CUSTOMS INCREASES

Evening Star, Issue 20942, 5 November 1931, Page 7

CUSTOMS INCREASES

PROBABLE YIELD; £1,300,000 LOCAL MANUFACTURERS SAFEGUARDED [From Our Pabliambntart EaronTiß.] WELLINGTON, November 4. . According to the Minister of Finance, (Mr Stewart), who moved the second reading of the Customs Amendment Bill in the House to-night, the additional duties, including Excise, which it confirms, should bring . increased revenue of £1,300,000. It was estimated when presenting tho Supplementary Budget, that the total Customs revenue for the year would be £6,750,000, but tho revenue collected during the seven months of tho present financial year was £3,171,429, or about £422,000 'below the estimate for that time. “It is impossible to read the future,” added Mr Stewart, “ but, taking into consideration the possibility of a continued increase in the prices of our primary products, there is some reason for believing that relatively higher returns may be expected for the ensuing months of the year.” The principal items included in the Bill from which increased revenue is anticipated, and the additional amounts expected from those items during the portions of the year in which they will be in operation, are; — Tea, £92,0()0. Sugar, £210,000. • , Tobacco, £240,000. Apparel and hosiery, £86,000. Silks and artificial silk, £42,500. Chinaware, _ £30,000. Floor coverings, £18,500. Motor spirit, £IBO,OOO. Other spirit, £IBO,OOO. Other items, £71,000. Primage, £IBO,OOO. Total, £1,150,000. The amount expected from the increased Excise duty on beer is £150,000, making a grand total of £1,300,000. Referring to the clause imposing primage duty of 3 per cent, ad valorem on all goods imported from British and foreign countries which are otherwise free of duty except on certain goods, the Minister said requests had been made for the exemption of other lines of goods from primage duty, but, owing to great pressure of work, he had not yet had an opportunity of fully considering these applications. Power was contained in the Bill to exempt by Order in Council, and lie proposed, as soon as possible, to go fully into tho requests which had been received. Australian exchange clauses enabled a higher duty to be charged on Australian goods, in view of the exchange premium. The Minister said the primary object was to protect New Zealand manufacturers, and the Government would _ later receive _ some revenue through income tax. _ This was the reason why it was decided that when the importer of the goods was not a retailer or manufacturer ho would be allowed to retain the exchange premiums, provided he came to an arrangement with the department that prices would not be reduced on account of the exchange benefits, and that he would sell to wholesalers and retailers only. “I am well aware that some members think this policy gave an advantage to certain importers over others, but a little consideration will show that the main object in view was the safeguarding of New Zealand industries. There was a choice of two evils in .dealing with the matter, .and I think that the lesser evil was chosen. When a dumping duty is claimed, it is charged on the amount of the exchange premium in excess of 5 per cent. It is recognised that, in a country in which currency is depreciating, or depreciated, internal prices sooner or later adjust themselves to the altered conditions.” Imports generally had fallen about 42£ per cent. It was interesting to note _ that_ the importations of the principal lines ,of goods of a class or kind made in New Zealand had decreased about 411 per cent., which showed that the measures which had been taken had achieved the result aimed at. However, as certain of commerce and mercantile organisations doubted whether the present legislation warranted the action which had been taken, the Government had not time to consider the course it would adopt after the clause became Jaw, but it was intended that the whole matter be reviewed as soon as possible. HOUSE SITS TILL DAWN BILL PUT THROUGH [Per United Press Association.] WELLINGTON, November 5. Mr C. A. Wilkinson (Egmont) moved that tho second reading of the Bill should be postponed until next sitting day to enable the Government to consider the direful effects of tho duties upon the price of wheat, flour, and bread. When tho committee stage commenced, the discussion on the short title centred mainly on the incidence of the increased petrol tax. Mr Fletcher strongly advocated that tho importing companies should be compelled to carry the impost, and that the consumers should be protected by the Government, fixing the selling price of motor sprit Mr Stewart said a law might bo passed fixing the selling price of petrol, but he did not know how it would work out in practice, unless there were some control of the source of supply. Moreover. lie did not know how a foreign corporations tax such as had been suggested by the Select Committee on Highways Finance could bo made to operate in the direction desired. There could ho no guarantee that it wbuld not bo passed on to tho consumers. The Minister said he had made inquiries as to the proportion of the tax tho companies carried, and their argument, he understood, was that, owing to adverse exchange, and tho depreciated state of our .currency, they had to meet an extra' charge of threepence or fourpence, although the twopence they were passing on was the amount of the additional impost. Mr llushworth, contending that there had been precedents during the war of Government imposing a “ lid,” suggested that it. should bo possible for the Government to fix the maximum price at which a commodity might be sold. Mr Stewart said the question of jprice fixation was one of tho most difficult any Government could tackle, especially when there was lack of substantial competition in an industry. Tho short title was passed at 3.20 a.m. The Leader of the Opposition divided tiie Houso on the clause imposing a 3 per cent, primage duly. The clause was retained. When the _ clause dealing with the special provisions as to duties on wheat

and flour imported from countries whose currency in relation to New Zealand currency is appreciated or depreciated, was under consideration, Mr Rushwortli moved to extend these provisions to all commodities. He said that if Now Zealand’s currency was depreciated in relation to that of the country from which goods were imported, it would' mean that the consumers would have to pay a higher price, and, unless the dnty_ was reduced, there would he hardship. Mr Stewart explained that in tho case of wheat and flour there was a sliding scale of duties. Mr Rushworth’s suggestion would he unworkable, because, if it was applied to other commodities which wore not on a sliding scale, the duty would have to he fixed at varying rates from day to day, as the exchange rate moved; and also at varying rates with respect to different countries. Tho amendment was rejected by 3!) to 20.

Mr Savage moved to restore the tax on tea to its oritdnal position. This was defeated by 36 to 20. Mr Wilkinson moved a number of amendments seeking to reduce the basis of the wheat duty from 5s to 4s at the country of origin, and of flour duty from £l3 10s to £ll at tho country of origin, and a!so_ to reduce tho rate of duty, when applied, from 8d a bushel to 3d a bushel in the case of wheat, and from 12s a ton to £1 5s in tho ease of flour. He did not press nil the amendments to a division, but those on which tho committee did divide were rejected by 36 to 20 and 30 to 19 respectively. , An amendment moved by Mr Fletcher to eliminate the additional 2d a gallon petrol tax was defeated on the voices. 'l’he 11:1) was put through the committee, unamended, read a third time, and passed.