When returning defective goods to the supplier, the buyer may expect to recover the money spent on importing them. But the seller's agreement to take the shipment back does not by itself resolve the issue of import duty and VAT - value added tax. Whether those payments can be refunded depends on how the return shipment is placed under customs procedure.
If the conditions of the EAEU Customs Code are met, re-export may be used - a special procedure for taking goods out of the territory of the Eurasian Economic Union. For goods that have already been released for domestic consumption and are being returned because the terms of the transaction were breached, Article 242 provides for a refund or offset of payments. Export under the ordinary export procedure does not create that basis under Article 242.
The reason for the return may concern quality, quantity, description, or packaging. These situations are covered by subparagraph 6 of paragraph 2 of Article 238 of the Customs Code of the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU Customs Code). Re-export requires all the conditions of paragraph 2 of Article 239 to be met. They include requirements concerning time limits, the condition of the goods, and documents, so the customs treatment of the return is better worked out before the shipment is sent abroad.
The first time limit runs from the original release of the goods. They must be placed under the re-export procedure within one year from the day following the day on which they were placed under the release-for-domestic-consumption procedure. The date is best taken from the original goods declaration - GD. Correspondence with the supplier, a claim, or a contractual warranty does not change this period.
A different time limit starts after the goods are placed under re-export. They must actually be exported no later than four months from the day following the day on which they were placed under that procedure. An exception is provided for goods imported into the territory of a port or logistics free economic zone. The one-year period concerns placement under re-export; the four-month period concerns the subsequent actual export.
| After release for domestic consumption | Up to 1 year to place goods under re-export |
|---|---|
| After placement under re-export | Up to 4 months for actual export |
At the same time, the circumstances of the return must be proved to customs. Paragraph 2 of Article 239 requires information on the importation of the goods, their release for domestic consumption, the breach of the transaction terms, and their use after release. For example, if the contract sets requirements for material density, equipment completeness, or packaging, the documents should show exactly how the shipment failed to meet them.
This may be supported by an acceptance report, measurement results, a technical opinion, quality-control documents, and correspondence with the supplier. The law does not reduce the evidence to one form. The Federal Customs Service (FCS) Guidelines on Re-export list TORG-3 as one possible document and expressly state that this form is not mandatory. The Chamber of Commerce and Industry certificate mentioned there concerns force majeure; it is not required for every manufacturing defect.
A separate condition of Article 239 concerns what happened to the goods after release. They must not have been used in the territory of the Union or repaired. An exception is made for use that was necessary to discover the defect or another circumstance that became the reason for export.
This is particularly important for equipment. If a fault was discovered only during a test start-up, that start-up may fall within the exception. Documents can then show why the equipment was switched on, how long the test lasted, what was discovered, and when operation stopped. If the equipment continued to perform ordinary production tasks after the defect was identified, customs may question whether the non-use condition was met. The exception also does not give a general right to repair the goods first and then declare them for re-export.
Customs must also identify the returned goods, meaning it must be able to establish that the goods being exported are the same goods that were imported. For a machine, this may be shown by its serial number and markings. For rolls, batches of raw materials, or serial products, batch numbers, article numbers, weight, packing data, and warehouse records may be used. For a partial return, it is particularly useful to show the quantity and weight of the imported goods, the returned part, and the remainder.
The fifth condition in paragraph 2 of Article 239 is compliance with the applicable prohibitions and restrictions. It applies together with the time limit, the documents explaining the reason for return, the restriction on use and repair, and the ability to identify the goods.
Placement under re-export alone is not enough for a refund of payments. Article 242 links a refund or offset to the actual export of the goods from the customs territory of the EAEU. Handing the cargo over to a carrier does not yet mean that this condition has been met.
After the actual export, the original declaration has to be addressed. Paragraph 2 of Article 67 of the EAEU Customs Code links the refund of overpaid duties and taxes to amendments to the information on their calculation, while Article 112 governs amendments to a declaration after release. In practice, a KDT - an adjustment to the goods declaration - is used. The procedure is established by Decision of the Board of the Eurasian Economic Commission dated December 10, 2013 No. 289.
If only part of a shipment is returned, the calculation must be tied to the actual remainder. The quantity, value, and expenses relating to the imported, exported, and remaining portions of the goods must reconcile. The cost of transporting the goods back to the supplier is a new transportation expense and is not automatically included in the amount of import duty to be refunded.
The allocation of the original transport costs was the issue in Judgment of the Fifteenth Commercial Court of Appeal dated August 7, 2026 No. 15AP-8261/2026 in case No. A32-72912/2025. The company imported 150 paper reels with a total weight of 121,243 kg. Because the goods did not meet the quality requirements, it re-exported 70 reels weighing 56,396 kg. A total of 64,847 kg remained in the EAEU.
Customs proposed allocating the entire original freight cost - transportation to the EAEU border - to the remaining 64,847 kg. The court upheld a calculation that allocated the expenses proportionally. The customs value of the remaining goods was RUB 8,995,478.31. The duty and VAT on those goods were RUB 2,338,824.37. The shipment had originally incurred RUB 4,372,848.23 in duty and VAT. The difference was RUB 2,034,023.86. The customs authority's refusal to amend the information was held unlawful.
This judgment shows the calculation for a particular shipment and particular transport costs. It does not establish a universal rule that freight must always be allocated in the same way in every partial re-export. For another shipment, it is necessary to examine which goods the expenses related to, how they are documented, and which allocation basis fits the actual data.
For a simple hypothetical calculation, take 100 identical items of equal weight with a total customs value of RUB 1,000,000. Each item accounts for RUB 10,000. At a hypothetical duty rate of 5%, RUB 50,000 was paid. If 20 items are placed under re-export in compliance with the conditions and are actually exported, the duty attributable to them is 20 × 10,000 × 5% = RUB 10,000. The remaining 80 items account for RUB 40,000. This example covers duty only, without VAT.
Article 242 provides for a refund or offset of import duties, taxes, and special, anti-dumping, and countervailing duties paid in connection with the release of the goods if the conditions of the rule are met. Customs fees are not included in that list. Storage of the goods and their return transportation to the supplier are also not reimbursed through this mechanism.
There is also a specific exception: Article 242 does not provide for such a refund of import duties and taxes if they were paid because of actions that violated the purposes and conditions of a granted exemption or the restrictions on the use or disposal of the goods associated with that exemption.
Agreeing with the seller on the return shipment and placing the goods under re-export are two related actions. Customs needs the reason for the return, the condition of the goods, and proof that the imported shipment is the one being exported, while the procedural time limit runs independently of negotiations. After the goods have actually been exported, a calculation of the refundable payments and amendments to the original declaration can be prepared.
Andrey Bernev, customs lawyer