A necessary caveat first: the Joint Administrative Order (JAO) on Yard Utilization and Transparency on Cargo Handling Charge remains a draft. As of this writing, it has just completed its public comment period and still faces final vetting among its eight inter-agency signatories: DOF, DTI, DOTr, BOC, BIR, PPA, MARINA, and the PCC. What follows compares the working versions, not a finished issuance, and every provision cited may still change.
That said, comparing the 2019 original with the latest draft (3 July 2026) reveals a maturing, more defensible regulatory philosophy that addresses one persistent problem: the high, opaque, and often unjustified charges that erode Philippine trade competitiveness.
The 2019 draft swung hard. It sought to suspend all origin and destination charges except internationally recognized ones (Sec. 12.6) until the BOC issued rules – a bold move, but legally fragile under the non-impairment clause and privity of contract. The 2026 drafts pivot to regulated transparency: the BOC standardizes charge nomenclature and ceilings, may disapprove or reduce unjustified increases, and requires DOF concurrence and public consultation before any hike (Sec. 29). Anchoring this on CMTA Sections 202, 701, and 1514, plus the Istanbul Convention on temporary admission, gives the order firmer legal footing and ties charges to customs valuation and revenue. Adding the PCC and MARINA widens enforcement beyond customs alone.
On empty containers, our chronic bottleneck, the 2026 text operationalizes relief. Shipping lines must confirm yard availability within 24 hours; truckers return within 48 hours. If a designated yard rejects a box, the BOC assigns an alternate; the line bears re-routing costs, and no detention may be charged. A penalty matrix (PHP 10,000/day) and a 30% cap on a line’s yard allocation give teeth to what the existing Customs memorandum (CMO 13-2019) lacked.
Container deposits improve markedly. The 2019 three-day refund was aspirational; the realistic 15-day period now applies per container, so one disputed unit no longer holds an entire shipment’s deposits hostage. Indirect liens on unrelated past accounts are expressly prohibited.
On yard utilization, the threshold relaxes from 70% to a more operationally honest 75%, with structured congestion declaration and clear laden-container transfer priorities.
My concerns are threefold. First, nearly all processes depend on BOC’s issuance of implementing rules within 30 days, making any relief contingent on the eventual IRR. Second, the 10% BOC monitoring fee on booking systems risks becoming an additional cost passed on to importers and, eventually, the consumers. Finally, transparency depends on self-reporting of charges; without independent verification, disclosures are unlikely to effectively discipline pricing.
The comment period has closed; we hope stakeholders seized the window and filed their position papers, because the harder work of vetting now begins. The signatories should bring the trade’s sharpest input to that room, because a framework this consequential will be judged not by its drafting but by the rules that follow.
Samuel C. Bautista writes Ask the Customs Wiz column on customs, trade, logistics and workforce development. For your comments, email him – thecustomswiz@gmail.com
PREVIOUS COLUMN: Between the Cargo and the Crisis
