Who's Been Running The United States?
News1 min ago
Surely Even The More Ardent Brexiteer Understood That This Would Happen?
When you're outside a trading bloc that you used to be inside, you're gonna have to pay tariffs for produce, goods and services.
Surely?
https:/
Surely?
https:/
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by sp1814. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Of course the UK should be treated as any other non-EU country. Anybody believing otherwise needs to wise up. The tragedy is that the country has not made the most of the opportunities presented by Brexit but there have, of course, been one or two other matters which have diverted our attention.
If the EU had a modicum of integrity (and common sense) it would quickly negotiate a free trade deal with the UK which does not involve political oversight of its affairs. That's what normal countries do. But the EU cannot by any stretch be considered "normal." The important thing is that the UK can now revert to being a normal country, along with the 160-odd other non-EU nations.
If the EU had a modicum of integrity (and common sense) it would quickly negotiate a free trade deal with the UK which does not involve political oversight of its affairs. That's what normal countries do. But the EU cannot by any stretch be considered "normal." The important thing is that the UK can now revert to being a normal country, along with the 160-odd other non-EU nations.
Of Course we are aware but these things are unnecessary. Both sides can do it or not do it, I suggest the latter. The problem is that the EUSSR is still having a hissy fit because we left their club. Why do remoaners always portray these things as a one side issue? We can both do it. It doesn't help France, Germany et al if we stick tariffs on does it? So lets all accept we have divorced and start cooperating, we could call it the common market......hang on!
NJ
The free trade agreements that Johnson had as an option were:
Swiss option: Multiple bilateral deals
Ukraine option: Deep and Comprehensive Trade Area
Canada option: A comprehensive economic and trade agreement
The Swiss option is not viable because Switzerland has a bespoke arrangement with the EU, based on more than 120 bilateral agreements developed over the last two decades.
The Swiss have tariff-free trade with the EU and limited access to the EU Single Market for services. In return, however, the Swiss accept free movement of people and comply with the EU’s regulations in relation to the parts of the Single Market they access, without having a say on what those rules look like.
That wouldn't work.
The Ukraine option is not viable because it "provides for nearly-full access to the Single Market through a special arrangement designed as a potential first step towards full EU membership".
The Canada option might be the best solution - but it too might have issues for the ardent Brexiteer. It allows tariff-free trade with the Single Market for industrial goods and some agricultural produce but very limited access for services.
Canada does not have to comply with the EU’s regulations, but there is mutual recognition where each side accepts the other countrie’s regulations for market access to some services. It can lead its own trade policy but that means customs controls and compliance with the “rules of origin” checks.
That last part would be a problem for the UK.
This was from:
https:/
The free trade agreements that Johnson had as an option were:
Swiss option: Multiple bilateral deals
Ukraine option: Deep and Comprehensive Trade Area
Canada option: A comprehensive economic and trade agreement
The Swiss option is not viable because Switzerland has a bespoke arrangement with the EU, based on more than 120 bilateral agreements developed over the last two decades.
The Swiss have tariff-free trade with the EU and limited access to the EU Single Market for services. In return, however, the Swiss accept free movement of people and comply with the EU’s regulations in relation to the parts of the Single Market they access, without having a say on what those rules look like.
That wouldn't work.
The Ukraine option is not viable because it "provides for nearly-full access to the Single Market through a special arrangement designed as a potential first step towards full EU membership".
The Canada option might be the best solution - but it too might have issues for the ardent Brexiteer. It allows tariff-free trade with the Single Market for industrial goods and some agricultural produce but very limited access for services.
Canada does not have to comply with the EU’s regulations, but there is mutual recognition where each side accepts the other countrie’s regulations for market access to some services. It can lead its own trade policy but that means customs controls and compliance with the “rules of origin” checks.
That last part would be a problem for the UK.
This was from:
https:/
TTT
There are no tariffs or non-tariff barriers to trade between the members of the customs union and (unlike a free-trade area) members of the customs union impose a common external tariff on all goods entering the union.
That's from all countries outside the EU. Nothing to do with hissy fits. It's simply a benefit of being in a trading bloc, and a downside of being outside that bloc. These tariffs were in place whilst we were in the EU- we just didn't pay them, nor did we complain about them - because they didn't affect the UK.
Now they do.
There are no tariffs or non-tariff barriers to trade between the members of the customs union and (unlike a free-trade area) members of the customs union impose a common external tariff on all goods entering the union.
That's from all countries outside the EU. Nothing to do with hissy fits. It's simply a benefit of being in a trading bloc, and a downside of being outside that bloc. These tariffs were in place whilst we were in the EU- we just didn't pay them, nor did we complain about them - because they didn't affect the UK.
Now they do.
TTT
"We and they should do a free trade agreement tomorrow".
Why?
Why should the UK have the benefit of a free trade agreement?
Only Vietnam, Japan, Canada and Singapore have negotiated FTAs with the EU but in exchange for bilateral agreement on tariffs the EU has specified economic and trade objectives...so which model would be acceptable to the Brexiteers?
FTAs don't just happen...they have to be negotiated.
Except those that are..."oven-ready".
"We and they should do a free trade agreement tomorrow".
Why?
Why should the UK have the benefit of a free trade agreement?
Only Vietnam, Japan, Canada and Singapore have negotiated FTAs with the EU but in exchange for bilateral agreement on tariffs the EU has specified economic and trade objectives...so which model would be acceptable to the Brexiteers?
FTAs don't just happen...they have to be negotiated.
Except those that are..."oven-ready".
//The Swiss option is not viable because Switzerland has a bespoke arrangement with the EU, based on more than 120 bilateral agreements developed over the last two decades.//
It's also not very advisable because the EU is seeking to railroad the Swiss into an all-enveloping treaty and ditch the multiple bilateral agreements. The EU doesn't like them because it gives the Swiss the opportunity to tailor their affairs with the EU to suit their own purposes.
https:/
The EU will not negotiate a proper trade deal with the UK because it will insist on political and economic interference. All a trade deal needs to concentrate on is common standards for the goods traded.
It's also not very advisable because the EU is seeking to railroad the Swiss into an all-enveloping treaty and ditch the multiple bilateral agreements. The EU doesn't like them because it gives the Swiss the opportunity to tailor their affairs with the EU to suit their own purposes.
https:/
The EU will not negotiate a proper trade deal with the UK because it will insist on political and economic interference. All a trade deal needs to concentrate on is common standards for the goods traded.
sp: "Why should the UK have the benefit of a free trade agreement?" - once again, there are 2 sides, why did you not ask
"Why should the EUSSR have the benefit of a free trade agreement?" - the answer is the same, it's good for us both, like it or not UK is the EUSSR's best customer. Ask the Business world if they'd like a free trade agreement.
"Why should the EUSSR have the benefit of a free trade agreement?" - the answer is the same, it's good for us both, like it or not UK is the EUSSR's best customer. Ask the Business world if they'd like a free trade agreement.
> 'Get rid of the *** tariffs' to aid pubs and make Brexit work, says Wetherspoons CEO
> TIM MARTIN, Chairman of UK's leading pub chain Wetherspoons, has slammed the Government for mishandling Brexit, causing more chaos to the economy, a news report has revealed.
The article doesn't say what tariffs Martin wants to get rid of. They may or may not be EU tariffs, who knows, but if they are then Martin isn't blaming the EU, he's blaming our Government which he calls "just as protectionist as the EU".
Yeah, Tim, guess what? Even after we've taken back control, you are not in control ...
> TIM MARTIN, Chairman of UK's leading pub chain Wetherspoons, has slammed the Government for mishandling Brexit, causing more chaos to the economy, a news report has revealed.
The article doesn't say what tariffs Martin wants to get rid of. They may or may not be EU tariffs, who knows, but if they are then Martin isn't blaming the EU, he's blaming our Government which he calls "just as protectionist as the EU".
Yeah, Tim, guess what? Even after we've taken back control, you are not in control ...
NJ
A trade deal between the UK and the EU would have to be agreed and ratified by all 27 member states. In negotiation terms it'd be as big a screw up as the last set of negotiations.
And it would most certainly include a clause on the NI protocol.
TTT - a free trade agreement doesn't just happen. It takes YEARS of negotiations. What is the point of a trading bloc that ratifies FTAs with third country?
The point of a trading bloc is frictionless trade. Now we have friction-full trade.
A trade deal between the UK and the EU would have to be agreed and ratified by all 27 member states. In negotiation terms it'd be as big a screw up as the last set of negotiations.
And it would most certainly include a clause on the NI protocol.
TTT - a free trade agreement doesn't just happen. It takes YEARS of negotiations. What is the point of a trading bloc that ratifies FTAs with third country?
The point of a trading bloc is frictionless trade. Now we have friction-full trade.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.