RISK WATCH | ADVICE | 13 While not every discrepancy has resulted in a financial penalty, largely due to the effective intervention from the Club’s local correspondents, these ports present elevated risks that calls for proactive mitigation strategies from Members. Customs administrations view cargo shortages with suspicion because they may indicate under-declaration, smuggling, tax evasion or other regulatory breaches. Consequently, customs authorities are empowered under their national laws to impose fines or penalties on responsible parties. These fines serve multiple purposes such as recouping lost customs duties and taxes, enforcing compliance with import declarations, deterring fraudulent practices and maintaining the customs control system integrity. Although customs procedures and legal frameworks vary globally, several common principles emerge regarding cargo shortage fines, i.e., reliance on official inspection or survey results to determine if shortages exist. Even minor discrepancies between the cargo manifest and the shore weighbridge and/ or stevedore’s outturn figures can trigger substantial fines. The figures of a ship are often disregarded in disputes, relying on the accuracy of shore-side measurements and limiting the ship’s ability to contest discrepancies. If a fine is imposed, it is usually based on the unpaid import duties for the alleged missing cargo(es) (estimated local market value), multiplied by a certain factor determined by local custom authorities or some additional applicable custom duties. Given the complexity of import regimes and fluctuating duty rates across countries and ports, even modest shortages can escalate into unexpectedly large exposures if not managed carefully. Ships are commonly required to post security, i.e., a cash deposit or bank guarantee to cover the potential fine while the matter is being investigated. While these initial demands can be steep, sometimes a more amicable approach can be achieved if carefully dealt with. Therefore, it is advisable to ensure cargo documents and submitted declarations are accurate and precise. Whether the cargo is bagged, bulk, or liquid, any variance between the declared quantity and the amount recorded by the customs-appointed surveyor can result in fines. No single commodity stands out as uniquely problematic, but commonly affected goods include rice, wheat, corn, soybeans, sugar and fertilizers. These are high-volume, high-value commodities where minor measurement variances can have outsized financial consequences. Therefore, draft surveys conducted by the ship often serve as our primary line of defence. For packaged cargo, they should be dealt with caution, and goods should be clearly marked and independent surveyors should be engaged where feasible to witness discharge operations. As an example, Dakar in Senegal has been one of the most stringent ports regarding customs enforcement where seemingly minor documentation errors, minor cargo variances or even typographical errors can trigger significant fines or, in severe cases, ship detention. However, the Club’s local correspondent recently reported a noticeable, albeit cautious, softening in enforcement, with authorities appearing more tolerant of minor cargo shortage discrepancies. Our Dakar correspondents 1 have compiled a detailed checklist of documentation and declarations that customs officials routinely inspect such as: • Manifest of cargo to be discharged • Manifest of the cargo in transit,