Fertilizer shortages have been a recurring issue every year, particularly during the farming season when demand is highest. This year is no exception, as farmers are once again facing difficulties due to the failure to import fertilizer on time. The delay stems from the inability of the Agricultural Materials Company, responsible for fertilizer distribution, and its contracted suppliers to adhere to their agreement.
The company does not accept fertilizer shipments that arrive after the agreed deadline. Instead, such delays result in fines and blacklisting of suppliers. Due to a dispute between the Agricultural Materials Company and a contractor, 1,300 tons of urea fertilizer have remained stuck in a warehouse at the northern Tatopani customs checkpoint for 21 months.
According to Anirudra Thapa, the warehouse manager of the Tatopani customs dry port, 3,590 tons of urea fertilizer were imported from China daily between 1 June and 17 June 2023. Of this, approximately 2,290 tons were transported from the warehouse to the Agricultural Materials Company.
“Around 1,300 tons remain in the warehouse. We are unsure of what transpired between the importer and the agricultural company. Our role at the dry port is warehouse management—storing imported goods in containers until the responsible parties complete the necessary documentation, clear customs, and arrange transport. However, the fertilizer has been stuck in the warehouse, and the suppliers have ceased communication. We have heard that the matter has occasionally reached the court,” Thapa told Annapurna. The warehouse charges rent at a rate of 17 paisa per kilogram per day. “If the suppliers had come to collect it, we would have facilitated the process as much as possible, but they have not been in touch.”
As per customs regulations, unclaimed goods must be confiscated if they are not collected within 60 days of arrival. Despite this rule, the fertilizer has remained in storage for over eight months, increasing financial liabilities. Although the fertilizer has not yet deteriorated, prolonged storage increases the risk of degradation. Additionally, the prolonged presence of the fertilizer in the warehouse has caused logistical challenges for handling other goods arriving at the Tatopani dry port.
The government provides subsidies on such fertilizers. Silk Market Pvt Ltd, Sinomac, Globalmatics, and Bidh Pvt Ltd had jointly opened a letter of credit (LC) with a bank to import fertilizer from China. However, when the shipment failed to arrive on time as per contractual terms, the Agricultural Materials Company canceled the tender. Consequently, the fertilizer remained stranded at the customs yard. The issue has been reported in the media multiple times, yet no resolution has been reached. Meanwhile, as the Finance Committee reviews amendments to the Customs Act, concerned Members of Parliament have been inspecting customs points. On Sunday, 12 MPs, including Finance Committee Chairman Santosh Chalise, visited the Tatopani customs checkpoint. Upon witnessing the stockpiled fertilizer, Chairman Chalise contacted Agriculture and Livestock Minister Ramnath Adhikari and the Agriculture Secretary to address the matter.
Tatopani Customs Checkpoint Chief Kamal Kumar Bhattarai stated, “The Customs Act is currently under review by the Finance Committee. The monitoring team inspected the customs office and checkpoint, expressed concern over the prolonged storage of fertilizer, and raised the issue directly with the Agriculture Minister from my office. The team conducted their inspection on Sunday and returned on Monday.”
According to Bishnu Prasad Pokharel, Managing Director of the Agricultural Materials Company, three years ago, Silk Market Pvt Ltd, Sinomac, Globalmatics, and Bidh Pvt Ltd entered into a joint venture (JV) contract with the company. Even under the initial agreement, fertilizer deliveries were delayed. At the time, the company imposed legal penalties, confiscated deposits, and blacklisted the suppliers. In response, the companies sought legal intervention, and the court temporarily halted punitive actions.
Following the court's decision, the suppliers did not immediately deliver the fertilizer but eventually shipped it later. The original contract required the suppliers to import 25,000 tons of urea fertilizer. Subsequently, a revised agreement stipulated that the fertilizer already held at customs would be delivered to the Agricultural Materials Company within 30 days, while the remaining 21,500 tons would be supplied within 107 days.
“Despite the 30-day commitment, it took them 8–9 months to deliver just 1,300 tons. Even after 300 days, they failed to supply the remaining fertilizer. We extended deadlines multiple times, sent formal requests, and urged compliance. However, as no action was taken, we were compelled to impose penalties and blacklist the companies once again,” Pokharel explained.
