Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Brexit discussion thread XIII (Please read OP before posting)
Comments
-
johnnyskeleton wrote: »I dont see it to be honest. Jersey maybe as they have strong links to France. But Mann had few links with Ireland and lots with GB (apart from a few key holding companies and the likes).
I did not mean it looking to merge with Ireland. I mean more would the Isle of Mann look to change its status in relation to the UK so as to be able to have closer links with the EU.0 -
The Isle of Man was never actually part of the EU, and its residents had limited freedom of movement, so its status after Brexit will have changed little. As you say, Jersey may seek closer ties given its proximity to France, and indeed regularly holds meetings with the Normandy regional government.0
-
An Ciarraioch wrote: »The Isle of Man was never actually part of the EU, and its residents had limited freedom of movement, so its status after Brexit will have changed little. As you say, Jersey may seek closer ties given its proximity to France, and indeed regularly holds meetings with the Normandy regional government.
Yes I knew that it was never part of the EU but it did have a protocol with the EU which allowed it free access trade wise in manufactured goods and agricultural products. Now that the UK is out this protocol is gone. So unless there is a deal struck between the EU and the UK and that deal includes a new protocol to cover the Isle of Mann there will be a significant negative impact on their economy.0 -
Join Date:Posts: 13683
ancapailldorcha wrote: »They tend to be fair with their analysis though they never cite sources which is a little vexing when adding links on a website costs nothing.
I remember the CEO of JP Morgan Chase saying that Dublin is an unfit replacement for London due to its size and underdeveloped infrastructure. Cities like Paris, Amsterdam, Luxembourg (?) and Frankfurt will probably fare better.
I can't see Ireland benefitting hugely but it will be interesting to see how London's relationship with various oligarchs and entities plays out.
Exactly. The analysis seems to hinge on "well there is no other city that can compete with London, but it is possible (likely IMO) that without any other city rising to compete with or take over from London, London will still be decimated.
So the fact that the moves to EU cities has been limited and manageable to date, doesnt mean that London wont suffer a catastrophic decline. Perhaps all of Europe will decline with it.0 -
Join Date:Posts: 13683
I did not mean it looking to merge with Ireland. I mean more would the Isle of Mann look to change its status in relation to the UK so as to be able to have closer links with the EU.
Yeah I get ya, but I mean that they are intimately tied to the UK in a way that say Jersey isnt ans their ties to the EU are not as strong as Jersey. So I would think that they will have no real interest in having strong links to the EU if it means they lose their connection to their biggest market i.e. GB0 -
Advertisement
-
johnnyskeleton wrote: »Yeah I get ya, but I mean that they are intimately tied to the UK in a way that say Jersey isnt ans their ties to the EU are not as strong as Jersey. So I would think that they will have no real interest in having strong links to the EU if it means they lose their connection to their biggest market i.e. GB
Fair enough. Was reading an article relating to Isle of Mann earlier today totally unrelated to the topic but it got me thinking hmmm I wonder will brexit have knock on effects in any way on their status given how likely brexit is to cause the breakup of the UK.0 -
The fact that we're almost a week on from the tantrums of last week, the negotiations are continuing and that all we've to talk about is Tallaght vs Boston, is a good sign that a deal is going well. There's few leaks, little sabre rattling, no threats, and Boris has yet to 'take personal charge of...' all signals that detailed work is happening0
-
Join Date:Posts: 19470
The fact that we're almost a week on from the tantrums of last week, the negotiations are continuing and that all we've to talk about is Tallaght vs Boston, is a good sign that a deal is going well. There's few leaks, little sabre rattling, no threats, and Boris has yet to 'take personal charge of...' all signals that detailed work is happening
They are in the tunnel.
Plus, GBP is stable in a narrow range. The markets expect a deal, or at least expect that no deal is off - just a 'thin deal'.0 -
Sam Russell wrote: »They are in the tunnel.
Plus, GBP is stable in a narrow range. The markets expect a deal, or at least expect that no deal is off - just a 'thin deal'.
A thin deal was the only thing possible - the UK left everything way too late. But yes, it looks like it's heading in that direction.0 -
-
Advertisement
-
A thin deal was the only thing possible - the UK left everything way too late. But yes, it looks like it's heading in that direction.
This explanation of the economic effect of Brexit, even if there is a deal, given in 2018 is succinct and spot on. I think because it's delivered by a well respected America Economist it avoids being automatically labelled as being pro or anti Brexit. He just lays out some very basic facts and concludes "there is no economic upside to this".
https://twitter.com/Femi_Sorry/status/13207210463586426890 -
According to a few relatively recent articles (I linked one not so long ago), Dublin is winning the City of London Brexodus race, followed by Paris or Luxembourg, with the ranking depending upon the metric used (new (ex-UK) structure authorised by local regulator; volume/value of assets relocated; number of jobs relocated/created).ancapailldorcha wrote: »They tend to be fair with their analysis though they never cite sources which is a little vexing when adding links on a website costs nothing.
I remember the CEO of JP Morgan Chase saying that Dublin is an unfit replacement for London due to its size and underdeveloped infrastructure. Cities like Paris, Amsterdam, Luxembourg (?) and Frankfurt will probably fare better.
I can't see Ireland benefitting hugely but it will be interesting to see how London's relationship with various oligarchs and entities plays out.
lt is very much a function of the local specialisation relative to other locations, prior to all things Brexit: for Luxembourg, personal/private wealth management and everything-insurance; for Dublin, backoffice services and general banking; for Paris, corporate banking <etc>0 -
Peregrinus wrote: »A thin deal is the only thing possible because that is all the UK will accept. The UK government wants a thin deal.
It does but it wants some fat parts too. Kind of like a pizza with a thin base and extra cheese.0 -
Professor Moriarty wrote: »It does but it wants some fat parts too. Kind of like a pizza with a thin base and extra cheese.
That’s true and the problem always has been that the Brexiters want lots of extra toppings on their pizza but are hostile to paying the price for even the most basic pizza model.
And, even if there is an agreement on the “pizza”, they’ll turn around in three months time and claim what they got wasn’t what they agreed to at all and they now want to pay less for it and, oh, get even more toppings at the same time.0 -
That’s true and the problem always has been that the Brexiters want lots of extra toppings on their pizza but are hostile to paying the price for even the most basic pizza model.
And, even if there is an agreement on the “pizza”, they’ll turn around in three months time and claim what they got wasn’t what they agreed to at all and they now want to pay less for it and, oh, get even more toppings at the same time.
And cake for dessert.0 -
With the UK being out of the EU will they decide not to implement the decision regarding changes to daylight savings just to be contrary?
Could it be in 2021 Ireland and Northern Ireland are in two different times?0 -
With the UK being out of the EU will they decide not to implement the decision regarding changes to daylight savings just to be contrary?
Could it be in 2021 Ireland and Northern Ireland are in two different times?
I see a lot of talk about this. Would it be so big of an issue? Many European countries share a border with another time zone.
It might be another reason for people north of the border to consider an all island approach to Irish issues as the best solution.0 -
Silent Running wrote: »I see a lot of talk about this. Would it be so big of an issue? Many European countries share a border with another time zone.
It might be another reason for people north of the border to consider an all island approach to Irish issues as the best solution.
It will be an issue within the UK if Boris makes the decision unilaterally without agreement with Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland and could be another chink to erode the UK after Brexit.
It will definitely have an affect to people living and working on the border.0 -
Professor Moriarty wrote: »That is a mixture of positives and negatives. Much more negatives though and the "positives" seem to be glorified damage limitation. It's a fair but mostly damning summation of how the City is fading and how Brexit is hastening its demise. The Economist has long been anti-Brexit so there's no surprise there. The problem is that not as many people get their Brexit info from the likes of The Economist as get their info from the Mail and Express.
For me reading that article suggested that Brexit will not have a major impact on the City of London as it still retains its listed attractions over EU financial centres. Its interesting to read that London became and remains the main clearing house for Euro-denominated instruments even though the UK never joined the Euro. This would suggest that entropy will continue to see London as one of the main world centres and indeed being able to set their own regulatory environment might even see London increase its dominant position in Europe, who knows?
The article suggested that London was more concerned with the rise of financial centres in Asia offering new products and markets rather than the relatively sluggish and limited efforts of European centres to become centres of gravity in the financial world.0 -
That’s true and the problem always has been that the Brexiters want lots of extra toppings on their pizza but are hostile to paying the price for even the most basic pizza model.
And, even if there is an agreement on the “pizza”, they’ll turn around in three months time and claim what they got wasn’t what they agreed to at all and they now want to pay less for it and, oh, get even more toppings at the same time.
Yes but Irish people seem to overlook that the EU also is demanding the parts of the UK pizza that it is used to. Complete access to UK fishing waters and unfettered access to sell German cars, Irish beef, French wine etc. into the UK. The EU/UK balance of trade weighs heavily on the EU side.
It was telling that Merkel intervened publicly some weeks ago to say that a deal is required so undoubtedly there is pressure from German business interests that the likes of the emotional row over fishing shouldn't be a block to a much larger overall trade deal. And everybody has got back to the table since and seem to be negotiating in the famous "tunnel" right now.
I expect a "heads of agreement" deal to be announced with details to be hammered out in some areas in the months to come but I think it will surprise many people on here who will find that the UK will achieve most of its aims on trade. And thus that its negotiating strategy will ultimately have worked, no matter how "edgy" it has seemed.0 -
Advertisement
-
forgottenhills wrote: »For me reading that article suggested that Brexit will not have a major impact on the City of London as it still retains its listed attractions over EU financial centres. Its interesting to read that London became and remains the main clearing house for Euro-denominated instruments even though the UK never joined the Euro. This would suggest that entropy will continue to see London as one of the main world centres and indeed being able to set their own regulatory environment might even see London increase its dominant position in Europe, who knows?
The article suggested that London was more concerned with the rise of financial centres in Asia offering new products and markets rather than the relatively sluggish and limited efforts of European centres to become centres of gravity in the financial world.
I wouldn't agree. Take this section. This indicates that the EU intends to weed out London's hold on clearing houses and build its own infrastructure.
Britain was quick to grant eu financial firms access on existing terms for three years, after which they can seek longer-term “authorisation”. This was not reciprocated. With passporting gone, the best that British firms can hope for in the eu is “equivalence”—a poor substitute. This would allow British firms to serve eu clients only if Brussels deemed British regulations to be closely aligned with its own. Moreover, the access is limited and revocable at 30 days’ notice.
Worse, the eu seems minded to offer relatively unfettered access only in areas where not doing so could affect its own financial stability, such as critical market infrastructure. It has thus agreed to extend current arrangements for clearing euro-denominated derivatives, an activity dominated by London-based clearing houses. But even here the extension is only for 18 months, after which it will be reviewed. The eu is determined to build its own clearing capacity to reduce “excessive” reliance on British financial plumbing—though, as Sir Douglas Flint, chairman of Standard Life Aberdeen, a British fund manager, points out, how the 27 countries would share the risks of backstopping it remains to be seen. Tellingly, the London Clearing House’s (lch’s) share of euro-swaps clearing has remained above 90% since the Brexit referendum, despite efforts by Eurex, a Frankfurt rival, to nab market share.
Here, it would seem that investment banking will take a major hit.
For many other activities, the level of access starting on January 1st remains unresolved. That is not least because the eu is using equivalence as a bargaining chip in the trade talks. European regulators are yet to decide, for instance, whether eu investors will be able to trade eu-listed stocks on British exchanges. The London Stock Exchange (lse) says it will offer trading of eu-listed shares on the Dutch trading platform it owns if necessary.
In several key areas, equivalence has been all but ruled out. One is investment-banking sales and trading—bad news for the Wall Street giants that have long used London as a beachhead from which to serve wholesale clients across Europe. Another is retail banking. Some eu countries have already told British banks they won’t be able to serve customers there, forcing the closure of accounts.
Again, this section indicates that the EU is determined to steal London's hold on asset management.
Fund managers have another worry, related to “delegation”, the outsourcing model at the heart of the €18trn European fund industry. Thousands of funds are domiciled in places like Luxembourg or Dublin for tax or regulatory reasons, but are permitted to be managed from London, New York or Hong Kong. The eu’s markets authority recently cast doubt on this arrangement, suggesting it may be reviewed. This has caused consternation in Britain—whose fund managers oversee £8.5trn of assets, £2.1trn of which sit in eu-domiciled funds—and elsewhere. “Asset management is just as critical [as banks] to the City’s long-term future,” says Bernie Mensah, president of International at Bank of America. “If you can prise much of that industry away from London then you really start to tip the balance of power.”
Banking itself has taken a hit and will be hit further and hard depending on the type of deal struck or if there is a deal (for example, elsewhere in the article, it is noted that Barclays have move 150 billion to Dublin)
eu regulators have made it clear that they want to see “substance” in eu subsidiaries. Banks are under pressure to move not just back-office staff but salespeople, traders and risk managers too. “Keeping the key staff in London, with a brass-plate operation across the water, is out,” says a British regulator. In response, banks have been moving employees in substantial numbers, albeit not the tens of thousands that City Cassandras predicted would migrate. According to ey’s Brexit Tracker, which monitors announcements by large banks and other financial firms, as of October 1st at least 7,500 jobs had left the City for the eu since the referendum. On top of this, firms have added, or plan to, over 2,800 new roles in eu subsidiaries.
These lost jobs add up to around 4% of the total in the City—hardly a devastating blow. But the actual number moving is higher; ey tracks only the 222 largest firms. And there is more to come. Some firms have been waiting to see the outcome of the trade talks before moving more staff. “We will see skeletal teams in the eu being fleshed out over coming months,” says John Liver of ey. With covid-19 complicating relocation, eu regulators have indicated that banks can finish transferring staff next year, as long as their intentions are clear. Hubertus Väth of Frankfurt Main Finance, the city’s financial cheerleader, says that in 2019 some 1,500 finance jobs moved from London to Germany’s financial capital. He expects another 2,000 to transfer as the pandemic fades.
And so on. It is a balanced article that attempts to predict what will happen based on past and current trends. Those trends are universally negative and if most predictions come true then the City will be hit very hard. Does it predict a catastrophe? No. If I was a manger in the City would I be worried? Very much so.0 -
Professor Moriarty wrote: »...
And so on. It is a balanced article that attempts to predict what will happen based on past and current trends. Those trends are universally negative and if most predictions come true then the City will be hit very hard. Does it predict a catastrophe? No. If I was a manger in the City would I be worried? Very much so.
It is a balanced article but you have quoted all the negatives for London in that article without listing the positive arguments in the article stating why it it likely to retain its pre-eminence in Europe. It sounds like you are pre-biased against London in some way, perhaps in the way that many Irish people believe (or perhaps hope) that Brexit will be a 100% failure, when only time will tell how the UK will fare.
For someone looking at this area in a neutral way, and from reading that article, there does not seem to be any knockout blow on the way to the City of London from Brexit. The sense seems to be that the City has always been nimble in both responding to threats and secondly in coming up with new products than other centres in Europe which seem slower to innovate and more conservative. As I stated previouly the City seems to be more concerned about the development of Asian capital markets than about the impact of Brexit.
To me it has been telling that there has not been any great clamour from leaders in the City to force Johnson and Co to avoid a No Deal exit. I have been quite surprised by this. It seems that the City is quite sanguine overall about Brexit and perhaps can see potential gains, perhaps from deregulation or innovation, to balance the losses they will suffer.0 -
surprised no news out of tunnel ; presumably nothing sorted till all is sorted. Since some national governments are leak factories its interesting to see how schtumm everyone is keeping which , to me, means that the individual heads of Govt arent at the point of being test-audienced yet... interesting times0
-
forgottenhills wrote: »It is a balanced article but you have quoted all the negatives for London in that article without listing the positive arguments in the article stating why it it likely to retain its pre-eminence in Europe. It sounds like you are pre-biased against London in some way, perhaps in the way that many Irish people believe (or perhaps hope) that Brexit will be a 100% failure, when only time will tell how the UK will fare.
For someone looking at this area in a neutral way, and from reading that article, there does not seem to be any knockout blow on the way to the City of London from Brexit. The sense seems to be that the City has always been nimble in both responding to threats and secondly in coming up with new products than other centres in Europe which seem slower to innovate and more conservative. As I stated previouly the City seems to be more concerned about the development of Asian capital markets than about the impact of Brexit.
To me it has been telling that there has not been any great clamour from leaders in the City to force Johnson and Co to avoid a No Deal exit. I have been quite surprised by this. It seems that the City is quite sanguine overall about Brexit and perhaps can see potential gains, perhaps from deregulation or innovation, to balance the losses they will suffer.
I note that, yet again, you don't quote from the article in anyway to support your argument. Yet you have the gall to suggest I am "pre-biased" and hope that Brexit fails. You are wrong. I hope the Tory party crashes and burns, not the UK. Just a thought: Maybe if you yourself supported your opinions with facts then your opinions might be taken seriously.
The idea that Brexit, whether No Deal or bare bones, will be anything but very negative for financial services in London, is simply delusional.0 -
Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 18,327 CMod ✭✭✭✭
Join Date:Posts: 16355
You mean the same car industry in Germany that stated already back in 2017 that while UK is important they fully support the single market first? While the numbers may be similar in trade in value the difference is on the EU side it's split 27 ways; on the UK side they take the full hit of it. Hence EU loses about 8% export, UK loses 50%.forgottenhills wrote: »Yes but Irish people seem to overlook that the EU also is demanding the parts of the UK pizza that it is used to. Complete access to UK fishing waters and unfettered access to sell German cars, Irish beef, French wine etc. into the UK. The EU/UK balance of trade weighs heavily on the EU side.
It was telling that Merkel intervened publicly some weeks ago to say that a deal is required so undoubtedly there is pressure from German business interests that the likes of the emotional row over fishing shouldn't be a block to a much larger overall trade deal. And everybody has got back to the table since and seem to be negotiating in the famous "tunnel" right now.
I expect a "heads of agreement" deal to be announced with details to be hammered out in some areas in the months to come but I think it will surprise many people on here who will find that the UK will achieve most of its aims on trade. And thus that its negotiating strategy will ultimately have worked, no matter how "edgy" it has seemed.
Secondly remember UK wanted full unfettered access to the single market with full equalliance for services while not paying into the budget; they are going to fall very short of that. They are going to lose direct access to the Interpol database which Scotland Yard has already stated will have a devastating effect on their ability to get information, they will not be able to use the fast track lanes at EU airports etc. The only question will be how many billions are UK going to be paying for what ever access they get; we already know they will be paying (Will Boris paint a new buss?) and the dispute now is how much and for how much worse of a deal by comparison.
Brexit will be a 100% failure; no economist anywhere has made a serious claim for it being a success. As for London; they will now be competing with New York and Singapore directly because were as London previously had a benefit of being in EU they are now just another third party country. If anything there's no real reason for EU countries to go to London anymore which will diminish their value even further now that there's full competition on the finance market again which was not the case previously. London has lost what was it's competitive advantage of being in the EU; now they are simply just another country out there.forgottenhills wrote: »It is a balanced article but you have quoted all the negatives for London in that article without listing the positive arguments in the article stating why it it likely to retain its pre-eminence in Europe. It sounds like you are pre-biased against London in some way, perhaps in the way that many Irish people believe (or perhaps hope) that Brexit will be a 100% failure, when only time will tell how the UK will fare.
For someone looking at this area in a neutral way, and from reading that article, there does not seem to be any knockout blow on the way to the City of London from Brexit. The sense seems to be that the City has always been nimble in both responding to threats and secondly in coming up with new products than other centres in Europe which seem slower to innovate and more conservative. As I stated previouly the City seems to be more concerned about the development of Asian capital markets than about the impact of Brexit.
To me it has been telling that there has not been any great clamour from leaders in the City to force Johnson and Co to avoid a No Deal exit. I have been quite surprised by this. It seems that the City is quite sanguine overall about Brexit and perhaps can see potential gains, perhaps from deregulation or innovation, to balance the losses they will suffer.0 -
Professor Moriarty wrote: »I note that, yet again, you don't quote from the article in anyway to support your argument. Yet you have the gall to suggest I am "pre-biased" and hope that Brexit fails. You are wrong. I hope the Tory party crashes and burns, not the UK. Just a thought: Maybe if you yourself supported your opinions with facts then your opinions might be taken seriously.
The idea that Brexit, whether No Deal or bare bones, will be anything but very negative for financial services in London, is simply delusional.
I didn't quote from the article as the part of the article supporting my argument that, on balance and despite several acknowledged negatives, the City of London didn't seem overly concerned with Brexit were evident in the article. In the section titled " The City still has charms"
But here it is reproduced below in case you have a problem finding or acknowledging that there are two sides to the argument.
The City still has charms
Despite Brexit, London retains several advantages over eu financial centres, from its language and legal system (which governs many financial contracts) to the rich corporate ecosystem of lawyers, accountants, consultants and public-relations experts entwined with the City. London is also—no small matter—the worldliest of the continent’s world cities.
This makes it attractive not just to big banks, but also to hundreds of smaller firms that “see advantages Paris and Frankfurt struggle to reproduce”, says Daniel Pinto, the Anglo-French founder of Stanhope Capital, a boutique investment firm. Paris, he says, is still seen as “wanting to penalise, not promote, the financial sector”, despite its strenuous efforts to woo business from London. Meanwhile, foreign institutional investors, from American endowments to Middle Eastern sovereign-wealth funds, “have an almost cultural attachment to London and will still want to invest through it if they can”. Moreover, London is streets ahead of European rivals in several fast-growing sectors, such as green finance and fintechs. For firms in these domains, “If you want to see 20 investors who are genuinely invested in your area, London is still the place, and we don’t see that changing,” says Mike Reid of Frog Capital, a vc firm that invests in fintechs.
Regulation might also be an advantage in the future. Some worry that standards may be allowed to slip to boost Britain’s competitiveness. The Bank of England rejects this (one of its mantras is “divergence doesn’t necessarily mean dilution”). It stresses a change in style rather than substance: making rules smarter by letting regulators, rather than lawmakers more detached from the industry, craft more of them. Improving on the eu’s one-size-fits-all-27 financial rule book is not the most fiendish of challenges. The aim is to rewrite it so it is “more open to innovation while no less attentive to financial stability”, says a British official, citing clunky European rules for small banks and the constraints of the Solvency 2 insurance directive as areas to work on. Ms Swinburne expects Britain to seek to align regulation more closely with America and Asia.
The eu, meanwhile, suffers from a lack of cohesion. The huge variation in its member states’ tax and insolvency laws is a formidable barrier to creating a unified capital market, for instance. The bloc is also riven with division over what type of financial sovereignty it wants. “It’s a delicate balancing act. The more it wraps its arms around eu borders and says activity has to take place within them, the less competitive and less connected to global flows its financial services will be, and costs will rise,” says Andrew Pilgrim of ey. Even America, the financial hegemon, has never sought to gain full control of its financial flows and currency.
Also hamstringing the eu is a lack of co-ordination in taking on London. Its financial centres compete with each other. When Paris hustles to lure asset managers, for instance, it looks to poach from Luxembourg and Dublin as well as London. “There’s no one place where they [the eu] are amassing their efforts,” says Eva Kingston, a financial headhunter. As a result, expertise is diffuse: Frankfurt is strong in banking; Amsterdam in trading platforms; Luxembourg and Dublin in fund administration; Paris comes closest to being an all-rounder but is far from world-class. In a recent global ranking of financial centres it came 18th, just ahead of Washington, dc.
There are also questions over banks’ longer-term commitment to a Britainless eu. They are being forced to relocate business against their will. “Allocating more capital to the euro zone right now feels odd, what with negative interest rates and an undynamic economy,” says a senior City figure. It does not help that the eu27’s share of global banking, insurance and capital-markets activity has been falling since before the global financial crisis: from 20% in 2006 to 13%, while America’s share has remained stable at around 40% and Asia’s has jumped from 18% to 28%. “Anyone for a market that’s relatively small in global terms, shrinking and inefficient?” asks another banker, acerbically.
Some bankers may find ways around the diktat that they serve eu clients from within the bloc. The lch has suggested that, faced with “forced fragmentation”, some firms might try “to reroute trades via different entities”. A central banker says: “Never underestimate the financial sector’s ability to do the business it wants, where it wants, despite regulators putting lines on maps. Arbitrage is in its dna.”
Even if London stays well ahead of European wannabes, however, it faces intense competition from elsewhere. It remains locked in a battle with New York for top spot. Asian markets are growing fast and becoming more self-sufficient in raising capital. China has hosted more of the ipo boom of 2020 than London, partly thanks to its fast-growing, Nasdaq-style market for tech stocks. “The big risk for London is not the eu but that in the not too distant future Asia doesn’t need it,” says Mr Wright.
The full impact of Brexit won’t be clear for years. Large parts of the future relationship between the City and the eu will be thrashed out only at the end of temporary extensions, such as that for clearing, says Simon Gleeson of Clifford Chance, a law firm. In the meantime, technology, along with covid-19 and home-working, is making the question of location-based regulation, long fundamental in finance, increasingly vexed. All of which, says Jan Putnis of Slaughter and May, another law firm, “makes Brexit look almost quaint”.0 -
forgottenhills wrote: »For me reading that article suggested that Brexit will not have a major impact on the City of London as it still retains its listed attractions over EU financial centres. Its interesting to read that London became and remains the main clearing house for Euro-denominated instruments even though the UK never joined the Euro. This would suggest that entropy will continue to see London as one of the main world centres and indeed being able to set their own regulatory environment might even see London increase its dominant position in Europe, who knows?
The article suggested that London was more concerned with the rise of financial centres in Asia offering new products and markets rather than the relatively sluggish and limited efforts of European centres to become centres of gravity in the financial world.
The EU have given an 18 month extension for licenses. That's it. That gives them 18 months to decide the direction to take. That direction could be insist on all clearing being done in the eurozone. Something which the UK fought against successfully from inside the EU but would be powerless to prevent outside the EU.
Coupled with the UKs current attitude the EU could tilt towards New York centers for this business with a more level relationship with a new Biden presidency's.
Don't forget this is the EUs gift to give.
Not London's nor Boris.0 -
Wow I just came across this:
However, from late 2022 onwards, visitors from countries with visa-free agreements with the EU (including the UK)will not be able to enter the Schengen Area with only their passports. The EU Commission has confirmed that UK citizens will need to pay a fee to visit Europe and will need to complete the online ETIAS application form before setting off.
https://www.etiasvisa.com/etias-news/etias-visa-how-will-it-affect-uk-citizens
So after Dec. 31st they will lose their European health cards, are recommended to plan 4 months in advance for taken a pet to the EU, the guarantee of free mobile phone roaming throughout the EU, Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway will end.
If taking their taking their own car they might also need a ‘green card’ or valid proof of insurance and a GB sticker.
I also take it that after Dec. 31st all car registration plates will need to change.
It's all this small, every day stuff that people don't seem to be seeing affecting their lives.
People will be really upset with the first point of having to pay a fee and fill out forms to enter the EU for a vacation.0 -
You mean the same car industry in Germany that stated already back in 2017 that while UK is important they fully support the single market first? While the numbers may be similar in trade in value the difference is on the EU side it's split 27 ways; on the UK side they take the full hit of it. Hence EU loses about 8% export, UK loses 50%.
Secondly remember UK wanted full unfettered access to the single market with full equalliance for services while not paying into the budget; they are going to fall very short of that. They are going to lose direct access to the Interpol database which Scotland Yard has already stated will have a devastating effect on their ability to get information, they will not be able to use the fast track lanes at EU airports etc. The only question will be how many billions are UK going to be paying for what ever access they get; we already know they will be paying (Will Boris paint a new buss?) and the dispute now is how much and for how much worse of a deal by comparison.
Brexit will be a 100% failure; no economist anywhere has made a serious claim for it being a success. As for London; they will now be competing with New York and Singapore directly because were as London previously had a benefit of being in EU they are now just another third party country. If anything there's no real reason for EU countries to go to London anymore which will diminish their value even further now that there's full competition on the finance market again which was not the case previously. London has lost what was it's competitive advantage of being in the EU; now they are simply just another country out there.
First of all I understand completely that the potential EU loss on exports is split among 27 members. The likes of Romania or Latvia may be sanguine about Brexit but tell that to Irish farmers who are still heavily reliant on beef and cheese exports to the UK and for whom tariffs would be devastating. Or tell that to individual car makers in Germany who will lose billions in car sales each when the market is already very weak due to COVID. If you do not think that some governments such as Ireland, Germany, France, Belgium and Holland are not under fierce pressure to do a trade deal with the UK then you do not understand the real world.
Secondly you state that "Brexit will be a 100% failure". That is a sweeping statement. Define Brexit for a start. And also define failure. Brexit was never an economic movement. It was always an expression of English nationalism. If you speak to these English nationalists then they already regard "Brexit" as a 100% success. They do not care about the economic impact.
In the same way that you could argue that Scotland becoming independent will likely lead to economic upheaval and downturn there, at least in the short term. But to Scottish nationalists it will be a 100% success, regardless of the economic ramifications.0 -
Advertisement
-
Wow I just came across this:
However, from late 2022 onwards, visitors from countries with visa-free agreements with the EU (including the UK)will not be able to enter the Schengen Area with only their passports. The EU Commission has confirmed that UK citizens will need to pay a fee to visit Europe and will need to complete the online ETIAS application form before setting off.
https://www.etiasvisa.com/etias-news/etias-visa-how-will-it-affect-uk-citizens
So after Dec. 31st they will lose their European health cards, are recommended to plan 4 months in advance for taken a pet to the EU, the guarantee of free mobile phone roaming throughout the EU, Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway will end.
If taking their taking their own car they might also need a ‘green card’ or valid proof of insurance and a GB sticker.
I also take it that after Dec. 31st all car registration plates will need to change.
It's all this small, every day stuff that people don't seem to be seeing affecting their lives.
People will be really upset with the first point of having to pay a fee and fill out forms to enter the EU for a vacation.
Does the NI protocol state how this is managed in Ireland? E.G Will people in the North need to fill this application when they visit the South?0
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement