Called to customs to 'give explanations': what to do before attending or signing anything

The call from customs can sound routine: ‘Come in tomorrow. We need to clarify a few points. Bring the contract and payment documents.’

The company may treat it as a working discussion. An employee attends, describes the transaction from memory, answers further questions and signs the officer’s text. Later, individual phrases are compared with the declaration, bank payments, accounts and correspondence. An imprecise date becomes a contradiction. A guess about a discount is treated as fact. An accountant’s account of the director’s actions is used as though it came from a direct participant.

Before receiving the document, avoid discussing prices, payments or relations with the seller. Ask for the basis of the summons and the action customs intends to take. There is no single customs procedure called ‘giving explanations’. The expression may refer to explanations under Article 323 of the EAEU Customs Code, oral questioning, a document request, valuation review, customs audit, an administrative offence report or an explanation in a registered incident inquiry (КУСП).

The document’s details are more informative than the officer’s oral description. A reference to Article 323 of the EAEU Customs Code and the ‘Explanation’ form indicates a distinct form of customs control. Article 339 concerns oral questioning, for which the Code does not require a formal record of the answers. If a question-and-answer sheet is presented for signature after that conversation, ask what document is being prepared and on what legal basis.

Article 313 of the EAEU Customs Code concerns customs valuation control and permits written explanations of how the price was formed. It does not itself identify the review stage. Article 325 governs pre-release document checks and Article 326 post-release checks; requests in the latter procedure follow Article 340 and Federal Law No. 289-ФЗ. A case number and Administrative Offences Code references require clarification of the participant’s procedural status. A КУСП number with Articles 144–145 of the Russian Criminal Procedure Code usually indicates an inquiry into a reported offence. Mention of an inquiry department alone does not establish that.

One communication may contain a summons, a document request and a procedural order in an administrative offence case. They do not acquire a common deadline. Calculate each separately. Retain the envelope, enclosure list, delivery confirmation, original electronic file, online-account record and technical delivery message. Without them, a dispute about the starting date may become one account against another.

A telephone call does not replace the notice required by Article 323 of the EAEU Customs Code. Once received, that notice should not be ignored. Article 323 requires a notice to be prepared and sent, but does not set a minimum preparation period or let the recipient unilaterally replace attendance with a written explanation. Assess the consequences of non-attendance against the document, procedure and person’s status.

If attendance is impossible or preparation time plainly insufficient, write before the appointed time. Record when the notice actually arrived, explain the obstacle, propose the nearest realistic alternative and request written confirmation of postponement. You may also propose a written explanation, video participation or attendance by another employee with direct knowledge. Until customs agrees, do not assume the arrangement has changed.

Replacing the summoned employee with a company representative also requires agreement. A power of attorney authorises legal acts; it does not give its holder another person’s knowledge. A logistics manager cannot reliably explain who agreed the price solely because the manager has authority to represent the company. Conversely, the accountant who made the payment may know more about it than a director familiar only with the overall transaction.

Different rules apply when an administrative offence report is drawn up. If a properly notified individual or the organisation’s statutory representative does not attend, the report may be prepared in their absence. A copy must be sent within three days. Absence does not stop the case; it removes the opportunity to check the wording and make comments as the report is prepared.

Where objective obstacles prevent attendance, a participant may request video-conference or web-conference participation. The officer preparing the report decides, considering the reasons and technical availability. If remote participation is agreed, notice of it must be sent at least ten working days before the report is drawn up.

An order requesting information under Article 26.10 of the Russian Administrative Offences Code does not follow the ordinary customs-request procedure. Information is generally due within three days of receipt. An organisation unable to comply must give written notice within those same three days. It may request more time, but filing that request does not extend the deadline.

A КУСП reference calls for a closer assessment. An explanation during an inquiry into a reported offence differs legally from witness questioning after criminal proceedings have begun. Before attending, establish the stage, the person’s role and whether documents will also be requested, inspected or seized. Corporate authority to act does not replace separate protection of an employee’s interests where the questions may expose that employee personally.

Choose the attendee for their actual involvement, not simply their job title. The director may know the contract terms, the accountant the payments, the logistics specialist the route and transport records, and the customs representative the declaration entries. A lawyer can oversee procedure, make applications and record violations, but should not answer as a witness to events they did not observe.

Before attendance, distinguish personal recollection from information learned from colleagues or documents. ‘We always paid the seller directly’ is a categorical assertion. Someone familiar with only one payment should describe that payment and say that the others need checking against the accounts. Where a date, amount or payment purpose is uncertain, a precise answer is: ‘I cannot confirm that now; I need to check the payment order.’

The company’s and employee’s interests may diverge. The company may attribute a breach to the employee’s error, while the employee relies on an approved procedure or management instruction. Corporate counsel represents the company and does not automatically defend the employee. Where answers may expose the employee to personal administrative or criminal liability, separate legal assistance is needed.

Prepare a comprehensive internal file: notices, requests, delivery evidence, contracts, amendments, invoices, payment and transport records, accounting registers, correspondence, earlier responses, signed explanations, offence reports and audit reports. This supports the company’s internal assessment. It does not all have to be submitted to customs.

Before submission, follow the transaction from contract and amendments through invoice, payment, dispatch, carriage and declaration. Reconcile dates, amounts, currencies, payer, recipient, delivery terms and goods descriptions. An unnecessary file can introduce a new issue: a price list for another shipment, an internal product name inconsistent with the declaration, a payment unconnected to an invoice or an unchecked explanation of a discount in the supplier’s letter.

Build the formal response around the request. For an existing document, identify its details and the fact it supports. Explain when a document was never created; do not manufacture a backdated version. For documents held by a counterparty or another department, identify the holder and steps already taken to obtain them. Hand over originals only after checking the legal basis and preparing a detailed inventory identifying each original, its page count and the recipient.

Trade secrets, personal data and other protected information require appropriate handling. They do not justify silently ignoring a lawful demand, but do justify addressing how the information will be protected and which materials are actually necessary.

Do not turn the company’s account into the summoned person’s claimed personal knowledge. Identify information obtained from accounting, a database or the logistics team. Someone who personally agreed the price, signed a letter or instructed payment can describe their own action. This distinction is more useful than a confident answer to every question.

Article 51 of the Russian Constitution applies according to the question’s substance, not the document’s title. A person may decline to testify against themselves, their spouse or close relatives, including where an explanation to customs risks self-incrimination. Personal answers and an organisation’s duty to produce existing contracts, registers, payment or transport records are governed differently. Invoking Article 51 does not automatically end all interaction with customs. Assess the particular question, addressee and information sought.

Signing the record deserves a separate check. Article 323(2) of the EAEU Customs Code requires explanations to be recorded in a customs document using the Commission’s form. Read the entire text before signing. Put corrections or objections in the document or in a separate written statement and ask for it to be recorded as an attachment.

Pre-release valuation deadlines are often measured in hours. Article 313 of the EAEU Customs Code permits requests for pricing explanations; Article 325 governs the review procedure. The two-month extension available under Article 340 in other situations does not apply to this regime.

An additional pre-release request should identify the grounds for doubt, required documents and deadline. Paragraph 7 of the Regulation approved by EEC Board Decision No. 42 requires reasons and indications of inaccurate or insufficiently substantiated information. Note inadequate reasons in the response rather than ignoring the request. Where additional documents are unavailable or cannot be obtained in time, explain why, describe the steps taken and submit the materials already prepared.

Post-release checks usually allow a different pace, but formalities still matter. A request under Articles 326 and 340 of the EAEU Customs Code must concern the facts under review, and the response period must reflect the volume of materials. A reasoned application may secure an extension of no more than two months from the original deadline. That is a maximum extension, not extra time obtained merely by applying. Continue to work to the original date until an extension is granted.

Delivery method affects the deadline. Paper post, an online account, the Unified Public Services Portal, email and electronic document-exchange systems follow different rules. Keep service evidence or technical delivery information with the request.

A post-release request does not necessarily mean a desk or field customs audit. Customs can check documents and information separately. An audit notice or decision starts a different procedure, with its own periods, report, access to materials and objections. Confusing those procedures leads to errors in deadlines and remedies.

Failure to provide documents needed for customs control on time may attract liability under Article 16.12(3) of the Russian Administrative Offences Code. Delay alone is not enough to establish liability. Check the officer’s authority, the request’s precision, addressee, receipt date, need for the documents, realistic ability to comply and steps taken by the organisation. A written explanation that a document was never created, was already submitted or is held by a third party does not guarantee dismissal, but shows that the demand was not ignored.

Customs-control material may later be used in administrative or criminal proceedings. Calling a document an ‘explanation under Article 323’ does not turn it into witness testimony or a statement by a person facing liability. In an administrative offence case, its relevance, admissibility and evidential weight must be assessed with the other evidence under Article 26.2 of the Russian Administrative Offences Code. Before each new procedural step, clarify the participant’s status and the document being prepared.

A person facing administrative offence proceedings may inspect the case file, give explanations, submit evidence, make applications and receive defence assistance. A witness has different duties: to attend, report known facts and confirm the accuracy of the recorded testimony, while retaining the privilege against self-incrimination and incriminating close relatives and the right to comment on the record. An organisation’s head may act as its statutory representative. A person admitted under Article 25.5 may act as defence representative after the case begins. An ordinary employee’s power of attorney does not make that employee the legal entity’s statutory representative.

An inaccurate signed explanation can still be addressed, but act promptly. Obtain a copy or reconstruct its contents as precisely as possible. Compare the disputed sentence with the primary records and submit a targeted correction. ‘I was misunderstood’ is too vague. A more useful explanation is: ‘The explanation of 6 August incorrectly identifies the payment recipient. The money was transferred to company X on seller Y’s instructions, as confirmed by clause 4.2 of the amendment and payment order No. …’

Send the correction to the body using the original explanation. In an administrative offence case, apply for it to be added to the file. After a customs audit report, include the point in the objections. If a decision has already been made, assess administrative or judicial appeal. Prompt, documented correction gives less reason to treat the revised account as a late attempt to change the original evidence.

To match the document you received to the relevant procedure, start with the situation guide ‘Post-release checks’ and the service description ‘Post-release customs control’. Brief answers are available in the FAQ on post-release checks and audits; for an assessment of your document and deadline, contact me.