The Waterbury Democrat., 1941-12-09
RELIEF IS SOUGHT

uruBs or Varlous kuluSI cOEkI Jute' etc.
 RELIEF IS
 SOUGHT
 Two attempts have been made to relieve these various agencies of the tariff tax burden. The first came in September when the REC asked Congress for permission to Issue notes that would increase it's funds by 9i,500, 100000. The bill also pro- posed that its subsidiary companies should be able to import defense materials without paying duty thereon. It was claimed this would cut the cost of the national defense program by the amount of tariff duty that would Dc eliminated.
 Jesse Jones, head of the REC, put in a statement showing that the Metals Reserve Company had made commitments totaling 9s60 040,000 for imports of bauxite, antimofiy, asbestos, cadmium, chrome, copper. graphite, iridium, lead, manganese ore, mercury, mica, nickel, tin, tung- Sten and zinc.
 Of these asbestos, chrome, nickel, tin and Q few others come in free under the various tariff laws. But metal antinony is taxed 2 cents per pound: bauxite, from which aluITis mum is obtained, q per ton; cad. miunn, IS cents per pound; copper, { cents per pound; lead, i.2 cents per pound of ore; manganese ore, cent per pound: tungsten ore, 50 cents per pound; mercury, 26 cents per pound, and zinc ore, i-2 cents per pound.
 Jones also testified that the De- fense Supplies Corporation had commitments for e7,7e0,eo0 for i'm. ports of various defense articles, Some of these like cork, manila fiber, kapok and quinine come in free of duty under the tariff laws, But jute pays 1 cent per pound, plus 10 per cent ad valorenl.
 MATTERS OF
 BOOKKEEPING
 Jones stated that up to date the two companies had not paid any tariff duty on any of their imports. He said the companies imported them for the Navy and under the present statutory authority of the Navy. Asked whether oil this StufT was being used for the Navy, he re. piled 1t was oil being used in the defense program. Senator Adams asked whether this procedure was not aTl evasion of the law, aS all was not used for the Navy Itself. Jones replied:
 Not necessarily. We may nave to pay the import duty, but If we are allowed to bring these articles in under this statute, a considerable saving will result to the government. There Is no evasion of the law. If we pay the duty, 1t will 90 Into the treasury in one pocket and come out in the other. This is essentially 6 matter of bookkeeping.
 Army men made their desire for tariff duty exemption clearer. by this explanation:
 If Congress appropriateS 4i.0o0,- 900 for the Army for certain defense Instruments, duties on materials imported may absorb as much aS 9l70,0O0 The result is the Army gets only 9e30,000 worth of these defense instruments, while the U. s. Treas- ury gets the other Sl70,000. In money the government loses noe thing. But the Army loses in the amount Of defense instruments 1t obtains.
 However, Congress killed the sec- ton of the bill that would have given the REQ the right to import defense materials free of duty. 1 NAvY's POSITION
 UNIQUE
 Tn the meantime. Congressman Robert Doughton, chairman of the powerful House Ways and Means Committee, introduced Q bill aimed at helping the Army and the other defense agencies. It provided that no tax or duty should be levied on any imported article certified by a governmental department or agency to be a defense article. It included in this category weapons, munitions, aircraft ships, machinery for mak- ing war materials, any strategic or critical materials needed in the de- fense program and "any other coin- modity or article for defense"
 The U. s. Tariff Commission iIn- mediateiy objected to this last clause as opening the way for iIn- port of all kinds of things, utterly knocking down the tariff walls. Some congressnien also took excep" ton to this as being too broad. Up to date Doughton has not even call- ed up his bill for a committee hear ing.
 So the Navy still Is the only de- pertinent that can import stuff duty-free.