This well-intentioned move by food industry experts sparked a wide range of reactions—from enthusiasm to bewilderment.
In response to a request from Logos Press to comment on the deputy prime minister’s statement, representatives of several food industry associations suggested that, most likely, raw materials from “third countries”—which are not covered by existing free trade agreements (which impose quotas on certain goods)—might be exempt from customs duties.
For example, last year meat processors went to great lengths to secure (in addition to the usual EU quota) a small additional quota for preferential imports of pork from the EU. It would seem strange if, in 2027, imports of European pork, milk and dairy products, sugar, and the like were removed from the quota system and began to be subject to zero customs duties.
Or take another example. Several years ago, due to the practical impossibility of obtaining a license—authorization from the Moldovan authorities—in a timely manner to import Ukrainian sunflower seeds, again under the preferential trade regime with Ukraine—the operations of the main production lines at Moldova’s largest enterprise in the oil and fat industry, Floarea Soarelui SA, were practically halted for an entire season. The country went from being a major exporter to a significant regional importer of sunflower oil.
Does this mean that “that decision” (to block the expansion of production capacity using cheap Ukrainian raw materials) was a mistake, and that it will now “be corrected”? Hardly.
Raw materials or ingredients?
Yuriy Riza, director of the “Agrocereale” Grain Exporters Association, considers the hypothetical exemption of (certain) agri-food raw materials from customs duties to be a secondary issue.
According to him, far more important is the Moldovan government’s intention to impose a 20 percent VAT on imported goods as they cross the border. And 20% of the average value of goods (agricultural and food raw materials, in particular), plus high logistics costs, provides a significant degree of protection for local producers against imports.
Incidentally, the administration of the “Forța Fermierilor” Association of Grain and Oilseed Producers shares this view —a rare instance of farmers’ and traders’ associations seeing eye to eye.
Igor Grigoriev, administrator of “Agrovector,” the Union of Producers and Importers of Animal Products, notes that the very concept of “agrifood raw materials” is quite broad and abstract.
For example, if a trader imports frozen fish and sells it in that form to a retailer or through their own chain of stores, then that product is a finished product. However, if the importer processes this fish at its own production facilities—by cutting it up, salting it, smoking it, and packaging it for consumers—then this fish is considered raw material for domestic processing.
How should these two commodity flows be distinguished, and in what proportions should they be subject to customs duties—or, conversely, exempted from them?
Some representatives of food industry associations have suggested that the authorities plan to exempt from customs duties not so much raw materials as ingredients—for example, certain types of spices or food additives not produced in Moldova.
Or, for example, biodegradable packaging, which has become significantly more expensive due to the war in the Middle East and the spike in oil prices. Imported packaging in Moldova is subject to customs duties, albeit relatively small ones.
But in today’s reality of fierce competition among everyone for everything, even such an exemption from customs duties benefits local producers.
