/ WTO Brexit- cost of living/ business

Please Register as a New User in order to reply to this topic.
MargieB 15 Feb 2020

Seems odd that most of cabinet is WTO rules' supporters and Boris made the oddest "negotiating strategy" of threatening a WTO rules based Brexit ! But how appropriate is that strategy with EU now? and, rather, is he softening us UK people up for the WTO idea? Does he prefer it?

Spending spree  and March budget will not distract from the cost of living issues of our weekly basket, nor business requirements of EU based businesses.

Report
L NERD 15 Feb 2020
In reply to MargieB:

WTO means no deal doesn't it? I think Pinky and The Brain will actively push for a no deal brexit, if the EU does not offer a deal that really works for the UK then I don't think they will agree to one.

One big spanner out of the works is the DUP, Pinky can do whatever he wants in N Ireland now including a boarder down the Irish Sea. This does make negotiations easier but I still think the Tories are setting up for a no deal, I can't see them making any significant concessions to the EU. 

Report
SDM 15 Feb 2020
In reply to NERD:

Having held a gun to our own heads by setting yet another impossible and arbitrary deadline, there are really only two options:

1) No deal

2) A deal that is so watered down that it is effectively either no deal or it is Brexit in name only.

We haven't left anywhere near enough time to negotiate a meaningful deal and the EU has far less to lose when the clock runs down. This deadline cannot have been imposed with the intention of securing any meaningful deal. It's all a bit groundhog day...

Report
L NERD 15 Feb 2020
In reply to SDM:

Yeah, I think the whole thing is a charade so both sides can blame one another and both sides have more time to prepare. 

Report
BnB 15 Feb 2020
In reply to MargieB:

What will the average WTO tariff be on UK/EU trade if no deal is struck? Is it 10%? 15%? 20%? What will be its impact on the weekly shop? £20? £40? These answers are available online and you might be surprised. Have you actually researched before becoming alarmed at the headlines?

Post edited at 15:50
Report
Blunderbuss 15 Feb 2020
In reply to MargieB:

Cummings HQ will be pushing the Australia style deal aka No Deal for those with some intelligence, more and more.....vast swathes of the public will think this is fine.

Report
BnB 15 Feb 2020
In reply to MargieB:

This fellow is a highly regarded investor and one-time critic of Brexit. Worth a read or listen to the vid. Very interesting on wage growth at the end of the vid.

https://on.ft.com/2vyE4pa

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCKscWaUi4w

Report
RomTheBear 15 Feb 2020
In reply to BnB:

> This fellow is a highly regarded investor and one-time critic of Brexit. Worth a read or listen to the vid. Very interesting on wage growth at the end of the vid.

More borrowing, more spending, more low interest rates, more debt-fuel growth, more protectionism, enough to keep la-la-land going.

Until it doesn’t.

Post edited at 18:43
Report
Blunderbuss 15 Feb 2020
In reply to RomTheBear:

> More borrowing, more spending, more low interest rates, more debt-fuel growth, more protectionism, enough to keep la-la-land going.

> Until it doesn’t.

New Tories = Old Labour

Report
RomTheBear 15 Feb 2020
In reply to Blunderbuss:

> New Tories = Old Labour

On the economic front, pretty much.

Report
MargieB 15 Feb 2020
In reply to BnB:

A possibility is cheap food from poor standards of  production- that sorts out poor people and the other side of society eats food from better production with higher prices. That's a Brexit option. Never mind costing the earth or one's health. But at the moment we have some standards.

It can go any way- I prefer the latter. And as soon as Brexit occurred, I noticed food prices went up and have not subsequently gone down.

Post edited at 18:48
Report
deepsoup 15 Feb 2020
In reply to NERD:

> WTO means no deal doesn't it?

It does, but that euphemism for no deal is *so* 2019. 
Pinky and the Brain are pushing for an 'Australian style' trade deal now.  (Australia has no deal.)

Report
pasbury 15 Feb 2020
In reply to Blunderbuss:

> New Tories = Old Labour

How symmetric!

Report
L NERD 15 Feb 2020
In reply to deepsoup:

> It does, but that euphemism for no deal is *so* 2019. 

> Pinky and the Brain are pushing for an 'Australian style' trade deal now.  (Australia has no deal.)

Wasn't that just Pinky taking the piss? That's what I thought, but then just about everything that seems to come out his mouth is taking the piss out of someone... Maybe I'm too cynical.. maybe not!

To be serious though how can the EU give us any kind of deal that's going to help us out? If they do and it worked out it could well be the end of the EU, certainly diminish their powers somewhat. I always thought a Norway deal was the path so I wasn't overly keen on May's deal. Now we want no free movement, no customs union, no ECJ, no payments to the EU. There is nothing to negotiate with, we literally haven't got a single thing to offer them, not that I can think of anyway. 

Report
BnB 16 Feb 2020
In reply to RomTheBear:

> More borrowing, more spending, more low interest rates, more debt-fuel growth, more protectionism, enough to keep la-la-land going.

Pretty much standard developed world economic policy at the moment, USA being a prime example, where the consumer is thriving.

Report
RomTheBear 16 Feb 2020
In reply to BnB:

https://citywire.co.uk/wealth-manager/news/richard-buxton-a-brexit-just-wont-happen/a902645

'It is just not going to happen. The bookies odds are still 2/1 that we stay in Europe. The British electorate is inherently conservative with a small c. Very rarely they vote for radical change unless in extreme and dire circumstances. Which is not what we are today.'

Report
BnB 16 Feb 2020
In reply to BnB:

> What will the average WTO tariff be on UK/EU trade if no deal is struck? Is it 10%? 15%? 20%? What will be its impact on the weekly shop? £20? £40? These answers are available online and you might be surprised. Have you actually researched before becoming alarmed at the headlines?

Three dislikes and one reply that doesn’t directly respond to the questions. It’s almost as if no one wants to know the answer because they fear that it won’t be nearly as horrifying as they’ve been whipped up to assume. Being right about Brexit, or rather feeling justified, has become more important than being informed.

The average import duty that the EU and, for now the UK, charges is 3.2%.

Yes, 3.2%. Not 10% or 20%.

Even in a very limited UK-EU deal, covering some goods, that small average will decline further as a proportion remain tariff-free. And then, following swiftly agreed, politically expedient, deals with the likes of Canada, New Zealand and Australia, WTO rules are likely not to apply to key food imports. 

So the impact might not be much more than the annual rate of inflation and, crucially, rather less than the 5% - 8% boost GBP is predicted to experience once uncertainty is finally removed. In other words, your imported goods ought soon to be cheaper, yes cheaper, for British importers, the opposite of which was the experience after the 2016 vote and currency collapse.

None of the above is meant as a justification for Brexit. But it’s a call for sanity and reason instead of fear and panic.

Report
BnB 16 Feb 2020
In reply to RomTheBear:

> 'It is just not going to happen. The bookies odds are still 2/1 that we stay in Europe. The British electorate is inherently conservative with a small c. Very rarely they vote for radical change unless in extreme and dire circumstances. Which is not what we are today.'

Exactly. Hardly a rabid Brexiteer, as I stated. Surely you’re not suggesting that because he, along with the whole of the establishment, misread the referendum, he’s disqualified as an economic commentator?

Report
Blunderbuss 16 Feb 2020
In reply to BnB:

> Pretty much standard developed world economic policy at the moment, USA being a prime example, where the consumer is thriving.

What happens when a recession hits and the deficit potentially goes through the roof? 

Report
Blunderbuss 16 Feb 2020
In reply to BnB:

> Three dislikes and one reply that doesn’t directly respond to the questions. It’s almost as if no one wants to know the answer because they fear that it won’t be nearly as horrifying as they’ve been whipped up to assume. Being right about Brexit, or rather feeling justified, has become more important than being informed.

> The average import duty that the EU and, for now the UK, charges is 3.2%.

> Yes, 3.2%. Not 10% or 20%.

> Even in a very limited UK-EU deal, covering some goods, that small average will decline further as a proportion remain tariff-free. And then, following swiftly agreed, politically expedient, deals with the likes of Canada, New Zealand and Australia, WTO rules are likely not to apply to key food imports. 

> So the impact might not be much more than the annual rate of inflation and, crucially, rather less than the 5% - 8% boost GBP is predicted to experience once uncertainty is finally removed. In other words, your imported goods ought soon to be cheaper, yes cheaper, for British importers, the opposite of which was the experience after the 2016 vote and currency collapse.

> None of the above is meant as a justification for Brexit. But it’s a call for sanity and reason instead of fear and panic.

The BCC have said it is the non tariff barriers that will impact us the most when we leave the SM...

Report
krikoman 16 Feb 2020
In reply to Blunderbuss:

> New Tories = Old Labour


Except, the money is flowing out of our hands into private companies hands, it's nowhere near equivalence.

Report
BnB 16 Feb 2020
In reply to Blunderbuss:

> The BCC have said it is the non tariff barriers that will impact us the most when we leave the SM...

The thread is about WTO rules, not SM regulatory divergence.

Report
BnB 16 Feb 2020
In reply to Blunderbuss:

> What happens when a recession hits and the deficit potentially goes through the roof? 

You want Austerity to continue?

Report
BnB 16 Feb 2020
In reply to krikoman:

> Except, the money is flowing out of our hands into private companies hands, it's nowhere near equivalence.

Under Labour infrastructure would be built by the mighty State Construction Department and its vast reservoir of bricklaying civil servants?

Report
Blunderbuss 16 Feb 2020
In reply to BnB:

> The thread is about WTO rules, not SM regulatory divergence.

Right so moving from unrestricted access to EU markets via the SM to WTO rules means we ignore non tariff barriers....

Report
Blunderbuss 16 Feb 2020
In reply to BnB:

> You want Austerity to continue?

That doesn't answer my question... 

Plans to ramp up spending at the moment seems like madness when we have no idea what sort of trade deal we will get with the EU...

Report
BnB 16 Feb 2020
In reply to Blunderbuss:

> That doesn't answer my question... 

> Plans to ramp up spending at the moment seems like madness when we have no idea what sort of trade deal we will get with the EU...

It seems pretty clear what kind of deal the government wants. And  since it’s a pretty minimal one, even no deal wouldn’t look very different. 

Report
neilh 16 Feb 2020
In reply to Blunderbuss:

You cannot have it both ways. Either in or out of the EU spending on infrastructure when rates are low is probably reasonable.

we will still need HS2 and we need more capital investment for the Northern powerhouse links , for 5g and so on .

thise issues would not have disappeared if we were still in the EU 

Report
Blunderbuss 16 Feb 2020
In reply to neilh:

We are due to run a £43bn deficit this year and will probably break the governments old fiscal rule which they conveniently changed to make them still look 'responsible' when it rises in 2020/21.....

50000 (well 31000 in reality) new nurses, 20000 new coppers, pledges to increase annual NHS spending increases to levels not seem since the boom years of Blair, HS2, new investment in the 'north' to keep his new Tory voters onside.......oh and a hardish Brexit guaranteed because they don't want to align us with the EU that will result in some economic damage and lead to reduced growth in the next few years....or even a recession if we leave on No Deal

What could possibly go wrong?!

The party of fiscal responsibilty and 'business' has died on the alter of Brexit and Cummings influence.....it certainly is not the party I have voted for in previous elections.

Report
DaveN 16 Feb 2020

Don't think that the tories have gone into this with any intention of getting a deal. They've set a studidly tight timescale and then gon in stupidly hard on the negotiating points. 

It's a negotiating strategy designed to result in no deal,whilst looking like you've at least tried. 

Report
neilh 16 Feb 2020
In reply to Blunderbuss:

The plan to take the North from Labour was hatched by George Osborne and it involved HS2  and the Northern Powerhouse.Its come to fruition and now has to be seen through.

Report
L NERD 16 Feb 2020
In reply to BnB:

> You want Austerity to continue?

THIS! The same people who rip Cameron and Osborne to bits for Austerity now rip Pinky to bits for reversing it!

Why? Because the top 5% aren't paying for it? Of course they aren't, they are far smarter than MP's and civil servants, better connected and better resourced. The only people who thought it was possible to put all the spending on them are stubborn old fools who could never let go of their childhood fantasies. Look at the manifesto, billions upon billions, hundreds of billions, thousands even. All on the top 5%, how can they be so deluded? 

I'm so glad austerity is ending, it's boring! We've recovered from the banking crisis as best as we can under austerity, it's time for investment. Putting the Brexit issue to one side this is the most centre tory government I've ever seen. Bring on the spending! 

Report
L NERD 16 Feb 2020
In reply to Blunderbuss:

> We are due to run a £43bn deficit this year and will probably break the governments old fiscal rule which they conveniently changed to make them still look 'responsible' when it rises in 2020/21.....

> 50000 (well 31000 in reality) new nurses, 20000 new coppers, pledges to increase annual NHS spending increases to levels not seem since the boom years of Blair, HS2, new investment in the 'north' to keep his new Tory voters onside.......oh and a hardish Brexit guaranteed because they don't want to align us with the EU that will result in some economic damage and lead to reduced growth in the next few years....or even a recession if we leave on No Deal

> What could possibly go wrong?!

> The party of fiscal responsibilty and 'business' has died on the alter of Brexit and Cummings influence.....it certainly is not the party I have voted for in previous elections.

So what do you want them to do? They're not going to reverse brexit. The NHS is falling to pieces, parts of London are turning into a violent version of Lord of the flies. Our manufacturering industry's are failing and can't compete. There's a good reason Napoleon called us a nation of shop keepers. We need investment in infrastructure, big construction projects, housebuilding, freeports, renewable energy, multi story farming. We could host 100 million people on this island in 50 years with major investment. The other option is continual decline with our national institutions falling apart. Roll the die, cross the Rubicon. Bring it on.  

Report
Blunderbuss 16 Feb 2020
In reply to NERD:

> So what do you want them to do? They're not going to reverse brexit. The NHS is falling to pieces, parts of London are turning into a violent version of Lord of the flies. Our manufacturering industry's are failing and can't compete. There's a good reason Napoleon called us a nation of shop keepers. We need investment in infrastructure, big construction projects, housebuilding, freeports, renewable energy, multi story farming. We could host 100 million people on this island in 50 years with major investment. The other option is continual decline with our national institutions falling apart. Roll the die, cross the Rubicon. Bring it on.  

Would you like to tell me what will happen when another recession hits if borrowing is ramped upfrom current levels during a period of low economic growth, will this be part of the 'fun' once we have got rid of 'boring' austerity aka living within your means....

Report
L NERD 16 Feb 2020
In reply to Blunderbuss:

> Would you like to tell me what will happen when another recession hits if borrowing is ramped upfrom current levels during a period of low economic growth, will this be part of the 'fun' once we have got rid of 'boring' austerity aka living within your means....

In 2010 both parties wanted austerity. In 2019 both parties wanted to spend. So the choice wasn't between spending or austerity, it was between Labour's spending plan or the Tories. The whole parliament wants to spend - from what I can see. 

I was never fully convinced austerity was a good idea. It got us to where we are now, painfully and without gambling, maybe gambling would have turned out better. Maybe the only way to stop the next recession is by spending now...maybe the only way to achieve growth is spending now, no one really knows. 

Report
Blunderbuss 16 Feb 2020
In reply to NERD:

> In 2010 both parties wanted austerity. In 2019 both parties wanted to spend. So the choice wasn't between spending or austerity, it was between Labour's spending plan or the Tories. The whole parliament wants to spend - from what I can see. 

> I was never fully convinced austerity was a good idea. It got us to where we are now, painfully and without gambling, maybe gambling would have turned out better. Maybe the only way to stop the next recession is by spending now...maybe the only way to achieve growth is spending now, no one really knows. 

Increased spending is fine to a point, providing there is some 'honesty' that taxes will have to rise to fund it....will this government do that in the next budget....lets wait and see.

If they don't and we ramp up borrowing again then god help us when the next recession arrives... 

Report
L NERD 16 Feb 2020
In reply to Blunderbuss:

If? It's happening matey, no way to stop it. I can't see Pinky raising taxs on the jams that just gave him his overwhelming majority, he ain't going to tax the natural tories. Reduce tax more like, spend through the nose, cross the fingers, hope for the best. Welcome to 21st century populism, at least it won't be boring ;) 

Report
RomTheBear 16 Feb 2020
In reply to BnB:

> Exactly. Hardly a rabid Brexiteer, as I stated.

 

No, just another guy of his generation who is completely blind to the bleeding obvious in front of them.

> Surely you’re not suggesting that because he, along with the whole of the establishment, misread the referendum, he’s disqualified as an economic commentator?

I am surely suggesting that. If you get things that wrong, that bad, then surely your opinion has no worth.

Post edited at 14:17
Report
Timmd 16 Feb 2020
In reply to MargieB:

A friend has a friend who works for a major supermarket chain, and they've told her that food prices could up by a third, to do with the cost of living. 

Post edited at 14:18
Report
BnB 16 Feb 2020
In reply to RomTheBear:

> I am surely suggesting that. If you get things that wrong, that bad, then surely you must be disqualified.

From making political predictions, maybe, although it’s a call most experienced observers also got wrong. But it’s not an economic one, such as I posted, which is his field of competence.

Why don’t you stop playing the man and tell us what you think the UK economy will do in the next 12 months.

Post edited at 14:28
Report
Blunderbuss 16 Feb 2020
In reply to NERD:

> If? It's happening matey, no way to stop it. I can't see Pinky raising taxs on the jams that just gave him his overwhelming majority, he ain't going to tax the natural tories. Reduce tax more like, spend through the nose, cross the fingers, hope for the best. Welcome to 21st century populism, at least it won't be boring ;) 

My if wasn't serious and yes this is pure populism.....it will certainly be fun when the next recession hits, except that for more than a few it won't be....still if gambling with the countries future floats your boat then you will be delighted. 

Post edited at 14:24
Report
BnB 16 Feb 2020
In reply to Timmd:

> A friend has a friend who works for a major supermarket chain, and they've told her that food prices could up by a third, to do with the cost of living. 

You’re saying that inflation, which in no developed nation on earth is capable of reaching even 3% today, and this in spite of the best efforts of policy makers to encourage it to rise, will hit 33% after January 2020. I am moved to suggest this is an outlier amongst theories.

Report
Timmd 16 Feb 2020
In reply to BnB: Don't shoot the messenger.

Post edited at 14:29
Report
BnB 16 Feb 2020
In reply to Timmd:

I’m not. I’m ridiculing the message

But it’s the kind of speculative claptrap whose proliferation here and in the media has most of the forum in a masturbatory lather over just how gloriously bad Brexit can be, when for most of the population, it’ll barely register in the end. Business will adapt, and, as the door slams shut on certain EU opportunities, a window will open on new territories and relationships. Why would a recent governor of the Bank of England and two chancellors of the exchequer be so in favour if there were no positives to contemplate?

Post edited at 14:46
Report
Timmd 16 Feb 2020
In reply to BnB: Fair enough.

Report
RomTheBear 16 Feb 2020
In reply to BnB:

> From making political predictions, maybe, although it’s a call most experienced observers also got wrong.

No, that’s a call all the experienced bullshiters got wrong.

My taxi driver makes better predictions.

> But it’s not an economic one, such as I posted, which is his field of competence. 

It’s the same thing.

I happen to agree that it’s likely that the British economy could see a bit of a short term relative rebound do to increased political stability, increased state spending, and protectionism.

But that is completely missing the bigger picture, that rebound would only be relative to very poor performance in the past 3 years, just a blip within the usual variance really.

The fundamental, long term change brought by brexit doesn’t change, it is simply one of a thick layer of costs added to the economy, less exposure to foreign competition, and reduced access to talents.

And of course the government will compensate with more and more debt, more and more ill-advised spending, central bank will keep interest rate low, etc etc, keep the music going as long as possible, pile up more and more risk.

But at some point someone has to pay, there is no free lunch that is the only thing I know to be invariably true in economics.

Post edited at 14:53
Report
BnB 16 Feb 2020
In reply to RomTheBear:

> No, that’s a call all the experienced bullshiters got wrong.

> My taxi driver makes better predictions.

> It’s the same thing.

> I happen to agree that it’s likely that the British economy could see a bit of a short term relative rebound do to increased political stability, increased state spending, and protectionism.

> But that is completely missing the bigger picture, that rebound would only be relative to very poor performance in the past 3 years, and the fundamental change brought by brexit is simply that of thick layer of costs added to the economy, less exposure to foreign competition, and reduced access to talents.

> And of course the government will compensate with more and more debt, more and more ill-advised spending, central bank will keep interest rate low, etc etc, keep the music going as long as possible, pile up more and more risk.

> But at some point someone has to pay, there is no free lunch that is the only thing I know to be invariably true in economics.

Right. So he’s an idiot. But in the end you agree with his prediction. Glad we got that sorted.

I don’t fundamentally disagree with your further observations but it’s too soon to hit the panic button when the UK’s success is levered to the global economy more than to its membership, or otherwise, of the SM. I have stakes in about 20 UK companies and they all do most of their business in Asia and the US. Europe is moribund and, in the case of Germany, Europe’s industrial engine, perilously wedded to its analogue industrial past. The world is digital today and Europe is miles behind.

Report
L NERD 16 Feb 2020
In reply to Blunderbuss:

> My if wasn't serious and yes this is pure populism.....it will certainly be fun when the next recession hits, except that for more than a few it won't be....still if gambling with the countries future floats your boat then you will be delighted. 

Eh? What have I got to do with it? None of this was my idea and I'm powerless to do anything to stop it. I don't worry about stuff I can't control, I just look on the bright side and hope for the best. All countries have to gamble on their future, if they didn't they wouldn't invest in anything and the economy would collapse. 

Report
Blunderbuss 16 Feb 2020
In reply to NERD:

You said you were bored with austerity and looked forward to a spending splurge, hence my "you'll be delighted" comment....if you don't feel this way fair enough. 

Post edited at 18:54
Report
wercat 16 Feb 2020
In reply to NERD:

his name is Porky, because of his record of "truthfulness".

his advisor is the ID or Invisible Dictator.   Can we drop Pinky and the Brain as it is too euphemistic

Report
L NERD 16 Feb 2020
In reply to Blunderbuss:

> You said you were bored with austerity and looked forward to a spending splurge, hence my "you'll be delighted" comment....if you don't feel this way fair enough. 

What was the non spending splurge option? There wasn't one. I said I'm optimistic about things out of my control. I'm a lot more optimistic about the Tories spending plans than I would have been about Labours. But I'd still be optimistic, it would be very interesting to see what a relatively far left government would do. Nothing to be optimistic about with Austerity, because nothing happens. Maybe it's just a way of looking at the world that doesn't get me stressed out. 

Report
L NERD 16 Feb 2020
In reply to wercat:

> his name is Porky, because of his record of "truthfulness".

> his advisor is the ID or Invisible Dictator.   Can we drop Pinky and the Brain as it is too euphemistic

Depends how you feel about them... I don't hate them, I don't even dislike them. OK Pinky is a ruthless, coniving, deceitful, unfaithful bastard. He's also bold and brave, he doesn't take shit and he comes out on top, smelling of roses every time. Winston Churchill was an absolute pig of a man, racist, misgogtisic, genocidal. I'm glad he was our PM though. I want a **** like Pinky dealing with the likes of Trump and Macron. Better than a wet fish like Corbyn.

As too The Brain, well I wanted brexit so why would I hate him? He's binned the Chancellor and put my MP into the second most powerful position in the land. Pretty good for Richmond when our MP is Pinky's new best mate. Plus Pinky, Rishi and Ben Houchen are all in bed together on this freeport project in the North East, I know Ben personally and the lad is no idiot. It's a terrible pun but we know which way the wind blows in the North East. I'm so psyched about this freeport stuff I think I must have sailor genes, which seems pretty likely since my Great Grandad was a Captain. 

Report
Sir Chasm 16 Feb 2020
In reply to NERD:

Hmm, the same person appears to have posted both these views:

"As too The Brain, well I wanted brexit so why would I hate him?" 

"I never vote, I don't care who's in power and I don't care if we leave or stay." 

Report
L NERD 16 Feb 2020
In reply to Sir Chasm:

> Hmm, the same person appears to have posted both these views:

> "As too The Brain, well I wanted brexit so why would I hate him?" 

> "I never vote, I don't care who's in power and I don't care if we leave or stay." 

Yeah, I never vote, I thought brexit was a good idea but I never in a million years thought the country would vote for it. If they'd voted remain I would have been absolutely fine with that.

Thinking something is a good idea doesn't mean you care, I thought this Tory government was a good idea but I wouldn't care if Labour had won. I wouldn't care if brexit didn't happen, I'd think it was a bad idea but I wouldn't do anything. 

Report
RomTheBear 17 Feb 2020
In reply to BnB:

> Right. So he’s an idiot. But in the end you agree with his prediction. Glad we got that sorted.

It’s not mutually exclusive. It’s just that the observation is rather irrelevant.

> I don’t fundamentally disagree with your further observations but it’s too soon to hit the panic button when the UK’s success is levered to the global economy more than to its membership, or otherwise, of the SM.

> I have stakes in about 20 UK companies and they all do most of their business in Asia and the US. Europe is moribund and, in the case of Germany, Europe’s industrial engine, perilously wedded to its analogue industrial past. The world is digital today and Europe is miles behind

But the simple reality is that we are as “moribund” as everybody else, and once you add an extra layer of costs to our economy, an extra layer of protectionism, then in 20-30 years time your average Brit ends up visibly poorer than the average French or German.

Also your view about the “analogue industrial past” makes no sense. Manufacturing in the EU is extremely productive,  high tech, extremely integrated, and extremely competitive. 
Moreover, most of western Europe has a services-based economy. Just like the U.K.

And in any case, this narrative makes no sense, telling us that Europe is behind (it isn’t true, by any objective measure) doesn’t mean that leaving it makes us gain anything anywhere else. If anything it makes it harder to capture growth opportunities outside.

Report
wercat 17 Feb 2020
In reply to NERD:

well I didn't expect to be ruled by an unelected invisible dictator either

Report
BnB 17 Feb 2020
In reply to RomTheBear:

I said Germany, not Europe, was wedded to its analogue industrial past. Here’s a link on German industrial decline in the face of a digital world: 

https://on.ft.com/2u4zeQ5

Report
RomTheBear 17 Feb 2020
In reply to BnB:

> I said Germany, not Europe, was wedded to its analogue industrial past. Here's a link on German industrial decline in the face of a digital world: 

Europe isn't in Germany. That's the beauty of a large internal market with a lot of variety. It's overall, very robust.
In many ways, that's also what made the US economy so strong.

As for Germany it has very low debt, a higher standard of living than the UK, a highly qualified population, a very open an attractive labour market, and are perfectly capable of pivoting as needed, which they are.

The reality is that most countries, including the UK, are continually facing challenges of the same sort. Germany is better equipped than most to meet them, and as far as I can tell, they are.

Even if it is true that Germany is about to enter a long decline - after all a possibility if it is run very incompetently - putting more distance between us and the german economy won't make us any better or more prosperous. The argument seems somewhat... moot, and more culturally/politically motivated than anything else.

Post edited at 09:17
Report
neilh 17 Feb 2020
In reply to BnB:

You only have to visit Industrial trade shows in Germany to understand that this view is very questionablein alot of the middle ranking industrial companies. I would sugest the FT gets off its backside and visit those shows.In additive technology ( 3 d printing) it is always German machines I see. In robotics it is German companys.The list is endless embracing new indusutrial technologies.

Just do not buy into that view.

I will add that digitalisation is embraced by these companies on there mechanical technology, its a combination of both you need.

Post edited at 09:18
Report
krikoman 17 Feb 2020
In reply to BnB:

> Under Labour infrastructure would be built by the mighty State Construction Department and its vast reservoir of bricklaying civil servants?


Well it looks like we might well be paying china for HS2 and we're paying China and France for Hinkley Power Station.

It's no good building huge infrastructure and then at a later date giving it away to foreign companies, water Gas and electricity are all examples, but of course you knew that, so some flippant post about bricklaying civil servants is the best you can come up with. Even in times of austerity Labour were advocating PQE, which at least left something tangible in the tax payers hands, money pissed away into the hand of bankers and hedge fund managers, hasn't really trickled down to the bloke on the street has it?

Report
krikoman 17 Feb 2020
In reply to neilh:

> You cannot have it both ways. Either in or out of the EU spending on infrastructure when rates are low is probably reasonable.

> we will still need HS2

I think the case for HS2 is piss poor, it's all about servicing London, with people who can't afford to live there.

The increase in passenger capacity has been vastly overestimated and as for creating a "Northern Power House" it's simply bull shit. If they wanted to do that they should have started in the North and worked their way down. 20 minutes off the journey to Birmingham for £106bn doesn't add up, and we're ALL paying for it. No one in our family uses the train, and we certainly don't need to shave 20 mins off a two hour journey, that's four out of four working people contributing to something that has no benefit to them.

Report
BnB 17 Feb 2020
In reply to neilh:

I’m well aware of German mid-size robotics capability. The largest is Kuka (owned by the Chinese) and the only plc is Kion/Dematic (owned by the Chinese). Is anyone seeing a pattern yet?

The point the article is making is that manufacturing in Germany is in recession and its industrial giants have been slow to adapt. Compare Siemens and Thyssen Krup to Honeywell or Keyence for a striking contrast

Report
neilh 17 Feb 2020
In reply to krikoman:

You are already seeing a shift to Birmingham according to Jim O'Neil )who put together the Northern Powerhouse concept and is no slouch economically)  in recognition of HS2.I would prefer his analysis considering his reputation.

Report
neilh 17 Feb 2020
In reply to BnB:

That is industrial giants for you, slow to change.

Mid size I would suggest is faster to adapt.

I do think there are inherent issues in Germany, their infrastructure is very poor.

I also think rather controversially that the faster the UK gets out of automotive the better, better to take the pain now whilst we can adapt than later. Just like coal in the 70's.Time to move on.

Report
RomTheBear 17 Feb 2020
In reply to BnB:

> I’m well aware of German mid-size robotics capability. The largest is Kuka (owned by the Chinese) and the only plc is Kion/Dematic (owned by the Chinese). Is anyone seeing a pattern yet?

Is the pattern that the Chinese are investing in the German economy ?

Report
summo 17 Feb 2020
In reply to krikoman:

> Well it looks like we might well be paying china for HS2 and we're paying China and France for Hinkley Power Station.

Most of Europe sold it's soul to China 20 years ago. The government or financial borrowing, of any kind.. who is buying the bonds? Company bail outs? Shares? China and the ME.

When you shop..  where do you think most of it is being made, either entirely or parts for European assembly, China. 

Yeah. Folk get excited because a big ticket project goes to China. But it's hardly surprising, they are already involved in 95% of everything else. 

And everyone, or nearly everyone is to blame. Folk are happy to buy the cheapest without conscience or any research, then complain when governments aren't supporting local companies. Hypocritical. 

Report
BnB 17 Feb 2020
In reply to RomTheBear:

They’re investing in the digital economy while Germany hangs on to its industrial past

Report
BnB 17 Feb 2020
In reply to neilh:

> That is industrial giants for you, slow to change.

> Mid size I would suggest is faster to adapt.

Undoubtedly true and always has been. But that doesn’t excuse the relative performance of, say, Siemens and Honeywell, two giants.

> I do think there are inherent issues in Germany, their infrastructure is very poor.

Yes. When my son lived recently in Munich, one of Germany’s wealthiest cities, he was forever complaining, or relaying complaints, about the railways.

> I also think rather controversially that the faster the UK gets out of automotive the better, better to take the pain now whilst we can adapt than later. Just like coal in the 70's.Time to move on.

Yes, that is probably true. There are social consequences that have to be considered but the industry is in a weak state, not just in the UK. 

Post edited at 10:06
Report
El Greyo 17 Feb 2020
In reply to BnB:

> The average import duty that the EU and, for now the UK, charges is 3.2%.

Can you quote the source for that as I'd like to review how it was calculated? Is it the mean of all individual tariffs that the EU have listed or is it the mean of the tariffs that UK businesses will pay on their services or goods (i.e. weighted by how what and much is traded)? 

You do realise that 3.2% is not insignificant, don't you? And that does not include quotas or non-tariff costs.

Report
BnB 17 Feb 2020
In reply to El Greyo:

https://ukandeu.ac.uk/research-papers/what-would-trading-on-wto-terms-mean/

My point wasn’t that it was insignificant. I was posting to expose firstly the lack of hard data at the fingertips of UKC’s abundant and vocal Cassandras, and secondly the contrast between their fears and expectations, which I figure run to at least 1000 bps, and the considerably diminished reality.

I don’t welcome Brexit and I detest some of its attitudes, but I don’t fear it economically. Indeed I would not be surprised if the accompanying uncertainty has done more damage than the reality eventuality will.

Report
neilh 17 Feb 2020
In reply to BnB:

My brother works in Further Education and is constantly surprised by how many Germanystudents tell him that UK education in respect of the quality of buildings etc  far outstrips anything in Germany.

Things go in cycles, Germany was the sick man of Europe unitl the early 2000's and in the past 15 years has had a resurgence.Looks like its heading the other way at the moment, unfortunatley.

One of my main competitors is German. They are very good at incremental improvement, but lack a certain creative entrepreneurial " outside of the box" mindset, which we have in spades in the UK. When put togehter it  can work very well as a German/UK combination in alot of sectors.

Report
MargieB 17 Feb 2020
In reply to neilh:

A lot of building materials are sourced from Europe. 

Report
krikoman 17 Feb 2020
In reply to summo:

> And everyone, or nearly everyone is to blame. Folk are happy to buy the cheapest without conscience or any research, then complain when governments aren't supporting local companies. Hypocritical. 

Aren't the government supposed to know, and act, better than us?

Report
El Greyo 17 Feb 2020
In reply to BnB:

Thanks for the link. I've had a scan and found the quoted 3.2%. Sadly it does not specify but from the wording, it does not appear to be weighted specifically for the trade that the UK does with the EU. It seems more likely to be a crude average of tariffs and as such is not very useful. In fact it is pretty meaningless.

The company I work for (engineering consultancy) faces an 8% tariff to do business in the EU. We are part of the service sector which is the largest export sector from the UK to the EU. You'll forgive me if I'm not overly optimistic about the future outside the European Union. 

Report
RomTheBear 17 Feb 2020
In reply to BnB:

> My point wasn’t that it was insignificant. I was posting to expose firstly the lack of hard data at the fingertips of UKC’s abundant and vocal Cassandras, and secondly the contrast between their fears and expectations, which I figure run to at least 1000 bps, and the considerably diminished reality.

> I don’t welcome Brexit and I detest some of its attitudes, but I don’t fear it economically. Indeed I would not be surprised if the accompanying uncertainty has done more damage than the reality eventuality will

Problem is that you seem to be talking at cross purpose. Of course that short term many other things are more important than our trading relationship. Impact of trade deals is generally small.

But WTO means extra costs and extra friction long term. The impact is small but it accumulates over time, so in a generation you find yourself visibly poorer than the neighbours. That’s it.

Report
Blunderbuss 17 Feb 2020
In reply to El Greyo:

> Thanks for the link. I've had a scan and found the quoted 3.2%. Sadly it does not specify but from the wording, it does not appear to be weighted specifically for the trade that the UK does with the EU. It seems more likely to be a crude average of tariffs and as such is not very useful. In fact it is pretty meaningless.

> The company I work for (engineering consultancy) faces an 8% tariff to do business in the EU. We are part of the service sector which is the largest export sector from the UK to the EU. You'll forgive me if I'm not overly optimistic about the future outside the European Union. 

It's pretty certain services will be outside of the scope of the FTA Boris want as they are pretty much excluded from the Canada deal......of course last week the Tories were seeking de facto equivilance for the financial sector....hahaha.

Cakeism is still alive and well in Number 10.

Report
Blunderbuss 17 Feb 2020
In reply to RomTheBear:

> Problem is that you seem to be talking at cross purpose. Of course that short term many other things are more important than our trading relationship. Impact of trade deals is generally small.

> But WTO means extra costs and extra friction long term. The impact is small but it accumulates over time, so in a generation you find yourself visibly poorer than the neighbours. That’s it.

Yep, the small losses compound over time......one commentator said the impact will be like the slow boiling of a frog.

Report
BnB 17 Feb 2020
In reply to El Greyo:

> Thanks for the link. I've had a scan and found the quoted 3.2%. Sadly it does not specify but from the wording, it does not appear to be weighted specifically for the trade that the UK does with the EU. It seems more likely to be a crude average of tariffs and as such is not very useful. In fact it is pretty meaningless.

It has considerably more meaning than the guesswork of UKC's Cassandras, which was my point.

> The company I work for (engineering consultancy) faces an 8% tariff to do business in the EU. We are part of the service sector which is the largest export sector from the UK to the EU. You'll forgive me if I'm not overly optimistic about the future outside the European Union. 

I'm not overly optimistic either. But I'm not overly pessimistic, having weathered a thousand storms in business. If Labour had won the election your employer would have had to endure an extra 8% tax on its profits. Would it have packed in? No, it would adjust, as it will to whatever regime eventually prevails.

Report
RomTheBear 17 Feb 2020
In reply to BnB:

> It has considerably more meaning than the guesswork of UKC's Cassandras, which was my point.

> I'm not overly optimistic either. But I'm not overly pessimistic, having weathered a thousand storms in business. If Labour had won the election your employer would have had to endure an extra 8% tax on its profits. Would it have packed in? No, it would adjust, as it will to whatever regime eventually prevails.

You are staying the obvious I think and nobody disagree with you the problem is that we are talking cross purpose. 

Of course that in the short term other factors are  more important than the trading relationships we have. We know already that the impact of trade arrangements on GDP is actually quite low.

The problem is that although the impact of tarifs and extra friction is low, it is constant and permanent, and because of its compound nature, increases over time. 

So over a generation you end up with a visibly lower living standard than the neighbours. It’s very clear in all the impact analyses that have been produced. They aren’t predicting immediate doom, as is often caricatured.

Its like having a couple of stones added to your rucksack whilst doing the west highland way. Sure thing it’s not going to make a huge difference on the first few miles, and you can adapt to it, you may not even notice much, but in the long run, it will definitely weigh you down and make a huge difference.

The extra cause for concern is of course that we’re adding extra stones in the backpack just as we’re about to potentially face a nasty winter storm.

Post edited at 13:13
Report
RomTheBear 17 Feb 2020
In reply to Blunderbuss:

> It's pretty certain services will be outside of the scope of the FTA Boris want as they are pretty much excluded from the Canada deal......of course last week the Tories were seeking de facto equivilance for the financial sector....hahaha.

> Cakeism is still alive and well in Number 10.

Actually it looks like internally they don’t have much hope of securing anything good. Hence why I expect them to shift the focus away from brexit as much as possible by giving up quickly, and increase public spending to compensate.
 

The strategy reminds that of Trump or Erdogan. Obviously at some point the chickens come back to roost, at which point.... you blame someone else.

Report
El Greyo 17 Feb 2020
In reply to BnB:

Corporation tax only applies to profit - the tariff applies to sales (in the EU) and could easily make a difference between making a profit and making a loss.

Yes, at least you were trying to put a figure on things. I do find it frustrating that, despite the fact that it is nearly 4 years since the referendum and less than one until we finally leave, it is very hard to find actual numbers. It would probably be possible to trawl through WTO or EU documentation to find the tariffs but then it would need further investigation into how much trade would be affected in each sector. In the absence of such quantification (and the current government are deliberately not helping) it is not surprising if people get very concerned about the future.

Report
neilh 17 Feb 2020
In reply to El Greyo:

Engineering consultancy is wide ranging and I would have thought very open to a global market.......

Report
BnB 17 Feb 2020
In reply to RomTheBear:

> You are staying the obvious I think and nobody disagree with you the problem is that we are talking cross purpose. 

> Of course that in the short term other factors are  more important than the trading relationships we have. We know already that the impact of trade arrangements on GDP is actually quite low.

> The problem is that although the impact of tarifs and extra friction is low, it is constant and permanent, and because of its compound nature, increases over time. 

> So over a generation you end up with a visibly lower living standard than the neighbours. It’s very clear in all the impact analyses that have been produced. They aren’t predicting immediate doom, as is often caricatured.

> Its like having a couple of stones added to your rucksack whilst doing the west highland way. Sure thing it’s not going to make a huge difference on the first few miles, and you can adapt to it, you may not even notice much, but in the long run, it will definitely weigh you down and make a huge difference.

> The extra cause for concern is of course that we’re adding extra stones in the backpack just as we’re about to potentially face a nasty winter storm.

None of which I disagree with. But you are painting an incomplete picture. Friction will undoubtedly increase in our dealings with Europe. But it is not only going to decrease in our dealings with other equally large markets, but also enterprises (good word that and one that all the doomsayers should reflect on) are going to find that those markets are considerably more vibrant and offer much larger and more profitable opportunities. Of course, it won't be an even distribution of opportunity or effect, but the vast number who adapt successfully are going to thrive. How do I justify this perspective? As a professional investor I study the financial performance of thousands of companies globally and the distribution of their earnings worldwide. All the growth is in the US and Asia, Europe is stagnant. European companies that are thriving are doing so on the back of those two geographies, and I invest in some of them. This is true for luxury companies, for auto manufacturers, for software and semiconductor companies, for retailers, for construction and civil engineering etc. Meanwhile, all the population growth and increase in per capita wealth is in Asia and Africa, while Europe is stagnant. Companies that engage with this trend will soon find Europe such small part of their turnover that your frictions become an footnote in the annual report.

Now you might want to dismiss this as fairy tale optimism. But I'm looking at confirmed data and putting my money behind these trends. I'm a hardened businessman and experienced investor. I'm pretty sure I could take any UKC Brexit sceptic and put them in front of my Thomson Reuters terminal and they'd be questioning their assumptions within an hour. Happy for you to disagree. It is your default setting. Yes, there will be disruption. I'm not saying otherwise. But the world is ever-changing. Just don't give me chlorinated chicken ;-)

Report
BnB 17 Feb 2020
In reply to El Greyo:

They are not directly comparable I agree. I was simply giving an alternative example of how political events continue to upset companies' plans. Another is the IR35 legislation which is going to upend the IT strategy of pretty much every UK business in a month from now. Shit happens every day but strong businesses thrive under all conditions. As neilh says, you are in a strong sector. Presumably you are selling outside the EU as well?

Post edited at 13:49
Report
El Greyo 17 Feb 2020
In reply to BnB:

Yes, most of our business is outside the EU but I see no tangible way that Brexit will benefit that business. So it's a loss from one market and no change in the rest (providing all EU trade agreements are rolled over to the UK - how's that going?).

> But it is not only going to decrease in our dealings with other equally large markets, but also enterprises (good word that and one that all the doomsayers should reflect on) are going to find that those markets are considerably more vibrant and offer much larger and more profitable opportunities. 

How is the friction going to decrease in our dealings with other markets (note that the EU is the largest market so others aren't 'equally large')? 

Report
BnB 17 Feb 2020
In reply to El Greyo:

> Yes, most of our business is outside the EU but I see no tangible way that Brexit will benefit that business. So it's a loss from one market and no change in the rest (providing all EU trade agreements are rolled over to the UK - how's that going?).

So, it turns out that Brexit only affects a small part of your business, which will surely rebalance effectively if already established globally. One minute the 8% tariff is going to put you out of a job, the next minute it turns out to be de minimus. Classic UKC Brexit exaggeration. Thanks for helping to make my point.

> How is the friction going to decrease in our dealings with other markets (note that the EU is the largest market so others aren't 'equally large')?

The idea that frictions will not decrease in other markets only stands up if you believe we will do no trade deals at all. That is vanishingly unlikely. 

Both China and India are already considerably larger on certain metrics and will be larger on all metrics in the near future. Indonesia on its own has a larger population than the EU. 

Post edited at 15:02
Report
RomTheBear 17 Feb 2020
In reply to BnB:

> None of which I disagree with. But you are painting an incomplete picture. Friction will undoubtedly increase in our dealings with Europe. But it is not only going to decrease in our dealings with other equally large markets,

That, I think, is no more than a very big fairy tale. That’s the narrative promoted by Brexiteers, but it totally lacks realism and substance.

If anything the opposite is true. The evidence is absolutely crystal clear that friction will increase, not only with Europe, but with the rest of the word.

> but also enterprises (good word that and one that all the doomsayers should reflect on) are going to find that those markets are considerably more vibrant and offer much larger and more profitable opportunities.

It’s always the same frothy and vague narrative of the promise of sunny uplands.

But in the real world we won’t magically be able to access these new markets any better just because we left the EU. That is just pure la-la-land.

Downgrading our trading relationships with the world to WTO terms whilst destroying our soft power isn’t going to help with accessing new markets.  On the contrary.

Penetrating new markets is hard, and it’s going to be a lot harder once you don’t have the convenient launchpad of a big market and the firepower of the EU to open doors.

My view is that political reality will push the U.K. exactly in the opposite direction, despite the narrative. And we are already seeing that with all the bullshit promises made about being open and low tarifs being dropped one after the other.

And UK companies will refocus on the U.K market and will be forced to revise global ambitions.

Investors, like you, on the other hand, will continue to increasingly seek opportunities and higher returns elsewhere, which they were going to do anyway, Brexit or not.

Post edited at 15:33
Report
El Greyo 17 Feb 2020
In reply to BnB:

> So, it turns out that Brexit only affects a small part of your business, which will surely rebalance effectively if already established globally. One minute the 8% tariff is going to put you out of a job, the next minute it turns out to be de minimus. Classic UKC Brexit exaggeration. Thanks for helping to make my point.

We were having a good, polite conversation until now. Please point out:

a) where I have said an 8% tariff is going to put me out of a job,

b) how you came to the conclusion that because our EU trade is less than 50% of our total business it is therefore 'de minimus',

c) whether you would consider your own paragraph above to be 'Classic UKC exaggeration'.

Report
El Greyo 17 Feb 2020
In reply to BnB:

> The idea that frictions will not decrease in other markets only stands up if you believe we will do no trade deals at all. That is vanishingly unlikely. 

No, it stands up if the trade deals we will do are not better than those that we enjoyed as part of EU. I have seen no indication that they will be, particularly considering recent free-trade deals that the EU has negotiated. If you have evidence, or even a tangible indication, that they will be better, I would be very willing to hear.

> Both China and India are already considerably larger on certain metrics and will be larger on all metrics in the near future.

We have offices in both China and India so I do actually know a bit about doing business in both. I have not yet seen how leaving the EU will gain us an advantage. Perhaps it will, but that appears to be speculation.

> Indonesia on its own has a larger population than the EU. 

Indonesia's population is 264 million, the EU, ex-UK, is about 450 million. Indonesia's GDP is about half the size of the UK's.

Report
BnB 17 Feb 2020
In reply to El Greyo:

> We were having a good, polite conversation until now. Please point out:

> a) where I have said an 8% tariff is going to put me out of a job,

You said "the tariff applies to sales (in the EU) and could easily make a difference between making a profit and making a loss." The implications are obvious.

> b) how you came to the conclusion that because our EU trade is less than 50% of our total business it is therefore 'de minimus',

I inferred that from your post. You didn't provide a hard number and anyone on my side of the argument would have assumed the same

> c) whether you would consider your own paragraph above to be 'Classic UKC exaggeration'.

I would consider it a swashbuckling writing style that balances the hard data, real-life examples and multiple reference sources with which I have peppered my responses, unlike almost anyone else.

Re: Indonesia, thanks for the correction. How long until the opposite pertains, particularly when measured by working population, do you think?

Post edited at 15:42
Report
neilh 17 Feb 2020
In reply to RomTheBear:

For the UK we will with most countries automatically switch to MFN ( most favoured nation status) status within WTO and not purely WTO rules. So for example the UK's relationship with the USA stays as Most Favoured Nation status, same with Japan and same with Mexico as further examples.

Its easy to figure out. You take your customs tariff code and look it up either on the WTO website or each countrys own customs website.

WTO rules with MFN are not that bad, we have been trading that way with the USA for years.Certainly for me Mexcio was a big concern ( as there is an EU FTA with Mexico) until I researched it more and found out we reverted to MFN status with Mexico and there was no change in duty...it was still 0%.If we did not have MFN then it was something like 25%.

So I think it is wise to be cautious  about WTO duty percentages and its impact.

Report
Mike Stretford 17 Feb 2020
In reply to BnB:

> So, it turns out that Brexit only affects a small part of your business, which will surely rebalance effectively if already established globally. One minute the 8% tariff is going to put you out of a job, the next minute it turns out to be de minimus. Classic UKC Brexit exaggeration. Thanks for helping to make my point.

I do try to read your posts with an open mind given your apparent knowledge of the financial markets, but that ^ kind of bluster really has me doubting.

> The idea that frictions will not decrease in other markets only stands up if you believe we will do no trade deals at all. That is vanishingly unlikely. 

No it doesn't. If we get the same deals as the EU friction remains the same. If we get worse deals than the EU (cos we have less clout), there will be more friction. We could get deals that do decrease friction, but given our clout, that will mean trading something else off.

> Both China and India are already considerably larger on certain metrics and will be larger on all metrics in the near future.

India's gdp would have to grow by x7 (from 2017 figures)

> Indonesia on its own has a larger population than the EU. 

WTF are you talking about?

https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=File:Primary_energy_production,_2005_and_2015_(%25_of_world_total)_world18.png

At least I now know to just skip your posts.

Report
neilh 17 Feb 2020
In reply to El Greyo:

Over the last 10 years which markets have been growing and which are mature or declining?Where does your business see the growth?

Report
RomTheBear 17 Feb 2020
In reply to neilh:

> For the UK we will with most countries automatically switch to MFN ( most favoured nation status) status within WTO and not purely WTO rules. So for example the UK's relationship with the USA stays as Most Favoured Nation status, same with Japan and same with Mexico as further examples.

> Its easy to figure out. You take your customs tariff code and look it up either on the WTO website or each countrys own customs website.

> WTO rules with MFN are not that bad, we have been trading that way with the USA for years.Certainly for me Mexcio was a big concern ( as there is an EU FTA with Mexico) until I researched it more and found out we reverted to MFN status with Mexico and there was no change in duty...it was still 0%.If we did not have MFN then it was something like 25%.

> So I think it is wise to be cautious  about WTO duty percentages and its impact

I don’t disagree that the impact of tariffs is initially small but over time the extra cost and friction add up, and we don’t really gain anything anywhere else. It’s been thoroughly quantified by BoE, treasure, etc etc. Over time, it makes a big difference.
That’s all I am saying.

The simple fact that you now have to worry about this nonsense shows that energy is being spent dealing with this nonsense whilst there are other issues to deal with.

Report
BnB 17 Feb 2020
In reply to RomTheBear:

> That, I think, is no more than a very big fairy tale. That’s the narrative promoted by Brexiteers, but it totally lacks realism and substance.

> If anything the opposite is true. The evidence is absolutely crystal clear that friction will increase, not only with Europe, but with the rest of the word.

> It’s always the same frothy and vague narrative of the promise of sunny uplands.

I named specific industries and geographies. You've just waved an imperious hand and shouted "sunny uplands". It's me providing all the examples, hard data and references on this thread.

> But in the real world we won’t magically be able to access these new markets any better just because we left the EU. That is just pure la-la-land.

> Downgrading our trading relationships with the world to WTO terms whilst destroying our soft power isn’t going to help with accessing new markets.  On the contrary.

> Penetrating new markets is hard, and it’s going to be a lot harder once you don’t have the convenient launchpad of a big market and the firepower of the EU to open doors.

We shall see but the important thing isn't the friction, it's the focus. Any entrepreneur understands that.

> My view is that political reality will push the U.K. exactly in the opposite direction, despite the narrative. And we are already seeing that with all the bullshit promises made about being open and low tariffs being dropped one after the other.

> And UK companies will refocus on the U.K market and will be forced to revise global ambitions.

That may well be true of certain manufacturers, not so the digital industries.

> Investors, like you, on the other hand, will continue to increasingly seek opportunities and higher returns elsewhere, which they were going to do anyway, Brexit or not.

Of course, but investors have increased their exposure to UK exporters in the last six months. Prices are up over 20%. What do they know that you don't?

Post edited at 16:12
Report
RomTheBear 17 Feb 2020
In reply to Mike Stretford:

> We could get deals that do decrease friction, but given our clout, that will mean trading something else.

This is the point that the trade experts I’m following are constantly repeating loudly and are getting visibility frustrated of having to do so, as apparently it isn’t well understood by the British intelligentsia.

Getting good trade deals is all about what you can offer in exchange - it could be anything. Moreover, you have to be upfront with the public from the onset as to what it is you are going to give. Otherwise you end up with a big democratic wall in your path.

Report
neilh 17 Feb 2020
In reply to RomTheBear:

I was worried and it took me about an hour to figure it out, no different from alot of stuff.

The issue is more that people/companies have a huge fear of exporting away from their comfort zones ( Europe being a big comfort zone), they build it up into something which is not.

For example.I am always surprised that people are surprised that I get paid before shipment.People think you have to give credit to overseas customers. And yet my overseas customers expect to have to pay before shipment, they do not bat an eyelid.Does wonders for your cashflow compared with the UK market.

The issue with the EU will be with protectionist barriers like CE Marking. That is the big friction cost as I see it.

Post edited at 16:03
Report
BnB 17 Feb 2020
In reply to Mike Stretford:

> I do try to read your posts with an open mind given your apparent knowledge of the financial markets, but that ^ kind of bluster really has me doubting.

> > The idea that frictions will not decrease in other markets only stands up if you believe we will do no trade deals at all. That is vanishingly unlikely. 

> No it doesn't. If we get the same deals as the EU friction remains the same. If we get worse deals than the EU (cos we have less clout), there will be more friction. We could get deals that do decrease friction, but given our clout, that will mean trading something else off.

Does the EU have a trade deal with USA, China or India?

> India's gdp would have to grow by x7 (from 2017 figures)

> WTF are you talking about?

At the current relative rate of growth it will occur well inside this century.

> At least I now know to just skip your posts.

As ever there's a point when Brexit threads turn personal. Nice work.

Report
Mike Stretford 17 Feb 2020
In reply to RomTheBear:

> Moreover, you have to be upfront with the public from the onset as to what it is you are going to give. Otherwise you end up with a big democratic wall in your path.

Yeah.... several other sections of society will get DUPed. Doubt it will mean a democratic wall though, not with our system.... I agree it should but with Bojo's majority he can do what he wants for some time.

Post edited at 16:22
Report
Mike Stretford 17 Feb 2020
In reply to BnB:

> Does the EU have a trade deal with USA, China or India?

No, and so what....completely irrelevant to the the flaw in your statement. If the Eu couldn't negotiate a deal with those economies, then what are we going to get with our clout? What's our trade off? India suggested more migration rights for its citizens? I can't see that going down well with the Brexiteers. 

> At the current relative rate of growth it will occur well inside this century.

None of us have a scoobie where the world will be at the end of the century. Safe to say I won't find out!

> As ever there's a point when Brexit threads turn personal. Nice work.

You call that 'personal'... come off it. You frequently back up your arguments with a call to authority.... your own or some CEO or other. That looks doubtful when you post such basic errors, and these are facts which can be checked in about 15 seconds. Sorry, but I'm just sick of online bullshit.

Report
RomTheBear 17 Feb 2020
In reply to BnB:

> I named specific industries and geographies. You've just waved an imperious hand and shouted "sunny uplands". I'd have been more impressed if you'd said "chlorinated chicken"

You can name specific industries, it still doesn’t tell us what they get, concretely, in 2021 that they didn’t have before that would give them a superior advantage. 

> We shall see but the important thing isn't the friction, it's the focus. Any entrepreneur understands that.

It would he helpful if you dropped the verbalistic stuff.


Sure, of course, focus is very important, but guess what businesses in the EU and all around the world are as capable of focus as U.K. businesses. If anything they won’t have the extra distraction of dealing with brexit related nonsense to take the focus away from the important stuff.
 

> That may well be true of certain manufacturers, not so the digital industries.

You couldn’t be more wrong.
I know this market very well and they are very exposed to regulatory frictions. More than what many think in my view.

> Of course, but investors have increased their exposure to UK exporters in the last six months. Prices are up over 20%. What do they know that you don't?

You are reading waaaaaaay too much into stock market prices blips. Price are currently total bullshit anyway.

My data tells me pretty much the opposite, the people I work with are doing the opposite, and bear in mind we have a view of an entire cross section of the economy, and I have access to very granular data, large and small businesses, across all sectors.

Post edited at 16:46
Report
BnB 17 Feb 2020
In reply to Mike Stretford:

> If the Eu couldn't negotiate a deal with those economies, then what are we going to get with our clout? What's our trade off? India suggested more migration rights for its citizens? I can't see that going down well with the Brexiteers. 

It's been signposted in recent public discussions of migration policy, where the emphasis is expected to shift to higher qualified immigrants. India is the one of the two largest potential sources of highly educated, digitally-skilled workers. China is the other.

Post edited at 17:17
Report
wercat 17 Feb 2020
In reply to BnB:

excellent - those higher qualified immigrants can be served their takeaway food by our serf kids

far better that we would fix what 10 years of Conservative rule have done to the likes of Appleby Grammar school - the A level chemistry class all got U grades in their pre A-level mocks as the school has run down to the point where they have been without a chemistry teacher for weeks in this their final year.

Still, we can effing well import the skilled

Post edited at 17:29
Report
Mike Stretford 17 Feb 2020
In reply to BnB:

> It's been signposted in recent public discussions of migration policy, where the emphasis is expected to shift to higher qualified immigrants. India is the one of the two largest potential sources of highly educated, digitally-skilled workers. China is the other.

I work for a company that employs highly skilled staff. We have 1 Indian guy and 2 Chinese. Getting their work permits wasn't too difficult, and that was while we were in the EU. I can't see where the potential to open up migration policy is, unless it's for lower skilled workers.

Report
BnB 17 Feb 2020
In reply to wercat:

> excellent - those higher qualified immigrants can be served their takeaway food by our serf kids

> far better that we would fix what 10 years of Conservative rule have done to the likes of Appleby Grammar school - the A level chemistry class all got U grades in their pre A-level mocks as the school has run down to the point where they have been without a chemistry teacher for weeks in this their final year.

> Still, we can effing well import the skilled

I'm quite impressed by advances in the teaching of digital skills in schools and higher education of late. The problem is the rapid proliferation of IT needs outgrowing the supply of talent. When I started in the industry the IT department was 5% of the employee base in an average corporate, now it is more like 75%. I can't speak for staff shortages in unrelated subjects.

Meanwhile, the takeaway will be served by a robot, perhaps programmed by one of our own youngsters.

Report
RomTheBear 17 Feb 2020
In reply to BnB:

> It's been signposted in recent public discussions of migration policy, where the emphasis is expected to shift to higher qualified immigrants. India is the one of the two largest potential sources of highly educated, digitally-skilled workers. China is the other.

More BS I’m afraid that doesn’t really map to hard facts.

The reality is that on average EU immigration that comes through FoM is more skilled than non-EU.


The only thing that will change is that there will be actually less space for Indian and Chinese talents to come in, as they’ll now have to compete with the few skilled Europeans who still want to come and will still face less cultural and financial barriers than them.

It is also completely ludicrous to expect that home office bureaucrats can predict ten years in advance what people will do and what the economy will need, and can accurately profile the future success of an individual.
It’s very hard to set up a good immigration system and will take years if not decades to get right. It’s even harder when you have a requirement to let very few people in.

Post edited at 18:00
Report
El Greyo 17 Feb 2020
In reply to neilh:

> Over the last 10 years which markets have been growing and which are mature or declining?Where does your business see the growth?

I'd say we've see growth in the US and China, decline in India, fairly stable in UK and rest of EU (personal impression and vague memory as I don't have the figures to hand). But, I'd say the main thing is that the market is volatile and rather than targeting specific markets, we have to be diverse.

The barriers to business in China and India are less to do with trade agreements and are as much cultural. India is a very tough market and dominated by price, to the expense of quality - we routinely have to substantially discount our fees to stand a chance. China has seen growth, but they would like to be doing everything themselves. The market in the US is open but they do tend to go to their own suppliers, but we may have gained a toehold - we'll see.

Brexit will set up barriers to business in the EU and will not open any other markets. It is not the majority of our business but margins are very tight and could well be a significant contributing factor to reduced revenues and profitability.

Report
BnB 17 Feb 2020
In reply to El Greyo:

> I'd say we've see growth in the US and China, decline in India, fairly stable in UK and rest of EU (personal impression and vague memory as I don't have the figures to hand). But, I'd say the main thing is that the market is volatile and rather than targeting specific markets, we have to be diverse.

> The barriers to business in China and India are less to do with trade agreements and are as much cultural. India is a very tough market and dominated by price, to the expense of quality - we routinely have to substantially discount our fees to stand a chance. China has seen growth, but they would like to be doing everything themselves. The market in the US is open but they do tend to go to their own suppliers, but we may have gained a toehold - we'll see.

> Brexit will set up barriers to business in the EU and will not open any other markets. It is not the majority of our business but margins are very tight and could well be a significant contributing factor to reduced revenues and profitability.

It's inconceivable that a UK/US trade deal will help you do business over there? Brexit is a necessary stage in that process.

Report
RomTheBear 17 Feb 2020
In reply to BnB:

> It's inconceivable that a UK/US trade deal will help you do business over there?

What you need first before talking about a US/UK deal, is to know what you want from the US, and what are you prepared to give up in exchange.

We haven’t even sorted this out. There hasn’t been consultation with stakeholders. Just doing this will take a long time. Once we have, negotiations can easily half a decade.

A respectable UK/US deal that is indeed going to provide benefits for UK business and U.K. consumers is not going to happen any time soon.

> Brexit is a necessary stage in that process

Quite wrong. There is absolutely no reason to think that a useful US/UK deal is more easily achievable than an useful EU/US deal.

Difference of position between the U.K. and the US amongst others proved fatal to TTIP, and that was under Obama.
To think mr « America First » Trump is going to do any gift to a weakened partner is delusional.

Post edited at 20:45
Report
BnB 17 Feb 2020
In reply to RomTheBear:

> What you need first before talking about a US/UK deal, is to know what you want from the US, and what are you prepared to give up in exchange.

> We haven’t even sorted this out. There hasn’t been consultation with stakeholders. Just doing this will take a long time. Once we have, negotiations can easily half a decade.

> A respectable UK/US deal that is indeed going to provide benefits for UK business and U.K. consumers is not going to happen any time soon.

Jeez Rom. I'm glad I don't live in your world. You see nothing but risks and obstacles. Good luck, my friend.

>> Brexit is a necessary stage in that process

> Quite wrong.

I think you'll find Brexit is a precondition for agreeing deals unilaterally, which was my point.

Report
RomTheBear 17 Feb 2020
In reply to BnB:

> Jeez Rom. I'm glad I don't live in your world. You see nothing but risks and obstacles. Good luck, my friend.

It’s called the real world. I‘m just stating the bleeding obvious:

- you can’t go into any negotiation seriously before knowing what you want. 

- Trade deals take a long time.

If stating something as obvious as that makes me some sort of doom-monger, it is quite worrying, we haven't reached peak delusion it seems.

> >> Brexit is a necessary stage in that process

> I think you'll find Brexit is a precondition for agreeing deals unilaterally, which was my point

Unilaterally, ok, but to what end ?

We can always try to make this shit shower work. I’m a big advocate of making it work.

You’ll note that unlike most remainers on here I was very quick to say we should vote in the WA fast, cut losses, and move on to build something new.
 

However, we won't succeed until we put the Brexit campaign BS and the La La Land stuff aside.

First we need to sit down, consult with public and stakeholders, and decide first, what is it we want from trade deals, and what we are willing to give up. Then take it from there and there is a chance of success - or at least of reasonable mitigation of losses - down the line.

Unfortunately - And that is the legacy of the awful, poisonous brexit campaign of lies - it seems to me that we have a government that is avoiding those difficult conversations, and seems to have given up already and going for the easy way out of more spending, more debt, more protectionism. That indeed is a risk.

I should also add that on the US side, they haven’t decided yet if they wants the UK to be an independent partner, or a pun in their war against China. More concerned with the next election, probably.

Post edited at 21:26
Report
HansStuttgart 17 Feb 2020
In reply to BnB:

> It's been signposted in recent public discussions of migration policy, where the emphasis is expected to shift to higher qualified immigrants. India is the one of the two largest potential sources of highly educated, digitally-skilled workers. China is the other.


India is an interesting example, because it has for some time been on the "we'll try out of general principle, but there isn't much to gain here" list for EU trade deals. The expected benefits were below .1% GDP. I think this was mainly because trade in India had little internal regulatory alignment.

You're right that the big advantage would be to recruit highly educated, digitally-skilled workers. This is exactly what could already have been done as a member of the EU, because EU members are free to set their own immigration policy. Having or not having a free trade deal isn't that important.

Report
Jim Fraser 18 Feb 2020
In reply to NERD:

> WTO means no deal doesn't it?

The WTO option is the pretend-no-deal that you get if you are a member of the WTO. WTO replaced GATT where half the world's governments spent years going round in endless cycles of talks about trade conditions. WTO is a club like the EU. They don't have to let you in. China was a major player in world trade for many years before they got WTO membership. Still today, nearly 20 years ;later, people talk about whether China was ready. 

So the REAL-NO-DEAL is no WTO membership. Then you really are out in the cold. Not quite so bad if you are the low-cost producer everybody needs but stuffed if you are a high value economy with high costs. The UK, being a developed major economy, meets WTO requirements but the way is still open to fall out with the WTO. Can anyone think of a politician who can fall out with just about anyone and never seems to achieve anything he is heard banging on about?

Report
neilh 18 Feb 2020
In reply to El Greyo:

No different to me in my business. India is always shall we say entertaining and the most important weapn on sales negotiation is to learn to say no and come up with a counter proposal for that market. They certainly sharpen up your negotiation skills.

Almost certainly I would  guess that the USA is your future when you have figured out how to be viewed as a local supplier.That takes time and repuation to build and then it becomes a goldmine.Love the place from a business perspective, so positive and dynamic. You have to drop the European way of doing business there.

Report
El Greyo 18 Feb 2020
In reply to BnB:

> It's inconceivable that a UK/US trade deal will help you do business over there? Brexit is a necessary stage in that process.

OK, tell me how a UK/US trade deal is likely to help us. Remember we are a service industry - there are no tariffs. One of the largest barriers is regulation. Unfortunately, many are set by the individual states which makes a trade deal that addresses them even more tortuous and, frankly, unlikely.

Report
BnB 18 Feb 2020
In reply to El Greyo:

> OK, tell me how a UK/US trade deal is likely to help us. Remember we are a service industry - there are no tariffs. One of the largest barriers is regulation. Unfortunately, many are set by the individual states which makes a trade deal that addresses them even more tortuous and, frankly, unlikely.

It looks as though you've answered your own question. A UK/US trade deal potentially addresses the regulation barriers which are limiting your expansion in the US. Whether or not it is likely I can't comment.

Incidentally, I didn't mean to upset you yesterday. The default UKC stance on Brexit is so unrelentingly miserable without much in the way of hard data or relevant knowledge or experience to justify it that I think a bit of push-back (from a Remainer!) is not out of order. Sorry if you copped for the frustration, particularly as you made more effort with data 

Post edited at 10:09
Report
neilh 10:01 Tue
In reply to El Greyo:

Turn it round, even USA business face State rules. So a USA business in CA faces the same regulations if they want to do business in WI.It is not really a barrier to us in the UK.

Report
RomTheBear 14:49 Tue
In reply to BnB:

> Incidentally, I didn't mean to upset you yesterday. The default UKC stance on Brexit is so unrelentingly miserable without much in the way of hard data or relevant knowledge or experience to justify it that I think a bit of push-back (from a Remainer!) is not out of order.

Wow. I think you need to look in the mirror. What exactly have you provided in the way of hard facts    to support your argument ? What is your argument even ? It seems to have become more and more vague.

Report
BnB 15:37 Tue
In reply to RomTheBear:

> Wow. I think you need to look in the mirror. What exactly have you provided in the way of hard facts    to support your argument ? What is your argument even ? It seems to have become more and more vague.

If my recent posts are vague, can I suggest you go back to the earlier ones ;-)

If one businessman looks to shrug off obstacles and strive for fresh opportunities while another prioritises risk assessment when the game changes, neither is wrong. But it's unlikely those two people will see the future in the same way. Crucially, it's probable they will experience different outcomes in the same market.

We shall surely meet on another thread. My work is done for this one.

Report
RomTheBear 16:23 Tue
In reply to BnB:

> If one businessman looks to shrug off obstacles and strive for fresh opportunities while another prioritises risk assessment when the game changes, neither is wrong.

Well actually the former is clearly very wrong. 

> But it's unlikely those two people will see the future in the same way. Crucially, it's probable they will experience different outcomes in the same market.

Your style seems to be to avoid any specific, concrete questions by replying with unrelated spin barely worthy of a cheap self-improvement book.

And then you complain about lack of hard facts...


 


 

Post edited at 16:38
Report
BnB 16:37 Tue
In reply to RomTheBear:

You have such a way with people Rom

Report
RomTheBear 16:38 Tue
In reply to BnB:

> You have such a way with people Rom

Sorry if I’m being a bit mean, but amongst all the interesting things that you post, once in a while you trigger my bullshit-o-meter very hard.

Post edited at 16:39
Report
BnB 17:00 Tue
In reply to RomTheBear:

It's not bullshit Rom, it's experience. Lots of it. Clearly your insights are different however, so we'll agree to diverge.

Report
RomTheBear 17:43 Tue
In reply to BnB:

> It's not bullshit Rom, it's experience. Lots of it. Clearly your insights are different however, so we'll agree to diverge.

Every time you are caught out on lack of substance, your reaction is to tell us you’re right because you have “experience”.

What experience exactly do you have negotiating international trade deals on the behalf of states ? What experience do you have analysing the impact of trade deals ? 

Piece of advice: I’d suggest you listen / read from people who do have significant experience in the topics, and start from there. 

Report
Rob Naylor 09:50 Wed
In reply to BnB:

> The average import duty that the EU and, for now the UK, charges is 3.2%.

> Yes, 3.2%. Not 10% or 20%.

That's an AVERAGE though, and includes a lot of products that will remain tariff-free whatever.

However, looking at individual products, the tariff on, say lamb, will be at least 38%, pork 32% and chicken 31%. The tariff for cars is 10%. For confectionary 23%, clothing 11%, fish and fish products 12%, etc...

Report
El Greyo 10:43 Wed
In reply to BnB:

> Incidentally, I didn't mean to upset you yesterday. The default UKC stance on Brexit is so unrelentingly miserable without much in the way of hard data or relevant knowledge or experience to justify it that I think a bit of push-back (from a Remainer!) is not out of order. Sorry if you copped for the frustration, particularly as you made more effort with data 

Oh no worries, I'll get over it . You are right in that Brexit is happening and there is nothing we can do about it so we should just get on with coping with a changed world. A good rant about the pointlessness of it all is good therapy though.

I've been searching through our corporate literature and database to see how much work would be affected by the EU tariffs and other restrictions and it's somewhat complicate. If the project is based in the EU and the client is based in the EU then it is probably clear cut. We then have situations where the project is elsewhere but the client is EU, but we might be a subcontractor and the end client is outside the EU, or our direct client is outside the EU and the end client is from the EU and all sorts of other combinations. Not really my department and I'm sure the directors, finance team and relevant business managers are on top of it (he says hopefully).

So the answer to how much our company is actually likely to be affected is that I haven't a bloody clue. 

The overall picture is that our market is volatile and we try to be diverse, both geographically and in market sectors to weather the ups and downs. I expect that the main effect of leaving the EU is that our business in the EU will decline which narrows our market and makes us a bit more vulnerable to the storms.

Report
RomTheBear 12:23 Wed
In reply to Rob Naylor:

> That's an AVERAGE though, and includes a lot of products that will remain tariff-free whatever.

> However, looking at individual products, the tariff on, say lamb, will be at least 38%, pork 32% and chicken 31%. The tariff for cars is 10%. For confectionary 23%, clothing 11%, fish and fish products 12%, etc...

Tarrifs and customs friction on foodstuffs from the EU isn’t even really sustainable. People in the industry don’t actually believe the government will be able to enforce them - But I sense a bit of complacency.

If they do, then consumers will pay  more, and there will be less choice. That’s it.
Of course this could be good for UK producers with an U.K. market focus. 

As I made the point before, this whole thing is really just about protectionism in the end, the government spins global Britain, but every single thing they have done goes in the diametrically opposed direction. And that isn’t surprising. 

Report
neilh 13:25 Wed
In reply to RomTheBear:

Those tariffs are set by WTO rules to ensure fairness, in other words the same tariffs will apply say from NZ and an EU country to take an example.

They are then negotiated away either through MFN status or seperate Trade Agreement.So it can get complicated.

The argument about protectionism is debateable, often undeveloped countries argue that the EU system and CAP are barriers to them selling more food into the EU ( includes the UK).We all know that CAP protects European farmers. In the USA they consider the issue over non GM food a protectionist barrier for the EU,same with chlorinated chicken. So the jury is out on this.

Report
RomTheBear 14:27 Wed
In reply to neilh:

> Those tariffs are set by WTO rules to ensure fairness, in other words the same tariffs will apply say from NZ and an EU country to take an example.

They aren’t set by WTO. We set the tarrifs as we like  but we just have to apply them equally unless we have specific deal in place.

> They are then negotiated away either through MFN status or seperate Trade Agreement.So it can get complicated.

Well yes, but the simple point is that currently a a large chunk of foodstuff comes tariffs free. Going forward, it won’t, unless something else is agreed.

> The argument about protectionism is debateable, often undeveloped countries argue that the EU system and CAP are barriers to them selling more food into the EU ( includes the UK).We all know that CAP protects European farmers. In the USA they consider the issue over non GM food a protectionist barrier for the EU, same with chlorinated chicken. So the jury is out on this

Well yes regulations and subsidies are another issue,  the US has large subsidies, so does the EU, and so will the U.K.

As for regulation, same thing, we still can’t export haggis or some cheeses to the US because it’s theoretically “unsafe”. Complete BS of course !

I expect that not only we’ll keep similar subsidies and regulations to what we had before, but over time, more will be added. 

Post edited at 14:35
Report
neilh 14:39 Wed
In reply to RomTheBear:

From outside the EU it is often subject to quota limits. So NZ for example has a quota limit into the EU .After you  hit the limit you get a duty . The limit on NZ lamb is 228,254 tonnes .

Regulations and subsidies are barriers to free trade.

it is a minefield. I doubt any country or trading block has free trade in its purest form. 

Post edited at 14:41
Report
Harry Jarvis 14:59 Wed
In reply to neilh:

> it is a minefield. 

But the idiot Fox told us it would be the easiest trade agreement ever! You're not surely suggesting he might not have been in full possession of a reasoned opinion? 

Report
RomTheBear 15:02 Wed
In reply to neilh:

> From outside the EU it is often subject to quota limits. So NZ for example has a quota limit into the EU .After you  hit the limit you get a duty . The limit on NZ lamb is 228,254 tonnes .

> Regulations and subsidies are barriers to free trade.

> it is a minefield. I doubt any country or trading block has free trade in its purest form. 

Nobody disagrees with you here, but my very simple point is that the direction of travel for the U.K. is firmly towards less free trade, despite the political spin stating the opposite.

Post edited at 15:18
Report
neilh 15:24 Wed
In reply to RomTheBear:

That is your view.....

Part of the picture is what the EU wants with us and how they protect themselves bearing in mind that they are viewed as a protectionist block by others in the globe.

So the direction of travel is also controlled by this. What the EU does not want is a free trade area in the UK with the rest of the world and then the UK to have a free trade deal with the EU ( do not forget we are a big market for them). It is free house for us then, if you see what I mean.In a way This is UKs discreet  threat to the EU. It is a finely balanced argument, but it plays to us, as we can haggle alot more.BJ is right to say-- we are going on our own- as a negotiating tool.And as the French correctly say--it is going to be a scap.Both sides recognise eath others strengths and weaknesses.

Report
Mike Stretford 15:42 Wed
In reply to neilh:

> That is your view.....

> Part of the picture is what the EU wants with us and how they protect themselves bearing in mind that they are viewed as a protectionist block by others in the globe.

No different to the US, China, India, Japan...... It's just Tory bullshit that around the rest of the world everyone is into free trade.

> What the EU does not want is a free trade area in the UK with the rest of the world and then the UK to have a free trade deal with the EU ( do not forget we are a big market for them).

There's no free trade area with the rest of the world. You can eliminate import tarrifs and regs but it won't be reciprocated.

> It is free house for us then, if you see what I mean.In a way This is UKs discreet  threat to the EU. It is a finely balanced argument, but it plays to us, as we can haggle alot more.BJ is right to say-- we are going on our own- as a negotiating tool.And as the French correctly say--it is going to be a scap.Both sides recognise eath others strengths and weaknesses.

We are a big market but there's not much of a threat there. This idea that Brits would stop buying EU stuff just because it was a bit more expensive just doesn't cut it..... and will the government really want to make Brits favourite cars more expensive? Cos that's what it comes down to.

Post edited at 15:51
Report
neilh 16:11 Wed
In reply to Mike Stretford:

Do you trade in any of those markets?

Report
Mike Stretford 16:25 Wed
In reply to neilh: Through my job, I've got plenty of experience of importing from and exporting to those markets.

Report
HansStuttgart 16:58 Wed
In reply to neilh:

> That is your view.....

> Part of the picture is what the EU wants with us and how they protect themselves bearing in mind that they are viewed as a protectionist block by others in the globe.

The EU is protectionist. But it is viewed as the least protectionist of the major blocks in the world. With the exception of agriculture. There the policy is self-sufficiency.

> So the direction of travel is also controlled by this. What the EU does not want is a free trade area in the UK with the rest of the world and then the UK to have a free trade deal with the EU ( do not forget we are a big market for them). It is free house for us then, if you see what I mean.In a way This is UKs discreet  threat to the EU. It is a finely balanced argument, but it plays to us, as we can haggle alot more.BJ is right to say-- we are going on our own- as a negotiating tool.And as the French correctly say--it is going to be a scap.Both sides recognise eath others strengths and weaknesses.

It is a threat that triggers a response from the EU: preventively raise barriers in the UK-EU trade flow. And this is more expensive for the UK than for the EU. So UK wins nothing with the threat.

Report
RomTheBear 17:13 Wed
In reply to neilh:

> That is your view.....

> Part of the picture is what the EU wants with us and how they protect themselves bearing in mind that they are viewed as a protectionist block by others in the globe.

This is just a familiar trope.

The EU is viewed as a very tough negotiator but is fairly liberal.
It can't claim to be the world's freest trader, but on many measures it's toward the more liberal end of the spectrum.

> So the direction of travel is also controlled by this. What the EU does not want is a free trade area in the UK with the rest of the world and then the UK to have a free trade deal with the EU ( do not forget we are a big market for them). It is free house for us then, if you see what I mean.In a way This is UKs discreet  threat to the EU. It is a finely balanced argument, but it plays to us, as we can haggle alot more.BJ is right to say-- we are going on our own- as a negotiating tool.And as the French correctly say--it is going to be a scap.Both sides recognise eath others strengths and weaknesses

The thing that worries the EU is indeed a “Singapore on Thames”, whereby the U.K. would act as a backdoor to bypass the rules and regulation of the single market.

This isn’t a negotiating advantage for us, it’s a big problem, because the EU will be very reluctant to give us much access unless we accept stringent and comprehensive level-playing field rules, with enforcement mechanisms etc etc.

We are in this situation because the UK government totally botched its approach. 
The first thing you should do in a negotiation, especially as the weaker part, is to build trust. We’ve done exactly the opposite, for ideological/political reasons.

As a result, I fully expect that we won’t get what we want from the EU, and we will reply in kind. 

Report
HansStuttgart 17:25 Wed
In reply to RomTheBear:

> As a result, I fully expect that we won’t get what we want from the EU, and we will reply in kind. 

From an EU point of view I really struggle to see why the EU should invest time and effort into getting the zero tariff/zero quota trade deal that is now being planned. The chances of this negotiation working out are pretty low and the impact of the deal will be quite minor: difference between 70% damage and 80% damage? (Here 0% is EU membership, 15% is EEA, 100 % is without the current WA).

The focus should be on securing the transition extension and preventing backsliding in the implementation of the NI protocol.

Post edited at 17:27
Report
neilh 19:51 Wed
In reply to RomTheBear:

Neither of us really know other than it’s going to be tough .

there is the negotiation and political spin.

Report
In reply to neilh:

> Neither of us really know other than it’s going to be tough.

Talk about equivocation! 

Probably the way Lemmings would speak if they had our intelligence, and our language.

Post edited at 20:18
Report
L NERD 20:25 Wed
In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

> Talk about equivocation! 

> Probably the way Lemmings would speak if they had our intelligence, and our language.

Why? 

Report
In reply to NERD:

'We're going on this perilous route and we'll probably get hurt' - and now you're asking ME to explain the logic of that. Sorry, I can't.

PS. 'It's going to be tough', in economic terms equals, surely: 'We're going to get hurt.'

Post edited at 20:36
Report
L NERD 20:44 Wed
In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

> 'We're going on this perilous route and we'll probably get hurt' - and now you're asking ME to explain the logic of that. Sorry, I can't.

> PS. 'It's going to be tough', in economic terms equals, surely: 'We're going to get hurt.'

I meant why would Lemmings say that? 

Report
In reply to NERD:

I'm talking about the animal called a lemming (and not any poster). Your question is a very interesting one philosophically. Of course I didn't mean, or want to suggest, that lemmings would say anything rational about their suicidal disposition/their 'lemming condition'. And, as I suggested before, obviously they couldn't think logically.

Report
L NERD 21:21 Wed
In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

> I'm talking about the animal called a lemming (and not any poster). Your question is a very interesting one philosophically. Of course I didn't mean, or want to suggest, that lemmings would say anything rational about their suicidal disposition/their 'lemming condition'. And, as I suggested before, obviously they couldn't think logically.

What suicidal disposition? Is that a joke? 

Report
In reply to NERD:

I suppose you could just call it a joke. But you need to explain yourself further.

Report
RomTheBear 22:06 Wed
In reply to neilh:

> Neither of us really know other than it’s going to be tough .

What is it we do not really know, and how does it relate to my points ?

Post edited at 22:17
Report
RomTheBear 22:09 Wed
In reply to neilh:

> there is the negotiation and political spin.

That’s just what I’ve been saying.

Report
RomTheBear 22:16 Wed
In reply to HansStuttgart:

> From an EU point of view I really struggle to see why the EU should invest time and effort into getting the zero tariff/zero quota trade deal that is now being planned. The chances of this negotiation working out are pretty low and the impact of the deal will be quite minor: difference between 70% damage and 80% damage? (Here 0% is EU membership, 15% is EEA, 100 % is without the current WA).

I think they will put in the effort because of course they also have an interest, but it is clear that they will want a very high threshold of alignment due to low trust and proximity. They probably won’t give in on that simply because they don’t need to.

As such it will depend on what the U.K. government accept. It seems unlikely that they will accept the level of alignment required, so indeed chances of a zero tarrifs / zero quota deal are very low.

However it just isn’t a sustainable position for business, so I also expect that we will get never ending negotiations to ease the most painful frictions, bit by bit, over decades.

> The focus should be on securing the transition extension and preventing backsliding in the implementation of the NI protocol

Correct.

Report
L NERD 23:15 Wed
In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

> I suppose you could just call it a joke. But you need to explain yourself further.

What suicidal disposition? 

Report
Basil 08:52 Thu
In reply to BnB:

Masturbatory Lather! Get a grip on yourself man.

Report
neilh 09:05 Thu
In reply to RomTheBear:

I view our postings as an ongoing  fluid discussion by the way.If you get frustrated by it then lets call it quits.

We do not really know the Uk Gov and EU's true red lines,we have alot of statements from both sides, I hope we are in agreement on that. You and I will agree that the Uk Gov views this as a transactional deal, whilst the EU will look to preseve the EU project.How this is reconciled will be interesting and tough.And meanwhile in the background there are internal EU finance negotaions going on about future funding which are fraught, which I suspect will play into the overall picture.It could well be that the EU will accept a fee from Uk for future market access but no ECJ jurisdiction to get some "cash".

I did have to laugh this morning on R4 when there were 2 spokes persons from the fishing industry discussing migration. One from Peterhead for Scotland saying we desperately needed migrant workers ( yet paradoxically that area voted leave) and automation was not the answer . Then next minute you had somebody from Grimsby ( another major fishing town)who said automation was the way forward and there were already robots doing filleting of fish etc.

Report
Rob Exile Ward 09:09 Thu
In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

As a matter of interest there is no evidence that lemmings have suicidal tendencies. The famous scene in one of the Disney nature films where they are seen throwing themselves off a cliff was actually faked by out of camera technicians throwing them off. I don't suppose they volunteered.  Which I always thinks provides a nice contrast between the warm and fluffy public side of Disney and the ruthless drive to entertain the public - and make money - at all costs.

Report
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

Yes, I've just read that up. Still, it's become a standard metaphor, and it's a useful image, even if very unfair to lemmings.

Report
carl dawson 12:52 Thu
In reply to neilh:

From Grimsby, I think the spokesperson was a Tory MP (who also said she hadn’t had time yet to speak to the main fishing business folk).

Report
neilh 13:11 Thu
In reply to carl dawson:

I thought that it was the social care  people she had not spoken to.

Report
Mike Stretford 13:38 Thu
In reply to Basil:

> Masturbatory Lather! Get a grip on yourself man.

Sounds like he already has!

Post edited at 13:38
Report
In reply to BnB:

> It's inconceivable that a UK/US trade deal will help you do business over there? Brexit is a necessary stage in that process.

I've been selling stuff the US for about 20 years.  Never had any paperwork beyond filling in a W8-BEN form or any tax/duty applied.  It can't get any better for my class of product.

The thing which has been f*cking it up a bit in the last couple of years is Trump.  I've see internal e-mail at some customers where their purchasing people are advising to try and avoid suppliers outside the US.  Not because of actual duties but because Trump is so unpredictable they are worried there could suddenly be a sizable tariff applied in the middle of a project.   

Report
RomTheBear 14:48 Thu
In reply to neilh:

> I view our postings as an ongoing  fluid discussion by the way.If you get frustrated by it then lets call it quits.

Well yes, “discussion” and “fluid” being the key words here.
You have a tendency to reply without quoting nor addressing previous points made, and instead just making some unrelated statement.


The point here is to take appart and challenge each other’s arguments so that we can learn something and converge to a better understanding, not to have a series of monologues.

> We do not really know the Uk Gov and EU's true red lines.


> And meanwhile in the background there are internal EU finance negotaions going on about future funding which are fraught, which I suspect will play into the overall picture.It could well be that the EU will accept a fee from Uk for future market access but no ECJ jurisdiction to get some "cash".

That doesn’t seem realistic to me, at all. And I never heard any expert suggesting anything of the sort. 
I don’t think EU budget will play at all, these are separate discussions, which in any case will be done well before. Wrangling over budget is routine and hasn’t impacted trade negotiations in the past.
 

> I did have to laugh this morning on R4 when there were 2 spokes persons from the fishing industry discussing migration. One from Peterhead for Scotland saying we desperately needed migrant workers ( yet paradoxically that area voted leave) and automation was not the answer . Then next minute you had somebody from Grimsby ( another major fishing town)who said automation was the way forward and there were already robots doing filleting of fish etc

Well that is the problem when the state tries to control tightly everything, you end up with one size fits all.

I don’t really see what the Grimsby person point is though, you don’t need extra immigration restrictions in order to automate anything (on the contrary), sounds to me like the usual politicised brexit bollocks.

Post edited at 14:52
Report

Please Register as a New User in order to reply to this topic.