The case first surfaced in June 2015, following representations by Atlântico Terminais and Suata Serviço Unificado de Armazenagem e Terminal Alfandegado, both of which provide bonded warehousing services at the port.
They claim that Tecon Suape has an effective monopoly over port operations.
They are unhappy about an additional fee (Terminal Handling Charge 2, or THC 2) levied by the operator on top of its basic tariff for import cargo handled by the independent bonded sites. This was first introduced in January 2011.
CADE has stated that THC2 has impacted competition in the market, artificially boosting the container terminal’s income and also making it more difficult for independent bonded sites to successfully operate.
Overall, the situation for importers would be less competitive as a result.
Separately, CADE is also investigating the imposition of a second fee in Suape that was introduced in May this year.
