Blue Economy
The Grimaldi’s Public Statement on Sales of Empty Containers: An Investigative Analysis
Grimaldi’s “Foreign Customs Position” Defence — Does It Hold Up?
Verdict: Partially Valid in International Shipping Practice, but Legally Insufficient Under Nigerian Law
By Oghenewoke Osaweren | Waterways News
What Grimaldi Claimed
Grimaldi Agency Nigeria’s defence rests on three interlocking arguments:
- The containers were sold in “foreign customs position” — meaning they were never domesticated into Nigeria’s customs territory.
- The sales invoice expressly preserved this classification, limiting use to international carriage.
- Any duty liability arising from domestication falls entirely on the buyer, not the seller.
Let’s examine each leg against Nigerian customs law and international maritime practice.
PART 1: Is “Foreign Customs Position” a Legitimate International Shipping Concept?
Yes — but with important caveats.
In international shipping, a Shipper Owned Container (SOC) is a cargo container that belongs to a business or freight forwarder rather than the shipping line, giving businesses more control over logistics and helping avoid additional costs tied to carrier-owned containers.
The concept Grimaldi invokes — selling containers in “foreign customs position” for continued use in international trade — is broadly consistent with the SOC framework. Since 2022, SOCs have gained significant popularity and are projected to see continued growth due to their cost-saving benefits and operational advantages.
However, “foreign customs position” is not a magic legal shield. It is a classification that describes the customs status of goods — it does not, by itself, exempt a transaction from Nigerian regulatory obligations. The critical question is whether that classification is valid and enforceable within Nigeria’s legal framework, particularly when the physical goods remain on Nigerian soil.
PART 2: What Does Nigerian Law Actually Say?
This is where Grimaldi’s position becomes legally precarious.
The NCS Act 2023 — The Central Problem
The Nigeria Customs Service Act 2023 is a comprehensive reform of Nigeria’s customs and excise legal framework, repealing the long-standing Customs and Excise Management Act and replacing it with a modern, technology-driven and enforcement-focused statute designed to facilitate legitimate international trade, secure government revenue, and align customs administration with international best practices.
Under this Act, the treatment of shipping containers as temporary imports is explicitly regulated. Empty containers fall under temporary imports, which allow goods into Nigeria for a specific purpose and limited period without full duty payment, on condition that they will be re-exported. Shipping lines bring them in to carry cargo and are expected to take them out empty. They cannot be sold in Nigeria unless converted to permanent import.
Section 36 of the NCS Act 2023 states that temporary goods must be re-exported or converted with duty paid; failure is an offence.
The conversion process is not optional. Under the Nigeria Customs Service Act 2023 and Temporary Import Guidelines, conversion requires: application to NCS, customs valuation, payment of duties, VAT and levies into government accounts, and issuance of a release order. Only then can the container be sold legally in Nigeria, and the transaction must be in Naira unless the CBN grants an exemption.
Grimaldi’s arrangement — transferring title to buyers with the expectation that buyers will handle domestication — skips Steps 1 through 4 of this mandatory process entirely. The shipping line cannot transfer the regulatory burden to a private buyer through a contractual clause when the statutory obligation rests on the importer of record — in this case, the entity that brought the containers into Nigeria under temporary import status.
PART 3: The Dollar-Denominated Sale — A Separate Violation
Beyond the customs question, there is a second serious issue Grimaldi’s statement does not adequately address: the currency of the transaction. The CBN FX Manual 2018, Paragraph 9.01, states that all domestic transactions must be in naira except with CBN exemption, and CBN Circular TED/FEM/FPC/GEN/01/010 (2016) specifies that domiciliary accounts are for foreign inflows, not domestic payments.
Grimaldi’s sale of containers priced in US dollars, with Nigerian buyers paying through domiciliary accounts, appears to directly contravene this regulation. This is a distinct and independent violation from the customs duty question — one that Grimaldi’s statement does not address at all.
PART 4: The Revenue Exposure
Industry experts have quantified what is at stake. Using the 2026 Customs tariff for HS Code 86.09 — comprising 5% import duty, 7.5% VAT, 0.5% ECOWAS ETLS levy, and 4% FOB levy — the government loses approximately $350–$400 in duties and taxes per $2,000 container if sold without conversion. For 2,500 units, the loss amounts to $875,000 to $1,000,000 from one company in one transaction.
In the broader picture, Nigeria may have lost as much as $600 million in customs revenue over the past three decades through the unregulated sale of temporary import shipping containers by foreign shipping lines.
PART 5: What Grimaldi Gets Right — And Where It Falls Short
What is defensible:
Grimaldi is correct that in international shipping practice, containers sold in “foreign customs position” for continued use in cross-border trade can legitimately be transferred without domestication — if they actually leave the country and continue in international commerce. This is a recognised practice globally. The concept of an SOC operating in international trade without re-registering under each country’s domestic regime is commercially standard.
Where the argument collapses in the Nigerian context:
The problem is not what the invoice says — it is what happens on the ground. When containers are advertised for sale to the general Nigerian public, priced for the local market, and purchased by Nigerian buyers who will use them domestically (as shops, cold rooms, storage units, building materials — the well-documented reality of container use in Nigeria), the fiction of “foreign customs position” cannot survive legal scrutiny. The more fundamental issue is that the containers were brought into the country under a temporary import regime and therefore cannot be legally sold without first being converted to permanent import status through Customs.
A contractual clause in a sales invoice shifting duty responsibility to the buyer does not extinguish the seller’s statutory obligation under Nigerian law. Contract law cannot override statutory customs obligations — particularly where the seller is the entity that introduced the goods into Nigeria’s customs territory under temporary import status.
CONCLUSION
Grimaldi’s “foreign customs position” argument carries legitimate weight in pure international maritime doctrine — as a general principle, containers transiting between nations in cross-border trade can retain foreign customs status. However, the argument fails as a complete legal defence under Nigerian law for the following reasons:
- Section 36 of the NCS Act 2023 mandates that temporary import goods either be re-exported or formally converted with duty paid before domestic sale — a process Grimaldi bypassed.
- The temporary import regime places the re-export or conversion obligation on the entity that brought the goods in — the shipping line — not on downstream buyers.
- A contractual clause cannot substitute for statutory compliance. Transferring liability to buyers through an invoice disclaimer does not satisfy NCS Act requirements.
- The dollar-denominated transaction is a separate violation of CBN FX regulations, which Grimaldi’s statement does not address.
- The “international carriage” justification is contradicted by the commercial reality: the containers were advertised for sale to the Nigerian public in a domestic market context, not to international exporters acquiring SOCs for cross-border trade.
Grimaldi’s statement is legally sophisticated but strategically incomplete. It addresses international maritime practice accurately on its own terms, while conspicuously sidestepping the specific obligations imposed by Nigerian domestic law. In investigative terms, that gap is the story.
Blue Economy
Nigeria Eyes €59M EU Fisheries Programme to Tackle IUU Fishing, Strengthen Ocean Governance
Nigeria Eyes €59M EU Fisheries Programme to Tackle IUU Fishing, Strengthen Ocean Governance
Oyetola Meets EU Ambassador in Abuja; Seeks Technical Support for Surveillance and Enforcement
By Ighoyota Onaibre | Waterways News
Nigeria has signalled its intention to fully engage the €59 million West Africa Sustainable Ocean Programme (WASOP), as the Federal Government steps up efforts to combat illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing and advance its blue economy agenda.
The Minister of Marine and Blue Economy, Dr. Adegboyega Oyetola, disclosed this during a high-level meeting in Abuja on Thursday with the European Union Ambassador to Nigeria, Ambassador Gautier Mignot, at which both sides reaffirmed their commitment to deepening maritime cooperation across the Gulf of Guinea.
Dr. Oyetola described WASOP — a major EU-funded initiative spanning West African coastal states — as a timely framework for reinforcing Nigeria’s enforcement capacity, improving ocean governance, and driving sustainable exploitation of marine resources. He called on the EU to scale up technical assistance to Nigeria, particularly in fisheries monitoring, maritime surveillance systems, and enforcement infrastructure.
The Minister left no ambiguity about the scale of the challenge. IUU fishing, he warned, is not merely an environmental concern but a direct assault on national food security and the livelihoods of millions of coastal Nigerians. He described the scourge as a threat to national security and food sovereignty, demanding stronger international collaboration, more aggressive monitoring, and uncompromised enforcement to permanently dismantle illicit fishing operations in Nigerian waters.
Beyond fisheries, Dr. Oyetola urged the EU to broaden its support beyond traditional piracy control to encompass environmental crimes and human trafficking — calling for a more integrated approach to maritime security in the region. He also highlighted reform milestones under Nigeria’s National Policy on Marine and Blue Economy, including improvements in port operations, logistics, and maritime security, while noting the government’s drive to expand maritime infrastructure and sharpen Nigeria’s competitiveness in global trade.
Ambassador Mignot, for his part, reaffirmed Brussels’ commitment to supporting safer and more sustainable oceans in West Africa. He outlined WASOP’s mandate — which covers integrated ocean governance, sustainable fisheries management, and protection of coastal and marine ecosystems — and indicated that the programme would strengthen coordination among coastal states and promote a more inclusive regional blue economy.
The Permanent Secretary of the Federal Ministry of Marine and Blue Economy, Mrs. Fatima Mahmood, and EU Head of Cooperation Massimo De Luca, were among senior officials present at the meeting.
Nigeria Watch
Thursday’s Abuja meeting is a significant diplomatic signal, arriving at a moment when Nigeria’s blue economy ambitions are increasingly colliding with the hard realities of resource depletion, weak enforcement, and institutional capacity gaps. The €59 million WASOP envelope represents one of the most substantial multilateral fisheries governance commitments in the West African sub-region in recent years, and Nigeria’s declared intention to fully leverage it is the right instinct.
Yet the country’s track record in translating international programme commitments into verifiable enforcement outcomes on the water remains a genuine concern. IUU fishing in Nigerian waters — particularly by foreign-flagged vessels exploiting surveillance blind spots — has persisted for years despite successive ministerial declarations. The critical test of this renewed EU engagement will not be measured in memoranda signed or delegations hosted, but in whether WASOP resources ultimately translate into more patrol vessels on the water, more prosecutions on the docket, and more fish in the nets of artisanal fishers along Nigeria’s 853-kilometre coastline.
Minister Oyetola’s push to widen the cooperation agenda beyond piracy — to include environmental crimes and human trafficking — reflects a more mature and realistic understanding of the interconnected nature of maritime insecurity in the Gulf of Guinea. That framing deserves support from both the EU and Nigeria’s domestic institutions. The blue economy cannot be built on depleted seas.
Blue Economy
Afolabi Urges FG to Rescue Eastern Ports, Warns Tin Can Congestion Threatening Port Efficiency
Afolabi Urges FG to Rescue Eastern Ports, Warns Tin Can Congestion Threatening Port Efficiency
By Okeoghene Onoriobe | Waterways News Reporter
The Chairman of SIFAX Group, Dr. Taiwo Afolabi, has thrown his weight behind the urgent rehabilitation and capacity development of Nigeria’s eastern ports, warning that the Federal Government’s prolonged neglect of those facilities is placing unbearable strain on the Lagos port complex and undermining the country’s overall maritime competitiveness.
Afolabi made the call during a high-level courtesy visit by Dr. Akutah Pius Ukeyima, Executive Secretary and Chief Executive Officer of the Nigerian Shippers’ Council (NSC), to SIFAX Group’s corporate headquarters in Lagos.
Dr Taiwo Afolabi, Chairman SIFAX Group
Speaking frankly on the state of Nigeria’s port infrastructure, the maritime industry leader said years of federal inattention to eastern port assets have taken a measurable toll on cargo throughput efficiency across the country.
“My passionate appeal to the government is to extend the port modernisation initiative to the eastern ports. Economic activities at the ports are on the increase year on year,” Afolabi said, stressing that the bulk of that growth is being absorbed almost entirely by the Lagos ports — facilities that were never designed to carry such volumes.
He warned that the resultant pressure has pushed terminal infrastructure to breaking point, with congestion now routinely disrupting cargo flow and hiking costs for importers, exporters and logistics operators alike.
Afolabi was particularly pointed in his assessment of the Tin Can Island Port corridor, describing the gridlock along that axis as a recurring financial burden on businesses, a source of deep frustration for transporters, and a persistent drag on the wider economy.
To ease the crisis, he called on the Federal Government to invest in dredging operations at the Warri, Onne and Calabar ports, enabling larger vessels to safely berth at those facilities and divert traffic away from the already overstretched Lagos port system.
“This is the time for the government to resuscitate those ports in the eastern part of Nigeria. Government needs to dredge the Warri, Onne and Calabar ports so that large vessels can berth there safely and reduce the pressure on the Lagos ports,” he stated.
On his part, NSC’s Ukeyima praised the contributions of SIFAX Group to Nigeria’s maritime economy, describing the conglomerate as one of the country’s foremost maritime investors that has leveraged the industry’s value chain to drive significant national economic growth. He pledged that the Shippers’ Council would deepen its collaboration with SIFAX in the interest of advancing the sector.
NIGERIA WATCH: Tracking this story across government ministries, departments and agencies
Federal Ministry of Marine & Blue Economy — As the supervising ministry for Nigeria’s ports and waterways, the ministry bears direct responsibility for driving the port modernisation agenda that Afolabi says must be extended to eastern port locations including Warri, Onne and Calabar.
Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA) — The NPA is the primary agency responsible for port infrastructure, channel maintenance and berth allocation across all Nigerian ports. Afolabi’s call for dredging at the eastern ports falls squarely within the NPA’s operational mandate.
Nigerian Shippers’ Council (NSC) — Already engaged through the visit of its Executive Secretary Dr. Ukeyima, the NSC has a statutory role in protecting the commercial interests of cargo owners and ensuring port efficiency. The congestion crisis at Tin Can Island Port is a direct concern for the agency.
Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA) — As the regulatory body for maritime safety and shipping, NIMASA has oversight interest in ensuring that port channels — particularly at Warri, Onne and Calabar — are navigable and safe for deep-draught vessels.
Federal Ministry of Works — The chronic gridlock on the Tin Can Island Port access corridor is partly a road infrastructure problem. The ministry’s intervention is needed to complement any port-side decongestion efforts.
Federal Ministry of Finance / Budget & Economic Planning — Capital allocation for dredging operations and eastern port rehabilitation will require budgetary provisions. These ministries must prioritise funding for the port modernisation programme to extend beyond Lagos.
Infrastructure Concession Regulatory Commission (ICRC) — Any concession or private sector partnership arrangement for rehabilitating the eastern ports will require ICRC oversight and approval under Nigeria’s public-private partnership framework
Blue Economy
China Harbour Engineers Begin Feasibility Survey for Proposed Obeaku Seaport, Raising Hopes for South-East Maritime Corridor
China Harbour Engineers Begin Feasibility Survey for Proposed Obeaku Seaport, Raising Hopes for South-East Maritime Corridor
Technical team conducts bathymetric and hydrographic studies in Ukwa East as Abia State pushes to unlock inland port potential
By Onyinyechi Anoweh | Waterways News Correspondent | Aba, Abia State
A technical delegation from China Harbour Engineering Company Limited (CHEC), one of China’s foremost marine infrastructure and port construction firms, has formally commenced feasibility and hydrographic surveys for the long-proposed Obeaku Seaport in Abia State, in what state officials are describing as a defining moment for maritime development in Nigeria’s South-East geopolitical zone.
The survey team, accompanied by senior Abia State Government officials, visited the Ukwa East Local Government Area — the proposed site of the facility — to conduct a comprehensive assessment of the waterways in the area. Activities carried out during the inspection included bathymetric studies to determine water depths, navigational surveys to evaluate vessel access corridors, and environmental and hydrological assessments aimed at establishing the technical viability of developing a functional seaport at the location.
Community Backs Project, Donates Over 2,000 Plots of Land
The survey team was received by the traditional ruler of the host community, the Aku of Obeaku Kingdom, His Royal Highness Eze Ikeagwuchi Ekeke, who used the occasion to reaffirm the community’s unequivocal support for the project. Eze Ekeke disclosed that the Obeaku community has already donated in excess of 2,000 plots of land towards the project’s footprint — a gesture he described as a demonstration of the community’s commitment to seeing the port realised.
The monarch also raised a point of identity that carries broader symbolic weight: he insisted that the facility be officially designated as “Obeaku Seaport,” rather than “Azumini-Obeaku Seaport,” arguing that the naming should reflect the primary host community and affirm the people’s enduring stake in the project’s legacy.
Officials Hail Survey as Strategic Milestone
Abia State Government officials who accompanied the CHEC delegation characterised the commencement of the survey as a critical milestone in a project that has long featured in the state’s economic development aspirations. They noted that a commercially viable seaport at Obeaku would significantly stimulate economic activity across the state, generate employment across logistics, trade, and ancillary maritime services, and — crucially — position Abia State as a gateway hub for maritime commerce in the South-East.
The officials expressed confidence that the feasibility findings would validate the project’s commercial logic and accelerate movement towards the financing and construction phases.
Nigeria Watch
The proposed Obeaku Seaport, if brought to fruition, would represent a significant addition to Nigeria’s emerging inland and coastal port network — and a rare maritime infrastructure breakthrough for the South-East, a region that has historically been underserved by port and logistics infrastructure despite its commercial density and trade volumes.
China Harbour Engineering Company is no stranger to major Nigerian port projects. The firm has been involved in terminal and waterway infrastructure work across West Africa, and its presence here signals that the Abia State initiative is attracting serious commercial attention rather than remaining a political aspiration.
However, Nigeria’s port development landscape is littered with projects that completed feasibility stages without progressing to execution. The more consequential questions — who finances construction, on what terms, and under what regulatory framework — remain unanswered.
The Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA) and the Federal Ministry of Marine and Blue Economy will need to be closely involved if the project is to advance through licensing, environmental impact assessment, and port concession processes.
For Nigeria’s inland waterways sector, the survey also raises the question of dredging and navigational maintenance along the rivers feeding the proposed facility — a domain where the National Inland Waterways Authority (NIWA) plays a central role. Sustained navigability will be as important as the port structure itself.
Waterways News will continue to monitor this project.
Oil and Gas3 months agoTantita’s Pipeline Deal: $144m Contract, Rising Output, and the Questions that Deserve Answers
- MARITIME TRADE & SHIPPING3 months ago
World’s Largest Container Ship Sets New Maritime Record with 22,233 TEUs on Single Voyage
- Blue Economy4 months ago
Nigeria’s Coast Guard Bill: A Solution in Search of a Problem?
