Brexit discussion thread XIII (Please read OP before posting)

prawnsambo

salonfire wrote: »

Once people are familiar with the process to export to the EU, it will become more streamlined. No delays reported today.

Brexit is going as I feared, the UK is going to gain a lot of advantages with fewer costs.

When others costs are imposed on business - rates, insurance, parental leave, increasing minimum wage - business absorbs and adapts and don't just pull down the shutters. The same will be for additional export costs.

The EU rolled over like a puppy, giving them tariff free access and kicked the Services can down the road allowing the UK to continue with services as well.

So much for nothing is agreed until every thing is agreed.

There have been no delays because there's the square root of feck all moving. But a good few trucks turned back at Dover and Holyhead this morning because of insufficient paperwork. We'll see how it develops, but a lot of businesses in the UK will find it very expensive to continue to export.

ancapailldorcha

salonfire wrote: »

Once people are familiar with the process to export to the EU, it will become more streamlined. No delays reported today.

Brexit is going as I feared, the UK is going to gain a lot of advantages with fewer costs.

When others costs are imposed on business - rates, insurance, parental leave, increasing minimum wage - business absorbs and adapts and don't just pull down the shutters. The same will be for additional export costs.

The EU rolled over like a puppy, giving them tariff free access and kicked the Services can down the road allowing the UK to continue with services as well.

So much for nothing is agreed until every thing is agreed.

This is just conjecture, sloganeering and wishful thinking.

The EU got everything it wanted from LPF to no hard border in Ireland to a financial settlement on outstanding money owed.

You assume that businesses have capacity to just absorb infinite costs as long as they are Brexit-related because Brexit is good and any costs imposed as a result are justified as a result. Large businesses and corporations will be fine, quel surprise but smaller and medium-sized businesses will be feeling the pinch in a big way, particularly ones involved in exporting time and/or temperature-sensitive goods which will now languish in lorry parks.

Whenever I see language like "The EU rolled over like a puppy", my hackles are raised. Can you specify what advantages the UK has gained?

Finance was kicked down the road to avoid financial ruin on both sides. The UK now exports financial services on WTO terms, a big loss IMO.

yagan

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Whenever I see language like "The EU rolled over like a puppy", my hackles are raised. Can you specify what advantages the UK has gained?

I reckon there's a few brexiters boasting about offloading Northern Ireland onto the EU.

Professor Moriarty

salonfire wrote: »

Once people are familiar with the process to export to the EU, it will become more streamlined. No delays reported today.

Brexit is going as I feared, the UK is going to gain a lot of advantages with fewer costs.

When others costs are imposed on business - rates, insurance, parental leave, increasing minimum wage - business absorbs and adapts and don't just pull down the shutters. The same will be for additional export costs.

The EU rolled over like a puppy, giving them tariff free access and kicked the Services can down the road allowing the UK to continue with services as well.

So much for nothing is agreed until every thing is agreed.

Not so sure about that. Jan 4th could be a wake up call.

CelticRambler

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I do think there may be a risk of the Swiss situation with multiple bilateral treaties ...

According to everything I've read, the risk is zero - the EU said ages ago "never again" because the multiple treaties with Switzerland have been an absolute pain in head, neck, ar5e and every other metaphorical body part. In recent decades, they've been consolidating the (?200) treaties with Switzerland into a more manageable dozen or so; and the mandate for drafting an FTA with the UK was set up from the beginning as "nothing is agreed until everything is agreed".

That's exactly what the Christmas Eve document provided for, and the ERG/clones/respawns will find out in due course just how narrow is their freedom to diverge from the EU's blueprint without sacrificing the few benefits they've managed to retain.

ancapailldorcha

CelticRambler wrote: »

According to everything I've read, the risk is zero - the EU said ages ago "never again" because the multiple treaties with Switzerland have been an absolute pain in head, neck, ar5e and every other metaphorical body part. In recent decades, they've been consolidating the (?200) treaties with Switzerland into a more manageable dozen or so; and the mandate for drafting an FTA with the UK was set up from the beginning as "nothing is agreed until everything is agreed".

That's exactly what the Christmas Eve document provided for, and the ERG/clones/respawns will find out in due course just how narrow is their freedom to diverge from the EU's blueprint without sacrificing the few benefits they've managed to retain.

I know the UK wanted to do negotiations with multiple treaties but the EU insisted on just the one.

I know the EU are keen to avoid a repeat of the Swiss situation but I don't see it getting anywhere near that bad. I think we're going to see the UK opt into various things over the next few years and there being a few bilateral agreements being made.

Ultimately, we'll just have to wait and see but I can't see there being any desire on either side for a mess of treaties. It remains to be seen how the Department of International Trade performs at negotiating deals as well.

salonfire

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

You assume that businesses have capacity to just absorb infinite costs as long as they are Brexit-related because Brexit is good and any costs imposed as a result are justified as a result. Large businesses and corporations will be fine, quel surprise but smaller and medium-sized businesses will be feeling the pinch in a big way,

New costs are imposed on business all the time. Employer PRSI is due to increase under this Government and not a word is mentioned about it anywhere. Not to mention whenever there are increases of fuel, insurance, rates, employee rights, health and safety requirements, etc.

But new export costs on a UK business is a calamity?

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

particularly ones involved in exporting time and/or temperature-sensitive goods which will now languish in lorry parks.

If paperwork is in order, why would there be delays?
But yes, it could be the case those businesses may no longer be viable. But other businesses will be created at the same time just like business always evolves.

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Finance was kicked down the road to avoid financial ruin on both sides. The UK now exports financial services on WTO terms, a big loss IMO.

The EU had four years with an apparently weak opponent who was on the back foot. They could not diverge from London in those four years? What's going to change between now and next six months? After a soft deal on Goods, I have every reason to expect a soft deal on Services or further can-kicking. Thus the UK continues to trade without the obligations.

ancapailldorcha

salonfire wrote: »

New costs are imposed on business all the time. Employer PRSI is due to increase under this Government and not a word is mentioned about it anywhere. Not to mention whenever there are increases of fuel, insurance, rates, employee rights, health and safety requirements, etc.

But new export costs on a UK business is a calamity?

No, they're not. The examples you give have been staples for decades. Small changes are expected from time to time but introducing disruption at the last minute is not, hence the significant risk.

salonfire wrote: »

If paperwork is in order, why would there be delays?
But yes, it could be the case those businesses may no longer be viable. But other businesses will be created at the same time just like business always evolves.

The infrastructure, system and personnel are brand new, that's why. It's all been hastily cobbled together from scratch. Lorry drivers aren't sat about Kent for fun, they're there because they are stuck there. Businesses aren't complaining for no reason.

salonfire wrote: »

The EU had four years with an apparently weak opponent who was on the back foot. They could not diverge from London in those four years? What's going to change between now and next six months? After a soft deal on Goods, I have every reason to expect a soft deal on Services or further can-kicking. Thus the UK continues to trade without the obligations.

I'll infer that because you haven't listed any advantages the UK has gained you do not know of any. The EU is happy with its regulations for the most part or they'd have been changed. Continuity is good as it gives individuals and businesses constancy. Why might they need to diverge?

prawnsambo

salonfire wrote: »

New costs are imposed on business all the time. Employer PRSI is due to increase under this Government and not a word is mentioned about it anywhere. Not to mention whenever there are increases of fuel, insurance, rates, employee rights, health and safety requirements, etc.

But new export costs on a UK business is a calamity?

Because they apply to EVERY export. There are no economies of scale to be had for a SME. Employers PRSI increases are a fixed cost and can be absorbed. But costs that affect the selling price directly will have direct consequences for competitiveness. Extra hoops to jump through will also have competitiveness issues for importers who may just turn to EU suppliers for ease of access reasons.

salonfire wrote: »

If paperwork is in order, why would there be delays?
But yes, it could be the case those businesses may no longer be viable. But other businesses will be created at the same time just like business always evolves.

Big if. It's delays that are the most costly. Yes, business evolves, but with a shrinking market, it will start to eat itself.

salonfire wrote: »

The EU had four years with an apparently weak opponent who was on the back foot. They could not diverge from London in those four years? What's going to change between now and next six months? After a soft deal on Goods, I have every reason to expect a soft deal on Services or further can-kicking. Thus the UK continues to trade without the obligations.

Divergence has already happened. Over £1 trillion of assets had left London by the end of 2019. I'm sure it's more now.

Professor Moriarty

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

No, they're not. The examples you give have been staples for decades. Small changes are expected from time to time but introducing disruption at the last minute is not, hence the significant risk.



The infrastructure, system and personnel are brand new, that's why. It's all been hastily cobbled together from scratch. Lorry drivers aren't sat about Kent for fun, they're there because they are stuck there. Businesses aren't complaining for no reason.



I'll infer that because you haven't listed any advantages the UK has gained you do not know of any. The EU is happy with its regulations for the most part or they'd have been changed. Continuity is good as it gives individuals and businesses constancy. Why might they need to diverge?

50,000+ Custom Agents. That cost alone is a pure loss.

CelticRambler

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I think we're going to see the UK opt into various things over the next few years and there being a few bilateral agreements being made.

It's more likely that these'll be a straight forward opt-in-for-a-fee agreements, on things like Horizon (already done), Erasums (the Scots might go it alone on that one - I think education is one of the devolved competences, isn't it?), various industry-wide databases, etc. There'll be no negotiating with the UK as to how the programmes are developed or governed; it'll be a straightforward access-and-abide-by-our-rules type membership as offered to other third countries.

joeysoap

paul71 wrote: »

Yeap, only ourselves and Portugal on GMT now.

And the canary Islands. Outside the EU a few more ie south africa

sandbelter

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Now they are a third country, so any issues regarding trade problems should be about as newsworthy as trade with Canada or Japan, and less newsworthy as trade with the US or Russia

In 2021 Turkey's confrontation with Greece is going absorb far more of the EU's attention, I've had a close family friend get his Greek call up papers in the Christmas new year gap, he's never lived in Greece but is getting on the plane to go.

I think Brexiit has distracted us from this. De Gaulle was right and it's time now for us to move on now and focus on the current real issues facing the EU. The threat to the the rule of law in the Eastern States EU and the Turkey's poor behavior would sit at the top of that list.

Sam Russell

salonfire wrote: »

New costs are imposed on business all the time. Employer PRSI is due to increase under this Government and not a word is mentioned about it anywhere. Not to mention whenever there are increases of fuel, insurance, rates, employee rights, health and safety requirements, etc.

But new export costs on a UK business is a calamity?



If paperwork is in order, why would there be delays?
But yes, it could be the case those businesses may no longer be viable. But other businesses will be created at the same time just like business always evolves.




The EU had four years with an apparently weak opponent who was on the back foot. They could not diverge from London in those four years? What's going to change between now and next six months? After a soft deal on Goods, I have every reason to expect a soft deal on Services or further can-kicking. Thus the UK continues to trade without the obligations.

One of the reasons for leaving the EU was written on the side os a big red bus - £350 million a week.

Now the UK has agreed to a customs setup that requires 50,000 customs officers, plus a cost to business to prepare the paperwork for C&E, plus a new C&E software suite that will be ready - well whenever (and they had four years to get it developed). The FT reckons this will cost GB£7 billion per year.

Now the net cost of the EU for the UK was reckoned at £9 billion when the contributions were netted off the receipts, so they have a net saving of GB£2 billion, before the additional costs of the various EU bodies like Euratom, EMA, EBA, etc. And that is before they have to pay to duplicate those services, probably at a cost close to the total cost for the EU of those services for 27 member states. |For example, it must cost much the same for the EMA to approve a medicine for the whole EU as it will cost the UK to do the same for itself.

I would think anyone who thinks it is a soft deal on goods must be soft in the head.

Brexit is a lose - lose event, but the losses for the UK will be huge. Just because the EU have yet to put the boot in is not to say they wont. Look at how quickly they reacted to the IMB fiasco.

We will see how it pans out, and if the Brexiteers get the opportunity to explain all the upsides of their new found freedom and sovereignty, we will all be interested in hearing them, after all they have had four years to determine them, but have kept very quiet about them.

Happy New Year.

tubercolossus

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Whenever I see language like "The EU rolled over like a puppy", my hackles are raised. Can you specify what advantages the UK has gained?

It's usually a reliable indicator of a bad-faith 'argument'. The other tell-tale phrase is "the EU folded/will fold like a cheap tent".

tubercolossus

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

50,000+ Custom Agents. That cost alone is a pure loss.

Or 50,000 NEW JOBS, looked at from a Brexiter perspective.

Nody

salonfire wrote: »

New costs are imposed on business all the time. Employer PRSI is due to increase under this Government and not a word is mentioned about it anywhere. Not to mention whenever there are increases of fuel, insurance, rates, employee rights, health and safety requirements, etc.

Except this is an additional 7.5 billion on top of all of that as well; did you miss earlier in this thread the number of companies that already stopped shipping to UK or UK shipping to NI for example? Did they do that for funzies?

But new export costs on a UK business is a calamity?

Yes because it's a risk vs. reward issue as well; if you make one mistake the fines and delays will eat up the profit of 100+ shipments to compensate. For bigger businesses that done this before it's an additional cost; for medium and small it's easy an show stopper.

If paperwork is in order, why would there be delays?

Well seeing how Switzerland has had this setup for over 40 years and I work for a major international company doing tens of thousands of shipments yearly I can tell you without any doubt it will not be in order 100% of the time and we know what we're doing with a dedicated team to handle it. Those orders that are not is what costs you a lot of extra money as a business and makes you take every step possible to avoid doing the shipments if you can and this is as a big international company.

But yes, it could be the case those businesses may no longer be viable. But other businesses will be created at the same time just like business always evolves.

And why did they not evolve while in EU then when they had better trade deals globally to use for their export?

The EU had four years with an apparently weak opponent who was on the back foot. They could not diverge from London in those four years?

You are aware that there are billions of contracts outstanding that go for 5+ years into the future right (we're talking currency swaps etc.)? Those type of contracts are now allowed to expire but are no longer allowed to be written in UK anymore.

What's going to change between now and next six months?

EU going through every type of service one by one and deciding if enough have moved and if not set a deadline for when it will expire. Keeping in mind as well London is now equal to NY or Singapore (actually NY and Singapore has better deals due to data privacy etc. due to other FTAs but hey) and hence they don't even need to look at EU alone but the world is a perfectly acceptable replacement from an EU perspective.

After a soft deal on Goods, I have every reason to expect a soft deal on Services or further can-kicking.

Except EU wanted a deal on goods because it benefits them; a deal on services not so much. EU will take the parts of services they need for now with a warning it will be time limited and EU can decide to shut down the service at any time and the scope of services will be shrinking; not expanding over the years.

Thus the UK continues to trade without the obligations.

Except the minor part of staying aligned with EU regulation without any say in it. And the additional cost to businesses. And the fact EU can cut them off from any service they feel like at any time. Or fishing being tied to UK not having to have rolling power outages. But yes, no obligations here, streets flowing with gold and honey.

Igotadose

So, besides the article posted earlier about the credit swaps business moving to the EU and now shippers not shipping to NI: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/brexit-northern-ireland-john-lewis-deliveries-b1780983.html

the consequences are starting to pile up. The swaps business moving, if indeed the bulk of it does, is a big loss to the City and will have ripple effects as swaps traders give up on London. The businesses not shipping to NI from GB is really going to hurt NI.

tubercolossus

Trying to keep up here, but the way I see it that makes sense to me is that all the other costs mentioned are across the board. Everyone has to deal with them. But the UK is now at a disadvantage - it's both more expensive and more time-consuming, with more paperwork and red tape, to export to, and from, the UK. Goodwill and long-standing ties are all very well, but business is business. If someone I deal with suddenly starts charging me a lot more, or vice versa, things are gonna change. That's when you start looking around for a new supplier.

Strazdas

tubercolossus wrote: »

Trying to keep up here, but the way I see it that makes sense to me is that all the other costs mentioned are across the board. Everyone has to deal with them. But the UK is now at a disadvantage - it's both more expensive and more time-consuming, with more paperwork and red tape, to export to, and from, the UK. Goodwill and long-standing ties are all very well, but business is business. If someone I deal with suddenly starts charging me a lot more, or vice versa, things are gonna change. That's when you start looking around for a new supplier.

An obvious solution for many EU companies would be simply to divert their trade away from GB (which can only be very bad for Britain).

yagan

Strazdas wrote: »

An obvious solution for many EU companies would be simply to divert their trade away from GB (which can only be very bad for Britain).

Yes, but they'll be rolling around in baths of sovereignty.

London no longer being a conduit for capital flow into and out of the EU will be the biggest business displacement.

Nody

tubercolossus wrote: »

Or 50,000 NEW JOBS, looked at from a Brexiter perspective.

Pfft, they don't need 50k new custom agents. Their new High Max system with drones, smart AI and cameras will sort them out in no order. They can actually reduce the number of custom agents and save more money!

peter kern

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

50,000+ Custom Agents. That cost alone is a pure loss.

i would think this is commnent resembles the 350 millions a week NHS bus math ...
those 7 billion that is being talked of will all stay entirely in the GB economy so thats certainly not a pure loss.i have no idea how much it will cost effectively but iam sure its not a pure loss.

Capt'n Midnight

prawnsambo wrote: »

There have been no delays because there's the square root of feck all moving. But a good few trucks turned back at Dover and Holyhead this morning because of insufficient paperwork. We'll see how it develops, but a lot of businesses in the UK will find it twitter.com/uk_domain_names/status/1344969443236081664?s=20
very expensive to continue to export.

RTE report 6 trucks sent back at Holyhead

BBC report the first ferry to arrive in Dublin from Holyhead had about 12 lorries on board.

Low numbers but that % will need to drop .

tubercolossus

peter kern wrote: »

i would think this is commnent resembles the 350 millions a week NHS bus math ...
those 7 billion that is being talked of will all stay entirely in the GB economy so thats certainly not a pure loss.i have no idea how much it will cost effectively but iam sure its not a pure loss.

The cost of hiring/training/paying for all these new positions is a cost to the British government. Whatever it costs it is money that won't now be spent elsewhere - such as the NHS, for instance. The fact that these people will be be paying taxes etc back to the government is sort of missing the point. It's like me writing off my car and consoling myself that the VAT on the repairs will offset my next VAT bill.

Professor Moriarty

peter kern wrote: »

i would think this is commnent resembles the 350 millions a week NHS bus math ...
those 7 billion that is being talked of will all stay entirely in the GB economy so thats certainly not a pure loss.i have no idea how much it will cost effectively but iam sure its not a pure loss.

You could argue that by taking some of these people from the dole queues you are mitigating the net cost of employing them. But I'm looking at it from a profit and loss perspective. 31st December, the UK does not employ 50,000 customs officers to facilitate trade. 1st January, the UK employs 50,000 customs officers to facilitate trade.

tubercolossus

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

I would think this thread will be very valid for quite some time. Just unfollow the thread if you think that it's done and dusted.

Yeah, none of us are running the country or anything; at least, I assume so. Makes no odds if some of us are still concerned with the ongoing, and it is ongoing, Brexit saga.

An Ciarraioch

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

RTE report 6 trucks sent back at Holyhead

BBC report the first ferry to arrive in Dublin from Holyhead had about 12 lorries on board.

Low numbers but that % will need to drop .

The 12 arriving in Dublin were all in order - no details of how many lorries actually went to Holyhead, so we can't calculate a % yet.

Professor Moriarty

tubercolossus wrote: »

Yeah, none of us are running the country or anything; at least, I assume so. Makes no odds if some of us are still concerned with the ongoing, and it is ongoing, Brexit saga.

Brexit has been discussed ad nauseam but the reality of Brexit hasn't yet happened.

CelticRambler

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

RTE report 6 trucks sent back at Holyhead

BBC report the first ferry to arrive in Dublin from Holyhead had about 12 lorries on board.

Low numbers but that % will need to drop .

Interesting bit of spin there on the BBC version - they report that the 12 lorries arriving cleared customs without any problems. Well ... duh! :rolleyes: If the problem loads were turned back at Holyhead before they even got on board, you'd expect the those that did travel had their paperwork in order! But hey, a win is a win, right? :pac:

I must say, I do feel a bit sorry for those unfortunate reporters whose editors told them they'd be spending New Year's Eve/Morning standing in a ferry port watching trucks drive onto and off a boat!