S

FTA Rules of Origin Workbook

4.20

Derivation Chain

Step 1 Growth in Korea's import/export trade
→
Step 2 Policies to improve FTA utilization rates
→
Step 3 Automating FTA rules of origin documentation for SMEs
→
Step 4 Self-service origin documentation workbook

Problem

Small-to-mid exporters with $2.25M-$22.5M annual revenue (approximately 70% of all exporting companies) need certificates of origin to leverage FTA preferential tariffs, but the BOM (Bill of Materials)-based origin determination process is so complex that they either pay customs brokers $75-$225 per case or forgo the benefit and pay standard tariffs. The actual FTA utilization rate is around 70%, and non-utilizing companies pay an average of $3,750-$22,500 in unnecessary tariffs annually.

Solution

Upload a BOM Excel file and the system automatically determines origin criteria per HS code (tariff shift, value-added, process-based) and generates a draft certificate of origin with a supporting document checklist. Compares criteria differences across FTA agreements (Korea-EU, Korea-US, RCEP, etc.) and recommends the optimal agreement.

Target: Trade practitioners at small-to-mid export companies with $2.25M-$22.5M annual revenue, solo customs broker offices
Revenue Model: Per Transaction Billing — Free (2 determinations/mo) / $3.75 per case or $37/mo flat (30 cases/mo + certificate draft), 15% discount for annual payment
Ecosystem Role: Regulation
MVP Estimate: 2_weeks

NUMR-V Scores

N Novelty
4.0/5
U Urgency
5.0/5
M Market
4.0/5
R Realizability
4.0/5
V Validation
4.0/5
NUMR-V Scoring System
N Novelty1-5How uncommon the service is in market context.
U Urgency1-5How urgently users need this problem solved now.
M Market1-5Market size and growth potential from proxy indicators.
R Realizability1-5Buildability for a small team with realistic constraints.
V Validation1-5Validation signal quality from competition and demand data.
Each dimension is scored 1-5 and weighted into grade S/A/B/C/D.
SaaS N=.15 U=.20 M=.15 R=.30 V=.20 Senior N=.25 U=.25 M=.05 R=.30 V=.15

Feasibility (70%)

Tech Complexity
29.3/40
Data Availability
20.8/25
MVP Timeline
20.0/20
API Bonus
0.0/15
Feasibility Breakdown
Tech Complexity/ 40Difficulty of core implementation stack.
Data Availability/ 25Practical availability and cost of required data.
MVP Timeline/ 20Expected time to ship a usable MVP.
API Bonus/ 15Bonus for viable public API leverage.
Total 100 points; below 50% is filtered out.

Market Validation (58/100)

Competition
8.0/20
Market Demand
6.2/20
Timing
16.0/20
Revenue Signals
10.5/15
Pick-Axe Fit
12.0/15
Solo Buildability
5.0/10
Validation Breakdown
Competition/ 20Signal quality from competitor landscape.
Market Demand/ 20Demand proxies from search and mention patterns.
Timing/ 20Fit with current shifts in tech, behavior, and regulation.
Revenue Signals/ 15Reference evidence for monetization viability.
Pick-Axe Fit/ 15How well the concept serves participants in a trend.
Solo Buildability/ 10Practicality for lean-team implementation.
Total 100 points; below 50 is filtered out.

Technical Requirements

Backend [medium] AI/ML [medium] Frontend [low]
Dashboard