EXTRACT.
10
Reference........
RESTRICTED.
To Director of Commerce and Industry, Hong Kong.
From Counsellor (Hong Kong Affairs), Geneva.
Memorandum No. 77.
File No. GVA/4/34
RESTRICTED
Date 13 May 1969
Non-tariff Barriers
Discussion on Hong Kong Notifications
in Sections W, V and VI
Annex 1
V.B
Surcharges, Port Dues, Statistical Taxes
etc.
AUSTRALIA
11.
In elaborating on Hong Kong's notification on primage duties, I asked a series of questions, namely -
(1) What products the primage duties applied to.
(11) Were they applied on an MFN basis?.
(iii) If they applied to items where the rates of duty were
bound, were they included in the bindings?
(iv) Why were they not rolled into the normal customs
duties for the products concerned?
Hall (Australia) said that primage duties were introduced in the 1930s as a revenue measure. There were two rates, namely, 5% for BP and 10% for MFN. They then applied to all imports. Since then primage duties had been progressively reduced, especially in the GATT negotiations in 1946/47.
Where
/bindings
bindings were agreed in these negotiations primage duties were eliminated. The primage duties are not automatically rolled inte normal duties to preserve the distinction between their nature as revenue duties and the protective element in the · tariff. This puts Australian industry on warning that primage duties should not be considered as part of their protection and the Tariff Board makes its recommendations on the assumption that primage duties might be eliminated. In the light of this Hall claimed that primage duties were tariff duties, that (apart from the preferential margin allowed in the GATT) they were non-discriminatory and that they should not therefore be considered a non-tariff barrier. In view of this explanation I agreep to withdraw the notification.
Q
-4JUL 1969
насирий
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.