Christos1 (trips to Cuba under ex-name, Pamit, Greek flag). Cris 2 Dimos---. Free Trader.... Giorgos Tsakiroglou. Granikos__. Nena. Ioannis Aspiotis_. Kalliopi D. Lemos_ Leftric-.. See footnotes at end of table, p. 137. 5, 006 7, 249 7, 223 8, 418 7,031 7, 244 7, 266 7, 128 7, 232 7,275 5, 032 7, 264 6, 888 7, 219 7, 217 7,245 7, 147 7, 369 7,282 7, 199 10, 904 9, 341 3, 929 7, 131 7, 144 6, 712 15, 852 7,143 10, 820 7, 128 5, 911 7,239 16, 241 7,244 7,362 10, 507 9, 268 293, 973 7,256 6,997 7, 285 6, 989 7.044 6, 259 7, 176 6,995 5, 324 4, 729 4, 557 4,884 6.032 7, 187 7,067 7,240 7,282 5,925 7, 297 5, 103 7, 176 Indian Jalaganga1 (trip to Cuba under ex-name, Silverlake, British flag). Chinese (Formosa) Comfort1 (trip to Cuba under ex-name, Guinee, French flag). Panamanian Jezreel1 (trip to Cuba under ex-name, Tine, Norwegian flag). 1 Ships appearing on the list that have been scrapped or have had changes in name and/or flags of registry. 2 Added to Report No. 24 appearing in the Federal Register issue of Jan. 17, 1964. Section 2. In accordance with approved procedures, the vessels listed below which called at Cuba after January 1, 1963, have reacquired eligibility to carry U.S. Government-financed cargoes from the United States by virtue of the persons who control the vessels having given satisfactory certification and assurance: (a) That such vessels will not, thenceforth, be employed in the Cuba trade so long as it remains the policy of the U.S. Government to discourage such trade; and (b) That no other vessels under their control will thenceforth be employed in the Cuba trade, except as provided in paragraph (c); and (c) That vessels under their control which are covered by contractual obligations, including charters, entered into prior to December 16, 1963, requiring their employment in the Cuba trade shall be withdrawn from such trade at the earliest opportunity consistent with such contractual obligations. Section 3. The ships listed in sections 1 and 2 have made the following number of trips to Cuba since January 1, 1963, based on information received through January 17, 1964: Number of trips 1963 Flag of registry 1964 Jan.- Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Total Nore.--Trip totals in this section exceed ship totals in secs. 1 and 2 because some of the ships made more than 1 trip to Cuba. Dated: January 24 1964. Mr. DOWNING, Mr. Tollefson? J. W. GULICK, Deputy Maritime Administrator. Mr. TOLLERSON. Coming back to the financial participation of the Government in this transaction, in addition to the Export-Import Bank credit, or guarantee, or whatever it is, as I understand it, in this particular transaction there are a million tons of grain involved. Mr. JOHNSON. That is my understanding, yes. Mr. TOLLERSON, But the total program involves a possible 411⁄2 million tons? Mr. Jonsson. Approximately 4 million, including the satellites; yes, sir. Mr. TOLLEYSON. Using the figure supplied in yesterday's testimony on the amount of export subsidies, which includes this ocean freight differential, the total subsidy averages according to the testimony yesterday 721 cents a bushel. According to my arithmetic 1 million tons is equal to 36,666,000 bushels Multiplying that by 72% cents on the million tons the Government's actual financial participation is $27,382,000. If we multiply that by four times, which takes care of the 4 million tons, then the American Government's participation would run in excess of $100 million. My arithmetic may not be correct. Mr. Jonsson, The Government's financial participation in this sense, I should think, Mr. Tollefson, would not be any different from its financial participation in any export wheat sales whether to the United Kingdom or Japan, or otherwise Mr. FOLLETSON, You are talking about the 4804 Mr. JOHNSON. No, no; not Public Law 480, but normal commercial sales carry with them an export price which is lower than the domestic price by the amount of the subsidy. Mr. TOLLEFSON. But it in no case reaches 7212 cents? Mr. JOHNSON. This I don't know, sir. I am not familiar with the details of wheat pricing, which is very complicated. Mr. TOLLEFSON. Inasmuch as my colleague, Mr. Downing, brought up the financial participation of the Government I was curious to know what it amounted to in dollars or dollar value and, as I say, on the million bushels it runs $271⁄2 million and on 4 million tons it would be four times that. Mr. DOWNING. Approximately $100 million it would cost us. Of course it would help the balance of payments. The counsel would like to ask you a question. Mr. JOHNSON. Surely. Mr. DREWRY. Mr. Secretary, it is still not exactly clear to me what took place in the beginning when the decision was made to use American-flag ships, "when available," in this transaction. After the traders came to you to ask whether this sort of thing were possible, the initial discussions were between State and other representatives, say, Commerce, Agriculture, perhaps, and Russian representatives. Is that correct? Mr. JOHNSON. No, sir; there were no discussions-I think I am correct in this with the representatives of the Soviet Union prior to the determination to go ahead with the program. Mr. DREWRY. Then when the upper levels considered the thing and they went to the Russians and said here is what we can do, that was when they were told that it would be on American ships when available? Mr. JOHNSON. That is correct, sir. Mr. DREWRY. And the Russians said it was all right with them. Mr. JOHNSON. That is correct. Mr. DREWRY. But do you know why that decision was made? Mr. JOHNSON. Why the decision was made to use American ships? Mr. DREWRY. Was it because of the consideration to balance of payments? Mr. JOHNSON. It was made I would say in the first place with background that the Soviet representative had already indicated a willingness on the part of the Soviet Union to use American ships. That being the case it was decided to put this in as one of the ground rules, as a method, I assume, of assisting the U.S. merchant marine. Mr. DREWRY. You say they had previously indicated a willingness. They were asked whether they would be willing to, or did they ask for American-flag ships? I have heard stories to that effect, that at one point they themselves were asking that American-flag ships be used. Mr. JOHNSON. This subject first came up, as I mentioned in my opening statement, at the time when an informal approach was made to the Soviet Union to find out whether they were seriously interested in a sizable purchase of wheat. In the course of this discussion with the Soviet representative this willingness on their part to use American ships came out. I was not myself at this discussion. I can't testify as to exactly the way in 39-375-64-10 |