HARARE — More than 50 haulage trucks carrying white cement remain stranded at the Chirundu Border Post following the implementation of a new 30% surtax on cement imports, prompting Augutich Investments (Pvt) Ltd to file an urgent application with the High Court in Harare. The company claims the tax, introduced via Statutory Instrument 50A of 2025, violates existing regional trade agreements under the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA).
In the court application, filed under case number HCH2500/25, Augutich is requesting immediate relief against the enforcement of the new levy, arguing that it contradicts the Customs and Excise (COMESA) (Suspension) Regulations, 2000. These regulations exempt goods traded between COMESA member states from duties and surtaxes, facilitating smoother regional commerce.
In his founding affidavit, Augutich CEO Levy Mashingaidze explained that the company has legally imported white cement from Zambia since 2020, under a valid license from the Ministry of Industry and Commerce. The license was last renewed through February 2025. He stated that Zimbabwe and Zambia are both COMESA member states, and as such, goods traded between the two should not be subject to additional import levies.
“Over the years, the applicant has imported white cement from Zambia for resale in Zimbabwe, duty-free and surtax-free in line with COMESA provisions,” Mashingaidze wrote. “However, the Zimbabwe Revenue Authority (ZIMRA) began enforcing a 30% surtax on May 21, even on shipments that were already purchased and in transit before the statutory instrument was gazetted.
HARARE — Over 50 Cement Trucks Stuck at Chirundu Border as Importer Challenges 30% Surtax in High Court
Augutich argues that applying the tax retroactively is both unconstitutional and unlawful. The stranded trucks, Mashingaidze revealed, are now incurring demurrage charges of approximately US$200 per truck per day, pushing the company’s daily losses to an estimated US$10,000. If the surtax continues to be applied, the company projects that it could face additional costs totaling US$2.9 million over the next year.
In September 2024, Augutich entered into a supply agreement with Chilanga Cement Plant in Zambia for the purchase of 70,000 tonnes of white cement. More than 50 trucks carrying part of that order are currently stuck at the border as the legal standoff unfolds.
In a certificate of urgency accompanying the application, the company’s legal representative, Advocate Gift Nyandoro of Hamunakwadi and Nyandoro Law Chambers, emphasised that the surtax’s retrospective application is fundamentally flawed. “The law is being applied with retrospective effect, contrary to established legal norms. The applicant has no remedy other than to seek the court’s intervention to suspend the surtax on cement purchased prior to May 16, 2025,” Nyandoro argued.
Augutich is seeking two key rulings from the High Court:
-
A temporary interdict to halt ZIMRA from collecting the 30% surtax on any cement already purchased or in transit before the surtax came into effect.
-
A final declaration that Statutory Instrument 50A of 2025 is inconsistent with Zimbabwe’s obligations under COMESA and therefore invalid and unenforceable.
These are two key rulings from the High Court:
The Ministry of Finance, Economic Development and Investment Promotion—named as the respondent in the suit—has yet to file a formal response to the court application. However, government officials have previously defended the surtax, claiming it is essential to shield local cement producers from a surge of cheap imports, which they argue have been undercutting domestic production.
Critics, however, say the sudden imposition of the surtax not only undermines investor confidence but also threatens regional trade harmony. They argue that such measures contradict the spirit and letter of multilateral trade agreements like COMESA, which are designed to promote the free flow of goods and regional economic integration.
In the broader context, the dispute has sent ripples through Zimbabwe’s construction and building materials sector. Cement prices are already rising in the local market as supply tightens due to the border standoff. Industry players warn that prolonged delays in clearing the shipments could impact infrastructure projects, housing development, and public sector works.
Analysts also caution that policy unpredictability—such as retroactive taxation—could deter future trade and investment, not only from regional partners but also from international suppliers relying on COMESA’s legal protections.
As Augutich awaits a court ruling, the immediate concern remains the mounting financial pressure from demurrage charges and delayed deliveries. The case is expected to set a critical legal precedent on the application of international trade obligations within Zimbabwe’s domestic legal framework, particularly as the country continues to navigate economic recovery and regional integration efforts.
