[Diskussionsbeitrag zum Kohlenbergbau, Bd. I, S. 84–85, Nr. 4]

Emil Lederer: Intervention on Coal-Mining Calculations (1920)

This commission speaking turn, preserved from volume I, pages 84–85, examines a possible inconsistency in colliery calculations. Responding to Hué’s distinction between Absatzeffekt and Fördereffekt—sales-based and output-based measures—Lederer asks whether replacing the latter with the former leads to double-counting the mine’s own coal consumption. His argument turns on what has already been excluded from the calculation:

In diesem Absatzeffekt ist bereits abgezogen, daß ein Teil der Förderung auf Selbstverbrauch der Zeche entfällt. Also der Absatzeffekt muß geringer sein als der Fördereffekt.

English translation: In this sales-based measure, the fact that part of the output goes to the mine’s own consumption has already been deducted. Thus the sales-based measure must be lower than the output-based measure.

The distinction matters because coal consumed by the mine itself is produced but not sold. If the calculation already uses a measure excluding that coal, Lederer argues, a further deduction for internal consumption appears unjustified:

Wenn ich das tue, kann ich aber nicht den Selbstverbrauch nochmals abziehen. Das scheint mir doch offenbar ein doppelter Abzug zu sein.

English translation: If I do that, however, I cannot deduct internal consumption again. That seems to me clearly to be a double deduction.

Lederer then addresses Stinnes’s observation that internal consumption would represent a higher percentage when the output-based measure falls. He connects this to a reduction in the wage share, since internal consumption is assigned to other charges. He closes by requesting clarification rather than claiming a demonstrated error: how can the old output-based measure be replaced by the sales-based measure while internal consumption is still deducted? The intervention’s significance lies in its scrutiny of accounting categories and their consequences for the reported distribution of costs.