Our Vision

We believe, and we are not the first to do so, that vision is something necessary for  the development, advancement, and success of a business.

While every business that operates for profit has, of course, the goal of maximizing  profits,  without an idealogical, spiritual, moral, social motive, that aims at findin solutions, whatever you call it, the goal of earning profits will be left naked, alone,   and without sufficient basis.

An important, though not exclusive, part of our office's activity is in the area of import duties and import law, is motivated by a vision like this, and in the next lines we will try to describe it and define it.

The legislation on import duties that exists in the state of Israel is, in our opinion, legislation that is stupid, unjustified, unbalanced, distorting commerce and injuring the community of importers and the commerce of the state of Israel.

Examples for this claim are not lacking.

Paragraph 154 to the Customs Code states that an importer that pays import duties under protest, because of a disagreement regarding the extent of import duties at the time of the release of the goods, must file an action with the court within 3 months. If this is not done, according to the ruling of the Magistrate's Court, the right of suit has passed its substantive period of limitation and is as if it never existed. In our opinion, this is a serious and extreme injustice, the result of Mandatory legislation from the twenties of the previous century, to which there is nothing comparable, in its present form, in any civilized country today. Even England, the birthplace of this arrangement, never applied it in her own territory, but
only to her colonies. It is clear that the arrangement seriously infringes on the legitimate right of suit of the importer, and discriminates against an importer that pays that duties under protest and an importer who pays the duties accidentally, who is allowed five years to file suit.

Another example: The Law of Indirect Taxation- Duties Overpaid and Underpaid, 1968. Paragraphs 2 and 3 of the law allow the Customs Authority to issue retroactive demands for payment of import duties. While the law does give the Customs Authority the authority to forgo these demands in case of good faith on the part of the importer, when the importer did not know and was not supposed to know about the missing payment and when the importer did not include the missing duties in the price of the product, still, the application of the paragraph by the Customs Authority is done in exceptional cases, and few requests are accepted. On the other hand, an importer who overpaid duties does not automatically receive this tax, but is required to prove that the tax paid by him was not transferred to the customers. This stance perpetuates a situation of unlawful enrichment by the state, and even places a heavy burden of proof on the importer rather than placing it on the
state.

A third example: According to the law that applies in the state of Israel, there is no incidence in the internal law for commitments of the state of Israel on the international plane. In other words, an importer who want to sue the state to receive a benefit according to the trade agreements, cannot realize this right in an Israeli  court.

And a last example: Unlike appeals on income tax and VAT, filing an appeal on import duties does not delay collection and enforcement proceedings. An importer who disagrees with the decision of the customs evaluator, cannot use his right of appeal without being subject to providing financial guarantees that the debt will be paid, or paying the debt itself.

It's hard to come to peace with legal situations like those described above, and our office definitely does not come to peace to them. In a series of proceedings, our office has represented importers and successfully brought about a change in the situation.

And so we can tell of a decision by the Magistrate's Court of Bet Shemesh that issued a stay ordering the Customs Authority not to collect tax deductions, subject to giving more reasonable guarantees (10% bank guarantees, 50% confiscation of vehicles registered.) Our office appealed to the District Court of Jerusalem to void the all-embracing immunity that the Customs Authority uses to avoid giving data to the importer, and succeeded. The District Court in that case obligated the Customs Authority to reveal complementary information about product classification. And in another case, the District Court of Jerusalem accepted, in an offhand statement, our
office's client's position and ruled that paragraph 154 to the Customs Code (above) does not establish substantive limitation, and that in a appropriate cases, the time for filing suit may be extended.

And beyond example, we think that there is a duty to change the balance between the Customs Authority and the import in everything that relates to import duties, and to strengthen and increase the rights of the importer, we stand for the protection of the importer's elementary rights: the right to examine the Authority's documents, the right to argue before the Authority before the Authority reaches a decision, the right to receive reasoned decisions, and others. We believe that standing firm on the fulfillment of the importer's rights will advance the foreign commerce of the state of Israel, and will strengthen Israel's image as a state that protects the basic rights of those that do business in her territory.