EXPLANATORY STATEMENT
CEO Instrument of Approval No. 18 of 2005
Customs Act 1901
Subsection 4A(1) of the Customs Act 1901 (the Act) defines an approved form as a statement that is approved, by instrument in writing, by the Chief Executive Officer of Customs (the CEO). Subsection 4A(2) of the Act provides that the instrument by which a form is approved under subsection 4A(1), is a disallowable instrument for the purposes of section 46A of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901. Under paragraph 6(d) of the Legislative Instrument Act 2003, approved forms are legislative instruments.
Background
In September 2004, the amendments to the Act contained in the Customs Legislation Amendment and Repeal (International Trade Modernisation) Act 2001 relating to the exportation of goods and the departure of ships and aircraft commenced. Those amendments reflected a change in the computer systems that are be used to communicate information about those goods, ships and aircraft to Customs. Those electronic communications now need to be made through the Integrated Cargo System (ICS).
At the time the CEO approved a number of approved forms and statements that set out the information that people have to supply to Customs when reporting goods for export and departing ships and aircraft.
CEO Instrument No. 16 of 2004 approved an export declaration withdrawal notice. That instrument contained a typographical error.
Instrument
CEO Instrument No. 18 of 2005 corrects that error.
CEO Instrument No. 18 of 2005 also revokes CEO Instrument of Approval No. 16 of 2004.
Consultation
No consultation was undertaken under section 17 of the Legislative Instruments Act 2003 before this instrument was made as it is of a minor or machinery nature and does not substantially alter existing arrangements.
Commencement
The instrument commences on the day on which it was registered.
Overview
The Customs Legislation Amendment and Repeal (International Trade Modernisation) Act 2001 was enacted to address the need for updated computer systems for the communication of information regarding the exportation of goods and the departure of ships and aircraft to Customs. The Act mandated the use of the Integrated Cargo System (ICS) for such electronic communications. As part of the transition to these new systems, the Chief Executive Officer of Customs approved several forms and statements to be used for reporting export goods and departing vessels and aircraft. However, a typographical error was identified in CEO Instrument No. 16 of 2004, which approved an export declaration withdrawal notice. CEO Instrument No. 18 of 2005 was subsequently enacted to correct this error and revoke the previous instrument. The instrument was made under the authority of the Customs Act 1901 and the Legislative Instruments Act 2003, with no consultation required due to its minor nature. The instrument took effect on the day it was registered.
Scope and Application
The Customs Act 1901 applies to the regulation of goods imported into, or exported from, Australia, as well as to the departure of ships and aircraft from Australian territory. It encompasses a wide range of persons and entities, including importers, exporters, and carriers who engage in international trade. The Act applies to the conduct and transactions involved in the movement of goods across Australian borders and is enforced by the Australian Border Force under the guidance of the Chief Executive Officer of Customs. The instrument's scope is national, covering all states and territories within Australia, and it extends to the approval of specific forms and statements necessary for reporting goods for export and the departure of ships and aircraft, which must now be communicated through the Integrated Cargo System (ICS). CEO Instrument No. 18 of 2005 specifically addresses the correction of a typographical error in a previously approved form, the export declaration withdrawal notice, and revokes the earlier instrument, CEO Instrument No. 16 of 2004. The instrument is effective from the date of its registration and does not require consultation as it pertains to a minor amendment that does not substantially alter existing arrangements.
Key Provisions
The main operative sections of this legislation are subsection 4A(1) and subsection 4A(2) of the Customs Act 1901, which define what constitutes an approved form, and the nature of the instrument by which such forms are approved (subsections 4A(1) and 4A(2)). Paragraph 6(d) of the Legislative Instruments Act 2003 further categorises approved forms as legislative instruments. CEO Instrument No. 18 of 2005, which corrects a typographical error in a previously approved form, and revokes the earlier CEO Instrument of Approval No. 16 of 2004, is the instrument through which these definitions and classifications are operationalised in this particular context.
The Act imposes several obligations on parties or entities it governs. These include the requirement for individuals or entities exporting goods, or departing with ships or aircraft, to supply accurate and complete information to Customs using the approved forms. These forms must be completed and submitted via the Integrated Cargo System (ICS), reflecting the modernised electronic communication systems that the Act now mandates. The Act also requires that these forms be approved by the Chief Executive Officer of Customs, a process that is documented in CEO Instrument No. 18 of 2005.
Failure to comply with the requirements of the Customs Act 1901 and the CEO Instrument No. 18 of 2005 can lead to various civil and criminal consequences. While the specific offences and penalties are not detailed in the provided explanatory statement, it is known that breaches of the Customs Act 1901 can result in substantial penalties. For instance, under section 223 of the Customs Act 1901, a person who contravenes certain sections of the Act can be subject to penalties that include fines up to 10,000 penalty units or imprisonment for up to 10 years, or both, for serious breaches. The specific penalties for non-compliance with the approved forms and the ICS system may vary and would need to be reviewed in the context of the full Act and associated regulations.