ANTI – DUMPING

Evening Post, Volume CIII, Issue 55, 7 March 1922, Page 11

ANTI - DUMPING

PROVISIONS OF THE LAW

WHAT MERCHANTS HAVE TO DO

The report of the sub-committee of the Council of the Chamber of Commerce, appointed to investigate the provision of the Customs Amendment Act, relating to dumping of goods from abroad, was considered at yesterday's meeting of the council. After setting out the provisions relating to dumping, the report mentioned that in the Act power was given to the Minister tfr determine, for the purposes of ths imposition of dumping, duties, the actual selling price of goods, the cost of production, or the current domestic vaJue, if it appeared to the Minister that the payment of dumping duty was being evaded oi' avoided by the importation! of goods other than on. sale, or in any other manner. Provision was made for formulating regulations to administer this portion of'the Act, and these regulations might provide for exemption from dumping duty where it was shown, that any goods Avere not made or sold in substantial quantities in New Zealand, or other parts of the British Dominions. The subcommittee reported! that the Controller of Customs had intimated that no definite procedure had been determined upon, in ■ the imposition of dumping duties, and that each possible case of tihe importation of goods whkh might be liable to dumping duties would be considered upon its merite. The committee thought it desirable that it should be pointed out clearly to the commercial community that the provisions of the Act would necessitate importers exercising extreme care before they entered into contracts for the purchase of goods' from overseas which were likely to come within,the provkbns of the section, and the conclusion! the committee came to was that, if importers had any apprehension that dumping duties might be charged, they should take stspa to lay the matter before the Customs authorities to obtain a ruling.

Mr. S. A. Longuet observed that, in future, cheap quotations from abroad would have to be viewed with suspicion. The price of the goodß in the country of origin would have to be ascertained; before a purchase was made. If there -were any special concessions in regard to railway or steamer freights, it had to be realised, that these might'be put on in New Zealand as a special duty. The operation of the Act was going to make importing very much more difficult than it had been previously, in the case of goods that competed with local manufactures.

The president, Mr. J.. T. Martin, stated that the other day a Belgian quotation was received for superphosphate at a price lower than the New Zealand price. Before anything couMi be done, it had to be ascertained wHether the quotation was a dumping one or not. That vras the position of merchants in New Zealand to-day. As the law stood, importers should satisfy themselves that they were not buying at a price lower than the domestic price in the country of origin. There was a, good deal of reason for the anti-dumping legislation.

Mr. A. F. Roberts remarked that when one thought of the legislation beiner submitted, in the United States, it would seem as if the members of the New Zealand Government had been "tboujrhtreaders." If the American legislation went through, there would be railway concessions, and all sorts of things. On th» motion of Mr. Roberts, it was decided toy circularise jnembers of the Chamber as to the nature of the antidimiping legislation. „...t , , . ;.- ■