Home About How we work Cases Reviews Oversized and project cargo Container shipping Reefer shipping Supplier sourcing in China Tools Glossary Blog 0 800 20 12 67 Free check-up
HomeBlogIncoterms 2020
Reference · International trade

Incoterms 2020: all 11 rules and where they cost you money

Incoterms are eleven three-letter rules that split two things between seller and buyer: cost and risk. Not title. Not payment terms. Only who pays for what, and from which moment the cargo becomes your problem.

The rules in force are Incoterms 2020. No revision is expected before 2030, so what you learn today will hold for years.

The most expensive mistakes happen not where the rule was chosen wrongly. They happen where it was read carelessly: in four rules out of eleven the cost point and the risk point do not coincide. The seller pays freight to Constanta — but the cargo is already yours from Ningbo. Below: a table of all eleven, seven traps from practice, and our case where switching CIF to FOB removed thousands of dollars in demurrage.

What Incoterms do not cover

Half of all disputes start here. The rule in the invoice looks as if it settled everything. It settled two things out of many.

A rule is always written together with a named place: FOB Ningbo, CIF Constanta, DAP Kyiv, 4 Promyslova St.. Without the named place the rule is incomplete, and it is exactly the vague “somewhere in the port” that produces the longest email threads.

The table: all 11 Incoterms 2020 rules

The orange dot is where risk becomes yours. The hollow blue one is where the seller's costs end. In group C they are pulled apart, and the band between them shows what you are already liable for while someone else still pays.

Risk passes to the buyer
Cost for the seller ends

Where there is a gap between the dots, the seller is still paying for carriage but the cargo is already yours. That gap is where disputes over who covers the loss begin.

Seller's premisesExport clearanceOrigin terminalOn boardMain carriageDestination terminalImport clearanceBuyer's door
E

Departure

The seller carries nothing. The buyer collects — from the factory yard.

EXWEx Worksat seller's premisesany mode of transport

The seller makes the goods available at their premises. Everything else — loading, export clearance, freight, duty — is on the buyer.

The trap that makes ICC itself advise against EXW. In most countries only a local company can file the export declaration. Under EXW your Chinese supplier is not obliged to, and you physically cannot: no Chinese tax number, no customs registration. The cargo sits at the factory until the seller agrees to file it “as EXW loaded”. ICC explicitly recommends using FCA.

The second EXW trap is loading. Under the rule the seller is not obliged to load the goods onto your vehicle. And even when the seller does load them, it happens at your risk, because risk passed to you the moment the goods were placed at your disposal. To change that, responsibility for loading has to be written into the contract separately. See the example below.

F

Main carriage unpaid

The seller delivers to the carrier and clears export. You book and pay for the freight.

FCAFree Carrierat named placeany mode of transport

The seller hands the goods to your carrier at the named place and clears export. The handover point is either the seller's premises or a terminal.

A 2020 addition — and it works only half the time. A letter of credit requires a bill of lading marked “on board”. But under FCA the seller has already completed delivery before loading onto the vessel and holds no such document. Incoterms 2020 added a mechanism: the buyer instructs their carrier to issue an on-board bill of lading to the seller. Lawyers call it unworkable — write it into the contract separately.

FASFree Alongside Shipalongside the vesselsea freight only

The seller places the goods on the quay next to the vessel. Loading on board is already yours.

FOBFree On Boardon board the vesselsea freight only

The seller loads the goods on board the vessel. From that moment the risk is yours.

FOB was designed for bulk, not for containers. A container reaches the terminal days before the vessel. All those days it is out of the seller's hands — yet formally the risk is still theirs. A reach stacker crushes the box the day before loading: that is the seller. A day later, already on the vessel: that is you. Proving exactly when is close to impossible. For containers ICC recommends FCA.

C

Main carriage paid

The most dangerous group. The seller pays freight to the destination port — but hands you the risk at the very start. The orange band is that gap.

CFRCost and Freightfreight prepaid to portsea freight only

The seller pays the freight to the destination port. Risk passes to you the moment the goods are loaded on board at the port of shipment.

CIFCost, Insurance and Freightfreight plus minimum coversea freight only

Same as CFR, plus the seller arranges insurance in your favour.

“Insured” here means the bare minimum. CIF requires only Institute Cargo Clauses C cover — a list of named perils, not “everything”. And the policy often ends at the destination port rather than at your warehouse, leaving the inland leg bare. If you need full cover, agree Clause A separately or insure the cargo yourself. Why cargo insurers refuse to pay →

CPTCarriage Paid Tocarriage prepaidany mode of transport

The seller pays for carriage to the named place of destination. Risk passes to you on handover to the first carrier — that is, right at the start.

The most common expensive mistake in all of Incoterms. The buyer sees the seller paying for delivery to the destination and assumes the cargo is the seller's responsibility all the way there. It is not. A container disappears mid-ocean and the loss is entirely yours, even though someone else paid the freight. The same applies to CIP, CFR and CIF.

CIPCarriage and Insurance Paid Tocarriage plus full coverany mode of transport

Same as CPT, plus insurance. The main change in the 2020 edition: CIP now requires Clause A — full cover. CIF was left at Clause C.

D

Arrival

The seller is responsible for the cargo up to the destination. The difference between the three rules is who unloads and who clears import.

DAPDelivered at Placeready for unloadingany mode of transport

The seller brings the cargo to the named point ready for unloading. Unloading and import clearance are yours.

Two traps at once. First, unloading: the driver arrives and there is nothing on site to lift the cargo off. The seller's obligation ended on arrival, and the waiting time is billed to you. Second, while you clear import the cargo sits there, and demurrage and storage run on your account. The question of who pays for delay if customs drags on belongs in the contract, not in a post-mortem.

DPUDelivered at Place Unloadedseller unloadsany mode of transport

The only rule where the seller must unload. It replaced the former DAT in the 2020 edition.

If your contract says DAT, you are citing a revision that no longer exists. The term was removed in 2020: DAT was tied to a terminal, DPU works for any place.

DDPDelivered Duty Paidduties paidany mode of transport

The maximum for the seller: they carry, clear import and pay duties and taxes. You only take delivery.

Here the trap is not on your side but on the seller's — which is why DDP costs more than it looks. To reclaim the import VAT they paid, the seller must be VAT-registered in the country of import. A foreign supplier usually is not — so that VAT becomes an unrecoverable cost, which they bury in the price of the goods. You, on the other hand, could have reclaimed it. Hence the wording “DDP VAT unpaid” in contracts.

Four groups instead of eleven acronyms

You do not need to memorise eleven codes. The first letter tells you almost everything:

After that, only two refinements: whether the seller arranges insurance (an I is added — CIF, CIP) and whether it is a sea-only rule (FAS, FOB, CFR and CIF work on water only).

Case: frozen vegetables, CIF Constanta — and why we moved the client to FOB

A client shipped frozen vegetables. The term was CIF Constanta: the supplier booked the vessel, issued the bill of lading and paid the freight. It looks convenient — nothing to organise.

The supplier sent documents not in advance, but whenever they sent them. The voyage took a week. Every time it turned out there was an error in the bill of lading or the manifest, and corrections began. The cargo was already in port; the paperwork was not.

A reefer does not wait for free. The bill came in three parts every time: reefer monitoring, demurrage, storage. Thousands of dollars. Regularly.

We moved the shipment to FOB. The booking is ours, we issue the bill of lading, and an error shows up before the vessel sails rather than after it arrives.

Not one dollar of demurrage since.

Note what the real cause was.
Not the transfer of risk — on a reefer of vegetables it barely mattered. The cause was who holds the documents. Under CIF you see the bill of lading after the fact and cannot influence its quality. Under FOB you hire the carrier — so you run the paperwork too.

This is the case where “easier” and “cheaper” parted ways. CIF takes work off the importer — and takes with it control over the clock ticking in the port.

Case: a mobile crane on EXW — badly secured, and no one to claim against

We were delivering a mobile crane to a client. The term was EXW. The shipper loaded and secured the cargo himself, with his own hands, on his own yard.

Container with mobile crane parts: the load has shifted, straps are slack, components lie unsecured
This is how the cargo arrived. Lashings loose, parts shifted, some of it lying straight on the container floor.

When we filed a claim, the shipper rejected it outright. With one argument: EXW.

And formally he was right. Under EXW the seller is not obliged to load the goods — the obligation is discharged by placing them at your disposal at their premises. Risk passed to the buyer before loading. Which means that when the seller does load, they do it at your risk, not their own. To reverse that, responsibility for loading and securing has to be a separate clause in the contract.

Here is what to take from this.
The person who physically tightened the lashings and the person answerable for them are, under EXW, different people. The seller loaded. The buyer pays. This is not a shipper's trick — it is the literal meaning of the rule you signed.

That is why EXW is not advised for machinery, equipment and anything where lashing decides the outcome. If you do take it, a clause on loading and securing is mandatory — ideally naming who inspects the result before the doors close.

Seven traps that cost money

All seven are set out in the callouts in the table above. In short, so you have something to check against before signing:

Which rule fits your case

If you ship by in containers or by reefer, the Incoterms rule has to match how the cargo actually travels. It is the mismatch between the paperwork and the route that produces the invoices nobody planned for.

What changed in the 2020 edition

Not sure which rule is in your invoice, or whether it suits your cargo at all? Send us the invoice and we will look at it together. Free of charge, even if you ship with someone else.

FAQ

In brief

What are Incoterms in plain language?

Incoterms are eleven three-letter rules from the International Chamber of Commerce that split two things between seller and buyer: the cost of delivery and the risk of loss or damage to the cargo. The rule is stated in the contract and the invoice together with a named place, for example FOB Ningbo or CIF Constanta. The edition in force is Incoterms 2020.

Do Incoterms determine when title passes?

No. This is the most common misconception. Incoterms split cost and risk, but title is not among them — it is written into the contract as a separate clause. Incoterms likewise say nothing about payment terms, jurisdiction, or what happens if the wrong goods are delivered.

What is the difference between FOB and CIF?

Under FOB the seller loads the goods on board and you book and pay for the freight. Under CIF the seller books the vessel, pays freight to the destination port and arranges minimum insurance. The key difference is not money but control: under CIF the seller issues the bill of lading and you see the documents after the fact. Under FOB you hire the carrier, so an error in the documents shows up before the vessel sails.

Why does ICC advise against EXW and FOB for containers?

EXW requires the buyer to file the export declaration, and in most countries only a local company can do that — a foreign buyer has neither a tax number nor customs registration. FOB was built for bulk cargo crossing the ship's rail: a container stands at the terminal for days before loading, and in that window it is unclear whose risk it is. In both cases ICC recommends FCA.

What changed in Incoterms 2020 compared with 2010?

Three things. DAT was replaced by DPU — the rule now works for any place, not only a terminal. The minimum insurance under CIP was raised to Institute Cargo Clauses A, that is full cover, while CIF was left at Clause C. And a mechanism was added allowing the buyer to instruct the carrier to issue an on-board bill of lading to the seller, which is needed for letter-of-credit settlements.

Which Incoterms rule should I choose for a first shipment from China?

FCA or FOB, depending on the cargo: FCA for a container, FOB if you are working with a trusted shipper and bulk. Both keep the freight and the documents under your control. EXW is best avoided because of export clearance, while CIF and DDP look convenient but take away your control over the bill of lading and, in the case of DDP, your ability to reclaim the VAT as well.

Not sure which rule is in your contract?

Send us the invoice or the proforma — we will tell you what the term actually means, where your risk sits, and what the supplier's “convenient” condition really costs.

Quick contactCheck-up