Merged Now What?

[MikeG]

If you think UK will be better off not having a disproportionally massive contributor to the taxes, that's your prerogative.......

Could you expand on this, as I have no idea what you mean.

 

[The Don]

Plenty of countries trade perfectly well with the EU without free trade agreements, and it may be the price of a free trade arrangement is just too high.

You're right, they do but whether they do the same volume of "invisible" trade that we do is another matter. Our trade surplus in services is considerable (IIRC £20bn a year) and a lack of a free trade agreement would likely have a bigger impact on that than on the trade in goods.

By way of an example, the problem my company will find itself in if we are outside the EEA. Currently we can provide people to work on German clients because, as we're in the EU, our clients do not have to demonstrate that there isn't a German (or EU) worker that can do the job. Our people are good and out skills are high but it's likely that our German clients will find the extra couple of hundred euro per person per day and get an EU worker than go through the hoops to retain our services - or at least a proportion likely will from the early conversations I've so far had.

It's not quite the same as shipping widgets and paying the 3%.

Likewise with financial services. Frankfurt in particular has long been eyeing London enviously. Any opportunity (currently denied under EU rules) to make life difficult for Brits selling financial services into the EU will be pounced upon.

 

[Lothian]

It is worth pointing out that there isn't a free market in financial services in the EU. UK insurance companies, for instance, can't sell insurance directly in Berlin or Bratislava or wherever.

Is there no end to the lies you tell about the EU? Of course UK businesses can supply financial and Insurance services throughout the EU. The same works the other way. Read the small print in your insurance contracts. You may be surprised!
It happens through passporting. However we would lose that ability on Brexit unless a new deal can be arranged.

Of course you don't have to believe me see what the ABI say.
"Membership of the EU guarantees British insurers the right to do business in 27 other countries on an equal footing. The UK gains from this arrangement, selling more in insurance and long-terms savings products to the rest of the EU than they sell to us"

 

[GlennB]

It is worth pointing out that there isn't a free market in financial services in the EU. UK insurance companies, for instance, can't sell insurance directly in Berlin or Bratislava or wherever.

Our house+contents here in Greece is insured with a British company. We took that route as their cover includes earthquakes, which was specifically excluded with Greek insurers.

 

[McHrozni]

Could you expand on this, as I have no idea what you mean.

The rich pay more taxes than the poor, both proportionately and in absolute terms. If you chase them away to some other country (or impoverish them), they will no longer pay those taxes. Therefore UK will have less taxes to work with. If you consider having fewer rich people a benefit that outstrips the loss incurred by lower tax receipts, that's your prerogative.

McHrozni

 

[MikeG]

.......Likewise with financial services. Frankfurt in particular has long been eyeing London enviously. Any opportunity (currently denied under EU rules) to make life difficult for Brits selling financial services into the EU will be pounced upon.

There are certainly freedoms and benefits, but we don't have a free market in financial services in the EU. As I said previously, UK insurance companies can't sell insurance directly in Europe, and I suspect it is vice versa. I fully accept your assessment. I am fairly sure though that the costs of membership of the single market will outweigh the benefits, and that we'll end up out.

-

I've got a house to build. Catch you later.....

 

[The Don]

I get that a lot.

"Mutually beneficial low tarrifs" do sound attractive, but the benefits of tarrifs, low or high, are a matter of judgement by each party. Unless one assumes that low tarrifs are in principle mutually beneficial, in which case we're doing the best we can with none at all as currently pertains, then the level that's mutually beneficial will necessarily become subject to contention.

Remember that lawyers and diplomats will be involved, and contention is always to their mutual benefit.

Tariffs are only a part of it.

I provide services to the EU. Many countries have rules that say that to employ a non-EU person there has to be no-one in the country (or from the EU) who could fill that role. The time and expense of proving that has provided a successful bulwark against Indian service providers and it would likely be the same for the UK were we outside.

3% tariffs are irrelevant if you cannot get a foot in the door.

 

[Lothian]

There are certainly freedoms and benefits, but we don't have a free market in financial services in the EU. As I said previously, UK insurance companies can't sell insurance directly in Europe, and I suspect it is vice versa[/I.

As I said earlier, you are lying. I even provided a link showing you were lying. No doubt you will carry on lying about this, apologies if I keep pointing out that you are lying.

While you may not be lying about about suspecting EU companies can not sell insurance to the UK you are again wrong. I have had a number of insurance contracts with EU businesses who do not have a UK presence. You probably do as well without realising it. Again read the ABI link I provided in post 1023 then stop lying4brexit

 

[The Don]

There are certainly freedoms and benefits, but we don't have a free market in financial services in the EU. As I said previously, UK insurance companies can't sell insurance directly in Europe, and I suspect it is vice versa. I fully accept your assessment. I am fairly sure though that the costs of membership of the single market will outweigh the benefits, and that we'll end up out.

-

I've got a house to build. Catch you later.....

Depends who does the calculations. If they're having their ears bent by the likes of James Dyson who wants to be able to import his vacuum cleaners into the UK a little more cheaply then they might come to that conclusion.

If they can somehow work out the proportion of the £20+ bn trade surplus in services that's at risk then perhaps they'll come to a different conclusion.

There are too many unknowns to come to a complete and accurate figure. For example, many people in the UK clearly think of the fee movement of people as a "cost" of membership, others think that it's a net benefit. Various figures have been bandied around but for businesses like mine who currently rely on being able to get quick access to skilled people from the EU, losing that ability and having to go through the same, or similar, hoops we have to in order to get people from outside the EU would place a cost on my business.

 

[GlennB]

There are certainly freedoms and benefits, but we don't have a free market in financial services in the EU. As I said previously, UK insurance companies can't sell insurance directly in Europe, and I suspect it is vice versa. I fully accept your assessment. I am fairly sure though that the costs of membership of the single market will outweigh the benefits, and that we'll end up out.

I posted at the same time as you so it's understandable you missed my comment. But Lothian showed your claim to be wrong well before that. In case you have him on ignore here's the link and quote he supplied:

Of course you don't have to believe me, see what the ABI say.

"Membership of the EU guarantees British insurers the right to do business in 27 other countries on an equal footing. The UK gains from this arrangement, selling more in insurance and long-terms savings products to the rest of the EU than they sell to us"

 

[Ambrosia]

Trade with Britain is about 5% of all EU (sans UK) exports, whereas exports to EU amount to 56% of British exports. Who do you think has the upper hand anyway?

You might want to check that you are comparing like with like. It's not as though the EU is monolithic trade entity. As a whole the UK might import 5% of EU exports, but that isn't an evenly spread 5%, we trade much more with some countries rather than others. e.g. Germany.

Germany is a lot of the financial muscle that's currently propping up Greece, there are other EU states too with lets say 'fragile' economic situations.

in 2015 Germany exported 89bn Euro of stuff to the UK and imported 38bn Euro.

How badly will Germany feel the pinch if we don't get a mutually beneficial trade deal post Brexit?

This is one of the main reasons why Brexit is inherently a bad idea. Free movement of goods aside, the cornerstones of British economy are existentially linked to the treaties with the EU.

The EU has only been a thing for a relatively short time. It'll take a lot of time and negotiation but we can remake all of the treaties.
We'll lose in some areas, we'll gain in others. It's not like the entire country is going to cease to exist when we leave the EU.

In the longer term (20+ years) the EU is turning into a "United States of Europe" kind of federation. They will be announcing what they'll be spending money on for the next 7 years very soon, and that is expected to contain plans for an EU army, amongst other things. Little by little the EU is accumulating more power and control over the member states.

I think that if we don't like the direction the EU is heading, then it's less painful to leave sooner rather than later, or worse, deal with the aftermath of some unforseen events causing the EU to breakup while we're still a member.

It just shows how poorly thought out the Brexitard position is. UK will come out weaker, practically regardless of what happens.

You seem suffer the same condition that most politicians do. Unable to think longer term than 1 election cycle.

 

[McHrozni]

You might want to check that you are comparing like with like. It's not as though the EU is monolithic trade entity. As a whole the UK might import 5% of EU exports, but that isn't an evenly spread 5%, we trade much more with some countries rather than others. e.g. Germany.

It's about 8% of German exports. Significant, but nowhere near 56% for UK.

How badly will Germany feel the pinch if we don't get a mutually beneficial trade deal post Brexit?

Less so than the already unimpressive export percentages suggest. Germany stands to gain a lot of business moving from London City to Frankfurt. Given the numbers involved, one could argue Germany could end up better off, especially since their industry is getting short on workers.

The EU has only been a thing for a relatively short time. It'll take a lot of time and negotiation but we can remake all of the treaties.

Sure. But the time works against UK. That's one of the points behind A50.

We'll lose in some areas, we'll gain in others. It's not like the entire country is going to cease to exist when we leave the EU.

UK won't cease to exist, but I do wonder where you see noteworthy gains.

In the longer term (20+ years) the EU is turning into a "United States of Europe" kind of federation. They will be announcing what they'll be spending money on for the next 7 years very soon, and that is expected to contain plans for an EU army, amongst other things. Little by little the EU is accumulating more power and control over the member states.

That's a good thing.

I think that if we don't like the direction the EU is heading, then it's less painful to leave sooner rather than later, or worse, deal with the aftermath of some unforseen events causing the EU to breakup while we're still a member.

It depends on the deal UK gets. If it's Norwegian style deal (ostensibly the only one where UK gets to keep the bank passport intact), it ends up with almost all the downsides of being in the EU and gives up many of the upsides.

You seem suffer the same condition that most politicians do. Unable to think longer term than 1 election cycle.

UK just voted itself out of the largest economic bloc in the world against advice of every reputable economic expert, advice from allies both within the bloc and outside of it (US) and in line with wishes of their enemies (Russia, ISIS), it stands to lose what made it's economy powerful for good and I'm the one who doesn't think more than 1 election cycle ahead?

McHrozni

 

[Aepervius]

and that is expected to contain plans for an EU army, amongst other things

Yeah people not understanding how the treaty works and not understanding what the EU can or cannot do by treaty, keep stating that. Naturally the fact that it is untrue and would require a treaty change does not seem to faze them. But it casts doubt on anything they say about EU or one of its country, since they can't get basic fact rights.

 

[Lothian]

The EU has only been a thing for a relatively short time. It'll take a lot of time and negotiation but we can remake all of the treaties.

I for one am really hoping that my 2 trips a year to EU funded meetings to meet with the other Member States will now be 54 a year. Unfortunately I don't think the Treasury will buy it.

 

[Lothian]

In case you have him on ignore here's the link and quote he supplied:

Of course, and MikeG in case you have Glenn on ignore. In between your consecutive lies that UK insurers can't insure in the EU he posted

Our house+contents here in Greece is insured with a British company. We took that route as their cover includes earthquakes, which was specifically excluded with Greek insurers.


But what if he has us both on ignore

 

[Aepervius]

Of course, and MikeG in case you have Glenn on ignore. In between your consecutive lies that UK insurers can't insure in the EU he posted

Our house+contents here in Greece is insured with a British company. We took that route as their cover includes earthquakes, which was specifically excluded with Greek insurers.


But what if he has us both on ignore

Probably not. But I doubt he has all of us on ignore.

 

[angrysoba]

My understanding is that the EU have "four freedoms" of goods, workers, capital and services. In that case, surely financial services are included under these rules.

 

[catsmate]

On one of these threads (it's a bit of a mess now with the different topics) it was suggested that while there is nothing in the treaty to allow you to withdraw your resignation there's nothing that doesn't either. In that case legal opinion suggests that yes it could be stopped. Although I guess that's not conclusive.

Correct. I quoted from, and linked to, the House of Lords report.

Yeah, it'll have to, even if it is just for the really basic stuff like naming their negotiating teams, assigning office space, and timetabling meetings. There doesn't have to be any substance discussed.

No, actually they don't.

<snip>and there is nothing in the rules that allows you back out once you've triggered it.

Legal experts disagree with your opinion.

I think giving up on free trade of goods would be okay - I think mutually beneficial low tariffs could be negotiated fairly swiftly on goods.

I think politicians are more worried about the financial services and trading done by the City of London in the EU. European countries all want a bigger slice of that action and I suspect the EU will play hardball in the negotiations over it.

And if the EU requires free movement of goods and people as a condition?

Why would you presume that? No, you're wrong. I mean stay out of the single market altogether. It isn't complicated.

No it's not complicated. Enormously stupid, yes. Economically disastrous, obviously.
But not complicated.

Could you expand on this, as I have no idea what you mean.

I believe he's referring to the value to the UK economy and tax take of the financial services sector.

 

[Lothian]

My understanding is that the EU have "four freedoms" of goods, workers, capital and services. In that case, surely financial services are included under these rules.

YES!!!

 

[catsmate]

You're right, they do but whether they do the same volume of "invisible" trade that we do is another matter. Our trade surplus in services is considerable (IIRC £20bn a year) and a lack of a free trade agreement would likely have a bigger impact on that than on the trade in goods.

By way of an example, the problem my company will find itself in if we are outside the EEA. Currently we can provide people to work on German clients because, as we're in the EU, our clients do not have to demonstrate that there isn't a German (or EU) worker that can do the job. Our people are good and out skills are high but it's likely that our German clients will find the extra couple of hundred euro per person per day and get an EU worker than go through the hoops to retain our services - or at least a proportion likely will from the early conversations I've so far had.

It's not quite the same as shipping widgets and paying the 3%.
Exactly. Simplistic answers just won't do.

Likewise with financial services. Frankfurt in particular has long been eyeing London enviously. Any opportunity (currently denied under EU rules) to make life difficult for Brits selling financial services into the EU will be pounced upon.

Oh believe me, the knives are being sharpened; Dublin, Paris, Frankfurt and Amsterdam are all making plans for new business.