Off Topic UK / EU Future

Tariffs are likely to be a much smaller issue than currency fluctuations which companies have to deal with the effect all the time. There is bound to be some unnecessary concerns raised, many for political purposes rather than business issues. All products will have the necessary tariff applied and once in the system will automatically be calculated by the freight forwarders. Once a company has become a 'trusted trader' border checks become a rarity.

 

Yes think we know all that.

Tariffs are the big issue.... the rest will get sorted.... the uncertainty is really hitting his business... as it has many others... for economic reasons

 

Allowing that you are a self proclaimed expert on such matters you will, presumably, have no difficulty in naming some countries which actually export to Britain under the bottom line of WTO rules. As it stands the UK. already has preferential trade agreements with around 50 non EU. countries - allowing that these include countries like South Korea (rather than the Democratic Republic of the Congo) they are with our most important trading partners - meaning that the WTO rules trade must be rather small. All of these would be lost on day 1 of a hard Brexit - meaning that WTO rules, which presently apply to a minute amount of British trade, would suddenly cover the whole package. If there were no advantage whatsoever in these preferential trade agreements then why were they made in the first place ? Britain will be playing 'catch up' for years trying to get back to the conditions it has now.

 

Yes ant that is why we will have up to ten years of shrinkage in our economy..... again as predicted both Govt and independent sources.

It is completely beyond me how hard Brexiters can seem to just discount this killing fact.....

 

Q: How many countries in the world trade on only WTO terms? A: None The UK could become the first.

 

A poll published by Sky today is interesting.
If there were a second referendum with 3 options : Government deal; No deal and Remain in the EU the results are:
Remain 48%
No Deal 27%
Govt Deal 13%
In the second round you eliminate the bottom one and distribute second preferences; results:
Remain 59%
No Deal 41%

So after 2 years of fruitless arguing and faffing about the governments deal attracts on 1 in 8 people - half that for no deal.

As one of our posters here says "let the people decide". They narrowly told us leave was their preference when they were told doing a deal would be quick and simple and good for the UK. Now we see the facts let them have the choice about the real situation.
Good for democracy that.

 

I fear for a country in which 41% of the pop. vote for no deal with our biggest trading partner

 

Deutche Bank has now moved half of it's euro dealing operation to Frankfurt. About 8% of the trades are now done in Germany, while a year ago they were all being done in London. Frankfurt seems to be the big winner in attracting the financial institutions with nine announcing they will go there, with others splitting between Paris, Madrid and Dublin. Others are still to announce where they will locate to. Of course this was just project fear.

 

They did decide in the referendum. They voted to leave the EU.

 

Most of the UK's trade is with non EU countries. There are well tried and tested systems in place to ensure trading is carried out in a smooth and efficient manner. If the EU's attitude is one of obstructing a decent trade deal these same systems can be employed for trade with the EU until they come to their senses.

 

Overtaken by events I would say. It is now clear that the government cannot agree what is now on offer. It is certainly nothing like the promises that were given to the voters before they voted.

 

Most of the UK's trade is with countries which have preferential trade agreements with the EU. (which is why they are carried out in a smooth and efficient manner) all of which will be lost on leaving.

 

A no deal will deliver the previously acknowledged benefits of Brexit. No large sums going to Brussels, control of borders, end to mass immigration and sovereignty.

 

There is nothing to stop these countries rolling over the trade agreements on leaving.

 

A no deal was never an option. A bespoke deal that would not harm trade was offered.

 

A no deal was always an option especially after Cameron was sent packing. I'm sure a common sense approach will eventually be demanded by current EU exporters via their own governments.

 

Have you not noticed that companies within the EU place far more value on keeping their single market intact rather than deal with a small country. They would like to do both, but if it come down to a choice they know which side their bread is buttered.

 

At last you have it right 'an end to sovereignty' in your own words

 

The lack of reforms in France has ensured very little trade from the city has relocated there. It would have always been expected that other minor sectors would take a smidgen of the city's business.

We require May not to mess up future trading by making sure all legal controls by the EU /ECJ are removed. The city has a unique position as the dominant financial centre, this will not change after Brexit.

 

Was Cameron sent packing before the referendum? No. Brexit was promised to be easy, simple and a good deal.
Why are brexiters so fearful of hearing what the people want now - given a real choice not a range of everything to all people?