IMPERIAL CONFERENCE.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXIX, Issue 102, 20 June 1911, Page 5

IMPERIAL CONFERENCE.

BRITAIN’S OVERSEA JNVESTVI ENTS. By Electric Telegraph—Copyright United Press Association. Loudon, June 19. The Imperial Conference sat at 2 p.rn. In reply to General Botha, Mr. Lloyd-George, Chancellor of tiio Exchequer, said that Britain was tlie world s greatest lending country. She had three thousand millions invested overseas, and if the income tax .revenue was made dependent on the amount charged iu the countries where the money was invested it would cause Lhc imposition of another penny, and later probably another twopence, on the resident of Britain. It was impos-

sible for him to face such a contingency immediately after the irreat struggle of 1909-10. Regarding the exemption suggested by General Botha, the amount was small, and the difficulty of administration great. It was impossible to check with accuracy these claims, and the authorities would

>e compelled to accept every claimant’s statement. General Botha’s final suggestion, which was now advanced for the first time, raised a point worthy of consideration. He would ascertain the possible effect, and decide later.

General Botha hoped for early uniform legislation as to death duties in South Africa. He suggested that death duties should be charged to companies only in the county whore they wore registered. Mr. Lloyd-Gcorgc remarked that the proposed concession- regarding death duties w ould ultimately cost the British Exchequer £2,500,000 a year, i’iio provision of the Finance Act in question was applicable to thirty-five .Monies. The arrangement generally ■was satisfactory, although it did not

ippoar to work well in South Africa. Recently ho invited a conference of parties interested to meet him, and the Hoard of Trade, hut the support they were prepared to givto to any drastic legislation was not encouraging. In fact, there was considerable difference of opinion as to how far, under proper conditions, the Shipping Conference would go, and whether the system involved an advantage or disadvantage to the country’s trade. In view of the magnitude of the mercantile marine it was not easy to legislate concerning its interests, unless a considerable body of opinion was behind him, but the Government would keep the-matter under consideration and watch' developments in South Africa and elsewhere. Mr. Bordeur said that Canada had •10 serious objection to the motion, but shrious injustice was done, not bv the Shipping Conference, but by a'British

insurance combine inserting a clause m their policies imposing higher premiums on ships entering British North American ports. Mr. Pearce stated that experience ml; set Australians very definitely igainst rebates. Legislation in connection with the coastal trade had proved that suppression of rebates did not interfere with the regularity of the service, stability of rates, or with other matters beneficial to trade. The conference system was a distinct disidvantago to the United Kingdom, if the companies wanted the advantage of a British market it was only fair that the Exchequer should tax them.

( Mr. Malan asked if Mr. LloydCJoorgo would consider the suggestion if paying the difference Jbetwcon the colonial and the Home taxes in connection with death duties, equally with the income tax.

.Mr. Lloyd-G'corge promised to con;ider the matter, hut said it was rather ,a different matter. Mr. Buxton suggested to add tlio following words, “in so far as such ■oin bines are prejudicial to trade.” Ho ".•lid he must not, however, bo considered necessarily as agreeing with ill Mr. Graaf’s arguments nr his conclusions. They must look a t thequos:ion irom a more general standpoint, do reminded the conference, in connection with tiie Hoy a I Commission on rebates in 19UG, whereon the l)o-

’.unions were represented, that, ncjth--3r t!io majority nor minority report made very drastic suggestions. They proposed not the abolition of rebates out tiie creation of an association of dioso concerned, with certain powers to bo conferred by tiic Board of Trade. ;ho initiative lor carrying out the proposals was largely loft to the partios interested, hut shippers, inerdiants, traders, and manufacturers litl not manifest any great desire to oress the Board of Trade.

One of .New Zealand’s resolutions regarding double income tax, also General Botha’s on tiie same subject Ond on death duties, were withdrawn. ‘- 11- ■ Ward recognised, from ap.r. Lloyd-George’s exidanation, at a suh-confereiico, where the'matter was ■ idly discussed, that the proposed change was so serious as far as the British Government was concerned, as to .make acceptance impossible. But it would bo very advantageous if some system could ho arranged to miti’■ato or obviate tiie present hardship on income tax payers. General Botha said ho was disdpoomted there was so little progress on the question since last conference, and mggested the Motherland should exempt persons oi small incomes as long is they resided; in some Dominion. The position might lie partly met by extending the principle embodied in the imperial death duties legislation. If ’die Homo Government was unahlo to \<i liie whole way, he suggested that " hero a resident in the United Kin.rilom invested money m the colonics lie should pay only the difference between the colonial and (he Motherland income taxes. This would stimulate ki itJ.sji investment within tlio Kniplre • uui diminish the amount invested elsewhere.

Mr. Lloyd-George stated that the iboiition ol the double income tax could involve a loss to the British Exchequer of £2,000,000 yearly, and |I)G amount would tend to increase. Ibe Royal Commissio nshowod that’ mder tiie Shipning Conference lines! no preferential svstem operated in ayour ol the 1 nited States .against ■ ntam. It also disclosed, the fact he.t the svstem extended fo tiie Aus•■"mn overseas trade.” There was a strong agitation iu Australia in favour h the Government owning the liners ■■teaming between Australia and Brihim to prevent the producer being exploited and deprived of the profits it the market.

; ‘' ll d• y* • Ward considered that '•oath Africa had a substantial grievincc. lie supported the resolution, turnip;!), as tar as Now Zealand was inn corned, lie was unable to agree to ill Mr. (Iraaf’s arguments. SouthAfiea iiad special difficulties. New Zealand must also study the particular needs of her own people. Owing to the ■peculiarities of her trade and the position ol rebates she could not exist but for her oversea trade. Many traders were compelled to pay double rates on special articles of commerce. Large refrigerating steamers were required for frozen moat, and dairy produce, and if tramp steamers wore given, ordinary cargo not requiring refrigerating, double rates would have to be paid for frozen moat and dairy produce. He always insisted that the smallest producer should be

placed on an equality with the largest shipper. New Zealand, on the whole, had placed her shipping business on a satisfactory footing, hut he recognised South Africa’s difficulties. Mr. Graaf declared that South Africa intended to proceed until she obtained reasonable rates and conditions. The resolution, as amended, was agreed to.