As regards the amendments tabled for the Committee Stage of the Finance (Customs Duties) (No. 4) Bill, I desire to say that it is only with much misgiving I allow the amendments to be moved. In my view provisions such as these, which propose amendment of the law relating to taxation and which amendments are more than incidental, should be included in the Bill as read a Second Time, but taking into account that this is not what might be described as an amending Bill proper, and that the Bill already includes an exemption provision, I am in this case allowing the amendments.
In Committee on Finance. - Finance (Customs Duties) (No. 4) Bill, 1932—Committee.
Sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 agreed to.
SECTION 7.
I move the first of the amendments which have been circulated:—
Before Section 7 to insert a new section as follows:—
(1) The customs duty imposed by Section 11 of the Finance Act, 1928 (No. 11 of 1928), as amended by subsequent enactments shall be charged, levied, and paid on the following articles imported into Saorstát Eireann after the passing of this Act at the respective rates hereinafter mentioned in lieu of the rates mentioned in the said Section 11 or any such amending enactment as aforesaid, that is to say—
(a) on all parts of motor cars which are, in the opinion of the Revenue Commissioners, engine assemblies as defined by regulations made by the Revenue Commissioners, transmission assemblies as similarly defined, or propelling gear assemblies as similarly defined—at the rate of an amount equal to 15 per cent. of the value of the article:
(b) on all parts of motor cars which, in the opinion of the Revenue Commissioners, are either radiators, lamps, or starting motors and are imported separately—at the rate of an amount equal to 15 per cent. of the value of the article:
(c) on all parts of motor cars which, in the opinion of the Revenue Commissioners, are metal doors or metal body shells or assembled metal parts of such doors or shells and have not been painted, upholstered, or fitted with glass or wood, and are suitable only for incorporation in the body of a motor car designed, constructed and intended for the carriage (otherwise than for reward) of not more than six persons exclusive of the driver— at the rate of an amount equal to 40 per cent. of the value of the article.
(2) The customs duty imposed by the said Section 11 of the Finance Act, 1928, as amended by subsequent enactments shall not be charged or levied on any of the following articles imported into Saorstát Eireann after the passing of this Act, that is to say—
(a) on any component parts or accessories of motor car chassis which, in the opinion of the Revenue Commissioners, are not assembled otherwise than by welding, soldering, or any like process;
(b) on any component parts or accessories (other than doors and complete body-shells) of motor car bodies which, in the opinion of the Revenue Commissioners, are not assembled and are suitable only for incorporation in or use as an accessory of the body of a motor car designed, constructed and intended for the carriage (otherwise than for reward) of not more than six persons exclusive of the driver.
(3) Whenever the Minister for Finance, after consultation with the Minister for Industry and Commerce, is satisfied that any articles chargeable with duty at a rate fixed by this section are required to be imported by a manufacturer for use in a process of manufacture in Saorstát Eireann, the Revenue Commissioners may be licence authorise such manufacturer, subject to compliance with such conditions as they may think fit to impose, to import such articles without payment of the said duty either, as the Revenue Commissioners shall think proper, without limit as to time or quantity or either of them, or within a specified time or in a specified quantity.
(4) In this section the expression "motor car" has the same meaning as it has in Part II of the Finance Act, 1928 (No. 11 of 1928), and the expression "motor car body" has the same meaning as it has in Section 14 of the Finance (Customs Duties) (No. 2) Act, 1932 (No. 11 of 1932).
The purpose of this amendment is to give certain remissions in respect of duties upon parts of motor chassis and motor bodies. In order to encourage the construction of motor chassis here, rather than their importation complete, it is proposed that the present duty of 33? per cent. will apply only in respect of the complete chassis. At present it applies to the chassis and each part of it. In future unassembled parts will be free of duty. Certain assembled parts, that is, the engine unit, the gear assembly, and the back axle, will be subject to 15 per cent. duty, with a preferential rate of 10 per cent. We propose to regard as an unassembled part any two parts which are joined together by a process of welding, brazing or soldering. In other countries they have in operation a three-tier tariff of this kind. The part of the chassis which it is proposed to allow in at the medium rate of duty is what is elsewhere called the knockachta down chassis, that is a chassis the greater part of the assembling work on which has yet to be done, but the more difficult assemblies are allowed in as such; consequently when this amendment is inserted in the Bill and this Act comes into operation a person desiring to get a motor chassis can either import it complete and pay the present duty on it without any increase; he can import it in unassembled parts and get it completely free of duty; or he can import it partly in the form of unassembled parts and partly in assembled parts, and he gets those parts at the medium rate of duty of 15 per cent., with a 10 per cent. preferential rate. It would require a considerable amount of skill and some elaborate machinery to assemble the chassis from completely unassembled parts. There is one firm which will possibly undertake to do so, and there may be others. I have no reason to believe that quite a number of firms will not engage in the assembly of the knock-down chassis, and an intimation to that effect has already been given to my Department.
Now we come to the matter of the motor bodies. At the beginning of the year we imposed a stiff duty upon completed motor bodies. The result of that duty has been that Messrs. Ford have since been constructing their motor bodies here, and of course that firm, as Deputies are aware, does much more than half the total trade of the country. Certain other firms made some progress in the matter of getting their bodies completed here also, but generally speaking, the motor traders and the coach builders of the country did not seriously set out to solve the problems that necessarily arose when that new condition was created. Certain representations were made to the effect that it would greatly facilitate the trade if, for a period at any rate, the importation of what they called a body shell were permitted, that is the shell of an all-steel body imported as such — unpainted, unupholstered and without any wood fittings or glass work attached. We were disinclined to do that, particularly because there is at any rate one firm, producing more than 50 per cent. of our requirement of motor cars, doing the complete job here, and it would be bad policy in our opinion to take any action which would make it unprofitable for them to continue doing so in competition with firms that were doing only part of the process of manufacture here; consequently in the case of the bodies we also propose to institute a three-tier tariff system. The present position that no duty is payable upon unassembled parts will continue; the present position that a duty of 50 per cent. is payable upon the complete body will continue, but in between we are going to permit the importation of assembled parts of bodies up to and including the complete shell, at a rate of duty of 40 per cent., with a preferential rate of 26? per cent. It will be possible for a motor trader or a person who proposes to engage in the motor assembling business to import all parts of a knocked-down chassis and to pay duty upon them at the rate now proposed, to import the body shell at the rate of duty now proposed, to complete the construction of the car here, and to have that car at less than he could have had it heretofore, even if we assume that the manufacturing process involved in the completion of the car here is going to cost very much more than it would cost if done elsewhere. It is undoubtedly to be expected that it will cost something more, but we may reasonably assume that as the work progresses and those who come into the industry get more efficient that cost will go down. In any case if the persons interested in the trade take advantage of the concessions now being given them, and seriously set out to establish the industry here, they can do so, and can have motors available for sale to the public at a price no higher than that at which cars would have been available at imported complete at the old rate of duty. That is the purpose of this amendment, which I move.
Can the Minister say how many revisions have been made in the motor duties since first imposed?
The only change we made was one made at the request of the motor traders, which permitted — for a period of three months, from the middle of May to the middle of August — the importation of completed motor cars at a somewhat higher rate of duty than that which had previously prevailed, but lower than that which subsequently prevailed. That concession was given upon the motor traders' undertaking to me that at the end of that period they would be in a position to do the job here themselves, and to supply their own requirements of completed cars. That undertaking was not carried out. There may have been some misunderstanding between the motor traders and myself as to what that undertaking meant, but as I understood it it was not carried out, and that is the position.
Does the Minister mean that the new proposal is founded on some new undertaking?
No.
Then it is founded on the Minister's hope that eventually we will get this industry established in the country? It is about time he gave up that illusion.
The only case — I am taking the Deputy seriously — ever advanced either before the Tariff Commission or by those engaged in the importation of motor cars, against the establishing of this industry here, was that the cost of the machinery necessary for welding the parts of bodies together was too high, having regard to the size of the market here. To build a car under the conditions imposed by this amendment requires no machinery at all. The actual outlay is negligible. It is all manual work and there are plenty of skilled workers here available to do that. The duty on commercial cars and omnibuses remains unchanged, and in connection with these types of cars, we have had it stated to us by people who have a knowledge of conditions prevailing in other countries and who are competent to express an opinion that the work done here is never below and very frequently superior in quality to the work done in the construction of similar cars in other countries.
That is not commonly stated. I might say that the only point ever in dispute before the Tariff Commission was the making of touring car bodies and that has not been successfully done here either in respect to price or quality.
There is at least one firm doing that work here.
Does the Minister refer to Fords?
Yes.
How many men are employed in Fords?
I do not know exactly, but the number engaged is not very short of 200 on this particular work of assembling motor bodies. Before the duty was imposed that work was not done there at all.
It was done years before.
That was when they were making cars entirely in Cork, not assembling cars but making them for exportation.
And what took them out of the country?
Changed conditions.
They could do better business elsewhere.
I think the Minister is discriminating between Fords, who are a comparatively new firm in this country, and the old established motor traders of this country, who were established before Messrs. Fords ever set foot in Ireland and before he ever established his factory in Cork. I might tell the Minister now that some of the citizens in Cork would tell you that the advent of Messrs. Fords to Cork was the biggest curse which ever fell upon them. Talking about bodies, the bodies come over finished and they are admitted free because there are a few rivets to be put in them at the works in Cork.
The Minister will remember that the old-established firms in the motor industry in Ireland have a capital which amounts to something like £370,000. These people have approached the Minister with regard to concessions on the importation of bodies and they tried to make some arrangement with the coach-builders so that some of these things could be done locally. The Minister knows well that the coach-builders were unable or were unwilling to meet the motor trade in the matter. I suppose the Minister will understand that. He received from the motor trade a letter sometime in November in which the motor traders stated that their position since the imposition of the special tariffs was one of complete stagnation. The letter reads:
There has been practically no business to keep us employed; we have been compelled to discharge 120 hands.
That is more than is employed in the whole of Fords at the present time.
Our combined gross turnover has already reduced by 60 per cent. in last year, and we are faced with the prospect in most cases that if present circumstances continue we must prepare to close our premises. The figures of reduction for the month of October are much greater than those of September.
As stated to you by our representative to whom you were good enough to give an interview last June, we were quite willing to accept the situation created by the new tariff provided the coach-builders were in a position to produce the bodies we required. With a view to facilitating them, two conferences were held at our request in your offices, but the attitude of the coach-builders at these meetings showed that they were not anxious to do business and convinced us that they were not serious in their desire to undertake the building of private bodies.
Ever since then, they have as a body, adopted a dog-in-the-manger attitude, attempting in no way to justify their claim that they are competent to build motor bodies and at the same time declining to admit the fact.
From the inquiries we have made, it seems clear that no coach-builders in the country have a plant at all suitable for the building or assembling of modern car bodies, and there is no sign that any of them is prepared to instal plant for the purpose.
Even if a coach-builder were to instal plant, the difficulties of conducting the business so that the demands of the different distributors could be met would be enormous, as can be fully explained in an interview.
Now, this matter, as I said before, is to subsidise Fords practically at the expense of the old-established industry and under sub-section (3) Fords is the only manufacturer in this country which can legally be called a manufacturer, and, as such, is entitled to import without payment of such duty or without limit as to time or quantity the things specified previously. I think it is a grave injustice to the whole motor trade — a trade which was established before Fords was even ever heard of in this country — after putting every penny they possessed into it. They even had to raise overdrafts in the bank to carry on this industry, and these men now are going to be jeopardised merely for the sake of a very ephemeral condition in the assembling of motor bodies in Fords.
Amendment agreed.
Mr. Hayes
On Section 7, there is one small matter to which I would like to call the Minister's attention. There are cinematograph films of the full standard size and sub-standard size used for the home cinematograph by the amateur photographer. There is in Dublin at present a plan for what is known as processing these small sub-standard films. If the section is to apply to these sub-standard films it will be cheaper, or as cheap, to send them to England and, therefore, a certain amount of employment already being given in the city will be hampered. I wonder would it be possible for the Minister to make this section apply only to films of the full size standard?
The section as it stands would appear to apply to these films. I would like to get a further opportunity of looking into that point. I do not think it is correct to say that they can be printed here. I am not aware of the fact that that can be done.
Mr. Hayes
I am assured by a firm in Dublin of sufficient repute in the photographic line that they are at present being done here — not the full size films but the sub-standard size. They are being done in Dublin at the moment. I will get the Minister further information on it if he requires it.
If the Dáil is agreeable I am prepared to put down an amendment to meet the point made by Deputy Hayes. I am not sure what the amendment would have to be.
Mr. Hayes
I did not get an opportunity of meeting the Minister for Finance until about an hour ago. I would ask the Minister to insert after the word "film" in line 61, the words "of full standard size."
Amendment agreed to.
Section 7, as amended, agreed to.
SECTION 8.
Certain representations were made that flour used for people suffering from diabetes should be exempt from duty. That is that diabetic flour should be imported free. I want to add at the end of Section 7 an amendment to cover that. The amendment which I move is:—
Any article chargeable with the duty imposed by Section 1 of the Finance (Customs Duties) (No. 3) Act, 1932 (No. 22 of 1932), which is shown, to the satisfaction of the Revenue Commissioners, to be intended for use exclusively because of or as a preventive of or remedy for disease shall, subject to compliance with such conditions as the Revenue Commissioners may think fit to impose, be admitted without payment of the said duty.
Amendment agreed to.
Section 8 agreed to.
SECTION 9.
I beg to move amendment 3:—
Before Section 9 to insert a new section as follows:—
(1) Subject to compliance with such conditions (if any) as the Revenue Commissioners may think fit to impose, there shall be payable in respect of any nicotine or tobacco extract manufactured from tobacco in Saorstát Eireann and any preparation in the manufacture of which any such nicotine or tobacco extract is used as an ingredient, on the exportation of such nicotine, extract, or preparation, to the exporter thereof an allowance at such rate (not exceeding the increased cost of such nicotine, extract, or preparation due to restrictions, requirements, or conditions imposed on or in connection with the manufacture of such nicotine or extract for the protection of the revenue) as the Minister for Finance shall from time to time determine.
(2) Every person who manufactures from tobacco in Saorstát Eireann any nicotine or tobacco extract shall furnish to the Revenue Commissioners on demand all information in his possession or procurement relating to the increased cost arising from restrictions, requirements, or conditions imposed on or in connection with the manufacture of such nicotine or extract for the protection of the revenue.
(3) Any person who fails to comply with a condition imposed by the Revenue Commissioners under this section or who, on demand made by the Revenue Commissioners under this section, furnishes to the Revenue Commissioners any information or alleged information which is to his knowledge false or misleading shall be guilty of an offence under this section and shall be liable on summary conviction thereof, to an excise penalty of fifty pounds.
There is a factory in this country which manufactures certain insecticides from tobacco waste. These insecticides are of a nicotine nature. The firm engaged in the business has an export trade. Because of the necessity for safeguarding the revenue a number of restrictions had to be placed on it. It has been the practice in the case of distillers that where for revenue purposes restrictions have been imposed in this respect an allowance is paid in respect of these exports. It is proposed to adopt this revenue device in the case concerned in order to offset the disadvantages inflicted upon the concern by the necessary regulations in respect of protecting the revenue and to make it impossible for fraud to arise. The matter was brought to the notice of the Government in another way. A proposal was brought forward that the particular difficulties of this firm should be met in another way; but it was decided that the usual revenue device in such cases should be adopted and so this is being inserted.
Amendment agreed to.
I move amendment 4:—
Before Section 9, page 6, to insert a new section as follows:—
Whenever the Revenue Commissioners are satisfied that any article imported into Saorstát Eireann and chargeable on such importation with any duty of customs imposed by this or any other enactment (whether past or future) is so imported solely for the purpose of any competition, exhibition, show, or demonstration, or any similar purpose and is not intended to be sold or offered for sale in Saorstát Eireann and is intended to be exported on the fulfilment of such purpose, the Revenue Commissioners may, subject to compliance with such conditions as they may think fit to impose, permit such article to be imported without payment of such duty, or repay any such duty paid on such importation.
This is a new section giving general exemption for articles imported solely for exhibition in the Saorstát.
Amendment agreed to.
Section 9 put and agreed to.
Section 10 agreed to.
SECTION 11.
I move amendment 5:—
Before Section 11 to insert a new section as follows:—
Wherever
(a) a duty of customs (in this section referred to as the new duty) is imposed by this Act on articles of a specified description, and
(b) a power is conferred by this Act on any person to issue licences for the importation of articles of the said description without payment of the new duty, and
(c) immediately before the commencement by virtue of the Provisional Collection of Taxes Act, 1927 (No. 7 of 1927), of the new duty, articles of the said description were subject to a duty of customs (in this Act referred to as the old duty) howsoever imposed, and
(d) immediately before such commencement power was vested in some person to issue licences for the importation of articles of the said description without payment of the old duty, and
(e) licences (in this section referred to as existing licences) were issued under the lastmentioned power before such commencement, and were unrevoked, unexpired, and unexhausted at such commencement,
there and in every such case every such existing licence shall continue in force in accordance with the terms thereof with the substitution therein of the new duty for the old duty and subject to revocation at any time by the person having power to issue licences in respect of the new duty.
This section provides for the continuance of the licence or for the carrying over of the licence so as to prevent lapsing of authority. It also provides for revocation in the reissuing of licences where necessary.
Amendment agreed to.
Section 11, as amended, agreed to.
Sections 12, 13, and 14 agreed to.
FIRST SCHEDULE.
I move amendment 6:—
At Reference No. 16, to delete paragraph (b) in the second column and the entries opposite it in the third and fourth columns.
The House is pressed for time and I would like to start off by pointing out to the Minister that my amendment only refers to floorings and sheetings, and as it will not be possible to get this timber until far into next year, he might very easily postpone this section until the Budget comes next year. It would mean giving the timber merchants an opportunity of knowing what was coming so that they would be able to prepare accordingly. I would like to point out that it is not as easy as I thought at first and there are some difficulties. The Government have imposed a tax on imported joinery and mouldings. Imported joinery is undoubtedly going to increase employment and so is the tax on mouldings. I think the Government have very much underrated the amount of employment that will be given by the manufacture of mouldings. They will have to be now run in the Saorstát, not by the piece or yard, but by hundreds of miles. Nobody need laugh at that. Perhaps it will run into thousands of miles. The timber merchants say that this will mean a very considerable increase in business and there is a certain amount of organisation needed. It is all very well to tell them to wait. Later on they would have to say to their customers: "You will have to wait your turn." Their idea is that the proper course should be to allow them to make arrangements to get in their proper stocks, their catalogues, and provide machines and instal them. Having said that, you may wonder why the trade are making difficulties about floorings and sheetings. It might be thought that the manufacture of floorings and sheetings are pretty much what mouldings are. Floorings and sheetings will produce some rather obscure reactions. They are not the same as mouldings. The manufacture is not the same. They are produced by different machines, though you might immediately answer me by saying they can be produced by the same machine. That is quite true, but the stocks will have to be got from countries other than Scandinavia, from which the stocks for these boards will have to be imported. I would ask the Minister does he imagine that timber merchants in the Saorstát can, at a moment's notice, provide 25 per cent. additional storage for these boards? Some of their trade must suffer. I would like to point out to the Minister that the saw millers, each in their turn, find themselves faced with a number of undesirable precedents. In some cases there will be a very large expenditure on machinery. I do not know whether the Minister would take this as a desirable time to think of embarking on the spending of a large amount of money on machinery and on machines of a type that will do twenty times the work of any of the machines in the Saorstát at the present time. Side by side with this a very large amount of refuse will be created.
In the Free State we have been trying to encourage our production of electrical energy and it now seems as if some of the mills will have to start to burn their refuse in the boilers and use coal. From the economic point of view of the country, that is not a very desirable expedient. I have said each merchant must have very large additional storage for these boards. Most of the timber merchants are engaged in bringing timber from the country of origin and supplying it to the people here. Another section of their trade, the hard wood trade, has to be taken into consideration. They control that trade only to a very slight extent. A lot of them will have to give up the sections they devote to hard wood for the time being, and that business will be done from across the water. I do not know whether the Minister thinks it is desirable to decrease the direct importation of this wood and encourage the trade amongst firms from neighbouring countries.
If very considerable outlays of capital are made, it will tighten up money and we all know the stringency in regard to money at the present time. I do not think the Minister would be pleased to find that the credit terms of the trade had been shortened. I am afraid the Electricity Supply Board have set rather a bad example, because they have reduced their credit terms from three to two months. Before the Minister can get going it will be well into next year and probably the next Budget will be before us. I told the Minister about the reorganisation that has occurred. He is, no doubt, aware that some of the mills have been tried in Belfast and they found the amount of labour saved so considerable that they do not have to work on Saturdays. I am sure he is aware of what happened in Cork. I would like to recommend this amendment to the favourable consideration of the Government.
The answer to most of Deputy Dockrell's points is that if we want to get this work done here we shall have to start some time and we contend that this is as good a time as any. Deputy Dockrell says that we may not be able to get the rough timber into the country before next April or May and he argues that we should wait until then. If we were to wait until then it would be probably six or twelve months before we could really get going. The mills would not be properly equipped and possibly there would be still a difficulty about arranging for supplies. I feel certain that if we were to wait until April the merchants would come along to us and say they were not in a position to do business then. If we allowed six months, that would bring us into next winter and consequently the period would have to be extended for a year because of the difficulty in getting timber during the winter months.
In our opinion, it was best to act as we did when we imposed the duty. We have not restricted the importation of planed and dressed timber. It is coming to those saw millers who have intimated their intention of continuing in that part of the business by installing the machinery necessary to enable them to deal with the planing and dressing when the timber is available. That situation will continue as long as the necessity for it is demonstrated to us. The timber will come in when those difficulties have been met. The shut down will take place at a specified time and from that date all the planing and dressing will will be done here by the millers who have, in the meantime, installed the necessary equipment and are in a position to deal with that side of the business.
We have either to give up the idea of doing this at all or else we must decide upon doing it at some definite period and, in our opinion, this time of the year is as suitable as any other; in fact we consider it more suitable than at any other period of the year. We are prepared to continue the licensing provision in order to ensure that there will be no hold up and until the supplies of raw timber are available and also until the merchants here are in the position to handle it properly. The point to remember is that instead of starting on the process next April we will by that time have completed the process and from that month onwards we can contemplate all that type of work being done within this country.
The Minister has entirely overlooked what I said about mouldings. There are only three sections in the timber merchant's business, the mouldings, the planed flooring and the joinery. The Minister has imposed duties on mouldings and joinery, which the trade have accepted. They wish a certain time in which to digest that change affecting two-thirds of their trade. I think the Minister might very easily wait three months before putting the third imposition upon them. The Minister referred to the giving of permits. He is giving permits only up to the end of December for normal requirements. Normal requirements have been interpreted to mean something approaching the quota. The quota is rather difficult to work, particularly when you are communicating by telegraph with Scandinavia and you are told the ship will not go up unless you take 150 standards. We are now within three weeks of a shut-down and that is not a very long time.
The period of operation of the licence will run to the end of December. Evidence was procured from various sources and conflicting statements were made, and we decided to institute an interim period in which we would endeavour to get accurate information on all the points raised, particularly the point about the availability of supplies in these months of the year. The necessary inquiries have been made in that connection in all the countries concerned, and will be available before the end of that period in order to enable us to determine whether a shut-down should take place then, or in January, February, March, or at any other period when a shut-down of the licences may be considered advisable. In the meantime, although "normal requirements" is the term used——
It is an elastic term.
Yes. It is not being enforced rigidly. It is intended to prevent the stocking up of timber here in anticipation of a period when the shut-down takes place. That is what would have happened if we had announced in advance our intention of imposing this duty next April. By that time there would be a year's supply in the country.
The Minister's assurance that this is an elastic term will relieve some people in the trade whose hair is being turned grey. The Minister has not answered my point as to a respite. You have given the trade a duty of two-thirds of their output and they have to prepare for that. They want you to give them a bit of respite——
They have got a respite. The duty on mouldings was imposed in October and the other duty in April. The full duty on planed and dressed timber will probably not take effect until next April.
You must work from the time you stopped it coming in and not from the time the duty starts. There is an enormous amount of work in mouldings and it would be better if people were allowed to prepare properly so as to be able to serve the trade properly and not leave them to wait their turn. Remember, you are not going to get Scandinavian boards. You are going to get boards planed in this country, which are very different things.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
I move amendment 7:—
At Reference No. 16, in clause 7, in the second column on page 11, after the word "use" to add the words "and also excluding scaffolding poles."
This amendment is intended to exclude scaffolding poles from the scope of the duty on manufactured wood.
Which way is that put? Does it mean that they are to be free or that they are to be dutiable?
Free.
Amendment agreed to.
Schedule 1, as amended, agreed to.
SECOND SCHEDULE.
I move amendments 8, 9 and 10:—
8. At Reference No. 9, page 17, in the third column, opposite paragraph (b) in the second column, to delete the figure "6" and substitute the figure "3," and in the fourth column, opposite the said paragraph, to delete the figure "4" and substitute the figure "2."
9. At Reference No. 11, page 18, in the second column, to delete the words "Rhubarb and".
10. After Reference No. 11, to add a new Reference No. as follows:—
|
12 |
Rhubarb. |
per lb. |
per lb |
— |
|
3d. |
2d. |
Amendment 8 reduces the duty upon lettuce imported before the 31st March next and for each four months from 6d. and 3d. to 3d. and 2d.
Amendments Nos. 9 and 10 reduces the duty on rhubarb.
These reductions have been entered into in agreement with the trade.
Amendments agreed to.
Second Schedule, as amended, agreed to.
THIRD SCHEDULE.
I move amendment 11:—
On page 18, before Reference No. 2, to insert a new Reference No. as follows:—
|
2 |
Section 21. |
(a) In paragraph (b) of sub-section (1), by deleting the words “thirty-three and one-third” and inserting in lieu thereof the word “twenty-five.” |
As from the passing of this Act. |
|
(b) At the end of the section, by inserting the following sub-section, that is to say:— |
|||
|
“(3) For the purposes of this section, loud-speakers, transformers, and condensers shall be deemed to be component parts dutiable under paragraph (b) of sub-section (1) of this section and not to be dutiable under paragraph (a) of that sub-section, notwithstanding that they are in fact assemblies of component parts.” |
The present duty upon complete wireless sets is 50 per cent. There is a duty on parts of 33? per cent. Since that duty was imposed, the matter has been given very careful consideration and it has now been decided to reduce from 33? per cent. to 25 per cent the duty upon parts, defining parts as completely unassembled parts — loud speakers, transformers and condensers. The duty on loud speakers, transformers and condensers will be 25 per cent. There is every prospect that the manufacture of these sets upon a factory scale will be undertaken here in the very near future. Consequently, any increased demand that might arise from the establishment of the new station at Moydrum will be supplied from Irish sources. It is the purpose of this amendment to assist in ensuring that. The whole effect is to reduce from 33? per cent. to 25 per cent. the duty on parts.
From to-night?
From the passing of the Bill.
Amendment agreed to.
I move amendments 12 and 13:—
On page 20, before Reference No. 8 to insert a new Reference No. 33 as follows:—
|
8 |
First Schedule reference number 15. |
In the second column, in paragraph (a), by inserting the words “paper ruled for writing music in manuscript” after the words “printed music.” |
As from the passing of this Act. |
On page 20, before Reference No. 8, to insert a new Reference No. as follows:—
|
8 |
First Schedule, reference number 16. |
In the fifth column, by inserting the following additional provision, that is to say:— |
As from the passing of this Act. |
|
“The duty mentioned at this reference number shall not be chargeable or leviable on paper (whether bound or not bound) ruled to writing music in manuscript.” |
Amendment 12 is to exclude from the duty on printed paper, paper ruled for writing music and manuscript. Amendment 13 is to the same effect.
Amendment agreed to.
Third Schedule, as amended, agreed to.
FOURTH SCHEDULE.
I move amendment 14:—
At Reference No. 5, page 22, in the third column, in paragraph (b), after the words "that is to say" to insert the following sub-section:—
(7) Section 6 of the Customs and Inland Revenue Act, 1879, shall not apply to any article liable to the duty imposed by this section.
This is purely a drafting amendment. It implements the previous provision relating to the readmission of personal clothing and wearing apparel, on its being shown that the clothing was not liable to duty on previous importation or that the liability had been discharged.
Amendment agreed to.
I move amendment 15:—
At Reference No. 7, page 22, in the third column, before paragraph (a) to insert a new paragraph as follows:—
(a) in sub-section (4), by deleting the words "or for use in the upholstering of furniture or vehicles".
Amendment agreed to.
I move amendment 16:—
At Reference No. 7, page 22, in the third column, in paragraph (a), to delete the words "to delete" and substitute the words "by deleting".
This is a drafting amendment.
Amendment agreed to.
The following amendment was agreed to:—
At Reference No. 7, page 22, in the third column, in paragraph (b), to delete the word "sub-section" where it first occurs in that paragraph and to substitute the word "sub-sections" and on page 23, at the end of paragraph (b) to add the following sub-section:—
(8) Whenever the Revenue Commissioners are satisfied that any woven tissue which, but for this sub-section, would be chargeable with the duty imposed by this section is suitable and intended solely for use in the upholstering of furniture or vehicles, the Revenue Commissioners may, subject to compliance with such conditions as they may think fit to impose, permit such woven tissue to be imported without payment of the duty imposed by this section. — (Minister for Industry and Commerce.)
Question proposed —"That the Fourth Schedule, as amended, stand part of the Bill."
Is there any disposition to review the duties imposed under this Finance Bill and other Finance Bills and to codify them? The terminology in some of the schedules is extraordinary. Duties are imposed in some cases subject to no other duty being in force in any other case. Though the Revenue Commissioners do issue certain informative publications as to what articles are dutiable, the law ought to be clearly set out if at all possible, and I think codification is necessary.
I think we should have one table indicating the duties chargeable on different types of commodities. We have had four Finance Bills this year and it would be difficult for the ordinary person who had not available the published list of the Revenue Commissioners to ascertain what precisely the duties were. Of course, a list of the duties is published but I think the codifying of the law is a matter that will have to be attended to.
Question put and agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported with amendments.
Agreed to take the Final Stages now.
Bill received for final consideration and passed.
Bill certified as a Money Bill within the meaning of Article 35 of the Constitution.
Seanad to be notified accordingly.