BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴
Comments
-
Jez mon wrote:Surrey Commuter wrote:What does everybody think about the Nissan deal? Assuming they export £10bn each year and the tariff is set at 10% then we have just spent 3 hospitals on one foreign car firm. Or if 40,000 jobs were at stake we could have paid them £25k a year to sit at home.
They reckon UK car exports are worth £25bn - to compensate them all we would need to put the basic rate of tax up 1%. That is just one industry. Add up all the promises to carry on paying everybody in receipt of EU grants and it starts to look worrying.
I know May can only play the cards she was dealt but we are starting to look phenomenally bad at negotiating.
Depends on what the tariff is set at doesn't it! If I'm reading it correctly the government has signed a blank cheque though?
Be interesting to compare the costs of this handout to the potential costs of stepping in Port Talbot or Redcar?
the worrying point is that is could be an annual blank cheque with no end date0 -
Surrey Commuter wrote:KingstonGraham wrote:What are the terms of the deal?
They are refusing to release the details but have assured Nissan that they will be no worse off post-Brexit. You can see how much they export to the EU and the widely touted figure of 10% as the likely tariff.
If Nissan haven't got it in writing, then good luck with that after a change of government.
If they have got it in writing, then it will come out because every car maker will get the same.0 -
The tariff was only one point of contention.
The other issue is wage differentials. British workers have taken an effective 15% pay cut compared to Eurozone workers, so paying workers the same number of pounds while selling cars at the same number of Euros makes UK an attractive place to base operations. If the low pound is the "new normal" then car makers will want to keep business here until inflation pressures push UK wages up to parity with Eurozone wages. That could take 5-10 years. Why build new plant in Europe at great cost when developing existing UK plant is cheaper for the foreseeable future.
Tariffs would need to be 10% or higher to offset the wage benefits of the low pound. Nissan did a very canny deal if they can get out of tarrifs even in the short term.0 -
mrfpb wrote:The tariff was only one point of contention.
The other issue is wage differentials. British workers have taken an effective 15% pay cut compared to Eurozone workers, so paying workers the same number of pounds while selling cars at the same number of Euros makes UK an attractive place to base operations. If the low pound is the "new normal" then car makers will want to keep business here until inflation pressures push UK wages up to parity with Eurozone wages. That could take 5-10 years. Why build new plant in Europe at great cost when developing existing UK plant is cheaper for the foreseeable future.
Tariffs would need to be 10% or higher to offset the wage benefits of the low pound. Nissan did a very canny deal if they can get out of tarrifs even in the short term.
So you think there is no way that Nissan were ever going to leave and the Govt has potentially handed over billions per year to the car industry.
I disagree they had no intention of relocating because the lifecycle of a car production line is several years so I doubt they would base a decison on the current exchange rate.
Would you agree it does not bode well for their future dealings with other industries and the EU?0 -
KingstonGraham wrote:Surrey Commuter wrote:KingstonGraham wrote:What are the terms of the deal?
They are refusing to release the details but have assured Nissan that they will be no worse off post-Brexit. You can see how much they export to the EU and the widely touted figure of 10% as the likely tariff.
If Nissan haven't got it in writing, then good luck with that after a change of government.
If they have got it in writing, then it will come out because every car maker will get the same.
May sent one of her monkeys to Japan to hand deliver the letter to the Nissan Board0 -
A couple of points:Surrey Commuter wrote:KingstonGraham wrote:What are the terms of the deal?
They are refusing to release the details but have assured Nissan that they will be no worse off post-Brexit. You can see how much they export to the EU and the widely touted figure of 10% as the likely tariff.
1. If the EU and UK both impose import tariffs on cars then what we would charge EU companies to import cars into the UK could potentially fund any cost. However there is more to it than just tariffs as mentioned above.
2. Given that Canada has just agreed the CETA deal with the EU that takes down to nil the import duty on cars, it is not entirely unreasonable to expect that the UK can cut a similar deal with the EU in this area of trade."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
When you factor in the cost of payroll taxes etc in some countries, the differential could be even greater.mrfpb wrote:The tariff was only one point of contention.
The other issue is wage differentials. British workers have taken an effective 15% pay cut compared to Eurozone workers, so paying workers the same number of pounds while selling cars at the same number of Euros makes UK an attractive place to base operations. If the low pound is the "new normal" then car makers will want to keep business here until inflation pressures push UK wages up to parity with Eurozone wages. That could take 5-10 years. Why build new plant in Europe at great cost when developing existing UK plant is cheaper for the foreseeable future.
Tariffs would need to be 10% or higher to offset the wage benefits of the low pound. Nissan did a very canny deal if they can get out of tarrifs even in the short term."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Surrey Commuter wrote:KingstonGraham wrote:Surrey Commuter wrote:KingstonGraham wrote:What are the terms of the deal?
They are refusing to release the details but have assured Nissan that they will be no worse off post-Brexit. You can see how much they export to the EU and the widely touted figure of 10% as the likely tariff.
If Nissan haven't got it in writing, then good luck with that after a change of government.
If they have got it in writing, then it will come out because every car maker will get the same.
May sent one of her monkeys to Japan to hand deliver the letter to the Nissan Board
I know, but that could be specific or general. We'll find out.0 -
Surrey Commuter wrote:mrfpb wrote:The tariff was only one point of contention.
The other issue is wage differentials. British workers have taken an effective 15% pay cut compared to Eurozone workers, so paying workers the same number of pounds while selling cars at the same number of Euros makes UK an attractive place to base operations. If the low pound is the "new normal" then car makers will want to keep business here until inflation pressures push UK wages up to parity with Eurozone wages. That could take 5-10 years. Why build new plant in Europe at great cost when developing existing UK plant is cheaper for the foreseeable future.
Tariffs would need to be 10% or higher to offset the wage benefits of the low pound. Nissan did a very canny deal if they can get out of tarrifs even in the short term.
So you think there is no way that Nissan were ever going to leave and the Govt has potentially handed over billions per year to the car industry.
I disagree they had no intention of relocating because the lifecycle of a car production line is several years so I doubt they would base a decison on the current exchange rate.
Would you agree it does not bode well for their future dealings with other industries and the EU?
The life cycle of a car model is 5-10 years, which is probably the same length of time it would take pay to equalise. Yes, I don't think they intended to move production, but made noises to get commitments on tariffs, which worked. Why would they develop expensive production plant in the Eurozone when they have already established production lines in the UK operated by a cheaper workforce.
I would agree that it does not bode well for the government's dealings with other industries as every time the Gov't make a deal, it ties the hands of negotiators - it pushes them more and more into a position where they must restrict tariffs and the EU team know this. Of course this may push the gov't to a point where it is more sympathetic to single market access above restricting immigration, which wouldn't be a bad thing.0 -
mrfpb wrote:Surrey Commuter wrote:mrfpb wrote:The tariff was only one point of contention.
The other issue is wage differentials. British workers have taken an effective 15% pay cut compared to Eurozone workers, so paying workers the same number of pounds while selling cars at the same number of Euros makes UK an attractive place to base operations. If the low pound is the "new normal" then car makers will want to keep business here until inflation pressures push UK wages up to parity with Eurozone wages. That could take 5-10 years. Why build new plant in Europe at great cost when developing existing UK plant is cheaper for the foreseeable future.
Tariffs would need to be 10% or higher to offset the wage benefits of the low pound. Nissan did a very canny deal if they can get out of tarrifs even in the short term.
So you think there is no way that Nissan were ever going to leave and the Govt has potentially handed over billions per year to the car industry.
I disagree they had no intention of relocating because the lifecycle of a car production line is several years so I doubt they would base a decison on the current exchange rate.
Would you agree it does not bode well for their future dealings with other industries and the EU?
The life cycle of a car model is 5-10 years, which is probably the same length of time it would take pay to equalise. Yes, I don't think they intended to move production, but made noises to get commitments on tariffs, which worked. Why would they develop expensive production plant in the Eurozone when they have already established production lines in the UK operated by a cheaper workforce.
I would agree that it does not bode well for the government's dealings with other industries as every time the Gov't make a deal, it ties the hands of negotiators - it pushes them more and more into a position where they must restrict tariffs and the EU team know this. Of course this may push the gov't to a point where it is more sympathetic to single market access above restricting immigration, which wouldn't be a bad thing.
If given a choice between hard brexit and no brexit which would you chose?0 -
Stevo 666 wrote:
A couple of points:Surrey Commuter wrote:KingstonGraham wrote:What are the terms of the deal?
They are refusing to release the details but have assured Nissan that they will be no worse off post-Brexit. You can see how much they export to the EU and the widely touted figure of 10% as the likely tariff.
1. If the EU and UK both impose import tariffs on cars then what we would charge EU companies to import cars into the UK could potentially fund any cost. However there is more to it than just tariffs as mentioned above.
2. Given that Canada has just agreed the CETA deal with the EU that takes down to nil the import duty on cars, it is not entirely unreasonable to expect that the UK can cut a similar deal with the EU in this area of trade.
Interesting- I have always seen tariffs as a tax on the consumer (like VAT). I wonder if the man on the street will be so keen to stick it to Brussels when they realise they will be the ones footing the bill. It will also push inflation still higher.
we could of course put no tariffs on everything.0 -
My blog: http://www.roubaixcycling.cc (kit reviews and other musings)
https://twitter.com/roubaixcc
Facebook? No. Just say no.0 -
the challenge of Brexit is the Northern/Southern Ireland border and Gibraltar
there are pros and cons for all the other views on the economy etc but no one seems to be able to explain what will happen over these issues.0 -
Clearly no tariffs is the better option. The CETA agreement shows it can be (largely) achieved - without any trade offs re: freedom of movement of people.Surrey Commuter wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:
A couple of points:Surrey Commuter wrote:KingstonGraham wrote:What are the terms of the deal?
They are refusing to release the details but have assured Nissan that they will be no worse off post-Brexit. You can see how much they export to the EU and the widely touted figure of 10% as the likely tariff.
1. If the EU and UK both impose import tariffs on cars then what we would charge EU companies to import cars into the UK could potentially fund any cost. However there is more to it than just tariffs as mentioned above.
2. Given that Canada has just agreed the CETA deal with the EU that takes down to nil the import duty on cars, it is not entirely unreasonable to expect that the UK can cut a similar deal with the EU in this area of trade.
Interesting- I have always seen tariffs as a tax on the consumer (like VAT). I wonder if the man on the street will be so keen to stick it to Brussels when they realise they will be the ones footing the bill. It will also push inflation still higher.
we could have course put no tariffs on everything."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Stevo 666 wrote:
Clearly no tariffs is the better option. The CETA agreement shows it can be (largely) achieved - without any trade offs re: freedom of movement of people.Surrey Commuter wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:
A couple of points:Surrey Commuter wrote:KingstonGraham wrote:What are the terms of the deal?
They are refusing to release the details but have assured Nissan that they will be no worse off post-Brexit. You can see how much they export to the EU and the widely touted figure of 10% as the likely tariff.
1. If the EU and UK both impose import tariffs on cars then what we would charge EU companies to import cars into the UK could potentially fund any cost. However there is more to it than just tariffs as mentioned above.
2. Given that Canada has just agreed the CETA deal with the EU that takes down to nil the import duty on cars, it is not entirely unreasonable to expect that the UK can cut a similar deal with the EU in this area of trade.
Interesting- I have always seen tariffs as a tax on the consumer (like VAT). I wonder if the man on the street will be so keen to stick it to Brussels when they realise they will be the ones footing the bill. It will also push inflation still higher.
we could have course put no tariffs on everything.
It's not going to happen Stevo. Canada isn't in Europe.0 -
mamba80 wrote:the challenge of Brexit is the Northern/Southern Ireland border and Gibraltar
there are pros and cons for all the other views on the economy etc but no one seems to be able to explain what will happen over these issues.
You will have to enlighten me as to why these are a major problem for us - most of the issue seems to be for southern Ireland which cynically I see as being their problem0 -
Surrey Commuter wrote:mamba80 wrote:the challenge of Brexit is the Northern/Southern Ireland border and Gibraltar
there are pros and cons for all the other views on the economy etc but no one seems to be able to explain what will happen over these issues.
You will have to enlighten me as to why these are a major problem for us - most of the issue seems to be for southern Ireland which cynically I see as being their problem
According to Hague, Spain may true to use the negotiations as an opportunity to claim joint sovereignty over Gibraltar. How realistic that is, I don't know.
Also reading a bit more about the Canada deal, it seems that it isn't all confirmed yet...seven years and counting...You live and learn. At any rate, you live0 -
Jez mon wrote:Surrey Commuter wrote:mamba80 wrote:the challenge of Brexit is the Northern/Southern Ireland border and Gibraltar
there are pros and cons for all the other views on the economy etc but no one seems to be able to explain what will happen over these issues.
You will have to enlighten me as to why these are a major problem for us - most of the issue seems to be for southern Ireland which cynically I see as being their problem
According to Hague, Spain may true to use the negotiations as an opportunity to claim joint sovereignty over Gibraltar. How realistic that is, I don't know.
Also reading a bit more about the Canada deal, it seems that it isn't all confirmed yet...seven years and counting...
Gibraltar is very minor compared to all the other issues - what am I missing (assuming i don't care if we own them or not)0 -
Surrey Commuter wrote:mamba80 wrote:the challenge of Brexit is the Northern/Southern Ireland border and Gibraltar
there are pros and cons for all the other views on the economy etc but no one seems to be able to explain what will happen over these issues.
You will have to enlighten me as to why these are a major problem for us - most of the issue seems to be for southern Ireland which cynically I see as being their problem
Put a hard border up between Catholic communities in Ulster and Eire and you'd be faced with renewed nationalism. How extreme this might end up being is anyone's guess, but if sectarian violence is re-ignited, it wouldn't just be their problem.0 -
Having been a frequent visitor to NI (Mrs Bomp is from there) for a long time, it strikes me that one of the major drivers of (relative, it's still a long way from perfect) harmony is that the "Olde Eire" that Nationalists hankered for and Unionists hated has disappeared - neither NI nor the republic are the same places they used to be, and they have grown closer together.finchy wrote:Put a hard border up between Catholic communities in Ulster and Eire and you'd be faced with renewed nationalism. How extreme this might end up being is anyone's guess, but if sectarian violence is re-ignited, it wouldn't just be their problem.
In most places the border is little more than slight changes in how the road signs look. "Hardening" it again looks very likely to stir up trouble.
(and, not for the first time recently, good honest Unionist Ulstermen I know are seriously considering getting Irish passports...)0 -
Jez mon wrote:Surrey Commuter wrote:mamba80 wrote:the challenge of Brexit is the Northern/Southern Ireland border and Gibraltar
there are pros and cons for all the other views on the economy etc but no one seems to be able to explain what will happen over these issues.
You will have to enlighten me as to why these are a major problem for us - most of the issue seems to be for southern Ireland which cynically I see as being their problem
According to Hague, Spain may true to use the negotiations as an opportunity to claim joint sovereignty over Gibraltar. How realistic that is, I don't know.
Why should I be bothered if Gibraltar isn't British anymore? Genuine question.0 -
Surrey Commuter wrote:mamba80 wrote:the challenge of Brexit is the Northern/Southern Ireland border and Gibraltar
there are pros and cons for all the other views on the economy etc but no one seems to be able to explain what will happen over these issues.
You will have to enlighten me as to why these are a major problem for us - most of the issue seems to be for southern Ireland which cynically I see as being their problem
It's more a problem for the EU, I'd say.
The UK and Irish governments could easily work together to stop UK folk migrating to the UK mainland via Ireland and Northern Ireland, so there's no reason for the UK to insist on a hard border. However, without a border (to impose customs checks even if not to restrict people) what's to stop stuff being exported from the UK to the single market tariff and restriction free via NI and Ireland?
The answer is "nothing", so the EU will have to choose between imposing its customs union and risking a flare up of sectarian violence (*) as even just customs checks could cause major delays / impositions on folk going about their business.
I'm sure Ireland, the UK and the EU can work something out that is sensible, so long as all parties approach such discussions looking to work together rather than punish anyone or teach anyone a lesson (or whatever the WU's current favourite threat is).
(*) If one believes this is a risk - like all Brexit "scares" it has to be taken with a pinch of salt.0 -
KingstonGraham wrote:
Why should I be bothered if Gibraltar isn't British anymore? Genuine question.
I don't necessarily think anyone should. Aside from that people who want to live there want it to remain British...
If was to take a punt though, I would imagine the people who were drawn in by the "take back control" narrative, would not want to give back control of a potentially important Naval base at the entrance to the Med.You live and learn. At any rate, you live0 -
Not sure about that - there's a pretty strong isolationist, fingers-in-the-ears-and-shut-the-world-out mentality going on here. They'd want the drawbridge pulled up a lot closer to home.Jez mon wrote:I would imagine the people who were drawn in by the "take back control" narrative, would not want to give back control of a potentially important Naval base at the entrance to the Med.0 -
Don't see what location has to do with it. If the EU prepared to do that sort of deal with Canada, why not with the UK?finchy wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:
Clearly no tariffs is the better option. The CETA agreement shows it can be (largely) achieved - without any trade offs re: freedom of movement of people.Surrey Commuter wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:
A couple of points:Surrey Commuter wrote:KingstonGraham wrote:What are the terms of the deal?
They are refusing to release the details but have assured Nissan that they will be no worse off post-Brexit. You can see how much they export to the EU and the widely touted figure of 10% as the likely tariff.
1. If the EU and UK both impose import tariffs on cars then what we would charge EU companies to import cars into the UK could potentially fund any cost. However there is more to it than just tariffs as mentioned above.
2. Given that Canada has just agreed the CETA deal with the EU that takes down to nil the import duty on cars, it is not entirely unreasonable to expect that the UK can cut a similar deal with the EU in this area of trade.
Interesting- I have always seen tariffs as a tax on the consumer (like VAT). I wonder if the man on the street will be so keen to stick it to Brussels when they realise they will be the ones footing the bill. It will also push inflation still higher.
we could have course put no tariffs on everything.
It's not going to happen Stevo. Canada isn't in Europe."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Stevo 666 wrote:
Don't see what location has to do with it. If the EU prepared to do that sort of deal with Canada, why not with the UK?finchy wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:
Clearly no tariffs is the better option. The CETA agreement shows it can be (largely) achieved - without any trade offs re: freedom of movement of people.Surrey Commuter wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:
A couple of points:Surrey Commuter wrote:KingstonGraham wrote:What are the terms of the deal?
They are refusing to release the details but have assured Nissan that they will be no worse off post-Brexit. You can see how much they export to the EU and the widely touted figure of 10% as the likely tariff.
1. If the EU and UK both impose import tariffs on cars then what we would charge EU companies to import cars into the UK could potentially fund any cost. However there is more to it than just tariffs as mentioned above.
2. Given that Canada has just agreed the CETA deal with the EU that takes down to nil the import duty on cars, it is not entirely unreasonable to expect that the UK can cut a similar deal with the EU in this area of trade.
Interesting- I have always seen tariffs as a tax on the consumer (like VAT). I wonder if the man on the street will be so keen to stick it to Brussels when they realise they will be the ones footing the bill. It will also push inflation still higher.
we could have course put no tariffs on everything.
It's not going to happen Stevo. Canada isn't in Europe.
I really don't think Finchy is referring to geographical location, he's not that daft, it's about the relationships starting point and the direction of travel of that relationship. Canada are looking for closer ties where as we are heading the other way and trying to extricate ourselves from a lot more than trade ties.0 -
Jez mon wrote:KingstonGraham wrote:
Why should I be bothered if Gibraltar isn't British anymore? Genuine question.
I don't necessarily think anyone should. Aside from that people who want to live there want it to remain British...
If was to take a punt though, I would imagine the people who were drawn in by the "take back control" narrative, would not want to give back control of a potentially important Naval base at the entrance to the Med.
I can see why Nelson needed a base at the entrance to the Med but can't see the relevance today.
I still think that and the threat of sectarian violence in Ireland are irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. I say give them both back and save a few quid.0 -
Surrey Commuter wrote:Jez mon wrote:KingstonGraham wrote:
Why should I be bothered if Gibraltar isn't British anymore? Genuine question.
I don't necessarily think anyone should. Aside from that people who want to live there want it to remain British...
If was to take a punt though, I would imagine the people who were drawn in by the "take back control" narrative, would not want to give back control of a potentially important Naval base at the entrance to the Med.
I can see why Nelson needed a base at the entrance to the Med but can't see the relevance today.
I still think that and the threat of sectarian violence in Ireland are irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. I say give them both back and save a few quid.
It doesnt matter what you or i think, a resurgent Continuity IRA is not good for the UK what-so-ever and a hard border there is very bad news, plays right into the hands of the Nationalists and brexit means a hard border, how else could the UK control anything without such?
I ve lost friends over there and i d not like others to suffer.
i agree on Gib though, however, the rest of the UK might not (after all, we went to war over a few Islands 1000s of miles away in 1982)
Spain will be able to wring what ever it likes from the UK as i m sure they ll have a veto on any final deal the UK gets, will be difficult to sell to a pro brexit electorate.0 -
High Court rules tomorrow at 10 on Article 50 case.0
-
Surrey Commuter wrote:Jez mon wrote:KingstonGraham wrote:
Why should I be bothered if Gibraltar isn't British anymore? Genuine question.
I don't necessarily think anyone should. Aside from that people who want to live there want it to remain British...
If was to take a punt though, I would imagine the people who were drawn in by the "take back control" narrative, would not want to give back control of a potentially important Naval base at the entrance to the Med.
I can see why Nelson needed a base at the entrance to the Med but can't see the relevance today.
I still think that and the threat of sectarian violence in Ireland are irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. I say give them both back and save a few quid.
Geopolitics is more important than a lot of us suspect, I'm starting to believe.
Reading an interesting book about that at the moment - https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/178396 ... MM9QKTXK9P0
