Previous Page  65 / 194 Next Page
Information
Show Menu
Previous Page 65 / 194 Next Page
Page Background

55

Figure 3.14. Post-authorization audit

Source: Authors’ compilation using survey data.

Figure 3.15. Suspension, revocation and cancellation procedures

Source: Authors’ compilation using survey data.

Among all sub-variables in the entire survey, regular re-validation mechanisms have one of the

lowest convergence rates, 38 percent. Other post-authorization audit related results of the

survey show that in 88 percent of the AEO programs in OIC, the AEO holder submits

statements to Customs on a regular basis or reports any changes in their situation.

Furthermore, there is varying degree of convergence in terms of field/site audit (88 percent),

AEO internal audit (63 percent) and risk profiling/assessment (63 percent) as in Figure 3.14.

All AEO programs in the survey have the feature that AEO status can be changed, suspended or

cancelled. However, only 3 out of 8 programs have a formal appeals process (38 percent

convergence). Additionally, 75 percent of programs are endowed with the feature that

Customs Authorities can issue administrative orders for improvements as in Figure 3.15.

38%

88%

88%

63%

63%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Regular Re-validation Mechanism

AEO submits statements to Customs on a regular

basis/any changes in their situation

Field/Site Audit

AEO Internal Audit

Risk Profiling/Assessment

100%

75%

38%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

AEO status can be

changed/suspended/cancelled

Customs can issue Administrative Orders for

Improvement

Appeals Process Exists