe/Malawi), SI 192 of 1988 (Zimbabwe/Botswana), SI 33 of 2005 (Zimbabwe/Mozambique), SI 156A of 1993 (Zimbabwe/Namibia) — bilateral trade agreements and their certificates. - Tariff Notice — SI 203 of 2022 (Tariff Handbook): general/MFN and preferential rate columns; tariff line 6109.10.00 (cotton T-shirts, general 40% + US$3/kg) used in the worked computation.

International instruments - WCO Harmonized System (HS) Convention — the classification basis for the CTH criterion and the product-specific rules. - COMESA Treaty (Kampala, 5 November 1993; in force 8 December 1994), Article 48 and the Protocol on Rules of Origin — five origin criteria, wholly-produced list, direct consignment, cumulation, STR. - SADC Protocol on Trade, Annex I (Rules of Origin) — Rule 2 (direct consignment; wholly produced or sufficiently worked), Rule 3 (processes not conferring origin), 15% value tolerance, cumulation, Appendix I product-specific list, Appendix II certificate, MMTZ textile derogation. - EU and UK interim Economic Partnership Agreements; AfCFTA — newer preferential regimes. - Revised Kyoto Convention (RKC) and WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement (TFA) — trade-facilitation basis for the eCoO and single-window automation.

Case law - Statutory onus of proof on the importer governs origin disputes; appeals lie to the Fiscal Appeal Court [Chapter 23:05]. - Persuasive, non-binding classification authority feeding the CTH analysis: Secretary for Customs and Excise v Thomas Barlow & Sons Ltd 1970 (2) SA 660 (A); IBM v Commissioner for Customs and Excise 1985 (4) SA 852 (A).

ZIMRA guidance - ZIMRA Public Notice 59 of 2024 — launch of the electronic Certificate of Origin (eCoO) under the National Single Window, live 1 September 2024, covering COMESA, SADC, EU/UK iEPAs and bilaterals. - ZIMRA Level 1 Customs module "Origin and Preference" — methods of determining origin, IMC and value-added worked examples, registration process, STR, certificate completion, handling of defective certificates and false claims. - ZIMRA Rates of Exchange for Customs Purposes (issued fortnightly) — for converting non-USD invoice values to the declaration currency at the date of entry.