The new procedural requirements introduced by CBAM can challenge the smooth functioning of existing trade facilitation tools. EU Member States have a range of tools in place such as pre-arrival processing, Authorised Operator (AO) programmes, Single Window systems, automated risk management, and border agency cooperation mechanisms. CBAM introduces new compliance requirements that may not yet be fully integrated into border procedures and information systems. Without adaptation, this misalignment could result in delays, duplication, or inefficiencies at the border.
The rollout of the CBAM can create risks of disruption to some particular trade facilitation elements. This includes information availability to facilitate trader compliance; automated and electronic clearance of import declarations; pre-arrival processing; risk management; Single Window systems; interconnected systems supporting border agency cooperation; post-clearance audits; and Authorised Operator programmes.
A lack of clear, comprehensive, and accessible information may complicate importers' ability to comply with CBAM obligations. Under the CBAM, importers need clear guidance on their obligations, procedures, and how to access systems such as the CBAM Registry. Missing, inconsistent, or inaccessible information can create uncertainty across CBAM goods supply chains and increase the risk of non-compliance.
CBAM procedures could place specific pressure on automated customs clearance and audit. Trade facilitation aims to speed up customs processes through automation, but the CBAM introduces additional checks – verifying CBAM status of goods and confirming declarant authorisation – which could affect automation, pre-arrival processing, and audits, increasing administrative burden and importation times.
Limited integration and interoperability of CBAM data with existing systems and digital platforms could cause fragmentation. Tools such as electronic data transmission or digital Single Windows are designed to streamline trade by consolidating procedures across border agencies. If CBAM requirements and data (such as the CBAM Account Number or declarant authorisation status) are handled separately, the result can be fragmented or duplicative processes, manual handling, and delays.
New risks and criteria for CBAM compliance could disrupt customs risk management systems and AO programmes. The CBAM brings new types of risks, such as emissions misreporting or circumvention attempts, which may not be fully embedded in current risk systems and selectivity criteria. Without harmonised criteria, Customs Authorities may apply inconsistent controls, leading to duplication and delays. AO frameworks reward compliant traders with simplified procedures and faster clearance, but if CBAM processes are not integrated into AO programmes, operators may lose AO benefits (e.g., because they need to also be an authorised CBAM declarant), adding complexity for importers.