Silviase/jgov_v1.4_full_ann huggingface dataset:
Moreover, trade policies of developed economies, which deteriorate the terms of trade in developing economies, have also been discussed on a number of occasions.

The current model simulations support that the trade protection in the developed countries such as Japan has been harmful for the economic welfare of developing countries such as neighboring Asian countries. From the perspective of development of Asian countries, as discussed in Box 2 below, it is also indicated that they could enjoy much more terms of trade gains from unilateral import liberalization in Japan without liberalizing their own markets, compared with those from reciprocal trade liberalization both in Japan and Asian countries. However, it must be noted that partial rather than broadly based trade liberalization may have the opposite effects generating significant economic losses. $ ^{40} $

The impact of unilateral Japanese import liberalization on the Japanese economy is mixed. Japanese trade, including both imports and exports, would expand. Japanese prices would drop. These would result in increases in real GDP. These are entirely opposite outcomes compared with those according to Japan’s ODA capital outflows. However, utility may still be lost because of terms of trade effects, which in turn significantly benefit Asian countries.

## Box 2

## Significance of Multilateral Trade Liberalization

The economic benefits of partial trade liberalization and more broadly based trade liberalization are compared by running several CGE model simulations. One is Japan’s “unilateral” import liberalization, in which Japan eliminates import protection from the six Asian countries, while import protection in those six countries remains unchanged. Two is “bilateral” trade liberalization, in which Japan as well as the six Asian countries eliminate import protection in a reciprocal manner, while import protection among the six Asian countries, for example, between China and Indonesia, are not eliminated. Three is “regional” trade liberalization, in which Japan and the six Asian countries eliminate import protection among these seven countries, while import protection for other countries is maintained. Four is “worldwide” trade liberalization, in which all the countries in the world eliminate trade protection without any exception.

Macroeconomic gains measured in terms of changes in real GDP are parallel to the scope of trade liberalization. Broader liberalization measures would result in larger GDP gains regardless of either domestic import liberalization or that of trade partners. However, it must be noted that GDP is no longer a good indicator of economic welfare.

As far as improvements of economic welfare are concerned, it is shown that changes in utility are affected to some extent by whether a certain country liberalizes its own market. The six Asian countries would
enjoy significant gains from unilateral import liberalization in Japan. However, these would more or less be offset when Asian countries liberalize their trade with Japan in a reciprocal manner. On the contrary, Japan would benefit from reciprocal trade liberalization. Deterioration in terms of trade due to unilateral import liberalization could be more than offset by such bilateral trade liberalization.
Alternative Macroeconomic Gains of Trade Liberalization
Real GDP	Utility
Japan	Unilateral	Bilateral	Regional	Worldwide	Unilateral	Bilateral	Regional	Worldwide
China	0.06	0.16	0.18	1.02	-0.11	0.57	0.54	1.21
Indonesia	0.08	0.16	0.24	1.78	0.78	-0.06	0.17	1.36
Malaysia	0.06	0.11	0.17	1.11	0.49	0.05	0.45	1.37
Philippines	0.05	0.16	0.50	1.74	0.16	-0.63	0.70	0.91
Thailand	0.22	0.43	0.63	2.34	1.56	0.32	1.04	2.05
Vietnam	0.21	0.23	1.09	3.27	1.86	1.05	1.71	4.08
World	0.04	0.10	0.13	1.02	0.03	0.08	0.11	0.92

### 2. Benefits and Costs of Aid and Trade

Macroeconomic benefits of Japan’s ODA loans and Japanese import liberalization in the six Asian countries are compared in Chart 9. It may be argued that entire Japanese import liberalization takes place once and for all, while the disbursement of Japan’s ODA loans continue over time. However, it may also be pointed out that both capital expenditures for ODA loans and tariff payment for trade protection are viewed as burdens by the Japanese taxpayers, $ ^{42} $ at a macro level. The impact of annual expenditures for ODA loans is compared with that of tariff payment every year.
Chart 9: Comparison of Macroeconomic Gains in Recipient Countries

As far as ODA loans are used for capital formation, sizable impacts on economic growth are expected. Estimating the impact of the actual amount of ODA capital flows to Asian countries, those on real GDP are shown to be significantly larger compared with the potential impact of Japanese import liberalization from those countries.

In contrast, as far as improvements in economic welfare are concerned, trade liberalization is shown to be much more beneficial to most Asian countries. This is a reflection of composition of economic gains from two alternative economic cooperation measures. As discussed above, expansion in production capacities is a primary factor of the benefits from ODA loans. Moreover, terms of trade gains are a crucial source of economic benefits in unilateral-and therefore partial-trade liberalization.

It may be pointed out that capital formation through ODA loans is effective for economic growth, while trade liberalization is efficient in welfare improvements. However, it does not necessarily mean that welfare improvements on average reduce poverty, as discussed above. In any event, two policy measures may more likely be complements rather than substitute for the development of developing countries.

In addition, it should be noted that reallocation of resources to more productive uses usually involves some adjustment costs. Implementation of ODA capital formation as well as import liberalization measures would result in the displacing of employment across industries within the economies. Employment in obsolete industries declines, harming workers in those industries. In a rapidly changing economy, some of these workers may find themselves without the skills required for the new jobs being created.
Estimated impacts on the structure of sectoral production according to Japan’s ODA loans and Japanese import liberalization are compared in Chart 10. Capital formation by Japan’s ODA loans would result in increases in sectoral production without any exception in the six Asian countries. Furthermore, the relative magnitudes of increases in production by the sectors may largely be determined by the sectoral distribution of ODA loans.

Chart 10: Changes in Industrial Structures
In contrast, Japanese import liberalization may result in a realignment of regional production. In principle, it would be in accordance with comparative advantage of the regions. According to conventional simulations by a CGE model of global trade, developing and transition economies are expected to expand production and exports of labor-intensive manufactured products as a result of broadly based trade liberalization measures.

However, such an impact may more likely be determined by degree of import liberalization by the sectors in the case of partial trade liberalization. The current simulations do not give such developments by the sufficiently disaggregated sectors. It is suggested that China and the Philippines would gain in primary sectors but lose in manufacturing sectors as a whole. On the other hand, contractions in several tertiary industries are suggested in some countries due to reallocation of production resources within the countries.

On the other hand, Japanese people may be concerned about the total amounts of ODA loans and trade protection in terms of the appropriate size of the government. In addition, sectoral variations in those payments and protections may be a much more serious concern from the viewpoint of distribution effects. ODA outflows are thought to be beneficial to certain exporting industries, while import protection could support non-tradable sheltered industries.

### V I. Conclusions and Recommendations

The main objective of this paper is to overview the developments of Japan’s ODA and assess their economic impacts on Asian countries. It has attempted to provide quantitative evaluation of Japanese economic cooperation measures by means of economic model simulations. The benefits of two alternative measures--one from capital formation by Japan’s ODA loans and the other from import liberalization in the Japanese market--are compared in view of the relative efficiencies of the economic policy measures. Key observations and findings are summarized as follows.

Allocation of Japan’s ODA both by region and sector would be reviewed. The appropriate amount of ODA to each country may vary when seen in terms of total value or scaled by a certain macro indicator such as population. In addition, trends in Japan’s ODA over time do not necessarily reflect the structural changes in Japanese trade and investment in Asian economies. In this regard, Japan’s ODA to China is not necessarily huge, while that to Indonesia is still over-represented relative to the other countries.

As far as macroeconomic gains of Japanese economic cooperation measures in recipient countries are concerned, capital formation through ODA loans is effective for
economic growth, while trade liberalization is efficient in welfare improvements. The two policy measures may more likely be complements rather than substitutes for the development of developing countries. Moreover, it must be noted that sectoral effects would be significantly different between the two policy measures of aid and trade both on the recipient and donor countries. A better policy mix may be sought in view of these distribution effects by sector, in addition to the appropriate size of policy measures in total.

Japan’s ODA has been called a “tool” of diplomatic policy. However, the geographical and sectoral distribution of aid need to be reviewed, first, in views of the effectiveness and efficiency of aid and trade for economic development, and second, in light of economic trends such as trade and investment.

## References

APEC (1995), 1995 Report on the APEC Regional Economy, Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation, Singapore

APEC (1997), The Impact of Trade Liberalization in APEC, Economic Committee, Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation, Singapore

Dee P., C. Geisler, G. Watts (1996), The Impact of APEC’s Free Trade Commitment, Staff Information Paper, AGPS, Canberra

Dee, P. and K. Hanslow (2000), Multilateral Liberalization of Services Trade, Productivity Commission Staff Paper, AusInfo, Canberra

Dee, P., A. Hardin and M. Schule (1998), APEC Early Voluntary Sectoral Liberalization, Productivity Commission Staff Research Paper, AusInfo, Canberra

Francois, J. F., B. J. McDonals and H. Nordstrom (1996), “Liberalization and Capital Accumulation in the GTAP Model”, GTAP Technical Paper No. 7

GATT (1994), “The results of the Uruguay Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations”, General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade

Hansen, H. and F. Tarp (2000), “Aid Effectiveness Disputed”, Journal of International Development, Vol. 12 No. 3

Hanslow, K., T. Phamduc and G. Verikios (2000), The Structure of the FTAP Model, Research Memorandum MC-58, Productivity Commission, Canberra

Hermann, L. (1996), Foreign Direct Investment and Technology Transfer in Transition Economies: An Application of the GTAP Model', HUMBOLDT-UNIVERSITAT ZU BERLIN Working Paper Nr. 28

Hertel, T. W. (1997), Global Trade Analysis: Modeling and Applications, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

Hertel, T. W., P. V. Preckel, J. A. L. Cranfield and M. Ivanic (2002), “Poverty Impacts of
Multilateral Trade Liberalization", paper presented at the fifth Conference on Global Economic Analysis, Taipei

Kawasaki, K. (1999), Applications of the Computable General Equilibrium Model: Simulation Analysis on Trade Liberalization and Regulatory Reform, NIHONHYORONSYA, Tokyo (in Japanese)

Nishigaki, A. and Y. Shimomura (1999), The Economics of Development Assistance, LTCB International Library Selection No. 7, LTCB International Library Foundation, Tokyo

Petri, P.A. (1997), "Foreign Direct Investment in a Computable General Equilibrium Framework," paper prepared for the conference, Making APEC Work: Economic Challenges and Policy Alternatives, 13-14 March, Keio University, Tokyo

Shimomura, Y., J. Nakagawa and J. Saito (1999), Political Economy of the ODA Charter, YUHIKAKU, Tokyo (in Japanese)

Shoven, J. B. and j. Whalley (1992), Applying General Equilibrium, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

UNCTAD (2001), World Investment Report 2001: Promoting Linkages, United Nations, New York and Geneva

World Bank (1998), Assessing Aid: What Works, What Doesn’t and Why, World Bank, Washington DC
昭和47年度政府関係機関決算書

(第 72 回 国 会 提 出)
## 目次

## 昭和47年度政府関係機関決算書

日本 専 売 公 社 …… 1
日本 国 有 鉄 道 …… 21
日本 電 信 電 話 公 社 …… 47
国 民 金 融 公 庫 …… 73
住 宅 金 融 公 庫 …… 85
農 林 漁 業 金 融 公 庫 …… 99
中 小 企 業 金 融 公 庫 …… 113
北 海 道 東 北 開 発 公 庫 …… 125
公 営 企 業 金 融 公 庫 …… 133
中 小 企 業 信 用 保 険 公 庫 …… 143
医 療 金 融 公 庫 …… 155
環 境 衛 生 金 融 公 庫 …… 165
沖 縄 振 興 開 発 金 融 公 庫 …… 173
日 本 開 発 銀 行 …… 187
日 本 輸 出 入 銀 行 …… 201
( 参 考)
コード番号について …… 229
( 1 )

昭和47年度日本専売公社決算書
## 昭和47年度 1010 日本専売公社収入支出決算書

## 收 入 支 出 决 算

昭和47年度日本専売公社における

収入済額は

1,026,774,034,193円

であつて

支出済額は687,142,413,883円

である。

したがつて、収入が支出を超過すること 339,631,620,310 円

である。

総収益

1,032,384,376,680 円

から

総損失 662,801,672,192 円

を控除すると

369,582,704,488 円

の利益を生ずる。さらに、日本専売公社法(昭和23年法律第255号。以下「法」という。)

第 43 条の 13 第 3 項の規定によつて積み立てる利益積立金 32,864,259,688 円

を控除すると

専売納付金は 336,718,444,800 円

となる。これから法第43条の13第4項の規定に基づき昭和48年3月31日に納付した概算納付額74,500,000,000円

を日本専売公社計令(昭和25年政令第320号)第11条第3項の規定により控除精算した

262,218,444,800 円
（4）日本専売公社収入支出決算書 収入支出決算

を法第43条の13第1項の規定によつて昭和48年5月31日国庫に納付することとして、本年度の決算を結了した。次に、収入支出決算に係る各事項の総額を示せば、下表のとおりである。
1 収 入
収 入
当 初 予 算 額 (円)	予 算 補 正 追 加 額予算補正修正減少額(△) (円)	合 計 (円)	収 入 済 額 (円)	収入予算額と収入済額との差(△は減) (円)
1,006,013,845,000	0	1,006,013,845,000	1,026,774,034,193
2 支 出
支 出 予 算 額	前年度繰越額(円)	予備費使用額(円)	予算総則の規定による経費増額(円)	支出予算現額(円)	支出済額(円)
当 初 予 算 額(円)	予算補正追加額予算補正修正減少額(△) (円)	合 計(円)	0	1,034,475,000	0	720,292,560,471	687,142,413,883
698,996,470,000	0	698,996,470,000	20,261,615,471	1,034,475,000	0	720,292,560,471	687,142,413,883
備 考	予算総則の規定による経費増額の内訳 第9条1,034,475,000円翌年度総越額の内訳 日本専売公社法第43条の3第1項本文9,311,429,477円
[収入支出決算額]
1 収 入
項	収 入 予 算 額 (円)	収 入 済 額 (円)	収入予算額と収入済額との差(△は減) (円)	増 减 理 由
01 た ば こ 事 業 収 入	956,892,430,000	983,251,367,828	26,358,937,828	製造たばこ売拡代が予定より多かつたこと等のため
日本専売公社収入支出決算書 収入支出決算 （ 5 ）

項目	収入予算額(円)	収入済額(円)	収入予算額と収入済額との差(△は減)	増減理由
02 塩事業収入	48,130,896,000	42,534,319,630	△	5,596,576,370	塩壳払代が予定より少なかつたこと等のため
03 共通収入	990,519,000	988,346,735	△	2,172,265	診療収入が予定より少なかつたこと等のため
収入合計	1,006,013,845,000	1,026,774,034,193	20,760,189,193
2 支出
項目	支出予算額(円)	前年度線越額(円)	予備費使用額(円)	予算総則の規定による経費増額(円)	流用増△減額(円)	支出予算現額(円)	支出済額(円)	翌年度線越額(円)	不 用 額(円)	備 考
01 給与其他諸費	76,596,637,000	0	0	1,034,475,000	777,764,042	78,408,876,042	77,436,125,923	0	972,750,119	不用額を生じたのは基本給等を要することが予定より少なかつたため仲裁裁定の実施等に伴い給与其他諸費に不足を生じたためたばこ事業費から422,914,000円諸手当を要することが多かつたため共通費から354,850,042円計777,764,042円流用
02 たばこ事業費	534,359,121,000	8,846,833,473	0	0	△516,653,000	542,689,301,473	528,606,778,024	5,117,493,107	8,965,030,342	不用額を生じたのは某たばこ購入費等を要することが予定より少なかつたため
03 塩事業費	46,942,980,000	3,773,286,633	0	0	0	50,716,266,633	39,415,459,683	4,141,678,870	7,159,128,080	不用額を生じたのは塩購入費等を要することが予定より少なかつたため
04 共通費	8,201,515,000	5,163,000	0	0	△354,850,042	7,851,827,958	7,270,505,480	11,809,000	569,513,478	不用額を生じたのは管理費等を要することが予定より少なかつたため
07 支払利子	4,000,000,000	0	0	0	0	4,000,000,000	899,760,268	0	3,100,239,732	不用額を生じたのは支払利子を要することが予定より少なかつたため
05 固定資産取得費	23,632,168,000	7,636,332,365	0	0	0	31,268,500,365	31,155,997,185	40,448,500	72,054,680	不用額を生じたのは附带事務費等を要することが予定より少なかつたため
10 沖繩復帰特別交付金	2,264,049,000	0	0	0	93,739,000	2,357,788,000	2,357,787,320	0	680
09 予備費	3,000,000,000	0	0	0	0	3,000,000,000	0	0	3,000,000,000
支出合計	698,996,470,000	20,261,615,471	0	1,034,475,000	0	720,292,560,470	687,142,413,883	9,311,429,477	23,838,717,111
予算総則に規定した事項に係る予算の実施結果
1 予算総則第2条の規定による債務負担行為
限 度 額(円)	負 担 済 額(円)
29,760,201,000	21,007,103,162
2 予算総則第4条の規定による借入金
借 入 金 等	限 度 額(円)	借 入 済 額(円)
長 期 借 入 金	125,000,000,000	74,500,000,000
短 期 借 入 金	210,000,000,000	153,000,000,000
3 予算総則第6条の規定による流用等
区	金	額(円)
(1) 予算総則第6条第1項第1号に定められた経費(役員給)へ流用した金額	4,040,000
(2) 予算総則第6条第1項第2号に定められた経費(基準内給与)へ流用した金額	160,042,000
(3) 予算総則第6条第1項第3号に定められた経費(基準外給与)へ流用した金額	258,832,000
(4) 予算総則第6条第1項第4号に定められた経費(交付金)へ流用した金額	93,739,000
4 予算総則第8条の規定による給与総額等
区	本 年 度 総 額(円)	予算総則第8条ただし書の規定による増加額(円)	計(円)	支 絡 額(円)
基 準 内 絡 与	38,367,186,000	1,925,995,000	40,293,181,000	39,520,727,041
基 準 外 絡 与	22,722,143,000	1,287,414,000	24,009,557,000	23,817,897,528
計	61,089,329,000	3,213,409,000	64,302,738,000	63,338,624,569
国民生活金融公庫財産目録 （ 7 ）

5 予算総則第9条の規定による特別給与の支出
区 分 金 額(円)
職員の能率向上による企業経営の改善によつて収入が予定より増加し、その収入の増加額の一部に相当する金額を職員に対する特別の給与として支出に充てた金額
昭和47年度日本専売公社債務に関する計算書
既往年度からの繰越債務額(円)	本年度の債務負担額(円)	計(円)	本年度の債務消滅額(円)	翌年度以降への繰越債務額(円)	備考
2,060,961,261	21,007,103,162	23,068,064,423	11,921,983,571	11,146,080,852	限度額	29,760,201,000円
[事項別内訳]
事項	既往年度からの繰越債務額(円)	本年度の債務負担額(円)	計(円)	本年度の債務消滅額(円)	翌年度以降への繰越債務額(円)	備考
塩事業費	2,060,961,261	2,010,752,182	4,071,713,443	2,060,961,261	2,010,752,182	限度額	10,700,000,000円
固定資産取得費	0	18,996,350,980	18,996,350,980	9,861,022,310	9,135,328,670	限度額	19,060,201,000円
合計	2,060,961,261	21,007,103,162	23,068,064,423	11,921,983,571	11,146,080,852
1 収 入
科 目	収 入 予 算 額 (円)	収 入 済 額 (円)	収 入予算額と収入済額との差(△は減)(円)
01 た ば こ 事 業 収 入	956,892,430,000	983,251,367,828	26,358,937,828
製 造 た ば こ 売 払 代	953,661,599,000	980,526,412,784	26,864,813,784
葉 た ば こ 売 払 代	2,886,678,000	2,033,632,999	853,045,001
雑 収 入	344,153,000	691,322,045	347,169,045
02 塩 事 業 収 入	48,130,896,000	42,534,319,630	5,596,576,370
塩 壳 払 代	47,443,388,000	42,124,526,040	5,318,861,960
雑 収 入	687,508,000	409,793,590	277,714,410
03 共 通 収 入	990,519,000	988,346,735	2,172,265
診 療 収 入	632,611,000	575,825,520	56,785,480
雑 収 入	357,908,000	412,521,215	54,613,215
収 入 合 計	1,006,013,845,000	1,026,774,034,193	20,760,189,193
2 支 出
科 目	支出予算額(円)	前年度線越額(円)	予備費使用額(円)	予算総則の規定による経費増額(円)	流用増△減額(円)	支出予算現額(円)	支出 済 額(円)	翌年度線越額(円)	不 用 額(円)
01 給 与 其 他 諸 費	76,596,637,000	0	0	1,034,475,000	777,764,042	78,408,876,042	77,436,125,923	0	972,750,119
11 役 員 給	103,368,000	0	0	0	4,040,000	107,408,000	107,387,770	0	20,230
11 職 員 給	63,718,515,000	0	0	0	469,712,356	64,188,227,356	63,224,113,925	0	964,113,431
11 休 職 者 給 与	165,349,000	0	0	0	△ 50,838,356	114,510,644	114,510,644	0	0
11 諸 手 当	5,237,600,000	0	0	0	440,660,793	5,678,260,793	5,678,260,793	0	0
( 10 ) 日本専売公社収入支出決算額内訳

科目	支出予算額(円)	前年度線越額(円)	予備費使用額(円)	予算総則の規定による経費増額(円)	流用増△減額(円)	支出予算現額(円)	支出済額(円)	翌年度線越額(円)	不用額(円)
61 児童手当	54,957,000	0	0	0	△ 30,480,000	24,477,000	24,477,000	0	0
15 共済組合負担金	7,026,946,000	0	0	0	△ 55,330,751	6,971,615,249	6,971,615,249	0	0
35 恩給負担金	289,902,000	0	0	0	0	289,902,000	289,902,000	0	0
11 業績賞与	0	0	0	1,034,475,000	0	1,034,475,000	1,025,858,542	0	8,616,458
02 たばこ事業費	534,359,121,000	8,846,833,473	0	0	△ 516,653,000	542,689,301,473	528,606,778,024	5,117,493,107	8,965,030,342
(たばこ消費税)
33 たばこ消費税	286,709,934,000	0	0	0	7,562,519,410	294,272,453,410	294,272,453,410	0	0
(販売費)	9,067,060,000	498,200	0	0	△ 286,910,339	8,780,647,861	8,779,683,201	964,660	0
19 販売報償費	44,900,000	0	0	0	△ 337,089	44,562,911	44,562,911	0	0
12 旅費	357,974,000	0	0	0	△ 2,527,323	355,446,677	355,446,677	0	0
13 業務費	4,072,888,000	498,200	0	0	△ 209,220,171	3,864,166,029	3,863,201,369	964,660	0
15 委託費	1,322,000	0	0	0	0	1,322,000	1,322,000	0	0
13 回送保管費	4,582,608,000	0	0	0	△ 74,949,114	4,507,658,886	4,507,658,886	0	0
36 郵政事業特別会計へ繰入	7,368,000	0	0	0	0	7,368,000	7,368,000	0	0
99 賠償及償還金	0	0	0	0	123,358	123,358	123,358	0	0
(試験研究費)	746,612,000	0	0	0	51,345,110	797,957,110	752,736,110	45,221,000	0
12 旅費	26,714,000	0	0	0	532,950	27,246,950	27,246,950	0	0
13 試験研究費	631,898,000	0	0	0	53,174,570	685,072,570	63,851,570	45,221,000	0
15 委託費	88,000,000	0	0	0	△ 2,362,410	85,637,590	85,637,590	0	0
(葉たばこ調達費)	161,297,306,000	6,552,477,642	0	0	△ 4,465,728,989	163,384,054,653	151,455,871,617	3,146,046,472	8,782,136,564
23 葉たばこ購入費	150,877,600,000	6,552,477,642	0	0	△ 2,961,091,748	154,468,985,894	142,605,735,515	3,146,046,472	8,717,203,907
12 旅費	796,945,000	0	0	0	△ 123,546,710	673,398,290	673,398,290	0	0
13 業務費	2,051,184,000	0	0	0	△ 236,018,138	1,815,165,862	1,815,165,862	0	0
15 委託費	40,292,000	0	0	0	△ 839,709	39,452,291	39,452,291	0	0
13 回送保管費	4,461,164,000	0	0	0	△ 767,313,706	3,693,850,294	3,693,850,294	0	0
13 葉たばこ納付運搬費	746,152,000	0	0	0	△ 130,003,954	616,148,046	616,148,046	0	0
99 補償金及補填金	923,346,000	0	0	0	△ 47,070,412	876,275,588	876,275,588	0	0
25 葉たばこ乾燥室施設整備費補助金	938,639,000	0	0	0	0	938,639,000	889,068,304	0	49,570,696
日本専売公社収入支出決算額内訳（11）

科目	支出予算額
(円)	前年度線越額
(円)	予備費使用額
(円)	予算総則の規
定による經費
増額
(円)	流用増△減額
(円)	支出予算現額
(円)	支出 済 額
(円)	翌年度線越額
(円)	不 用 額
(円)
45 たばこ耕作組合合併推進費
補助金	10,000,000	0	0	0	0	10,000,000	4,419,525	0	5,580,475
45 葉たばこ広域異常災害相互
救済制度補助金	33,000,000	0	0	0	0	33,000,000	23,218,514	0	9,781,486
23 貯 蔵 品 費	418,984,000	0	0	0	△ 199,844,612	219,139,388	219,139,388	0	0
(葉 た ば こ 加 工 費)	9,885,496,000	3,055,500	0	0	△ 1,996,885,013	7,891,666,487	7,871,660,487	20,006,000	0
12 旅
費	36,321,000	0	0	0	2,229,310	38,550,310	38,550,310	0	0
13 業 務 費	2,212,894,000	3,055,500	0	0	198,804,740	2,414,754,240	2,394,748,240	20,006,000	0
13 回 送 保 管 費	4,971,144,000	0	0	0	△ 1,500,928,408	3,470,215,592	3,470,215,592	0	0
23 材 料 品 費	2,142,687,000	0	0	0	△ 649,381,775	1,493,305,225	1,493,305,225	0	0
23 貯 蔵 品 費	522,450,000	0	0	0	△ 47,608,880	474,841,120	474,841,120	0	0
(た ば こ 製 造 費)	66,652,713,000	2,290,802,131	0	0	△ 1,380,993,179	67,562,521,952	65,474,373,199	1,905,254,975	182,893,778
12 旅
費	152,271,000	0	0	0	57,853,665	210,124,665	210,124,665	0	0
13 業 務 費	7,598,400,000	83,463,463	0	0	89,112,805	7,770,976,268	7,691,419,218	79,557,050	0
13 回 送 保 管 費	2,733,770,000	0	0	0	274,476,442	3,008,246,442	3,008,246,442	0	0
23 巻 紙 費	3,212,367,000	0	0	0	12,322,347	3,224,689,347	3,224,689,347	0	0
23 材 料 品 費	45,355,778,000	0	0	0	△ 1,141,734,649	44,214,043,351	44,214,043,351	0	0
23 貯 蔵 品 費	4,135,639,000	1,445,481,959	0	0	△ 673,023,789	4,908,097,170	3,633,393,731	1,274,703,439	0
23 製 造 た ば こ 購 入 費	3,464,488,000	761,856,709	0	0	0	4,226,344,709	3,492,456,445	550,994,486	182,893,778
03 塩 事 業 費	46,942,980,000	3,773,286,633	0	0	0	50,716,266,633	39,415,459,683	4,141,678,870	7,159,128,080
(購 入 費)	108,926,000	0	0	0	0	108,926,000	70,453,124	0	38,472,876
12 旅
費	46,054,000	0	0	0	0	46,054,000	26,441,045	0	19,612,955
13 業 務 費	62,172,000	0	0	0	0	62,172,000	43,812,079	0	18,359,921
15 委 託 費	200,000	0	0	0	0	200,000	200,000	0	0
99 補 償 金 及 補 填 金	500,000	0	0	0	0	500,000	0	0	500,000
(販 売 費)	6,276,451,000	0	0	0	0	6,276,451,000	5,688,209,630	0	588,241,370
12 旅
費	66,505,000	0	0	0	0	66,505,000	61,449,545	0	5,055,455
13 業 務 費	248,521,000	0	0	0	11,539,347	260,060,347	260,060,347	0	0
13 回 送 保 管 費	5,141,491,000	0	0	0	△ 12,254,793	5,129,236,207	4,663,532,439	0	465,703,768