Something about sugar : $b Its history, growth, manufacture and distributionRolph, George M. (George Morrison)
History
Something about sugar : $b Its history, growth, manufacture and distribution
Rolph, George M. (George Morrison)
Sugar
Apart from certain details, the various regulations in European countries
for the purpose of building up the manufacture of beet sugar and making
it a revenue producer were very much alike. The essential features were
a prohibitive import duty and a slightly lower excise tax. The latter
provided revenue for the government, and the difference between the
import duty and the excise shut out foreign competition and fixed the
amount of profit the domestic beet-sugar producer could make. Still
worse, it created pools or combinations for the control of both output
and price.
With increased production, which was more than sufficient to supply the
home demand, these countries were in a position to export sugar, and
in order to enable their manufacturers to compete in outside markets,
a drawback of the excise was allowed on all exported sugar. A peculiar
condition of the law affecting this drawback was that it really, though
not directly, provided for a bounty on export sugar, and while this was
not the original intent of the law, the improvements that it encouraged
accomplished the purpose.
In Germany the principle was that the excise was levied upon the
quantity of beet-root sliced, while the export drawback was allowed on
the actual sugar produced.[21] At the time of the passing of the law that
was in operation from September, 1869, to July, 1886, the assumption
was that the yield in sugar would be 8.51 per cent of the weight of the
beets, allowing 11.75 tons of beets for one ton of sugar, and on all
raw sugar exported the manufacturer was given $2.03 per hundredweight
drawback, the exact equivalent of the excise tax, which was 17 cents per
hundredweight of beets.
For some years after this law became effective it took twelve tons of
beets to make a ton of sugar, consequently the drawback allowed the
exporter did not represent all of the excise. Thus it became the aim of
the manufacturers to raise the sugar content of the beets and to improve
the extraction. By 1882 they had succeeded so well that a ton of sugar
was produced from 10.46 tons of beet-roots instead of 11.75 tons, as
predicated when the law was drawn up. The drawback, however, was still
allowed at the rate of $2.03 per hundredweight, which netted the producer
a clear gain of 22 cents.[22]
In France from 1864 to 1875 the calculations were made from the
quantity and purity of the juice. In other words, a certain arbitrary
_rendement_[23] of sugar from the beet-root was the basis of taxation,
while any excess recovery was exempt. This was equivalent to an indirect
bounty, but the French government saw to it that the estimates and the
actual outturn did not get too far apart. No bounty whatever was paid on
French sugar from 1875 to 1884.
About 1880 the sugar production of Germany exceeded that of France, so
that in 1884 the French authorities revived the indirect bounty system to
put new life into the industry, and the effect of this action was soon
apparent.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account