Walter G. Moyle August Total net gun sales revised to exclude gun barrel Reduction sales to Savage" “a5, 926,292.90 “Remington- jobbing price 685, 250.18 Actually Paid Computed Tax Payable Tax 62,295.47 Less As the taxable base if 102% putation of of $2,026.99 Tax previously in of would of each the would $6,229.55 tax i941 base $38,921.82 stated, we have used one-eleventh In the latter these computations. were of $685,250.18 result. result 23, 373.65 In if the the 10% first basis increase an used computation were an of com- in increase used. For the post suit period we are proceeding on the theory that gun barrel sales are not taxable and that transportation charges and the reduction of retail sales to wholesale as presented We also underin our brief of December 11, 1940 will be allowed. stand that from the figures submitted in our statements accompanying the brief, gun barrel sales should be eliminated and that sales made from the original inventory transferred should be taxed upon the full “wholesale” price but that the remaining sales should be reduced to the average "Remington-Savage” jobbing price upon which the tax would prepared and attach hereto a schedule We have, therefore, be based. in the sum of reflecting the amount of tax excluding interest, If the tax upon subsequent importations reduced to $173,902.25. jobbers price is figured upon 10% of the tax base it would result in an increase in tax of $16,528.69. The tax liability tentatively assessed by the Department amounted to $236, 366.02 of which $160,732.55 had been paid. If we were able to settle the case on the basis of the above computation instead of an additional tax of $75,633.47, we would This represents a difference of pay $13,169.70, plus interest. This would be decreased by $16,525.69 if the tax were $62,463.77. computed upon the basis of 10% of the jobbers price. The figures given in these computations approximate very closely those which we worked out in Washington and if a settlement of the case could be made for both the suit and post suit period based upon them we feel sure that Mr. Browning, Mr. Thatcher, and ourselves would recommend settlement. There are two hurdies, both of which we seem to have One is the assessment of the tax gotten over, temporarily at least. using one-eleventh of the selling price which Mr. Ekstrand appears We, of to use and to which we have previously called attention. course, do not know what his computations are for the post suit period and are assuming that inasmuch as the figure given in your letter of