The Minister for Trade and Customs:

The Minister for Trade and Customs has received from Mr A.B.C., warehouseman, Brisbane, the following letter (dated 24 October 1902):

I have the honour to bring under your nonce what appears to me an unfair and illegal exaction on the part of our officials acting for you here. The complaint is this, that on the Duke of Sutherland shipment I was compelled to pay duty on the cash discount although this was clearly shown on the invoice in the same handwriting as the whole invoice. The officer demanded a statement showing that the cash discount was actually taken, but this we could not produce as the goods were not paid for when shipped and whether I took the cash discount or the time would, of course, depend on my financial position at the time. The cash discount is there for the taking if I am able to do so, and it is surely loss enough to lose the discount without having to pay duty on it. This becomes simply a tax on poverty and under this arrangement the duty is unequal as between the rich man and the poor. We are required to make a declaration that the invoice produced is the true and only invoice and the cash discount has to be deducted to arrive at the cash value. If we cannot take the discount and must take the time the discount is then interest and insurance on the loan of money. Under the Federal tariff this discount has always been allowed, as it was under our Queensland regulations till this shipment. May I further point out that it has occurred in some instances that I have had to add interest instead of taking a cash discount; should I have paid the duty on the interest? I respectfully submit that the question as to the manner of finance rests entirely between the buyer and seller and that the cash value only is the true basis on which to collect duty. This places all importers on an equal footing as far as duty is concerned.

The Minister for Trade and Customs forwards the papers to me with the following minute (dated 8 November 1902):

I desire to be advised whether there is properly any difference between the amount on which duty should be charged in the case of two purchasers of similar goods, on one of which the buyer pays cash and gets discount for it, and in the other when he takes credit and gets no discount.

In my opinion there is no difference if the invoice in each case discloses the cash value. The market value of the goods is their cash market value; and if a cash discount marked on the invoice is bona fide, it is immaterial, for the purpose of assessing the value for duty, whether cash was paid with discount off, or credit taken instead of discount.

[Vol. 2, p. 419]