Page
160
CORRESPONDENCE.
REVENUE FROM THE LIQUOR TRADE.
TO THE EDITOR OF THE HONGKONG
DAILY PRESS.
*
Macao, August 15th, 1909. DEAR SIR, As the Hon. Mr. Stewart stated, when proposing the postponement of the debate on the new Liquor Ordinance, that it is only fair that the general public should have an opportunity of expressing their opinion through the medium of the local Press, with your per- mission I would respectfully make a few sugges tions, which-if adopted by the Government -would, I believe, have a more far-reaching effect than the new proposed ordinance, would produce all the revenue required, and yet would not be so unjustly severe on the hotel keepers, wine and spirit merchants and wholesale dealers.
My suggestion is as follows:- On every bottle of wine, spirits or beer, manufactured or bottled in the Colony, and sold for consumption in the Colony, place an adhesive stamp over the cork in such a manner that it must be destroyed when the bottle is opened.
1st. Fay, on every bottle of wine or spirits-a 10 cent stamp: say, on every bottle of beer or stout-a 3 cent stamp, and as I think the teetotalers should also contribute to the revenue of the Colony, place on every bottle of aerated water bottled in the Colony and sold for consumption in the Colony, a 1 cent stamp.
2nd. On every bottle or case of wine, beer, spirits, aerated or mineral waters, imported into the Colony, make the wholesale dealers charge a surtax of, say, 5 per cent., 7 per cent., or 10 per cent.-whichever would be necessary to make up the deficiency required-upon their ordinary list prices, for all such wines, &c., that are sold for consumption within the Colony. The wholesale dealers to send in a return every month to the Government of the actual number of bottles sold and the actual amount of the surtax received. The wholesale trade is in the hands of reputable firms, and there would be a very slight chance of false returns being sent in, but the Government could make the penalty of doing so very severe, such as imposing a heavy fine and cancelling the licence.
By adopting this scheme, the extra revenue required would come out of the pockets of the actual consumer,
And the point of the Clubs, which was touched upon by the Hon. Mr. Osborne, and which has been a sore point in the Colony for many years, would be rectified, as not only would the members of the numerous clubs in the Colony contribute directly to the revenue, but also the numerous public and private boarding-houses, so-called private hotels," and all other houses where liquor is consumed would contribute their fair share.
46
The hotels would not then be compelled to raise the price of their drinks to any great extent, if they had to raise it at all, and the higher price they would have to pay for their wines would be equivalent to a quite sufficient increase in the licence fee.
Now as regards liquors imported into the Colony by clubs, messes and private individuals, and who at present pay no tax to the Government, would suggest that all the shipping companies be required to send in to the Government a return of all wines, beers, spirits, &c., imported into the Colony by their vessels, with name of the con. signee, and the Government should cause that person-if the liquors are sold or consum ed in the Colony-to pay the tax imposed.
Most
It seems to me that this schems could be carried out at very little expense to the Colony, no cumbersome system of Custom House official- dom or bonded stores would be required, and Hongkong would still be a "free port." of the work and expense of collecting the revenue would fall upon the merchants and importers, wholesale dealers, local bottlers and agrated water manufacturers, while the revenue would come out of the pockets of the general public, who are the proper people to pay it.
This scheme is naturally very much in the rough and would have to be thoroughly worked put and amplified, but, as I said at the first, I
THE HONGKONG WEEKLY PRESS AND,
believe it would bring in all the revenue required | and not be unjustly hard on any individual company, firm or person.-I have the honour to be, Dear Sir, Yours respectfully,
BRITISH COLONIAL.
[TO THE EDITOR OF THE HONGKONG DAILY PRESS."]
Hongkong, August 16th, 1908 SIR, There is much controversy going on just now as to how the Colony is to "raise the wind," since the best source-through opium is practically closed. The consensus of opinion appears to be that liquor licences should be increased to make up the revenue now lost to us on opium.
4
That there is everything to be said for the fact that our revenue must be increased there is no doubt, and there is no more doubt that liquor is the next best thing to tax after opium, be- cause it is in general demand and is a luxury, except for medicinal purposes.
Many men will aver they take alcohol medicinally only, but how many of them take it "under Doctor's orders."? Perhaps one might ask how many of them are "ander Doctor's orders" not to take it-or to "cut it down "P
However, as I state above, it being generally conceded that the revenue is to be raised on liquor, the next question is How (a) without putting undue strain on any one section of the community, (b) to collect effectually, (c) to collect cheaply.
I propose to take native wines or spirits first, and think same may be dismissed shortly by the institution of a Spirit Farm on the lines of the Opium Farm. Both articles being used by natives, the latter are best able to collect. In the case of opium it has been proved. The method of collection from the Government's point of view may be considered effectual and cheap.
[August 21, 1909.
Then comes the question of shipments from ports other than the United Kingdom. We could not well get the Imperial Government to collect this, and therefore collection would have to be made as follows: All shipments of wines spirits and beor from ports other than in the United Kingdom would have to be accompanied by a Consular Certificate stating that a tax (as arranged) had been collected for account of the Hongkong Government. The Consuls may add something for their cost of collection. The steamers' agents in Hongkong would be in- structed not to countersign bills of lading without presentation of the Consular Certificate.
For Australia, and other self-governed Colonies having Customs Houses, arrangements could be made similar to those suggested for shipments from the United Kingdom.
Shipments from Singapore and other Straits forts form a difficulty. They could be included in the Spirit Farm-although not simply. Or captains could be called upon to declare at the Hongkong Harbour Office when carrying wines, spirits or beer, and the Harbour Master would issue a certificate, after collection of
duty" (or whatever the tax is to be called), without presentation of which the steamers' agents would not countersign bills of lading. If Singapore came into line with Hongkong in the matter, the difficulty would be solved, as the duty" would have been prepaid at port of shipment. The only point that Singapore would get the duty on spirits, &c., transhipped at Singapore for Hongkong. But it would not pay shippers of cargo to deliberately tranship at Singapore, and Hongkong, therefore, would not lose much and its sister Crown Colony would get what it did lose.
Lastly, comes the question of Hongkong's Outports: Canton, Macao, Swatow, Amoy, Foochow, for which places Hongkong is merely a transhipping centre. I think shipments des- tined for those places had better all arrive duty paid also. Let them all help on the good work. I cannot imagine any of those ports taking a full cargo of liquors and so avoiding transhipment at Hongkong. On the other hand, fairplay is a good thing, and refunds could be made upon presentation of Customs Certificates should outports make too much fuss about paying double duty.
As regards liquors for European consump. tion, increase of revenue may not be gained by increased amount of "Publican's" or "Grocer's licences. In your leader this morning you show that such will lead to extinction of many of the smaller licences and consequent loss of revenue to the Government. There is no doubt of the truth of this.. It is better to have five licences each paying $1,000 than two each paying $2,000. Apart altogether from the reduction in the number there is the loss of That is all I have to write at the moment. I revenue resulting from vacant houses to be have tried to show a principle whereby all con considered. It is not good to put undue strainsumers shall bear the tax and by which the local on the licencees, although the effectiveness and cheapness of collection by merely increasing licences cannot be maintained.
There are other methods, however. One is the establishment of a Bonded Warehouse, which, as has been pointed out by His Excellency, is the "thin end of the wedge," and takes away from Hongkong the right to be styled a free port.
In looking round for other methods, I sug- gest that the tax might be collected at Home before export, and the proceeds paid into the Treasury at Home for account of the Hongkong Government,
As is well known, all liquors at home, whether destined for export or not, are stored in a bonded warehouse, and when required for export a Customs permit to ship-called, I believe, a "Pricking Note"-is issued by the Customs officer to the shipper, and is attached to the usual shipper's order, and without the Pricking Note goods are not allowed in the dock where the ship is loading. My suggestion is that Pricking Notes should be stamped, the amount of the stamp to vary according to the goods shipped: a case of whisky should not bear so large a stamp as a case of champagne. amounts collected in stamp fees to be credited to the Hongkong Government and the total to be deducted from the amount due from the Colony to the Imperial Government.
.
There could be no refunds for Macao, as it is a free port.
licencee shall not have to speculate upon the number of his customers and the size of their thirsts,, to enable him to make up his mind whether the business is worth the outlay. Also I have endeavoured to evolve a system by which the tax may be imposed and cheaply collected, with as much avoidance as possible of the thin edge of a wedge," depriving Hong. kong of the right to style itself a "free port.
is I believe the Principle" or System sound, although perhaps a coach and four could be driven through the methods proposed to work it. If so, let another assist in closing ap gaps.
CE
"
Yours faithfully,:
OBSERVER.
We have been asked what excise duties are charged in Singapore. The reply is that spiritu- ous and fermented liquors used or consumed in any of the settlements of the Colony are liable to the following Excise Duties, payable to the Spirit Farmers, viz. :— On all Spirituous Liquors... $2.40 per gallon.
Sparkling Wines. 1:50 31 The
Still Wines All other intoxicating
It may be argued : "Bat you put the cost of collection on to the Imperial Government.' The answer is: "There is not much cost attaching to stamping a document. If the Imperial Government want some payment, it may add, say, 3d. to the stamp for itself. It should be prepared to do it for nothing, seeing it has taken away so large a source of the Colony's revenue"
So much for the effectiveness and cost of collection, as far as shipments from the United Kingdom are concerned.
1.00
4
Liquors (excepting
native wines
and
0.24
spirits and toddy)
11
[TO THE EDITOR OF THE HONGKONG DAILY PRESS"]
Hongkong, 17th August, 1909. SIR Reading the correspondence in the columns of the Local Press anent the burning question of the hour, ie., the Colony's increased taxation, it occurs to me that our demagogues have left out of their estimates the veiled
ས་