DIAN says your goods belong in a different subheading:
a change of tariff classification is contested with technical proof of the goods and a defense at every stage.

It is the assignment to goods of a numeric code, the tariff subheading, based on their physical, chemical and technical characteristics (Decree 1165, art. 304). Classification is governed by the Harmonized System (Law 646 of 2001), the Nandina, the binding criteria of the Andean Community and the decrees that amend the Tariff (art. 303). The absence of a classification ruling does not prevent classifying by applying the Tariff directly, and the characterization made by other entities does not bind DIAN (art. 304). When several subheadings seem possible, the debate is about the characteristics of the goods, which is why technical evidence carries so much weight.

Under Law 2586 of 2026: (1) DIAN identifies the inaccuracy in a post-clearance audit and issues the Special Customs Request no later than 30 business days afterwards (art. 67), stating the proposed modification, the quantification of taxes and penalties, the facts and the rules (art. 69); (2) you answer within 15 business days, extendable up to 70 business days when legal or administrative restrictions must be proven (art. 70); (3) the evidence period opens (art. 71); (4) DIAN decides on the merits within 70 business days (art. 72) through the official correction assessment, which replaces the declaration and may impose the penalty in the same act or in another (arts. 56 to 58); (5) the reconsideration appeal lies within 15 business days (art. 88) and is decided within five months (art. 94); and (6) once the administrative route is exhausted, the lawsuit before the administrative courts, within the term of the applicable type of action.

The change of subheading produces (a) the difference in customs taxes between the declared rate and the proposed one, which the official correction assessment collects (arts. 56 to 58); (b) the corresponding interest; and (c) the penalty. Making an inaccuracy or error in the import declaration that causes an underpayment of customs taxes is a serious infraction with a fine of 10% of the taxes left unpaid per declaration (Law 2586, art. 15, no. 15.2.2.6). Illustrative example: if the difference in taxes were 200 million pesos, the fine would be 20 million, in addition to the taxes and the interest. The 15% of FOB value fine (no. 15.2.2.4) applies to partial errors in the serial or descriptions that do not involve different goods or a change of subheading with higher taxes. Which one applies in your case depends on the facts.

Evidence showing what the goods are and what they are used for: the manufacturer's technical data sheet, catalogs, composition and percentages of materials, manufacturing process, function and use, photographs, drawings, the physical sample and, when the dispute calls for it, a technical analysis. Existing classification rulings on identical or equivalent products also count. In the answer to the request you may submit additional elements, such as videos, presentations, flowcharts or certifications, which the customs authority must assess as a whole (Law 2586, art. 70). Evidence is requested in the answer and taken during the evidence period (art. 71).

No. Classification determines which subheading the goods fall under and therefore which rate applies; valuation determines the customs value on which taxes are assessed. Both can appear in the same import, but they are argued with different reasoning and evidence: in classification, the technical data sheet, composition and use carry weight; in valuation, the invoices, contracts, payments and valuation method. The law distinguishes the assessment that corrects inaccuracies causing an underpayment of taxes (Law 2586, art. 57, no. 1, and art. 58) from the one that corrects inaccuracies affecting valuation (art. 57, no. 2), and provides that the correction assessment does not prevent a later exercise of the power to verify valuation (art. 58). If your case is about value, see Ligal's page on customs valuation.

It depends on the technical evidence and the exposure. The law provides for two specific situations: (1) partial errors in the serial or descriptions that do not involve different goods or a change of subheading with higher taxes are not penalized with 15% of the FOB value if the correction declaration is filed within 30 business days after the authority detected the errors (Law 2586, art. 15, no. 15.2.2.4); and (2) if an incorrect classification detected in a post-clearance audit requires proving restrictions, there is no seizure if the importer files the declaration, pays the higher taxes and proves the restrictions within a term of no more than 30 days from when DIAN informs it (art. 26, paragraph). Outside those cases, correcting makes sense when the technical analysis supports DIAN's subheading and the exposure is high, but it closes the debate on the merits; contesting makes sense when the evidence supports your classification. Whether correcting changes the penalty that applies depends on the case and the timing, and is assessed before acting.

The law provides a way out for this situation: when in the post-clearance audit DIAN finds that the importer filed the declaration and paid the taxes, but identifies an incorrect tariff classification that implies proving compliance with legal and administrative restrictions, the goods are not seized if the importer files the corresponding customs declaration, pays the higher taxes and proves the restrictions within a term of no more than 30 days counted from when DIAN identifies and informs it of the improper classification (Law 2586, art. 26, paragraph). That is why time is critical in these cases. In addition, the deadline to answer the special customs request may be extended, without exceeding 70 business days, when it is necessary to prove restrictions as support for the correction declaration (art. 70). If the goods have already been seized, see DIAN seizure and forfeiture.

It is the ruling you request before importing to know under which subheading your goods classify. The importer, exporter, producer or anyone legitimately entitled may request an advance ruling, which covers tariff classification, valuation and origin, among other topics (Decree 1165, art. 298). It is mandatory as long as the information is truthful and the facts do not change, and it is a supporting document of the import declaration; the applicant must report changes in the assumptions within 15 days, and it has no effect if it was issued on false, inaccurate or incomplete information (art. 299). DIAN issues it within 2 months after filing, with a sample of the goods when necessary; it may request information in the following month and you have 2 months, extendable once, to answer, otherwise the request is deemed withdrawn (art. 300, text amended by Decree 659 of 2024). It remains in force while the conditions under which it was issued remain (art. 301). It may be denied if the matter is under verification, review, appeal or court proceedings (art. 298).

The classification ruling may be advance (before the import), ordinary (at the request of any interested party, other than the advance one) or ex officio (to harmonize criteria), and all are supporting documents of the import declaration (Decree 1165, art. 304). The ordinary one is resolved within 2 months of filing, may be appealed and follows the same information request scheme (art. 305). The ruling applies to the applicant from the day after it becomes final and to other persons from its publication in the Diario Oficial; ex officio and unification rulings become generally binding three months after their publication, and all remain in force while the conditions under which they were issued remain (art. 306). Because it applies from finality, it serves to prevent future imports; declarations already filed are defended within the DIAN proceeding.

The import declaration becomes final three years after it is filed and accepted, unless a special customs request has been notified (Decree 1165, art. 188). That is why an import with a debatable subheading can be reviewed during that period. It is advisable to keep the technical data sheet, the catalog and the samples of each imported item, together with the supporting file for the chosen subheading.

The reconsideration appeal lies against the official assessment, filed within 15 business days after notification (Law 2586, art. 88), and DIAN must resolve and notify it within five months (art. 94). The same article 88 provides for the cases in which whoever properly answered the special customs request may skip the appeal and go directly to the administrative courts, under the terms of the law governing that proceeding. Appeal lies against advance and ordinary classification rulings (Decree 1165, arts. 298 and 305). Which route suits your case depends on the stage and on the evidence provided.

Ligal is a firm specialized in tax, customs and tax-criminal law. Led by Juan Santiago Rodríguez Prieto, an ex-DIAN tax lawyer, together with accountant Jeysson Pulido and LIGAL Auditores (certified public accountants), we combine the legal argument with technical and accounting evidence and handle the defense end to end: the answer to the request, the official assessment, the appeal and the lawsuit. Our work is backed by 5.0 / 5 on Google with 36 reviews: https://share.google/VVzMvULrOj8Mj52Au. The team handles real cases of audits, enforced collection and tax litigation. No result is guaranteed.