The public ledger. [volume] (Maysville, Ky.) 1913-1968, 1921-11-25
WASHINGTON LETTER.
,CCCCCOCC @ OOoOOOOCs

Washington - Under the present
plan. II, for example, an articles costs
two dollars to make In Japan and four
dollars to make in Great Britain, and
there is tariff Of ten per cent. nd
valorem, II follows that the. articles
made In Japan would pay q tariff
duty Of twenty cents an dthe articles
made in Great Britain would pay a
tariff duty OF forty cents" says Sena-
tor Selden Spencer, of Missouri, who
favors the American valuation system
in the tariff bill now pending.
Senator Spencer aptly illustrates
the proposition. Let us suppose an i'm
porter brings into this country three
cameras, one from Great Britain, one
from Japan, and one from Germany.
The one from Great Britain costs him
$500; from Japan, $1,000; and from
Germany, because of the deprecated
mark, $500. The present law assesses
a duty OF Is per cent on the basis CT
the foreign value, wherefore the Brit
ish camera would pay duty Of $2,25;
the Japanese, $3.50; and the German.
rs cents. They may all be practically
alike, yet each pays a different duty,
an dthis duty may fluctuate with the
fluctuating exchange. But suppose the
wholesale selling price of an Ameri-
can camera of similar make is $4,000,
and the American valuation plan is in
operation. Then each of these cam
eras would pay dut equal to Is per
cent. of $4,000, or $500, the landed
price Of the British camera being
$500; Of the Japanese, $1,000; of the
German, $500. This is on the basis
of the present non-protective law.
The pending tariff bill, which in
corpcrates the American valuation
feature, placed duty Of 30 per cent |
o ncameras-30 per cent. Of the Amer
lean wholesale selling price. This
would mean that each of these cam
eras would pay $500 duty-the landed
price to the importer being for the
British camera $210O; for the Japan
ese. $500; for the German, $110O.
The importer pays three different du-
ties in the former case and the same
duty in the latter. And the duty re-
mains more or less constant, to the
JOY of the assessor.
Nor is it true that this would give
the home manufacturer an opportun-
ity to boost his prices. Suppose he
puts the wholesale price Of the cam
era up to $500. Then the landed
price of the British camera would be
$3.50 (s15.OO plus 80 per cent. Of
$4,000 or $3.50 under the manufac-
turer's price, whereas with the home
price at $4,000 the landed price of the
British article is s21.OO, the same APP
plying with more force to the other
two cameras.
With respect to ad valorem duties,
the American valuation plan is work
able, but when we get into compound
duties Specific and ad valorem on the
same articcle) it is not so flexible, and
considerable care must be exercised
in adjusting it to such conditions. No
tariff ever devised was 100 per cent.
perfect, but the American valuation
plan is vast improvement over any
yet suggested, particularly in vie wof
the demoralized state of foreign finan-
yes. The alternative suggested of ap-
plying ad valorem rates on the basis
of the foreign valuation expressed in
terms of the American dollar would,
because of daily exchange fluctuation,
create such confusion as to confound
utterly the administration of such a
measure by customs officials.