SUBSIDY DRAWBACKS

Otago Daily Times, Issue 26637, 6 December 1947, Page 8

SUBSIDY DRAWBACKS

EXPORTS FROM AUSTRALIA POSITION CLARIFIED P.A. WELLINGTON, Dec. 5The Australian Trade Commissioner, Major-general J. J. Murray, to-day made a statement which, he said, he hoped would clear a misunderstanding among New Zealand merchants regarding the drawback of subsidies on certain exports from Australia. In recent months, he said, he had received numerous inquiries concerning additions to invoice prices under the titles of “ wool surcharge,” “ export levy,” and similar notations. .’’Many businessmen here have thought that these additions to invoice prices, represent some sort of tax on exports by the Commonwealth Government,” General Murray continued. “This is not the case. They represent the allocation of production cost which had been paid previously by the Commonwealth Government to stabilise domestic prices. If this subsidy were not withdrawn on exported goods it would mean that Australian public funds were being used to reduce the prices of goods to overseas markets.”

In many industries, particularly clothing, footwear, leather goods, woollen goods, and certain foodstuffs, substantial subsidies were paid by the Commonwealth Government to stabilise living costs in Australia, he added. These subsidies were paid on the whole production as it would be difficult to designate what goods and materials were for home consumption and what for export. When subsidised goods ' were exported the authorities assessed the amount of the subsidy which had been paid and arranged for this to be repaid to the Government and shown as an addition to the domestic price of the finished goods. General Murray added that importers should ensure that, any applications for import licences on Australian goods subject to subsidy drawback be sufficient to cover the drawback in addition to the quoted price.