TARIFF ARITHMETIC

Press, Volume LXIX, Issue 21034, 9 December 1933, Page 6

TARIFF ARITHMETIC

TO TUB BDITOB 0* THS PBIS3. Sir,—ln the short article under above heading, are you not in error In saying that the shippers, of such lines as butter, stock, etc., from the Free State into Britain, do not pay the duties on them? The imposition of these duties has not raised the price paid by the consumers, nor has that price been lowered. What has taken place is that part of the amount paid by the consumer is deflected into the hands of the British Government. As between the Free State and Britain, a smaller sum is being transferred from the latter to the former. This is one of those cases to which your theory does not apply, though quite sound in some other cases, the reason in this case being, that Britain is the only market available, and as that market can secure full supplies of such commodities as those mentioned from other sources at the same price as before, the Free State must be content a lower net price. While this is true as a general statement of the position, there may be a small amount of difference in favour of the Free State, through certain customers preferring Free State goods to others. The same applies to other imports as well. The difference, however, between (say) the selling price of New Zealand and Danish butter, since a duty was placed on the latter, indicates that British customers are paying the duty, and in that case your argument would apply, though it does not, in the case of the Free State.—Yours, etc.,

Governor's Bay, December 7, 1933. IThe essential point is that the revenue derived from the tariffs en Irish Free State imports is contributed by British, not by Free State, taxpayers. If the Free State exporter at the same time has to accept a smaller price, this is due to market conditions, which might change; but nothing can alter the fact that British customs revenue comes out of the British pockets.—Ed., "The Press."]