RADIO SET TARIFF

Evening Post, Volume CXVI, Issue 102, 27 October 1933, Page 9

RADIO SET TARIFF

IMPORTERS' CASE

FURTHER REPRESENTATIONS

Supplementary representations were . made on behalf of twelve importers oi' radio sets from the United Kingdom, Australia, and the United States of America before the Tariff Commission today by Mr. C. W. Eickard. It was represented as desirable that radio sots from Empire sources bo admitted free of duty, and that sets of foreign origin be subject to a, duty of 25 polecat. It was pointed out that as thero wore no fundamental differences botween the parties concerned, it had been agreed, in. the interests of the. trade and broadcasting, that the unanimous 1 views of the importers should bo placed before the Commission. VARYING REQUESTS. Local assemblers, it was pointed out, were far from agreement in their re-, presentations. One had' no objection to free English sets, but asked for a duty of. 25s per valve socket on foreign makes; another requested from 10 to lo per cent, on British sets, and 35 per cent., or 25s per valve socket, whichever was the greater, on'foreign sets; five Auckland assemblers asked for 15 per cent., or 7s 6d per valve socket on United Kingdom sets, 25 per cent, or 12s Gd per valve socket on other Empire sets, and 40 per cent, or 25s per valve socket, whichever was the greater, on foreign sets. These differences indicated disparities in relative efficiencies. It had been stated in evidence by one firm that it could compete with British sets which were ad--mitted free. If the higher protection sought by some firms were imposed, then the 'efficient firm he had alluded to would reap a premium; the tariff was a bonus to inefficiency. The wide disparity between British and Foreign tariffs, said Mr. Eickard, called for comment. The present margin was 25 per cent., and as the importers had agreed that this was fair, it would be unreasonable to widen it at the request of the local assemblers.' If Britisfi importers contended that they could compete with foreign manufacturers on a margin of 25 per cent, preference, there wag no reason to widen the gap, especially as_the alterations proposed were specific duties which often had repercussions detrimental to the consumer, for if the price of a commodity on which a specific duty was imposed fell, the percentage of duty rose correspondingly, which was not so in the case of an act valorem duty. PROTECTION AND PRICES. It was claimed, that since radio manufacturing began in New Zealand, prices of sets had fallen, and that owing tosuccessful competition some local sets were selling at below the price of imported sets, but prices had fallen the world over, and decreased prices charged for imported sets were; in keeping with the drop in prices elsewhere. If they were selling at prices below those of imported sets, why did the Now Zealand assemblers' seek greater protection?. In Australia, where protection was higher, the price of locallyassembled sets.was higher also. Local assemblers would no doubt take full advantage of the tariff if Dominion protection were higher. That local assemblers had 50 per cent, of the sales on the local market, as had been contended by Mr. Boucher, seemed to indicate that their footing under the present tariff arrangement gave no claim for further consideration. It was submitted that the.statement made by Mr, Anderson, "The keenest 'competition in radio sets arises from U.S.A;, but the landed cost of receivers at the present rate of duty (35 per cent.) enables us to manufacture and trade successfully," meant that an increase in the tariff would practically force imported sets off the local market and limit the public selection to locallyassembled sets, which werl^ much narrower in their rango of models. CONTRARY TO OTTAWA. . Discussing evidence already before the Commission, Mr. Eickard pointed out that to shut out overseas competition altogether was the antithesis of the Ottawa Agreement. .Three reasons why the :New Zealand assembling business was in a favoured position were that it did not pay royalty on patents, did not carry on costly research activities, and was able to"-employ cheap casual labour. Owing to the payment of some £1300' monthly by the Post and Telegraph Department out of the licence fees to the patent holders, the local, assembler was immune from royalties, the royalty fee having become fixed before the local assembler assumed importance. It was designed, in fact, to facilitate the development of broadcasting in New Zealand. The Roosovelt Recovery Plan had raised wages in America, the code adopted by the Radio Manufacturers'' Association of America, and accepted as part of the Recovery Plan, showing a minimum wage rate of 40 cents per hour. The minimum rate of pay for the same sort of work, under the Factories Act in New Zealand, was 10s a week, wi,th annual increases until £110s was reached. These were lower than apprenticeship rates. WOULD PUBLIC SHARE? Australian experience discounted the claim that protection assureda' sufficient share of the market to local manufacturers to enable, them to produce economically and thus give the public the benefit of lower prices. The diminution of imports by tariff led to a greater, consumption of the home product, but the larger volume of production might bo spread over innumerable Minall factories. '' There is nothing in protection itself to favour large scalo production," said Mr. Eickard. "In other words, thero is no guarantee that protection will ensure the establishment of economic units of industry. It may load to tendencies towards monopoly, or to the multiplication of small factories rather than amalgamation. Protection has also the effect frequently of attracting capital from the most suitable industries of a country to the least suitable. The capital will be available if the protection is high, enough." It was pointed out that with the exception of a. small portion of. the timber used in cabinetmaking tho raw materials and the whole of the essential parts had to bo imported. Tho effects of tho increased duties asked for by the local assemblers, said Mr. Bickard, would cause a disruption of the established business and selling organisation of the distributors of imported radio, most of whom had spent enormous sums on advertising and organising dealerships. Importers ha!d done the pioneering in the development of radio broadcasting. An increase in duties would considerably reduce revenue from imported sets, but if the importers' tariff proposals were adopted, future annual importations could be set down at £100,000, alone producing a revenue of £25,000.