FOOTWEAR TO BE DEARER.

Western Star, 4 March 1938, Page 3

FOOTWEAR TO BE DEARER.

PROPHECY MADE IN AUCKLAND., MUCH HIGHER COST OF CLOTHING. AUCKLAND, March 2. 'Strongly opposing tho statement by the Minister of 'Finance and Customs, the Hon. W. Nash, that although duties have been increased it does not necessarily follow that internal prices will rise, several leading retailer s and importers yesterday produced figures to suggest that there will be sharp advances in prices of many classes of goods as a result of the higher tariff affecting considerably the cost of living. Clothing and footwear wore given as particular of classes of imported goods for which, higher pricc s would necessarily be the 'result. It was stated that the bulk of children’s shoes were imported and thi s class of footwear would now carry a 50 per cent, price advance, “Th e importation of some lines of low-priced English footwear will stop,” said one footwear importer. “I should say that at least 150,000 fewer pair s of British shoes will now he imported. By mass production, English factories have been supplying cheap women’s and children’s shoes, and these will now be subject to a flat rate duty of 3s. A child’s pair of sandals costs Is 4d in England. On the old rate of duty there was an addition of 2id; now it is 3s. We ca.n buy a woman’s summer walking shoe at 3s. Hitherto the duty was 7d; now it is 3s. < At least 100,000 pairs of children’s sandals are absorbed -each year, and so far as I know no Dominion manufacturer produces sandals except in one factory, which supplies a portion of the retail requirements of the patient firm. The labour costs alone in New Zealand in the manufacture of a pair of sandals would be higher than the English purchase price.”

EFFECT OF LANDING CHARGES.. This, retailer instanced the case of a child’s school shoe costing 3 S 6d in England, which under the old scale of duties would cost the retailer about 6s to land. Tho.retail price would be about 9s. It would now ’cost about 8 S 3d to land, and would be, retailed at approximately 13s. Tile corresponding size of a New Zealand slice would be sold at about 13s 6d. Up to now, however, about 75 per cent, of children’s shoes consumed in New Zealand were imported. Dearer rimes would not bear the s ame relative rise in cost as cheaper shoes, because They would be subject to a duty, of 5 per cent., whereas the lower quality shoe carried the minimum rate of 3s, the tariff increase being 5 per cent, or 3s, whichever wa s the greater. That applied to English shoes. For Australian the flat rate was 4s. and for foreign 6s. In his cpinion Czechoslovakian footwear* would be wiped off tile market.

WHAT ADVANCES REPRESENT. Retailer,.. supplied examples of a rise in landed costs on various classe s of goods well beyond the actual advance in duty. On foreign apparel, which included a comprehensive range of goods, the duty had been increased from ,50 to 65 per cent., a rise of 15 per cent. With duty and surtax the old rate was 67.37 per cent., and under the new scale the addition was lifted to 87.58 pei; cent. But whereas the sales tax represented 12.17 per cent, on a 50 pei cent, duty, it was 13.55 per cent, on the new. That* meant in substance that the rise of 15 per cent, in duty represented an added cost of 22£ per cent. Canada was now the- biggest supplier in the world of silk hosiery. The duty on hosiery had beep increased from 32$ per cent, to 55 per cent. Australian shirts and pyjamas were now subject to a duty of 40 per* cent., instead of 20 pei cent. There was no exchange or surtax in this instance, but nevertheless the landing charges were increased by 23 per cent. The duty on men’s and boys clothing imported from Australia had been increased from 25 to 40 per cent., this making a difference in added landing charges of 17 per cent.

DOMINION PRODUCTION. “Mr Nash has stated that us a result of. increased production and consequent greater efficiency in production, New Zealand manufacturers should he in. a position to reduce prices,” said one prominent retailer. “That is absurd. The question really i s .whether the local manufacturer can increase the output of merchandise that the public wants, taking into consideration style changes that are not originated in New Zealand, but overseas. . The local manufacturer i s so limited in his scope that the major requirements are drawn from overseas.” It was further pointed out that there was a fashion Jag in New Zealand, and the public naturally turned to overseas goods for the la,test in ideas-