The
Importers and Exporters Association of Ghana (IEAG) wishes to state, in
unequivocal terms, its strong support for the recent directive issued by the
Ghana Shippers' Authority to streamline and cap Container Administrative
Charges (CAC) at Ghana’s ports. This intervention is not only timely but long
overdue.
For
decades, importers, exporters, and Ghanaian businesses have borne the brunt of
excessive, opaque, and, in many instances, unjustified administrative charges
imposed by international shipping lines and their local agents. These charges,
commonly referred to as local handling charges, have significantly inflated the
cost of doing business and undermined Ghana’s competitiveness as a trade hub.
The
Association notes with concern the recent threats issued by certain shipping
line workers. We wish to make it clear that such threats will not deter
regulatory action in the national interest.
The global
shipping industry operates on well-established commercial principles where
freight charges, surcharges, and ancillary fees, including demurrage and
detention, are revenue streams accruing directly to the shipping lines
(carriers). Industry data and global shipping practices confirm that:
Ocean
freight is the primary revenue of carriers, covering vessel operations, fuel
(bunker), and capital expenditure.
Demurrage
and detention charges, paid when containers overstay at ports or outside
terminals, are also collected and retained by shipping lines, contributing
significantly to their ancillary income streams.
These
revenues are typically repatriated to parent companies abroad, resulting in
substantial foreign exchange outflows with limited direct fiscal benefit to the
Ghanaian state.
Against
this backdrop, it is disingenuous for shipping lines to suggest that Container
Administrative Charges are essential for their operational sustainability in
Ghana.
Clarification
on Cost Structure and Freight Pricing
It is
important to place on record that all legitimate port-related costs incurred by
shipping lines in Ghana, such as port dues, pilotage, towage, berth charges,
and terminal handling charges, are already embedded within the ocean freight
rates charged to importers and exporters.
In
shipping economics, this is standard practice: Freight rates are structured
using a cost-recovery and margin-based pricing model, where carriers factor in
origin and destination port costs, operational overheads, and market
conditions.
Whether
freight is prepaid (at origin) or collect (at destination), these costs are
ultimately borne by the cargo owner, not the shipping line.
Therefore,
the imposition of separate Container Administrative Charges at destination
constitutes a duplication of cost recovery, effectively making Ghanaian
importers pay twice for the same service components.
The
IEAG maintains that these charges are unwarranted and outdated.
Historically,
the Container Administrative Charge was introduced in the late 1980s, at a time
when vessels calling at Ghanaian ports were required to deploy ship-mounted
gear (geared vessels) to facilitate cargo operations due to limited port
infrastructure. However, this justification no longer holds.
Today,
Ghana’s ports, particularly Tema Port and Takoradi Port, are equipped with
state-of-the-art container handling infrastructure, including: Ship-to-Shore
(STS) gantry cranes, Rubber-Tyred Gantry (RTG) cranes, Automated terminal
operating systems (TOS), modern quay and yard facilities capable of handling
large container vessels
These
advancements have eliminated the operational conditions that originally
justified the CAC. Its continued application is therefore technically
indefensible and economically exploitative.
On
Employment and Welfare Claims
The
argument that the directive will adversely affect employee welfare is
misplaced.
Shipping
lines operating in Ghana are agents of international principals (carrier
owners). Under standard maritime business structures, the principal is
responsible for all operational expenditures, including staff remuneration,
insurance, pensions, and other benefits.
Local
administrative charges such as CAC are not designed to fund employee
compensation, but rather have evolved into additional revenue streams.
It is
therefore inappropriate to suggest that Ghanaian businesses should continue to
bear unjustified charges to subsidize employment conditions that are the
responsibility of multinational shipping corporations.
Economic
Impact and National Interest
The scale
of the issue cannot be ignored. Available industry estimates indicate that in
2024 alone, Ghanaian shippers and traders paid approximately GH₵1.69 billion
(about USD 108.32 million) in Container Administrative Charges. This represents
a substantial cost burden on trade and a major contributor to high import
prices and inflationary pressures.
At a time
when Ghana is pursuing trade facilitation, cost competitiveness, and regional
hub status, such charges are counterproductive.
Support
for the GSA Directive
The IEAG
fully endorses the decision by the Ghana Shippers' Authority to cap the
Container Administrative Charge at GHS 550 per Twenty-Foot Equivalent Unit
(TEU), effective 1st May 2026.
This cap
represents: a reasonable and proportionate ceiling, a balanced regulatory
intervention that protects shippers while allowing operational flexibility, and
a step toward eliminating unjustified cost build-ups within the logistics chain.
The IEAG
reiterates that the era of unchecked and opaque charges in Ghana’s shipping and
logistics sector must come to an end.
We commend
the Ghana Shippers’ Authority for its decisive action and urge all stakeholders
to comply fully with the directive in the interest of fairness, transparency,
and national economic growth.
Attempts
to resist or undermine this reform through threats or pressure tactics will not
succeed.
Signed
Samson
Asaki Awingobit
Executive
Secretary
Tel:
0243575046

0 Comments