Costs Additional to Freight

costs additional to freight

If a letter of credit indicates that costs additional to freight are not acceptable, a transport document is not to indicate that costs additional to the freight have been or will be incurred.

If you are working with CIF, CFR, CIP, CPT trade terms under letters of credit you are likely to see a statement under field “47A: Additional Conditions” such as “Costs additional to freight is prohibited.”

The logic behind these kinds of statements is to fix the freight cost by the issuing banks to the value that was indicated in the credit.

Normally letter of credit rules allow additional costs which may be shown on the transport documents such as multimodal transport documents or bills of lading.

However issuing banks frequently disallow charges additional to freight by inserting a statement in the credits on this effect, when the trade term is CFR, CIF, CIP or CPT.

Remember on FOB, FCA and EXW terms freight is payable at destination, so you should not be having any problem arising from prohibition of costs additional to freight.

You need to look at the letter of credit text on DAT, DAP and DDP trade terms to determine whether costs additional to freight is prohibited or not.

Examples:
47A: Additional Conditions:

  1. Transport document bearing reference by stamp or otherwise costs additional to freight is prohibited.
  2. Costs additional to freight are prohibited.
  3. Costs additional to freight are not allowed.

Which Costs Can be Regarded as Costs Additional to Freight?

According to the International Standard Banking Practice an indication of costs additional to freight can be shown on the transport documents by two ways:

  • by express reference to additional costs
  • by the use of trade terms which refer to costs associated with the loading or unloading of goods, such as, but not limited to,
    • Free In (FI),
    • Free Out (FO),
    • Free In and Out (FIO) and
    • Free In and Out Stowed (FIOS).

What Happens If a Letter of Credit Prohibits Costs Additional to Freight?

According to the International Standard Banking Practice if a credit indicates that costs additional to freight are not acceptable, a transport document is not to indicate that costs additional to the freight have been or will be incurred.

Related Articles:

Costs Additional to Freight Discrepancy

costs additional to freight

Letter of credit rules allow transport documents to show costs additional to freight.

However, some banks especially in certain countries, prohibit costs additional to freight to be mentioned on the transport documents, by cancelling the related article of UCP 600.

If a letter of credit indicates that costs additional to freight is not acceptable, then the transport document presented must not indicate that costs additional to the freight have been or will be incurred.

How Could Costs Additional to Freight Discrepancy Occur?

Tere are the three requirements of a costs additional to freight discrepancy.

  1. A letter of credit, that expressly prohibits cost additional to freight and cancels related article of UCP 600.
  2. A transport document, that is presented with a cost additional to freight expression such as FIFO, FILO, FIO etc…
  3. A discrepancy raised by the issuing bank due to the transport document shows charges additional to freight contrary to l/c terms.

Costs Additional to Freight Discrepancy Example:

A letter of credit has been issued in SWIFT format, subject to UCP latest version, with the following details:

Letter of Credit Conditions

46A: Documents Required

  1. Full set of at least 3/3 long form original (clean on board) bill of lading on the printed forms of carrier plus one non-negotiable copy issued or endorsed to the order of Expo Arab Bank Plc, notify applicant showing freight prepaid and showing full name and address of the shipping company agent or his representative in Bahrain.
  2. Bill of lading showing charges additional to the freight mentioned in article 26 (c) of the UCP, 2007 revision, publication no. 600 are not acceptable except where such additional charges are demurrage fees for containers.
  3. Short form or blank back bill of lading are not acceptable.

The beneficiary presented a bill of lading, that contains a clause stating that “Carriage Term: Free In & Liner Out

Bill of Lading

costs additional to freight discrepancy

Discrepancy:

The documents refused by the issuing bank due to the discrepancy indicated on the following advice of refusal.

————————————-Message Header——————————————-
Swift OUTPUT FIN 734 Advice of Refusal
Sender: EXPOBHBMMAN
EXPO ARAB BANK PLC
MANAMA BH

Receiver: IHRKTRISXXX
TURKIYE IHRACAT BANKASI T.A.S
ISTANBUL TR
—————————————-Message Text——————————————-
20: Sender’s TRN
2002RML2AI2A3369

21: Presenting Bank’s Reference
18208L23R109

32A: Date and Amount of Utilization
Date: 28 December 2012
Currency: USD (US DOLLAR)
Amount: #285.600,00#

33A: Total Amount Claimed
Date: 07 January 2013
Currency: USD (US DOLLAR)
Amount: #285. 600,00#

72: Sender to Receiver Information

Documents refused by us due to discrepancies stated below. We notified the applicant, we shall revert upon hearing from them.

77J: Discrepancies

  1. B/L shows additional charges to the freight not authorized under L/C.

77B: Disposal of Documents
/ HOLD /
————————————-Message Trailer——————————————–