'File 35/87 VI A. 38 Muscat reforms, customs, finances' [‎56r] (119/440)

d ut1es ,
■Tfiere ooes not appear to be a strong case for a general
increase in the rate of duty.- Tne collections fiax of duty
for tne year 1924 amounted to Rs. 7,69,000 and exceeded those
.i o- tne year 1. Dy rs . 1,11,400- Provided there Is a reaa
reasonable amount of rain, and consequently good crops of datea.,
etc., the trade of Oman should remain fairly constant and
snou.La yield ac least Rs . 7 >50,000 eacn year in customs duties
iexcluding landing charges)►
Any Increase of duty eventually falls on tne ultimate con
sumer. Unfortunately the merchants usually try to take an
unfair advantage by raising the retail cost of all articles
by considerably more tnan the equivalent increased amount of
duty *
The inriabitants of Oman as a whole are not rich and can-
uot well at± ord to pay higher prices for trie necessities of
lite and it is possible that imports would show a falling off
to such an extent that no extra duty would be realised ®
as stated previously the treaties with G-reat Britain and
France would require alteration. 1 believe also the .igree-
ments with tne shaikhs oi the Interior would have to be mod if i—
ed^and an increase 01 duty would doubtless be used as a
His
political lever to alienate Mish Highness the Sultan's
authority and to foster disrcontent , particularly at outposts
where considerable difficulty is experienced in collecting the
present duties»
as far as my information goes the general rates of import
duty in dome neighbouring countiiea are as follows
India 15% "Yemen il$ Hejaz lo^ Bahrain 5^
Iraq 15^ Kuwait 11^ Hasa 8^ Oman 3%.
It iitfxi will thus be peen that the existing rate of 5^ ad
valorem is coniiderably lower than in most of the neighbouring
stages o I his rate has remained in force for mapy years
1
whereaa the rates in some other countries have been raised
from time to time»
If