Saturday, 16 October 2021

Terms of Trade or International Commercial Terms (INCOTERMS) ~ ©Prof Archie D'Souza

One of the most common set of terms used in international trade is INCOTERMS; this is short for International Commercial Terms, published by the International Chamber of Commerce and it’s possibly its most-read publication.  It is also perhaps the least understood and most often misrepresented.  Every logistics service provider, and this includes airfreight/ocean freight professionals, and user needs to have a thorough understanding of INCOTERMS. This statement will be oft repeated. The purpose of this booklet is to understand what INCOTERMS are and deal with some myths and misconceptions regarding the same.  Later, we will get into INCOTERM strategy and arrive at how to choose the right INCOTERM.

By the definition an INCOTERM or International Commercial Term is a formalized international term of trade, which specifies the responsibility of the exporter and importer in an international transaction.

Whenever an international sales transaction takes place i.e. when an exporter sells goods to a buyer in a foreign country, there are a host of steps involved in getting the goods to the location required by the buyer.  This happens irrespective of whether the transaction has taken place directly or through an intermediary. So, certain services need to be purchased and fees levied by various authorities and agencies. These have to be paid either by the seller (exporter) or buyer (importer). The study of INCOTERMs is about how these tasks are shared between buyer and seller.

These tasks include:

v  Customs clearance of goods for export

v  Organizing transport of the goods from the point of origin to the location it needs to be delivered, often using more than one mode of transportation. This includes three distinct stages:

Ø  pre-carriage, or pick-up – this is the transportation that takes place in the country of origin/export

Ø  main carriage, i.e. the international transportation between the country of origin (export) and country of destination (import)

Ø  Clearing customs in the importing country

Movement of goods involves a buyer, seller and transporter, with or without an intermediary.  An exporter and importer enter into an agreement under which the responsibility of transportation and/or handling of goods and other formalities passes from one to another with risks also being transferred.  INCOTERMs were for the first time formalized by the International Chamber of Commerce in 1936 and last published before the current edition in 2009. They address some of the problems related to international movement of goods.  It tries to bring clarity and reduces confusion about the duties and responsibilities of the seller and buyer.

INCOTERMS, also called terms of trade, are incorporated in the contract of sale and purchase.  These determine which of the tasks are the responsibility of the exporter and which are the responsibility of the importer.

Some of the questions they address are:

Ø  At what point should the seller deliver the goods?

Ø  At what point are the risks passed from the seller to the buyer?

Ø  In case goods in transit are damaged, pilfered or lost, who takes the liability for the loss?

There are a total of eleven INCOTERMs divided listed in the chart below. Four of them are meant specifically for non-containerized water transport, the other seven are applicable to all modes of transport.  Every INCOTERM starts with one of the following letters; C, D, E and F; or rather E,F, C & D.  Having listed them out we will define each term let us look at some of the misconception about them, their scope, and areas covered and not covered by them.

List of INCOTERMS®

Non-Containerized Water Transport

FAS     -           Free Alongside Ship

FOB    -           Free On Board

CFR    -           Cost & Freight

CIP      -           Cost, Insurance & Freight

Any Mode of Transportation

EXW   -           Ex Works

FCA    -           Free Carrier

CPT     -           Carriage Paid To

CIP      -           Carriage & Insurance Paid To

DAP    -           Delivered at Place

DPU    -           Delivered at Place Unloaded

DDP    -           Delivered Duty Paid

We shall then look at transfer of property or title – whether this is decided by an INCOTERM, their structure, and the primary responsibilities of different parties under various terms.

After dealing with this, we shall delve into how to choose the right INCOTERM.  Looked at in a proper perspective they can be a powerful tool in buyer/seller contracts, leading to a win-win situation.

INCOTERMs deal with the relationship between seller and buyer under a contract of sale.  The distinct areas they deal with include:

Ø  Provision of goods in conformity with the contract and paying the price of the same.

Ø  Procuring licenses, authorization and formalities.

Ø  Entering into a contract of carriage and procuring insurance as may be necessary.

Ø  Point of delivery of goods, i.e. the transfer of responsibility from seller to buyer.

Ø  Transfer of risks from seller to buyer.

Ø  Division of costs between the buyer and seller.

Ø  Notice to the buyer or seller.

Ø  Proof of delivery, transport documents either paper or electronic.

Ø  Checking the packing, marking etc.

The whole arrangement of INCOTERMs is based on the above heads.  Each term defines the precise obligation of the seller and buyer.  It helps give precise understanding of the objectives of the parties to the contract.  Finally, it minimizes, if not totally eliminates the space for confusion or dispute.

In spite of their clarity, misconceptions do exist about their applicability.  INCOTERMs apply to the contract of sale and not their carriage.  They do not provide for all the duties and responsibilities which parties may wish to include in a contract of sale.

As just indicated, INCOTERMS deal with the contract of sale, they do not cover carriage, insurance and finance.  However, when parties agree on the use of a particular INCOTERM, there would be implication for other contracts.  For example, a CIF/CIP or CFR/CPT contract cannot be performed without a contract of carriage.  Under these terms, the seller must present to the buyer a bill of lading, air waybill, or any other transportation document, depending on the mode of transport used.  This is also important from the point of view of documentary credit. Here, documents required would invariably depend upon the means of transport which may be used in a particular transaction.

INCOTERM, therefore, identify the obligation that various parties to a transaction have; for example, the seller’s obligation to place goods at the disposal of the buyer; or hand them over for carriage; or deliver them at the destination.  They further deal with the obligation to clear the goods for export/import, the packing, the obligation to take delivery and to provide proof of any complied with respective obligations.  Thus, these terms deal with issues which are extremely important for the implementation of the contract of sale.  Although INCOTERMs are primarily intended for use in international trade they are also widely used in domestic sales and purchasers.

It should be noted that INCOTERMs do not cover all possible legal or transport issues arising out of an international sale.  What the terms do is specify the following:

Ø  The portion of the transportation cost shared between buyer and seller.

Ø  The point at which the risk of loss will be transferred from the buyer to seller.

Ø  The party responsible for handling of customs formalities and dues, including customs duties, payable at the origin and/ or destination.

Ø  Seller’s responsibility for providing insurance cover in case stipulated by the buyer.

Areas not covered under INCOTERMs include:

Ø  Transfer of ownership and property rights.

Ø  Breach of contract and the consequences flowing from such breach     

Ø  Exemption of liability in certain situations.

These areas need to be taken care of by providing for specific stipulation in the contract of sale under the applicable law.  It is therefore prudent to include in the sale contract precise details on the exact place and method of delivery, loading and unloading charges, extent of insurance and mode of transport.

The ICC reviews INCOTERMS from time to time to ensure that they reflect and respond to current trade practices and trends. INCOTERMS 2020 is the ninth revision of INCOTERMS since their inception in 1936. By definition, INCOTERMS are a series of internationally recognized standardized trade terms published by the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) and widely used in international sales.

Let us look at what they cover.  In simple layman’s terms they cover the following:

Ø  Who does what

Ø  Who pays for what

Ø  When do risks pass from seller to buyer

Ø  When delivery occurs

In addition to the above, INCOTERMS also cover such issues as insurance, export & import clearance and the division of other costs pertaining to the delivery of goods. We've already seen what they don't cover. Besides those points there's nothing on ownership/title to the goods, nothing in detail on payment obligations, viz. when, how, what security, against what documents or for that matter nothing on detailed vessel requirements, force majeure, termination, insolvency, etc. In short, INCOTERMS do not constitute a complete contract of sale. However, they provide convenient internationally recognized rules for the sale of goods.

Now we shall look at how they are used.  INCOTERMS are incorporated into many contracts by express reference.  E.g. DAP one safe berth (please note the full address of the location must be mentioned) Rotterdam, INCOTERMS 2020.  They may be referred to in standard format contracts.  They may also provide some guidance as to the generally accepted meaning of trade terms such as CIF/FOB/DAP.  However, it is important that one expressly refers to them if one wants them to apply. Logistics services purchasers and service providers need to understand each INCOTERM. Let us look at this aspect of international movement of goods.

INCOTERMS ® Strategy

How do buyers and sellers arrive at a decision on what INCOTERM to use either in a single transaction or as a general policy? This is generally contingent upon the strategy followed by the exporting company (the seller). However, the decisions are jointly arrived at by the buyer and seller at the conclusion of their negotiation process. These decisions are somewhat constrained by the following parameters:

·         The type of commodity being sold: Sellers and buyers in certain industries prefer using one particular term over the others. E.g. sellers of iron ore, fertilizers and cement, besides some other commodities, prefer FOB over CFR and CIF

·         The mode of transport: Four terms, FAS, FOB, CFR and CIF refer specifically to non-containerized water transport, i.e. bulk, break-bulk, barge, etc. These four are the oldest surviving INCOTERMs with buyers and sellers preferring these over the other seven, even though the seven don't exclude these modes

·         The size and dimensions of packages (this applies to uncrated machinery and equipment as well): Depending on whether commodities are packed in small packager (e.g. corrugated boxes, small sized drums/jerry cans, etc), large crates or uncrated; depending on whether the same is containerized or not, different INCOTERMS are used and modes also differ

·         The ability for either party to perform certain tasks

·         The willingness to perform the tasks despite the ability

·         The ability, through volumes, to negotiate favourable rates with carriers and other service providers

·         The amount of trust that the party has over another; also, the mutual trust or lack of it.

Before we proceed with INCOTERMs strategy there's a question often asked:

Can a shipment have multiple INCOTERMs rules? INCOTERMs rules have now become the standard in international business rules and recognized by UNCITRAL as the global standard for the interpretation of most common terms in international trade. Though this version has come into effect from January 1, 2020, all contracts agreed upon under previous versions are still valid. The answer to the question asked is an extremely simple and emphatic no.  One cannon have multiple INCOTERMS for any shipment. So, another question asked is ~ what about master prepaid and house collect? This will be answered when we discuss the features of each INCOTERM.

Can a single shipment have multiple buyers and sellers? In a sea shipment, it is possible that one can use a negotiable bill of lading, with the consignee box left blank or the words to order put. This cannot be done for an air shipment. We have seen what the term non-negotiable means and also looked at the shipper's right of disposition where it's very clear that the air waybill is not a document of title. The consignee can only be changed by the shipper before the consignee picks up the documents. In case of a negotiable bill of lading however, the consignee may endorse the BL to another person. Non-air shipments may have multiple buyers and sellers while in transit. This is called string sales. This happens is when the first seller, the original shipper, can sell the goods to the first buyer, in what is turned as sale on high seas. This buyer, in turn, may sell to a second buyer and the string continues. Risks too are passed for the new seller to the next buyer. There is no limit to the number of sellers and buyers who may be involved in multiple transactions.

Who pays for the various services purchased? One needs to remember, that regardless of the INCOTERM used, ultimately the importer is the one who is paying for the same because pricing would depend on the term used and place of delivery. Just because the exporter is prepaying and making arrangements for certain services doesn't mean that the burden of these costs will be on them. The final invoice for the commodity sold will incorporate all these costs. Often, the exporter may even mark up this cost and thus increase their margins.

However, in most cases, the exporter chooses the INCOTERM to be used. They stick to their decisions for various reasons which we've already discussed when dealing with the role of freight forwarders. They find it either difficult or bothersome to adapt to the requirements of the importer. It may also entail them to perform certain tasks that they prefer not to perform. They don't mind losing business but prefer to stick to their guns. Ultimately, it is a joint decision.

Very often the choice becomes a crucial decision for the company involved. It could be because  it is an integral part of the company's export strategy. It could also be, as seen in iron ore exports, the exporters' reluctance to perform certain service due to a lack of trust or an inability to leverage deals with carriers.

Before listing out the INCOTERMs and discussing them in further detail let us look at the various steps that an international shipment takes from the exporter's premises to the importer's premises. Often, it may involve delivery to a bonded or non-bonded warehouse/terminal. It could involve delivery at a road border crossing. Although our emphasis is on ocean and, to some extent air, we'll be taking a cursory glance at other modes as well. Even for air shipments often, delivery takes place at a land terminal, especially in the United States.

The following are the steps involved:

1.      Packing for international carriage: This includes labelling, marking and numbering the packages. More than 95% of commodities require some form of external packing, the few exceptions being commodities like iron ore, coal, etc. and un-crated items like granite blocks, locomotives, massive pieces of equipment, etc. Packaging is a topic we'll be dealing with in detail

2.      Loading cargo on the conveyance provided: This could be a pick-up truck, a courier who picks up small packages from the exporter's desk, a marine container, or any other type of conveyance used.

3.      Inland carriage from the exporter's premises to a terminal at a port, airport, inland container or any place from where the first part of international carriage takes place. This could be termed a pre-carriage or pick-up

4.      Customs clearance for exports: This includes preparation of all documents required for the purpose. Documentation is a topic we'll be dealing with in detail. Also, payment of terminal charges, export duties and other statutory levies, etc.

5.      Loading cargo on to a vessel: This applies only to non-containerized water transportation

6.      Main international carriage: This includes arranging for space in a flight/voyage, arranging for a container and liaising with a container liner/steamer agent, arranging for a vessel, etc. and paying for carriage.

7.      Purchase of insurance

8.      Unloading cargo from the vessel: Like #5 above, this applies only to non-containerized water transportation

9.      Import clearance

10.  Payment of Import Duty

11.  Destination delivery

There could be two possible extremes here. One, where the cargo is picked up at the exporter's premises by the importer's representative. Here, the importer has only to make the cargo and available to the exporter's nominated agent or carrier who will take care of all formalities and tasks till the cargo is delivered at the importer's premises. The other extreme is where the exporter arranges delivery of the cargo at the importer's premises after paying all duties and levies. This graphic will give a clear picture on how these tasks and costs are shared between sell and buyer.

So, lets us start with the first extreme and we'll end with the second. As stated, all INCOTERMS start with one of these letters: E, F, C & D. The terms are about sharing of tasks/responsibility/payments of services and transferring of risks and responsibilities, not about transfer of title. So, depending on how these are shared under different INCOTERMs, the point of transfer is decided. Under terms starting with E & F, this point is somewhere in the country of origin while, under terms starting with C & D, it is in the destination country. So, let's look at each of the terms.

EX WORKS (EXW)

The term should be used with the following syntax:

            EXW - 33, Peenya Industrial Estate, Bangalore 560077, India, INCOTERMs 2020

The address stated is the exact location at which the merchandise will be made available to the buyer's representative. A full address has to be mandatorily stated. Stating Bangalore factory or Peenya warehouse isn't allowed.

Here the exporter informs the importer as soon as the cargo is ready. The latter then arranges to pick the same up at the former's premises with all formalities being taken care of by the importer. This, obviously, is the easiest term for the seller with the opposite being true for the importer. To be able to complete all the formalities the buyer must necessarily have a network of service providers in the exporting country who will be able to render the necessary services. The seller ought to cooperate with the buyer's representative and make available all documents, copies of licenses and whatever else is required for customs clearance and transportation.

While the term is meant for all modes of transportation, it is ideally suited for small consignments that can be picked up by a courier agency.

Transfer of risks and responsibility takes place once the cargo is loaded in the vehicle provided by the buyer's representative and necessary documents transferred.

FREE CARRIER (FCA)

Syntax:

FCA - ICD Bangalore - Container Corporation of India Ltd. Inland     Container Depot, Whitefield Road, Bangalore-560066, India -          INCOTERMs 2020

The goods have to be customs cleared and handed over to the nominated carrier. They could be stuffed in a container at the exporter's premises, an airport/inland CFS/port, etc., generally close to the exporter's premises. However, in certain cases, it may be in a neighbouring state or country. For example, an exporter from Mysore may be asked to clear the cargo at Mumbai airport, even though Bangalore may be closer and more convenient.

Transfer of risk and responsibility takes place once the cargo is handed over to the carrier after making it ready for carriage.     

FREE ALONGSIDE SHIP (FAS)

Syntax:

FAS - Belikere Jetty #6, Beilkere, Dist Uttar Kannada, Karnataka,       India - INCOTERMS 2020

Cargo has to be delivered at the designated jetty or anchorage point at the port of origin, after customs clearance.

Transfer of risk and responsibility takes place once the cargo is kept at the disposal of the carrier nominated by the importer and ready for loading on the vessel. This is ideally meant for delivery at a port where no equipment for loading cargo on the vessel is available. The vessel should be equipped with the necessary facilities to load the cargo.

FREE ON-BOARD (FOB)

Syntax:

            FOB - Jetty #12 New Mangalore Port, Karnataka, India -          INCOTERMS 2020

Here the exporter has to get the cargo loaded on a vessel arranged for by the importer at the designated port at the port of origin. Loading charges are on the exporter's account.

Transfer takes place once all the cargo is loaded on the vessel and the master of vessel signs for it.

CARRIAGE PAID TO (CPT)

 Syntax:

            CPT - Frankfurt Airport, Frankfurt, Germany - INCOTERMS 2020

The exporter has to pay the freight charges and ensure that the cargo is delivered at an airport/port or terminal at a designated place in the country of destination. Customs clearance for import.

Transfer takes place once the cargo is handed over to the first carrier.

CARRIAGE AND INSURANCE PAID TO (CIP)

Exactly identical to CPT except for the fact that purchase of insurance is on the exporter's account. It differs slightly from the same term in the 2010 edition. How, will be seen in the next unit.

COST AND FREIGHT (CFR)

Identical to CIP but applicable only to non-containerized water transportation

COST, INSURANCE AND FREIGHT (CIF)

 Identical to CIP but applicable only to non-containerized water transportation

DELIVERED AT PLACE (DAP)

Syntax:

DAP - National Warehousing Company, 330, Whitefield Industrial      Estate, Bangalore 560077, India

Here cargo has to be delivered at a place designated by the importer, generally a bonded warehouse because the onus on customs clearing the goods and payment of duty is on the importer.

DELIVERED AT PLACE UNLOADED (DPU)

This is a new term introduced in the 2020 version with the term DAT - Delivered at Terminal having been removed. Almost identical to DAP but here the cargo remains in the delivery vehicle.

DELIVERED DUTY PAID (DDP)

This, as we have seen, involves all tasks to be performed by the exporter, including import customs clearance and payment of duty. The exporter has to complete all formalities, pay the duty and deliver the cargo to the buyer at its premises. Transfer takes place when the cargo is delivered.


Now that we've described the eleven INCOTERMS let's see what has changed between INCOTERMS 2010 and 2020. We need to understand this because many contracts will still continue to be performed under the previous edition.

What has Changed between INCOTERMS® 2020 and 2010

We've already seen that the ICC reviews and updates the INCOTERMS periodically. For close to half a century this has been happening every ten years, with previous one being published in 2010, 2000, 1990, &c. These changes are necessary so the ICC could respond to market conditions and ensure that they are relevant and suitable to the current situation on international and domestic trade. The changes made in this edition address various issues. Among them are the increased security requirements, improved clarity on cost allocation and the need to tackle insurance concerns that were hitherto not looked into. One should note that, as we've stated already, contracts referring to previous versions of the INCOTERMS Rules are still valid. Each order is governed by the version that was referred to in the contract of sale and purchase. If the contract doesn't mention which version of the terms are referred to, i.e. the specific year is not mentioned, then, in case of a dispute, the version in force at the time of contracting will automatically apply. Using the latest version is a best practice in international trade.

So, let us look at what the changes are between the 2010 and 2020 versions.

1.      Bills of Lading/Sea Waybills/Air Waybills

The term FOB, i.e. Free on Board is meant and designed for non containerized water transportation. It should be used for carriage only in bulk, break-bulk vessels and barges, not for containerized cargo. The main reason why FOB should not be used for containerized cargo and air consignments is that the seller usually loses control of their cargo one the consignment reaches arrives at the airport/port/inland terminal and handed over to the first carrier ready for carriage. Under FOB terms the risk and responsibility is with the seller till the cargo is loaded onboard the vessel. FCA is the term that should be used for other modes of transport.   

Many logistics professionals continue mentioning FOB instead of FCA. Often a letter of credit (LC) may specify the need for an on-board bill of lading or a departure certificate. An on-board BL is only issued by the container liner once cargo is loaded on the vessel. Similarly, a departure certificate is issued by the issuing carrier of an air shipment after it's been loaded on board its flight. This is needed whenever the first carrier is not the issuing carrier.

2.      Insurance under CIF and CIP

Under CIP & CIF the seller is not only responsible to deliver the goods to the carrier after customs clearance but is also has the responsibility of purchasing international carriage and insurance. INCOTERMS 2020 has retained the same level of insurance under CIF but has increased it under CIP. The responsibility of purchasing insurance under these terms lies with the seller. The reasoning behind this is that CIF is mainly used for raw materials while CIP for manufactured goods.. The latter require a higher level of cover. While negotiating price, the parties must consider whether additional insurance cover is required. Risk management and insurance will be dealt with in detail.

3.      DAT (Delivered at Terminal) has been changed to DPU (Delivered at Place Unloaded

The term DAT referred to delivering the goods unloaded at a named terminal. This has limited the place of delivery to a terminal. Now the reference to the terminal has been removed. The result is that it has become more general. Under DPU goods may be delivered to the consignee at any named place, not necessarily a terminal. This has taken away unnecessary ambiguities. No other change has taken place. If DAT was being used so far, it needs to be changed to DPU.

4.      Security Requirements

Events keep taking place, even post September 11, 2001, resulting  in more stringent security requirements. INCOTERMs 2020 reflects these changes by detailing security requirements for each term. Non-compliance by either party could result in cost increases and delayed transit.

Besides the above changes, the ICC has added, considering the fact that we live in the digital age, a brand-new matrix comparison tool. This makes is easier and faster for users to be able to identify the right tool for their transactions. This, they say, helps even the lay user.

Incorrect use of INCOTERMS and their Consequences

It's been 84 years since INCOTEERMs were first published. INCOTERMs 2020 is its thirteenth edition. However, to date there is plenty of confusion with even senior representatives from buyers, sellers, traders, freight forwarders, shipping lines and other service providers involved in the business of international trade not having a clear understanding of them. At times a wrong term is used. It is essential that every person involved in global trade learn and periodically relearn them. Among the most common errors in their usage is the use of terms used in domestic trade. Many countries, including the USA, have different interpretations for terms using the same nomenclature for domestic movements as for international ones. A term FOB factory, for example, used in domestic movements there is used in domestic trade. There are other reasons why incorrect terms are used. Here are some of them:

The most common among these is the inappropriate INCOTERM use for a given mode of transport, e.g. CIF Bangalore Airport or FOB Bangalore Airport. FOB is term for non-containerized water transport and nor air. The FOB point can never therefore be an airport. It was designed for ocean, coastal or inland waterways, for carriage by bulk & break-bulk vessels, barges, etc. It is only suitable when the exporter has the ability and willingness to get the cargo loaded on-board the vessel and, of-course, the port of origin has the necessary facilities for the job to be carried out. The buyer has to make arrangements for the vessel to reach the port or origin. Risks and responsibilities pass from seller to buyer when all the cargo is loaded on board the vessel. It is not to be used for any other means of transport including containerized cargo moving by ship. For these modes FCA is the right term.  

However, incorrect usage tends to continue. It is still quite prevalent worldwide. This incorrect usage results in sellers and buyers being exposed to unnecessary risks. There is also a danger of extra costs being borne nor no reason whatsoever. The representatives of users and service providers lack a clear understanding of how costs are shared between seller and buyer reinforcing the need for beginners' training and refresher courses.  

Incorrect version of the INCOTERMs® Rules. It is recommended that the current edition, rather than an old one, be used. The version of the INCOTERMs Rules ought to, as far as possibly, be incorporated into the contract. In its absence, the current ones apply as a default. So, they need to be aware of the changes.

INCOTERMs Rules very clearly lays out the allocation of costs along with risks and responsibilities between the seller and buyer. Yet, very often, disputes and disagreements arise. The reason for this is the lack of a clear understanding among those involved. For example, discussion goes on about who bears the cost of the issuance of a bill of lading or charter party. Often disputes arise over certain statutory costs such as terminal handling charges (THC) or other port levies.

Under CIF and CIP, insurance is on the shipper's account. However, what is the type of cover to be taken? Both parties need to arrive at a clear-cut understanding on the nature of cover to be taken. The rules do state the minimum coverage needed. Insurance will be dealt with in detail later in the course. A lack of understanding of what exactly is required can lead to a cost dispute or shipping delays or both. 

As stated repeatedly, it is always appropriate to mention the version of the INCOTERMs Rules being applied. This is more so during the first two years of the currency of the INCOTERMs Rules. Although, if the year of publication isn't mentioned by default it should be the current version, it could be open by a judge or arbitrator, if one of the parties has hired a smart lawyer. This could result in further escalation of costs. Also, there is danger that cargo could be stuck indefinitely in a vessel or port.

Users and service providers need to understand that the rules are not geographically specific. It's extremely important that there is geographic precision when deciding on the place of delivery at the destination or even the pickup point at the origin. That is why, since INCOTERMs Rules 2010 came into force, the syntax has to mention the detailed postal address of the pickup or delivery point. FCA Bangalore or CIP Mumbai isn't enough. In an FOB transaction, not specifying the exact terminal and jetty, may result in cargo having to be moved from one place to another resulting in unnecessary costs. So, it goes without saying, the geographic precision is absolutely necessary.  

Lack of a clear-cut understanding as to what is allowed and what is not is very much a possibility. Also, they may not understand what the rules do and what they don't. The consequences could be disastrous. Everyone ought to understand that, though the INCOTERM to be used is mentioned in the contract for sale and purchase, it, in itself, isn't. Neither is it a contract for sale and purchase nor does it apply to specific cargoes. It does not specify the time, place method or currency of payment for the goods. Even the freight amount along with the terms and currency of payment (for the freight) is not specified here. This is an agreed deal between the carrier and the party who's paying the freight.

There is often a grave danger of choosing a term that does not suit the business. Before entering into a contract, buyers and sellers, must understand that there are, in all likelihood, big differences in the way business is done in different countries and accordingly arrive at an understanding. To cite an example, DDP places the onus of customs clearance at the destination, import duty payment and delivery on the exporter. The seller's representative at the destination must the requirements and be confident that they can undertake all the needed responsibilities to complete the task. Failure to do so could jeopardize the transaction and future business as well. Looking at the other extreme, EXW places full responsibility on the importer once cargo is handed over to their representative at their premises. Whoever is doing the work must be clear on what the formalities on both sides are.

To conclude our discussion on the incorrect use of INCOTERMS and their consequences, we need to know, that purpose behind the initial creation of INCOTERMs and their regular revision has been to address the risk of misunderstanding and unnecessarily expensive disputes in domestic and international trade. If a contract has not been properly drafted problems could arise. With every generation, trade volumes have been growing and, with it, their complexity. The ICC has done the trading communities across the globe a great service by publishing them. According to them, INCOTERMs Rules seek to  “offer a simpler and clearer presentation of all the rules, featuring revised language, an expanded introduction, explanatory notes, and articles reordered to better reflect the logic of a sale transaction."

Users need to have a clear understanding of what it means when the three-letters referring to the INCOTERM for that particular movement or set of movements are incorporated into a contract. There can be very grave consequences if an incorrect term is used. INCOTERMs reflect business-to-business practices in contracts for sale and purchase. They also describe the responsibilities of buyer and seller with regard to carriage, documentation, customs clearance, etc. They are very clear about the point at which risks and responsibilities get transferred from seller to buyer. They also state who bears what costs.

Users also need to understand that INCOTERMS don't decide on the transfer of title.  To conclude we'll see how they can be used as a marketing tool.

We've repeatedly discussed that the principal criteria to be considered when a particular INCOTERM is agreed upon is the willingness of either party to perform their part of the contract and the willingness to pay for the services purchased, i.e. the tasks involved in moving the shipment from the exporter's to the importer's premises. The exporter could be dealing with a first-time importer, or vice versa. In either case, the exporter and importer could gain a strategic advantage in the sale of the product. We have also seen how companies with huge global operations can leverage their shipping volumes to negotiate better deals with carriers and international forwarders. They are in a better position, whether acting as a buyer or seller, to perform all or most of the tasks involved in their sale and purchase.

In most cases, the exporter does not look at each and every shipment individually to consider what INCOTERM to use. Generally, the company will have a policy, depending on various factors. As we've seen in the Bosch case, the company which has multiple manufacturing operations across the globe, changed from leaving the decision to local manager to their centralized logistics department. This was a change of strategy through which they could leverage their worldwide volumes and consolidate them. They did this by calling for international bids. Forwarders take part in these bids by responding to RFQs. Obviously, only those forwarders with a well spread-out international operations and a strong presence in the locations where Bosch operates from or has vendors will be able to take part. GE and Tyco Electronics also follow a system of international bids, although the latter leaves certain decisions to the local offices.

Having said this, we need to remember that it is impossible for an exporter to adapt its INCOTERMs strategy to accommodate every importer's requirements. This will result in the exporter having to perform tasks that it would rather not want to perform. Another point is that certain services like customs clearance entail handing over to the customs broker (CHA in India) documents which reveal confidential information of the client [Gokuldas Exports case]. This can be solved by asking the client's own customs broker to complete the formalities and bill the international forwarder instead of the client. So, it often makes sense to be a bit flexible in approach. Of course, there are exporters who say they'd rather lose business that deal with unknown forwarders.

Still, arriving at a decision to choose the right INCOTERM is very crucial for any business organization. [more cases from the garment industry] Most garment buying houses in Europe and America prefer to nominate their own forwarder so they can avoid dealing with multiple parties. An exporter having multiple clients has to deal with the situation. Another situation that we repeatedly encounter is delays in production resulting in sea shipments being converted to air with the exporter having to bear the additional cost. This would result in a change of INCOTERMs for that particular or a set of shipments. Exporters prefer to pay the extra freight rather than losing out on future orders.

Not just the choice of INCOTERM, whether for an individual shipment or as a general rule, a crucial decision for the business organization, it is also an important factor in providing the level of customer service it wishes to render. It this becomes an integral part of its export strategy.

Therefore, when one looks at it from this perspective, it makes a great deal of sense for their personnel to master expertise in international logistics and be prepared, with the help of 3PL service providers, to include as many of the logistics functions as possible, especially at the country of origin. Every exporter wishes to increase their sales. Therefore, they need of offer their clients the services they wish for. They need to, at the beginning at least, offer the most customer friendly INCOTERM. Therefore, they need to use the services of the most competent and competitively priced freight forwarder. As we've seen, the forwarding business itself has become very competitive owing to the increase in the number of players. This has resulted in them working on wafer-thin margins often at unreasonable terms. Of course, the importers may be willing to, in due course, take care of more and more services at the destinations. It may do so using the services of the exporter's forwarder itself. So, from 'D' terms they would shift to 'C' or 'F' terms. The ideal situation would be where the exporter gives the importer a choice of terms to choose from as illustrated in the following illustration:

EXW

FCA    Air       Bangalore Airport

FCA    Sea       Our factory

CIP      Air       LHR airport

CIP      Sea      Your factory at London

DAP    Air       Your factory at London

DAP    Sea      Your factory at London

No figures have been given. This is just an illustration to state what alternatives can be offered to the potential buyer. The latter could make their own inquiries and decide on which terms to use.          

How to choose the right Incoterm and Method of Payment

Terms of Trade and Terms of Payment are two points that an exporter an importer must agree upon.  The Terms of Trade decides which costs the exporter will pay, which the importer will pay and the point at which the responsibility shifts from the former to the latter.  This is determined by the Incoterm chosen.  The terms of sale under which the transaction is performed specifies the point at which the exporter gets paid.  However, one issue still exists for the importer and exporter to consider.  It is the currency under which the transaction is undertaken.

However, there are some points that need to be looked at before we come to the point.  What we have dealt with so far has been more from an exporter's than an importer's perspective.  With international purchases of raw materials and components increasing, importers need also to be guided on parking.  The following are tips that an importer will find useful in international purchases:

1.       List out your needs and find out who can fulfil them

2.       Choose a good customs expert, a CHA or a Customs Consultant.  You may save huge amounts in duty and storage charges if the right advise is given.

3.       Manage your documents.  Ensure that you have the right papers before the consignment reaches its destination.  Improper documentation could lead to     delays in clearance and unnecessary storage charges.

4.       Know your rights.  Even if the documentation is not complete goods could be moved from airport or CFS to a bonded area where the storage charges are much less.

5.       Use a bank that will give a good exchange rate.  With the right bankers you could save huge amounts in your foreign exchange remittances.  Also, if you have an open account system with your suppliers, make remittances when the rates are low.

6.       Get as many quotes as possible, with different possible incoterms.  Look for hidden costs.  Most freight forwarders, when they do not know a figure, put a term at actuals.  It is advisable to know what actuals are.

 

Thursday, 14 October 2021

How Blockchain Technology Coupled with IoT will Eliminate Counterfeiting ~ Prof Archie D'Souza

Counterfeiting has, for a long time, been a menace in the economy that needs to be eliminated. Blockchain technology, coupled with the internet of things, has the potential to do so or be a catalyst in eliminating counterfeit products and tracking freight. According to a study conducted by the US government, the cost of counterfeiting is upward of $250 billion annually. That figure translates into lost revenue to legitimate designer businesses and their employees — and, as a consequence, lost jobs. [see: What's wrong with buying counterfeit goods? | ShareAmerica]. Blockchain brings in traceability and thus enables users to track raw materials/components and finished products from source to consumption point. Let’s see how.

Traceability is all-inclusive. It’s more than just tracking products from factory to consumer. It also includes procurement and reverse logistics processes. These could be reclamation of raw materials and metals from old products, which, through blockchain technology may be enhanced in value. Blockchain technology documents the origin of a product prior to manufacturing which eliminates uncertainty in the supply chain.

Businesses have been battling counterfeiters since the time trade and commerce originated. Companies have been investing significant time and resources to guard against the risk of defective and fake parts entering the production system. Clever look-alikes and reverse-engineered goods have for centuries been stealing sales. Despite public knowledge of the same, for much of that time, sellers – other than those that make the counterfeits – and buyers have been forced to operate in the dark. The fact that data is fragmented make networks, and sourcing arrangements difficult to trace and authenticate. Two technologies have the potential to change the situation. These will throw a great deal of light on the menace. They will give manufacturers and stakeholders the ability to trace any kind of fraudulent activity. What we’re referring to are advances in blockchain-with-IoT. They’ll enable instant counterfeit detection and provide at-a-glance visibility, tracing, and recording of provenance data from source to sale, and beyond. However, the scale of the benefits will vary across businesses. Blockchain with IoT could be a source of significant financial and competitive advantage for many.

The Toll that Counterfeiting Exacts

Counterfeiting is known to be a massive economic problem. It results in billions of dollars in lost revenues for business each year. It also exposes individuals and corporations to heightened health, safety, and even cybersecurity risks from fraudulent materials and defective parts. It is estimated that within the global pharmaceuticals space, between $75 billion and $200 billion in counterfeit drugs are sold each year. In the electronics industry, fake parts cost component manufacturers about $100 billion annually. In the European luxury goods market, about 10% of all items for sale are counterfeited, representing approximately $28 billion in lost value. Because of its reach, the impact of counterfeiting is very pernicious. Counterfeiting affects every stage of the product life cycle, from the manufacturing floor to the point of sale, to the servicing function and beyond. It ends up driving up costs, eroding revenues, and damaging company reputations and brands. Companies do invest a significant time and money tracking parts, validating provenance, communicating with partners, and filling out copious documentation to ensure the authenticity of their products, protect customers, and satisfy regulatory and compliance demands. The challenges—and the areas in which blockchain and IoT can help—extend across the five major stages of the product life cycle.

Let’s now see how exactly it’s done in each of the following areas in the production and distribution system. To begin with, let’s look at the magnitude of the problem.

Procurement and Production: Manufacturers – large, medium and small – usually lack the visibility very essential to verify the authenticity of components/raw materials and the ability to trace them back to their source. This problem is exacerbated by lengthy, complex global supply chains, varying data and quality control checks across entire vendor bases. To add to the problem, one seen a growing list of regulatory and compliance requirements. Fake and defective parts add to the risks faced and lead to increases in cost. Whether the use of these spurious materials is inadvertent or deliberate, counterfeit components during the manufacturing process can compromise product quality, leading to recalls, lawsuits, attrition, and long-term reputational harm. There are no statistics available to determine the magnitude of the menace of fake electronic components being installed in products. However, it’s known and acknowledged.

Sales: Labels are often cleverly manipulated and on reverse-engineered products making it impossible for consumers and difficult for manufacturers to spot counterfeit goods. How will they then be able to prove provenance? Several fast-moving consumer goods are contract manufactured. This compounds the problem. What makes it more challenging is the rapid growth of third-party and online retail channels. While these channels make it easier for bad actors to get products to market, it becomes harder for legitimate brands and retailers to track illicit activity. Counterfeit Nike Air Jordan sneakers or products of other leading brands are available in several markets across India and other parts of the world. Even the United States hasn’t been spared. This obviously leads to trillions of dollars in lost revenues for these companies. the consumer durable goods market or industrial space haven’t been spared either, not even defence. In the aerospace and industrial machinery sectors, for instance, uncertain provenance can cause significant downtime if counterfeit products are determined to have entered the service chain. These need to be tracked down and replaced. Several counterfeiters also target aftermarket goods. They take advantage of the fact that here, in the secondary markets, evading detection is so much easier. It isn’t just the lost revenues that’s the problem. Brands also suffer irreparable damage to their reputations when customers buy what they believe are genuine parts but turn out to be counterfeits. They get disappointed when the inferior substitutes don’t work well as expected.

After-Sales and Support: Counterfeits definitely will lead to surges in service requests, unnecessary replacements, which could turn out to be expensive, and skewed customer satisfaction figures. It’s certainly accepted that invalid support requests consume time and money. They make it extremely difficult for a company to isolate and address genuine problems in a timely fashion. Brand issues are also at stake. A company, well aware that the product is fake, may still entertain the related service requests. They’ll do it in the spirit of providing a superior customer experience. This is needed to maintain their reputation. Of course, they may need to explain the reason for the service issue to their customers. This may be the only to safeguard the company’s reputation.

Having looked at the problem, let’s see what the solution is.

how BLOCKCHAIN technology combines WITH IOT TRACKS the GENEALOGY of products END-TO-END

IoT & blockchain technology when combined provide us first with unique identification plus traceability, and also a tamperproof chain of custody information. By pairing them one creates a shared, distributed ledger capable of recording the origin, location, and ownership of raw materials/components and finished products at every stage of the value and supply chain. It gives manufacturers, partners, and customers the transparency and authentication they are looking for and need so badly. The two together, because of blockchain technology’s unique ability to immutably track and share genealogy across multiple stakeholders, can totally prevent counterfeiting in ways that traditional technologies have never been able to.

The best way to thwart counterfeiting is for suppliers and manufacturers to join a single blockchain platform and use smart tags. A smart tag is an electronic tag with an embedded RFID device, attached to an object for the purposes of tracking or storing data relating to its use. It is a unique cryptographic identifying device that tracks and confirms the provenance and location of each item. These tags may take myriad forms, including security labels with unique QR codes, RFID, and digital tags that contain an individualized software component. Another way of doing this is to have subtle, deliberate physical imperfections on metallic or ceramic surfaces that create distinctive signatures. These serve the same purpose.  Smart tags/marks can be applied to a single item in a batch or to all of them. Authenticity is managed with only genuine, verified tags and products. They ought to be incorporated into the blockchain. They have to be entered early in the manufacturing process. This allows each tagged item or batch to be tracked at every stage along the manufacturing, shipping, distribution, and sales process. Relevant data is logged at each step.

Are these solutions fully fool-proof? Perhaps not. Yet, smart tags capture the complete genealogy of a product and are almost impossible to replicate. Counterfeit tags will never show up on blockchains. If a smart tag is somehow duplicated, a quick scan of the blockchain will detect it. One can find out exactly when and where genuine items are manufactured and sold. So, any duplicate fake item is instantly found out as such. In addition, when a product comes in for repair, support teams can use the smart tag to confirm not just legitimacy but even ownership, of course only if that data is recorded in the blockchain. Front-end applications built on top of the platform allow stakeholders and regulators to digitally trace the entire chain and confirm the authenticity and origin of each part or good.

Let’s looking once more at the five stages of the typical product life cycle. It’s been explored how improved tracing and authentication, combined with a tamperproof chain of custody, reduces counterfeiting and associated losses. We can safely conclude that blockchain with IoT will improve operational and financial performance. This is how it will happen:

End-to-end oversight of raw materials/components reduces product defects because blockchain with IoT serves as a single, immutable source of provenance data. For the same reason, companies can prevent defects caused by spurious components and bring down labour spent validating materials and satisfying regulatory requirements. The information of when a product is unloaded into a warehouse and when it is dispatched are recorded in a verifiable event log that all stakeholders can easily refer to. Manufacturers, vendors and service providers can use the blockchain platform to authenticate items, flag deviations from agreed-upon sourcing arrangements, and prevent defective and inferior components from entering the production system. Visibility is improved as a result. This safeguards customers and protects the company from the risk of recalls, lawsuits, and reputational damage. It also lowers operating costs.

Smart tags coupled with blockchain reduce the likelihood of fraudulent sales. We’ve already referred to smart tags. When they are integrated with blockchains manufacturers, channel partners, third-party retailers, customers, and regulators can verify a product’s authenticity as goods move through the value/supply chain. Counterfeit goods with adulterated labels become visible and difficult to escape detection. Real-time authentication ensures that the preponderance of sales and revenues goes to legitimate brands and manufacturers. Regulators will now be able to digitally trace the provenance and chain of custody for any product being sold.

Better tracing helps support centres prevent unnecessary servicing and repair. Front-end applications linked to the blockchain platform make it simpler for support staff of companies to verify if a claim is genuine or not. This can be done even without the product being seen. Authentication becomes faster and more accurate. This allows support personnel to direct more of their time and resources to legitimate, high-value purposes, improving responsiveness, reducing waste, and increasing customer satisfaction.

It will be very interesting to study the potential cost and revenue impact of improved counterfeit detection. Till such time as we have some authentic information, we can look at the same hypothetically. Let’s look at a hypothetical company in the electronics equipment sector with a USD 1 billion plus turnover. The company is American but manufactures its products in China and sells them through channel partners and third-party retailers throughout the world, including the United States. We could model our assessment on any of the two scenarios, one, an aggressive one in which the company reaps significant returns from blockchain-enabled improvements and two, a conservative one that delivers a very modest turnover. Let’s see what happens when we average the results.

Let’s analyse what the likely results will be. One thing that introduction of blockchains with IoT will do is to prevent spurious materials from entering the manufacturing cycle. This will help the company reduce failure rates. The cost of replacing defective parts will come down leading to improved support centre efficiency. The cost savings would result in a definite benefit as far as revenue is concerned. And, of course, by far the greatest benefit from blockchain-enabled authentication will be the stemming of sales losses. It is an established fact that electronics and technology companies lose huge amounts annually due to counterfeit components and products. The use of blockchains with IoT will help businesses reduce the number of fraudulent sales and this will allow the manufacturers to recoup losses. The impact would be maximum for businesses whose products face high counterfeiting exposure. Pharmaceuticals and luxury goods are two great examples. The benefits will not just be quantitative. Improved counterfeiting detection will also help the companies generate significant intangible value through improving regulatory compliance, safeguarding the customer experience, and protecting the brand.

The benefits may not be uniform. Businesses or industries don’t all face the same exposure to counterfeiting. The severity and magnitude of the impact varies depends on several factors. So, how do we determine the return on investment from a blockchain-with-IoT counterfeiting solution? To do so, companies first need to look at their product characteristics, supply chain composition, and market risk. There are several high-value products, especially in the luxury goods segment, that can be forged relatively easily and quickly. These are then sold at markets across the world. designer leather bags and jackets are, for example, most vulnerable to counterfeiting. Stemming that activity is essential and will definitely help protect the brand and the top line. Companies also ought to acknowledge that certain products are more likely than others to be copied. Wherever prices and brand value are high, such as with some of the very popular handbag or sneaker brands, many buyers may choose to buy the spurious versions. This effectively will reduce the value of the tools that help establish provenance. To evaluate the overall cost-benefit of a blockchain solution, companies need to look across key markets and segments and examine buying behaviours as well as channel characteristics.

The size and complexity of the supply base is one more consideration to weigh the ROI of blockchain with IoT. The larger and more diverse the supplier network, the more likely are companies to benefit from provenance and chain-of-custody information. Of course, companies whose products and raw materials are tightly controlled internally also will benefit. Market risk is another factor one needs to consider. Certain businesses, for example, medical equipment makers, pharmaceutical companies, and food & beverage entities, have a strong fiduciary responsibility to ensure product safety and reliability. A tiny issue, like we’ve seen with Cadbury in the past, has the potential to wipe out a huge percentage of a company’s value. The ability to rapidly, continuously, and accurately authenticate components and raw materials across the product life cycle creates a profound impact on the company’s bottom line apart from helping safeguard the public interest and the brand value. A blockchain-with-IoT solution has the potential to generate significant value. However, this may not be the case in situations where counterfeit products and materials are easily identified by their performance, look, or feel. Here, the benefits of a blockchain solution are likely to be less clear. Having stated all this, the fact remains that in almost every case, knowing that one has what may be termed as the real deal in terms of product authenticity will be just that in economic terms – a real deal. However, businesses need to run the numbers on the tangible and intangible value that blockchain-enabled counterfeit prevention will ultimately deliver and compare that to the cost of implementation.


To conclude, blockchain platforms give manufacturers something they have long sought – an effective, scalable means of combatting the risks posed by counterfeit parts and goods. When one combines blockchain technology with IoT, stakeholders across the supply/value chain are able to ascertain whether a component or a product is legitimate or not. What’s more, they can instantly know where it was sourced, how it was transported and stored, and if it’s a first sale or resale. Success requires building a substantial adoption base. Every stakeholder ought to be involved in the supply and distribution chain. Certainly, this effort will benefit if the larger players and industry leaders at the helm, choose to do so. Use cases are few but rapidly increasing. Technologies are evolving as blockchain platforms become more mature and enterprise solutions become more readily available. The potential benefits for most companies will far outweigh the early-stage setup efforts. Manufacturers ought to embrace blockchain-enabled counterfeit solutions. This will serve as a very powerful tool to safeguard their customers, protect their revenues, and ensure stronger bottom-line returns for a very long time in the future.

 

Sunday, 1 August 2021

Smart Contracts & Blockchains in Supply Chains & Projects, the dire need for legislation

 The second article in a series on the use of blockchain technology in supply chains and projects

Blockchain technology has been powering the Bitcoin since its inception. It is an ingeniously simple technology that has immense potential for use in supply chains and projects. It is a public ledger to which everyone has access. However, at the same time, no single individual or entity can control it. The technology allows companies and individuals to collaborate with an unprecedented degree of trust and transparency. Despite being cryptographically secure, it is fundamentally open. Blockchain technology is a revolution that begun already and will change the world. Its impact on supply chains and projects will be unprecedented. Governments around the world need to be aware of its potential and legislation is needed to give it legitimacy.

As early as in 1994, Nick Szabo, a legal scholar and cryptographer found that decentralized nature of cryptography could be used in smart contracts. These are basically self-executing contracts and ensure the performance of virtual agreements through blockchain technology. They provide a hassle-free execution of agreements made between parties. The main property of blockchain technology is its decentralized nature. This is because it takes away the requirement of intermediaries. This, in turn, saves a lot of time and prevents any conflict that may arise due to a third party. A smart contract is a self-performing contract. The terms of the agreement that exist between a buyer and a seller are written directly into lines of code. A distributed, decentralized blockchain network contains the code, which consists of all the agreement terms. In addition to the agreements, the code also consists of information that executes the transactions and ensures that these transactions are tracked and are irreversible.  

A smart contract can therefore be termed as mainly a type of computer protocol. It digitally performs the function of facilitation, verification as well as enforcement. In other words, the performance of the contract is self-enforced and digitally recorded. Here are the key factors of smart contracts:

  • The smart contract, once released, can’t be altered by anyone. No one can change its terms, not even the creator or owner
  • The execution and completion of a smart contract does not require physical preparation and/or submission of documents
  • Users can and may be anonymous but, the transaction details are recorded and registered
  • Transactions of smart contracts can’t be revered

Smart Contracts & How They Work

The terms and conditions of a smart contract are engraved in the code itself. Typically, a smart contract interprets, verifies, and automatically executes any transaction laid down in the terms and conditions. Let us take a rental contract, for example. When it is made into a smart contract, we will see its efficacy and effectiveness. The tenant pays the rent to the house owner in cryptocurrency. As soon as the payment is made the code carries out the transactions in accordance with the terms of the contract as entered into the code. The landlord receives an advice when the transaction is successful and will issue a receipt. The first-time deposit and advance that are paid will lead to the release of the house key. The system operates on the If-Then principle. Whoever is involved in the blockchain will observe the transaction and become witness to the contract. The record of payment and key release are visible to all concerned. One action will not be completed without the other. What could be a more efficient and effective system than this?

Smart contracts specify the rules and penalties related to an arrangement in the same manner and format as a conventional contract. They also implement those obligations automatically. The contracts are implemented using a platform, which consists of two elements, currency and contracts. Smart contracts are essentially agreements in electronic form rather than paper. So, the question is ~ what is its legal status? Can they still be regulated by the existing legal framework? Do they require a new legal system to govern them? We shall see.

Secured Transactions & their Benefits: With smart contracts transaction can be carried out and terms can be enforced seamlessly between the parties concerned. The concept of a smart contract is that while one person gains something of value in return to the second party being paid. The absence of intermediaries makes it easy to enforce. In the non-smart era implementation wouldn’t be as seamless. Often third parties, usually in foreign countries, are part of the contract. This makes enforcement complicated. Blockchain platforms have made this possible. The networks are transparent as is the ability to determine and formulate who has priority over the funds in question. Parties can therefore easily accept or reject certain terms thus promote quicker and more efficient ways to implement contracts.

Regulation of Smart Contracts Around the World: Under contract laws applicable almost universally, a conventional contract must contain the following elements to be considered as valid:

  • A legitimate offer
  • A properly communicated acceptance
  • Enforceability by lawful
  • Consideration
  • Consent of all competent parties in regards to all aspects of the contract

The Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (UETA) serves as a framework that states can use in order to determine the legal status of electronic signatures. It is not a federal law. As many as 47 states have passed and started enforcing it since 1999. UETA places regulations on electronic contracts, records and signatures. It states that electronic contracts and signatures are valid. They constitute a legitimate way of providing contractual consent. In the European Union (EU), Rome I Regulation is the legislation which determines the legality of all EU civil and commercial contracts. The Rome I Regulation governs the choice of law in the European Union.

Overview of Contract Law in India

Contracts in India are governed by the Indian Contract Act of 1872. It lays down the basic elements under which contracts are enforced and governed. Section 10 of the act states that “all agreements are contracts if they hold the free consent of parties willing to contract, for a lawfully accepted consideration and with an object.”

For an agreement to be enforceable by law it must consists of an offer, acceptance and consideration. By definition, it would be construed therefore, that smart contracts are valid under the Indian Contract Act 1872. A smart contract consists of the offer, the acceptance and consideration in the form of cryptocurrency. Cryptocurrencies are not consideration as legal tender under Indian law. Therefore currently, these are not enforceable and hence don’t constitute a contract. Section 5 & 10 of the Indian Information Technology Act 2000 states that electronical signatures are legally accepted. So, a contract is legitimate and enforceable if it is prepared and signed electronically.  Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act 1872 states that contracts digitally signed shall be admissible in the courts. 

So, what about smart contracts in India?  Smart contracts basically provide a platform for contracting parties who do not know each other. Not that parties who know each other are excluded. Every contract involving exchange of goods/services and money is prone too many risks. Smart contracts can help mitigate this problem. However, the Indian Contract Act is the law which will regulate the contract. So, to be enforceable under Indian law, due caution must be exercised. Although electronic documentation and signatures are valid, the Indian Contract Act needs to be amended to make all smart contracts legal. For example, the absence of consideration should not render the contract null and void. So, though smart contracts are legal in India, several provisions need to be added to it to make it compatible with the Indian laws. For a smart contract to be valid it must fall within the boundaries of Indian contract law.

Risks of Smart Contracts: Today, Indian law allows electronic contracts and signatures. However, several Ponzi schemes which succeeded in duping many people indicate that there is lack of desired safety in electronic documents. Will blockchain technology help in safeguarding people’s interest? As things stand, there are no well-established legal frameworks to regulate Crypto-transactions, not just in India but almost everywhere else in the world. Section 35 of the of the Information Technology Act, 2000, regulated electronic signatures. It states that “Any person may make an application to the Certifying Authority for the issue of a Digital Signature Certificate in such form as may be prescribed by the Central Government.” This raises a problem as far as smart contracts and blockchain technology are concerned. When using blockchain technology, the hash key is self-generated. It is the hash key that is used as an identifier to authenticate the smart contract. Under the Indian legal system today, there is no legal authority that regulates blockchains sanctions electronic signatures in the form of hash-tags. There is a dire need for legislation in this direction.

Section 88A of the Indian Evidence Act 1872 states that “The Court may presume that an electronic message, forwarded by the originator through an electronic mail server to the addressee to whom the message purports to be addressed corresponds with the message as fed into his computer for transmission; but the Court shall not make any presumption as to the person by whom such message was sent.” Explanation. –– For the purposes of this section, the expressions “addressee” and “originator” shall have the same meanings respectively assigned to them in clauses (b) and (za) of sub-section (1) of section 2 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (21 of 2000).

So, under the act the court presumes that an electronic record produced in court is genuine. However, it does not make any presumptions about the sender of the contract. So, if a signature obtained using blockchain technology, what will be its status? Und the act, it will only be admissible if the signature is obtained as per the provisions of the Information Technology Act. Unfortunately, this not only vitiates the system of encryption present in the blockchain technology for smart contracts, it also disallows their use. That is why we need legislation, maybe a brand-new evidence act, to replace the existing one. Remember, the current one is close to a century and a half old.

Despite the absence of legislation, some businesses have already started using blockchain technology and smart contracts to conduct their business.  

One such company is Bajaj Electricals, a leading manufacturer of a wide range of electrical equipment. The company, one among the Bajaj Group of Companies, is perhaps a key player in this industry. Its business activities affect several sectors, not just channel partners and vendors internal & external, within India and abroad. One of the biggest problems for vendors, whether supplying goods or rendering services, is that payment processes are always cumbersome. Payments are forever delayed and this badly affects their cash-flows. In most cases, customers deliberately delay payments but, even if they don’t, the very act of processing documents and payments plus the money transfer mechanism, leads to delays. This happens even in this day and age of electronic documentation and payments. How Bajaj Electricals dealt with this issue makes an interesting case-study. [see: https://www.livemint.com/Companies/BcqXQgey9fieFps9xVZxrK/How-Bajaj-Electricals-uses-blockchain-to-pay-suppliers.html ][also, https://www.thefuturescentre.org/signal/bajaj-electricals-in-india-uses-blockchain-to-pay-suppliers/ ]

According to the report in the Mint getting paid for the material they supplied to Bajaj Electricals Ltd was a cumbersome process for vendors. It involved several steps that included confirmation of delivery by Bajaj Electricals, raising of a physical bill of exchange by the supplier and submission of invoice and transport documents to Yes Bank Ltd, for payment.

This prompted the Bajaj Electricals management to explore a speedy and secure solution to replace its manual bill discounting process. The solution they hit upon was blockchain. In January, the company announced going live on a blockchain-based vendor-financing (also known as supplier financing) solution developed by Yes Bank. The use of blockchain technology eliminated the manual steps involved in the company’s bill discounting process and the entire transaction is now paperless. [Click on the link above for the full report]

Besides Yes Bank, the Mahindra Group and IBM are pursuing and experimenting with supplier finance blockchain. This was revealed in November 2016 that they are co-developing a cloud-based blockchain framework with the potential to reinvent supply chain finance in India. [Details available in these reports: https://cointelegraph.com/news/tech-mahindra-employs-ibm-blockchain-in-new-platform-to-combat-digital-piracy & https://mediacenter.ibm.com/media/Mahindra+Group+unlocks+the+disruptive+potential+of+IBM+Blockchain+technology/1_0qnjw112 ]

Meanwhile, the Institute for Development and Research in Banking Technology (IDRBT) has come out with a blueprint of blockchain technology for the banking sector. The institute has been working with government, banks and industry for building a blockchain that can serve as a common platform to launch varied applications. [see: https://www.financialexpress.com/market/idrbt-proposes-road-map-for-blockchain-technology/1451854/ ]

There is no question that the implementation and growth of smart contracts is the next step of innovation. It can lead directly to billions of overhead costs being minimized while making the whole system more efficient. Regulatory issues, however, exist, especially in India where there are no regulations regarding the finer details of a smart contract. If specific regulations are not made, a wide-ranging adoption of the technology will require the government to make amendments to the Indian Evidence At, 1872 and the IT Act. Therefore, although there is a certain amount of progress in government thinking and more businesses are adopting the smart contract concept, the law is still functioning in a grey area. Legislation is direly needed to establish an intricate framework within which to regulate the functioning of smart contracts in India.   

https://www.livemint.com/money/personal-finance/blockchain-in-personal-loans-how-it-will-redefine-the-future-of-lending-11734938973041.html