Blocking Counterfeit Goods at the Border: Should Businesses File a Customs Surveillance Request or Request Temporary Suspension of Customs Clearance?
For a suspected counterfeit import shipment valued at VND 5 billion, the statutory 20% security deposit required to request temporary suspension of customs clearance would amount to VND 1 billion. This amount is intended to compensate the cargo owner if it is later determined that the shipment does not infringe intellectual property rights. This article helps businesses properly distinguish between the nature of a customs surveillance request and a request for temporary suspension of customs procedures under Circular 06/2026/TT-BTC, which amends and replaces the previous framework under Circular 13/2015/TT-BTC as amended (“Circular 06”). Understanding that distinction is essential for selecting the right tool, at the right time, and avoiding being pushed into a passive position once a signal has already emerged at the border.
Customs surveillance registration: a procedure for feeding IP data into the Customs system
Under Article 6 of Circular 06, a dossier requesting customs inspection and supervision of exported or imported goods related to intellectual property includes:
- an application prepared through the prescribed data fields or one original copy in Form No. 01;
- documents evidencing intellectual property rights;
- photographs and identifying data of the goods, including descriptions of infringing goods and distinguishing features between genuine goods and counterfeit/infringing goods, where available;
- lists of lawful exporters/importers and parties likely to be involved in infringing goods; and
- a power of attorney where the application is filed through a representative (for example, Bross & Partners).
Where a protection title or certificate already exists in electronic form on the official website of the competent authority, the applicant is not required to submit a hard copy; it is sufficient to declare the relevant information in the application so that Customs may verify and cross-check it.
In substance, the request for inspection and supervision of exported or imported goods related to intellectual property under Article 6 is effectively a customs surveillance registration procedure. Its real function is to place IP rights data and goods-identification data into the Customs system. A notable improvement is that this procedure has been significantly digitised and streamlined in three respects: the power of attorney now only requires one copy, with no repeated requirement for consular legalisation as before; electronic filing has become the primary filing method; and proof of rights has been simplified where the protection title already exists in electronic form for verification by the Customs Department.
Requesting temporary suspension of customs clearance: a procedure aimed at a specific shipment
Unlike customs surveillance registration, a request for temporary suspension of customs procedures is, by its nature, a measure designed to intervene directly in a specific import or export shipment. The dossier must be filed with the Border Customs Office / Non-Border Customs Office handling the customs procedures through the electronic customs data processing system.
If the Customs Department has not yet accepted the customs surveillance dossier, the applicant must submit:
(a) the full customs surveillance dossier under Article 6;(b) an application for temporary suspension in the prescribed form;(c) a guarantee issued by a credit institution or a security deposit equal to 20% of the shipment value, or at least VND 20 million where the shipment value cannot be determined; and(d) proof of payment of the customs fee applicable to temporary suspension.
If the Customs Department has already accepted the customs surveillance dossier under Article 6, the Article 9 dossier is reduced to only the following three components:
- the application for temporary suspension in the prescribed form;
- the guarantee or security deposit equal to 20% of the shipment value, or at least VND 20 million where the shipment value cannot be determined; and
- proof of payment of the customs fee for temporary suspension.
Where the electronic system is unavailable or malfunctions, the applicant must submit one hard-copy dossier to the Border Customs Office / Non-Border Customs Office handling the shipment, in which the application for temporary suspension and the security documents must be submitted in original form.
The new ex officio temporary suspension procedure
Article 10a is the most notable new point of Circular 06 because it expressly allows the Customs authority to temporarily suspend customs clearance on its own initiative. In the course of inspection, supervision, control, analysis of intellectual property databases, or on the basis of information from customs operational units, where there are clear grounds to suspect that goods are counterfeit trademarks, counterfeit geographical indications, or pirated goods, the Head of the Customs Team at the place of customs declaration may issue a decision on temporary suspension under Form No. 10.
Once the suspension decision is issued, the Customs authority must notify the right holder or its lawful representative within 8 working hours using the contact details already available in the dossier. Depending on the results of the physical inspection, the case may proceed in one of three directions:(a) if there is no violation, customs clearance resumes;(b) if a violation is confirmed, the case is handled in accordance with law and may even be referred for criminal proceedings where criminal signs are present; or(c) if there is not yet sufficient basis for a conclusion, the Customs authority may continue to send images, request supporting documents, require sampling for expert examination, or coordinate with competent state authorities for clarification.
Article 10a grants the Customs authority greater initiative, but at the same time imposes significant responsibility on it. Specifically, if Customs wrongly initiates a suspension and causes damage to the cargo owner, the authority issuing the decision must compensate for the damage and reimburse related costs.
A filtering and routing mechanism for e-commerce goods related to intellectual property
For goods traded through e-commerce, Customs cannot operate in the traditional manual way — i.e. opening each parcel to look for counterfeit or infringing goods. Instead, it must proceed under the principle of risk management: collecting data, screening risk indicators, classifying the level of suspicion, and then deciding whether to escalate inspection, conduct physical examination, or move the case to a stronger enforcement branch. Article 14a therefore does not create a new procedure for businesses; rather, it establishes a distinct Customs approach for e-commerce goods.
The key point of Article 14a is this: e-commerce is not treated as an “exception”; rather, it is brought into the same data-screening logic used by Customs. If, through that screening, the Customs authority at the place of declaration already has clear grounds regarding counterfeit IP goods, the case moves directly to the Article 10a branch, i.e. ex officio temporary suspension. If the goods are only at the stage of showing signs of being counterfeit or infringing intellectual property rights, the matter is routed to Article 13 or Article 14 depending on the specific nature of the conduct. In other words, Article 14a is not the final enforcement branch; it is a mechanism for filtering, classifying, and routing e-commerce cases.
Because this mechanism operates on risk-management principles, the quality of the input data becomes especially important. A well-prepared Article 6 dossier — containing IP rights data, photographs, identifying features, HS codes, lawful parties, and suspicious parties — is not a mandatory legal condition for Article 14a to operate, but it can clearly help the Customs system identify risks earlier and route the case into the correct enforcement branch more quickly. That is why, as e-commerce grows, customs surveillance dossiers can no longer be prepared superficially.
Conclusion
Put simply, if Article 6 is the step of feeding IP rights data into the Customs system, and Article 9 is the tool used to strike at a specific shipment, then Article 10a and Article 14a are the two mechanisms by which Customs may proactively intervene or direct the case into the proper enforcement branch. The earlier a business prepares, the greater its chances of stopping counterfeit goods at the border.
Bross & Partners – a Vietnam-based intellectual property law firm ranked Tier 1 by Legal 500 Asia Pacific, with extensive experience in IP litigation and cross-border enforcement.
For further information, please contact:
🔗 LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/in/lequangvinh | ✉️ vinh@bross.vn | 📞 +84 903 287 057
Zalo: +84 903 287 057 | Microsoft Teams: vinh@bross.vn
🌐 http://www.bross.vn
Leave a Reply