PART Ill 
Comparis i . . : 213 
parison of the equivalent rates of duty in the tariff act of 1922 and the tariff act of 1930, by groups of commodities 
arranged according to the statistical classification followed by the Department of Commerce in its annual 
publications of imports for consumption 
Pages 
I 143 
mmm mmm mmm mmm 143-146 
A. Summary by statistical groups._________ 
B. Detailed comparison for groups and subgroups... tes of duty for groups of commodities 
The following tables have been prepared primarily for the purpose of showing the equivalent ad valorem Froli pM imports for consumption. 
arranged according to the statistical classification followed by the Department of Commerce in tts annua Ds t of 1922 and under the act of 1930. 
Comparisons are made between the calculated duties and the equivalent ad valorem Token of duty under the tanh a le rls alle dallos 0d 
Results are based upon imports for consumption for the calendar year 1928. The principal az erence betweet 1930 is that items in this table have been 
publications issued by the Tariff Commission and used by the Congress during the consideration of the ee d publications presented from time to 
rearranged and grouped according to the Department of Commerce classification, whereas mn all other ta 0. The comparison by statistical groups 
time, data have been arranged by paragraphs and schedules as in the tariff act of 1922 and in the act ol 0. rts alone are involved. 
necessarily comprehends both free and dutiable imports, whereas in comparisons by tariff schedules dui ° oe n separately by groups for the act 
A further difference is that in this tabulation the values of free and dutiable imports for consumption are o erent for the act of 1022 
of 1922 and for the act of 1930. In other words, each of the acts is permitted to stand on its own basis. Thus, : ° rts dutiable under that act. This 
have been related to the imports dutiable under that act and the duties for the act of 1930 have been related to ipo le oor fities under successive 
is the method used in the statistical abstract of the United States, in comparing ad valorem rat es 5 dhyy on en ress in which the computed 
tariff acts. The rates thus computed differ from those shown in tables prepared by the comission fur the use ° bl EE either act. When large 
duties both for the act of 1922 and for the act of 1930 have been related to a common base, viz, the imports uae ; roups including such transfers 
items have been transferred from the free list to the dutiable list, or vice versa, the average ad valorom rates on poy > oe B, Part 11. There it is 
may differ widely when computed by the two methods. This may be illustrated by reference to Group O or 2 > ct of 1930 $150,290,990. The 
shown that the value of hides, skins, and manufactures dutiable under the act of 1922 was $17 441,863 and or obtained ad ——— equivalents 
computed duties are $7,477,836 and $23,769,411, respectively. Relating the ation tor Th Beli of 4 ee f o bringing into the calculation $132,- 
of 42.88 under the act of 1922 and 15.82 under the act of 1930. The lower rate under the act of 1930 results bo f 1930, which were free under 
849,127 of hides and skins and leather and leather manufactures, dutiable at 10, 12%, 15, and 2 per a, under the ae gh en applied to a common 
the act of 1922. If the computed duties for the 1922 act and for the act of 1930 for hides, skins, and mene 15.81, respectively. Other 
base, viz, all imports dutiable under either act, the resulting average rates for this subgroup would have been in other groups in which transfers 
illustrations are found in the computations of ad valorem rates for Group 4—Wood and Paper—and in a less degree 
to and from the free list have been made