eDouane ICS


Can you advise if a declarant third party would need to apply to your customs administration for an official permit to file his ENS?

The filing of an ENS by any party always requires the carrier's knowledge and consent.

How the carrier's consent to a third party ENS filing is to be evidenced and under which conditions and terms (e.g. time for submission of the ENS, the shipments involved, and the duration of the filing arrangement) are subject to contractual agreement between the commercial parties.

In practice and if the third party is using another system than the carrier to lodge its ENS declaration, it must ask for a Luxtrust certificate as well as a right of access to the Luxembourg Customs Administration eDouane system.

Who is held legally responsible by your customs for the accuracy and correctness of the information in the ENS when a third party is declaring his own ENS?

Whoever lodges the ENS, this person (“the declarant”) is responsible for its content, accuracy and completeness.

Therefore, once a third party, (e.g. a freight forwarder, with the carrier’s knowledge and consent), undertakes the responsibility of making the ENS filing and thus becomes the declarant, the content, accuracy and completeness of the ENS filing is the third party’s responsibility.

Notification to the carrier of the MRN for the freight forwarder filing will provide evidence for the carrier that an ENS has been lodged and that the carrier’s obligation that an ENS filing is made has been met.

What are the possible penalties if an ENS declaration is incorrect?

Customs Offences relating ICS are punishable by "Loi Générale sur les Douanes et Accises" Article 220 (p.44) and following, as well as Articles 231 (p.46) and 261 (p.51)

Could the concept of "Cargo Reporter" be, for example, the Carrier and in other cases the Freight Forwarder or the Handling Agent?

Yes, cargo reporter is the one who declare the goods.

Is the Cargo Reporter a parameter per message?

The cargo reporter is always for each message the one who sent the message.

The message CAR.EntrySummary-DOC.SUB is only used for import. Isn’t there another possibility that goods arrive by trucks from another non-UE country?

No, the Entry Summary Declaration is done at the first point of entry within the EU.

If a truck arrives at Findel, he has already crossed the external border where an entry summary has already been submitted.

A MRN number is assigned to each MAWB. If the MAWB is splitted by “Aircompany”, is each HAWBs forced to have the number of the MRN assigned to the MAWB?

For entry, the splitting is done after the goods are declared arrived in Luxembourg, therefore after arrival of the plane.  When processing declarations (NCTS / Import...) the link to the MRN of that MAWB is done as previous document.

In this case, who’s the « ideal » Cargo Reporter? N/A

Will it be an emergency procedure if the system doesn’t works and doesn’t deliver the entry MRN ?

The emergency procedure is currently under discussion.

After having sent a CAR.EntrySummary-CAN.REQ, will we receive a CAR.EntryCons-Cancellation.NOT?

If you are defined as GHA, yes ; As defined in the explanation for the message CAR.EntryCons-Cancellation.NOT.

Why is the CAR.EntrySummary-DOC.SUB not sent by the carrier instead of the Cargo Reporter? This would allow us to have number of MRN "IN" to be sent in the message CAR.EntryArrivalManifest-DOC.SUB?

The carrier can be the cargo reporter.

Arrival manifest should contain all ENS's MRN and therefore also the FROB (Freight Remaining On Board)

Would it be possible to clarify the procedure to apply in case of diversion, especially the distinction between diversion 4 hours before the arrival and less than 4 hours before?

There is no distinction between diversion more than 4h before the arrival or less than 4h before.

A case of flight HKG-LUX-LAX (Hong-Kong – Lux – L.A.). Do we have to “declare” goods to LAX as these goods are not staying in the EU? If yes, we will have to ask other air flight companies to sent us their FWB/FHL for these goods that we are not concerned about.

If by « declare » you mean, sent an ENS, the answer is YES. The ENS is mandatory for every goods entry in the EU including FROB (Freight Remaining On Board) and transhipments.

FROB must be declared as all goods in the ENS

Case of a flight leaving LUX and that should come back after 30 min (technical problem). A part of goods are then re-routed by trucks. What should we do?

A ENS is mandatory.  Goods will enter again in the temporary storage (new entry « IN » the goods accounting) and after that the normal procedure for the temporary storage is applicable.

Due to the fact that this is exceptional case, the plane would be considered as coming from third-country and having Luxembourg as first point of entry.

After the flight has arrived in LUX and the GHA is ofloading, what does the carrier or GHA need to do regarding LU customs if an ENS declaration is found to be different from the physical shipment at offload at the airport of first entry, such as piece or weight discrepancy?

Discrepancies in the ENS are corrected in Temporary Storage.

An ENS is never corrected after the arrival of the plane.

In the case of CAR.Entry-AdvancedIntervention.NOT, who’s the Cargo Reporter? Is it the Freight Forwarder? In that case, shouldn’t the GHA also receive this message?

The message is sent to the one who has sent the IE315 and to the GHA if different.

In the case of CAR.EntryCons-ControlDecision.NOT, is it the same functionality ahs the actual Lucas’ functionality "Blocked by Customs" ?


At what time in the flow could this message pop-up ?

At any time, between arrival of goods to acceptance by a customs procedure (NCTS, Import...).

In practice, it appends from time to time that goods are controled (on hold) and that a part of that voyage is blocked definitively because of fraud analysis followed by a “procès verbal”. In that case, the part non blocked by the fraud is free.

In fact, the consignment N#  who’s blocked NOT the ENS or EXS in question. The rest is free.

How to proceed after a refusal from customs (message CAR.EntryCons-ReleaseRejection.NOT, IE322) ? Will this message be free at the same time of the sending (to be returned to origin)?

It is always a manual intervention form customs.

Extract notification: Is the CAR.EntrySummary-Extract.NOT message sends by customs to handling agent no matter who sends the ENS? In this message, do we see the MRNs allocated to the shipments?

The answer to this question is under investigation.

In case of shipment forwarded under partial basis, what should the declarant do to meet customs requirements?

For example one AWB 10/1000kgs, only 1st part 6/750kgs forwarded due to space problems. Second part (4/250kgs) will arrive LUX only two days later on another flight.

Departure out of EU -> Findel 10 Packages, 1000kg

Those 10 packages/1000kg will arrive in 2 or more "bits" to Luxembourg on 2 or more days, same flight Number.  As every flight has its own number and the entry key is combined Flight Number + Date, we can have on 2 different days the same AWB-Number with the same Flight Number.  The Information Flight Number + Date + AWB is still unique.

At the end, the ENS will have to reflect this, e.g. :

  • 01/01/2011 AWB: 123  Flight: XYZ  6/750 kg
  • 03/01/2011 AWB: 123  Flight: XYZ  4/250 kg

Those are 2 separate consignments and will be handled as such:

  • The flight details (carrier, flight number, date, routing) are declared at the HEADER level of the ENS. It is not possible to report on one ENS two different flight numbers/dates.
  • On arrival to Luxembourg, the carrier's Arrival Manifest must report the incoming flight details at HEADER level, and provide a list MAWB's carried on board.
  • As I indicated, these are considered two separate consignments (each with a separate Flight No. and Flight Date), each of which should be covered by an entry summary declaration.  In this case, two entry summary declarations are required because the structure of that document permits you to report only goods on the same flight.
  • We assumed that as the carrier send in the ENS 4 hours before arrival and a flight lasts longer than 4 hours outside EU -> Luxembourg, they would send in directly an ENS1 with the 6 packages and ENS2 with 4 packages.
  • It should be clear that sometimes the ENS1 is sent before discovering a split shipment.
  • In that case and to be clear the scenario is a follow:
    • Entry Summary Declaration MRN No.123 is registered for AWB XYZ with 10/1000 pkgs.  The entry summary declaration declares that the AWB will arrive on Flight No.1, Expected Date of Arrival 01/01/2011.
    • Flight No.1 departs, with AWB XYZ, but only 6/750 packages on board.
    • Flight No.2, Expected date of Arrival 03/01/2011, will move the balance of AWB XYZ (4/250).
  • In this scenario, we would expect the following:
    • Amendment of Entry Summary Declaration MRN No.123 to show the correct number of packages for AWB XYZ that will arrive on Flight No.1 on 01/01/2011 (6/750kgs),
    • Registration of a new Entry Summary Declaration to cover AWB XYZ (4/250kgs) arriving on Flight No.2 on 03/01/2011.
  • Hereafter we describe also what could be scenario if the ENS2 is not submitted at flight arrival.  When the second flight arrives, the Arrival Manifest will declare the flight number and date for the incoming flight.  The system will therefore reject as unknown the MAWB covering the goods that were declared in the ENS for another flight.
    • The carrier requires to amend the original ENS (to reduce packages) and registers a new ENS for the shipment arriving on the second flight (with the second flight number, date and routing). This second ENS would be processed as usual, including a safety and security risk assessment.
      • The Arrival Manifest for ExpectedDateAndTimeOfArrival: 2011-01-01, Flight: XYZ,  AWB: 123 will arrive 10 packages (form ENS 1 ver 1),
      • the Outturn report (CDR) will correct to GAC packages 10 -> 6,
      • The Arrival Manifest for ExpectedDateAndTimeOfArrival: 2011-01-03, Flight: XYZ,  AWB: 123 will result in an Arrival Manifest Item Rejection: No ENS with 2011-01-03, XYZ, 123 found,
      • Submit ENS 2 with Item 1: ExpectedDateAndTimeOfArrival: 2011-01-03, Flight: XYZ,  AWB: 123, packages: 4,
      • If you do step 4 before step 3 -> no rejection happens...
Is post-code mandatory or optional (shipper/consignee)?

Either the EORI number is given, or Name, Street and number, Postal code, City, Country code are required (EU-Rules). Please note that there are countries without Postal Code (as Eire / Ireland). Here you have unfortunately to give a dummy information. Please also have a look at the Message Validation Rules for ICS, available on our webpage.

How to do ENS declaration of different goods with different countries of departure and two different countries of destination?

There were different various interpretations between MS about that question (ITSM Service Desk IM11387).
The following rules should apply: Data element “itinerary – country(ies) of routing code” should be identified in a chronological order of the countries through which goods are routed between the country of original departure and final destination.
This comprises the countries of original departure and of final destination of the goods.

As the data element “itinerary-country(ies) of routing code” is on header level, and according to Annex 30A, we have two different countries of departure and two different countries of destination.

Economical operators has to lodge two ENS, each with a specific route for each good.


What is the difference between CAR.ExitSummary-DOC.SUB and message CAR.ExitManifest-DOC.SUB (6.26)?

Exit Summary Declaration is used for « Security & Safety » need and is an entry into our Goods Accounting system. The manifest is used as exit from Goods Accounting, when goods are in the plane to leave EU.

In the exit manifest you should refer to the ENS when take-off again so that customs can clear these from their Goods accounting.

Are addresses of consignees mandatory?

Do not confuse consignee with final importer. (ex. “Forwarder HK” – consignee “Forwarder LU”) “Forwarder LU” is not the final importer!

Information’s buyer/seller are not foreseen for the moment and will not be mandatory.

Addresses are conditional’s.  This means that if TIN is present for consignees/consignors and that TIN is an EORI number and exclusively EORI, the customs doesn’t need addresses because customs will retrieve it from EORI database.  If the TIN-EORI is not present, names and addresses are mandatory.

What do we do in the case of HAWB for which consignee is the final importer (buyer)?

The consignee is always declared.  So, in that case the consignee is the final importer.

With entry MRN number, can you determine if goods have stay more than 14 days?

This control is foreseen by the comminatory legislation.  It has to be noted that 14 days could be changed, please foreseen a variable!

Is the usage of D number used to identify each entry MRN should be kept?

The MRN is given by customs.

If goods stays more than 14 days and went away by truck (declaration via NCTS), should we also sent this document?

In this case, only the temporary storage plays a role, the short term (actually 14 days) doesn’t play a role. So only the NCTS document should be sent.

Clarify the notion of "Blocked by customs / on-hold".

Inspection disposition: The allowed disposition of inspections for inward and outward cargo movements are:

  • Entry summary consignment:  allowed entry/refused entry/hold (The status hold allows inspection to be finished and to change this status hold a new inspection report must be generated),
  • Exit summary declaration: released/refused exit,
  • Exit controls: exit allowed/exit refused,

The message IE361 (EntryCons.ControlDecision) is about one consignment status notification and not about the complete shipment.

Block partially a shipment (part-shipment).

A shipment can be released or refused for exit.  To determine by experience of practical cases. Experience will demonstrate if specific procedure is needed for such case.

Is there a new customs reference associated? (Another MRN?) Will we receive it if we are not Cargo Reporter?

Yes, it is another MRN.

What appends is the following situation: A shipment is prepared for departure, documentation finished, 13th day. For weather cause or diversion, goods leave EU only the 15th day or after.

The manifest is used to go out of Goods Accounting, and it is at that date that receiving date plays a role.

A manifest entry on the 15th day or later will be rejected if the link with an exit summary declaration is not provided.

What is the procedure when goods are staying more than 14 days? Do we have to submit a specific request? In which system?

14 days is the period during which an ENS could be used in an exit Manifest without being forced to submit an EXS.  After 14 days the ENS could not be sued in Exit Manifest and a new EXS declaration must be submitted to customs.  The risk analysis could then block this EXS.

If goods remain on ground more than 14 days, then you must submit an EXS for this ENS before to submit your exit manifest.

What is the entry reference that we have to give for an Exit Summary declaration? The MRN number received at the entry declaration or the MRN of the export document?

An EXS could have as previous document a transit. The exit Manifest could contain MRN EXS and ENS (within 14 days), a transit if this contains data of EXS and an export declaration.

For the moment, we will request to submit, if necessary, an EXS in the case of Standard Transport Contracts (STC) and for which the airport is actual exit office.

The question has been raised to commission because regulation is not quite clear on that subject.  Customs will come back on that point if a declaration EXS is mandatory.

Is the truck report that is mentioned (CAR.ExitCons-Control.NOT) concerns only truck reports for export?


What are the reasons that would lead to refuse ending of a (CAR.TruckReport-DOC.SUB) (Apart from technical/format errors)?


It is foreseen a message to do AMD of truck report. It is not foreseen to do CAN. Is this forgotten or whish?

We did not found any needs.

Will the paper documents still be stamped (unloaded from trucks and planes, customs cargo manifest) ? Due to the fact that all information are electronic, we do not see this as necessary (vision e-freight…).

In principle no, in practice this would be required to facilitate operations at destination.

We propose to keep this procedure as actually for the beginning, procedure that has been developed to facilitate communication between customs and operators.

Last update