Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
For a start, I don't think that there will be tariffs because the EU would be the big losers due to their very healthy trade surplus with the UK. However, if tariffs are imposed then the UK will retaliate. It would be political suicide not to do so.
I don't know the ins and outs of the WTO agreements but I do know that the USA regularly targets certain countries with tariffs so I don't see why the UK could not. Furthermore, there are plenty of non-tariff barriers that could be used. I recall a time when the French made all Japanese video recorders go to a facility in Poitiers to be 'tested'.
But, in any event, trade agreements are a huge red herring. You do not need a trade agreement to do business whether it be goods or services. What you need are the right skills or the right product at a competitive price.
The other question is why has it got to this point? The EU risks losing the fifth biggest economy in the world and the second biggest contributor to their budget and why? Because they were unwilling to sit around a table and make some serious concessions? The EU is in need of reform. Too many back-room politicians like Junckers playing games, too many countries like Greece or Spain with their hands out for free money and too many new entrants too quick. Don't imagine that Germany are going to be happy to pick up the tab for everyone else.
The EU needs an existential crisis because it is still a 1960s solution to a 1930s problem. It needs some serious reform but it doesn't have the institutions to make that happen. So you get Brexit.
You, and others, appear to put inordinate stress on the fact that the UK is the 5th largest economy in the world.
There's another way of looking at that, the EU way. Approximately 50% of UK trade is non EU, so from an EU perspective the UK is the 5th largest economy minus 50%, which coincidently puts it between 10th & 11th placed Canada and South Korea. You always need to be able to walk in the other side's shoes.
Remember, in Europe the UK is viewed with suspicion. It was asked but refused to be a founding member of the EC&SC. Then changed it's mind and sought admission, but was vetoed by de Gaulle. Now on the eve of the vote, the leavers appear to expect the EU to coming running after them with carrots. Don't be surprised if that doesn't happen.
Fifty years on de Gaulle's objections look less and less like personal foible, and more like principled stand.
My prediction is that, if the UK votes to leave, there will be another round of negotiations, a new deal and a new vote.
That would be political suicide for both the Conservative Party and their European partners. I don't see that happen. Especially when one considers what the UK wants.
WTO members agreed to reduce or eliminate tariffs and other barriers to trade. Every member agreed on a minimum standard granted to all the other members. To ensure that there is no discrimination, the WTO introduced a principle called most favoured nation (MFN) principle.
It means that countries generally can't discriminate between their trading partners, even though various exceptions exist. One of those exceptions are preferential trade agreements. The EU is one of those preferential trade agreements. This exception allows the UK to discriminate other WTO member states (those that have to pay tariffs) in favour of EU member states that don't have to pay tariffs.
If the UK decides to leave the EU there is no legal basis for discriminating all the other WTO members. The UK would be legally obliged to introduce tariffs for products from the EU. Just like the EU would be obliged to introduce tariffs for British products. Otherwise they are subject to dispute settlement.
Now, both the UK and the EU could decide that they still want to be on good terms and unilaterally remove all tariffs. At this point MFN would kick in again and would require them to eliminate all tariffs for all the other WTO members.
As you can see, it's not about the UK and the EU willingly starting a tariff war. It would happen automatically when the British people decide to leave the EU.
As to why the whole ordeal started? Well, I'm a bit tired of that discussion. It's a chicken or the egg causality dilemma. I could easily say that the EU doesn't care since the UK wouldn't remain the world's fifth biggest economy after Brexit and that EU budget contributions are not really relevant considering their relatively low amount compared to domestic budget contributions. Why is it always the remaining 27 remaining member states that have to sit around a table and make some serious concessions? Why not the UK? Why is it only the UK that is unwilling to bring their benefits system in line with ECJ judgments? Why is it the UK that is maintaining one of the biggest lobbies in Brussels encouraging such backroom deals?
Frankly, I can't see any good reasons for leaving the EU besides some vague Trump-esque "Make Great Britain Great Again" slogans. Do we need change for the better? Sure, that's always good. But at this point I'm still struggling to understand or even make out the proposals of Brexit politicians. There doesn't seem to be a plan besides "You'll see, it will all be better afterwards".
WTO members agreed to reduce or eliminate tariffs and other barriers to trade. Every member agreed on a minimum standard granted to all the other members. To ensure that there is no discrimination, the WTO introduced a principle called most favoured nation (MFN) principle.
It means that countries generally can't discriminate between their trading partners, even though various exceptions exist. One of those exceptions are preferential trade agreements. The EU is one of those preferential trade agreements. This exception allows the UK to discriminate other WTO member states (those that have to pay tariffs) in favour of EU member states that don't have to pay tariffs.
If the UK decides to leave the EU there is no legal basis for discriminating all the other WTO members. The UK would be legally obliged to introduce tariffs for products from the EU. Just like the EU would be obliged to introduce tariffs for British products. Otherwise they are subject to dispute settlement.
Now, both the UK and the EU could decide that they still want to be on good terms and unilaterally remove all tariffs. At this point MFN would kick in again and would require them to eliminate all tariffs for all the other WTO members.
As you can see, it's not about the UK and the EU willingly starting a tariff war. It would happen automatically when the British people decide to leave the EU.
As to why the whole ordeal started? Well, I'm a bit tired of that discussion. It's a chicken or the egg causality dilemma. I could easily say that the EU doesn't care since the UK wouldn't remain the world's fifth biggest economy after Brexit and that EU budget contributions are not really relevant considering their relatively low amount compared to domestic budget contributions. Why is it always the remaining 27 remaining member states that have to sit around a table and make some serious concessions? Why not the UK? Why is it only the UK that is unwilling to bring their benefits system in line with ECJ judgments? Why is it the UK that is maintaining one of the biggest lobbies in Brussels encouraging such backroom deals?
Frankly, I can't see any good reasons for leaving the EU besides some vague Trump-esque "Make Great Britain Great Again" slogans. Do we need change for the better? Sure, that's always good. But at this point I'm still struggling to understand or even make out the proposals of Brexit politicians. There doesn't seem to be a plan besides "You'll see, it will all be better afterwards".
As to why the whole ordeal started? Well, I'm a bit tired of that discussion. It's a chicken or the egg causality dilemma. I could easily say that the EU doesn't care since the UK wouldn't remain the world's fifth biggest economy after Brexit and that EU budget contributions are not really relevant considering their relatively low amount compared to domestic budget contributions. Why is it always the remaining 27 remaining member states that have to sit around a table and make some serious concessions? Why not the UK? Why is it only the UK that is unwilling to bring their benefits system in line with ECJ judgments? Why is it the UK that is maintaining one of the biggest lobbies in Brussels encouraging such backroom deals?
If they're really that aggrieved why is it that the rest of the EU is so desperate to keep the UK in the EU ?
The reality is without the strong British economy all that's left to bail out the rest is Germany and even the German taxpayers are getting tired of this.
The game is very nearly up.Even without Brexit the EU experiment is doomed. Brexit will simply speed up the inevitable end.
If they're really that aggrieved why is it that the rest of the EU is so desperate to keep the UK in the EU ?
The reality is without the strong British economy all that's left to bail out the rest is Germany and even the German taxpayers are getting tired of this.
The game is very nearly up.Even without Brexit the EU experiment is doomed. Brexit will simply speed up the inevitable end.
Well, the EU didn't seem to be very desperate considering the deal Cameron got...
In any case, there are more than enough healthy and wealthy economies left... And it's very unlikely the EU will collapse after Brexit... But whatever. I'm not here to convince you or anyone else.
Initially I just wanted to ask for the latest post-Brexit plans. But no one seems to have an answer for that.
Initially I just wanted to ask for the latest post-Brexit plans. But no one seems to have an answer for that.
The reason for a lack of answer is that we (British public and quite probably the 'Out' politicians too) don't really know.
There is a dearth of info on what will happen, quite a few assumptions, guesses and hopes/fears but very little that's concrete. What we do get inspires skepticism rather than confidence in me at least. As for others, well... people after all will believe what they want in the end.
With regards to what will happen if/when we stay in the EU? Same as normal I presume.
If they're really that aggrieved why is it that the rest of the EU is so desperate to keep the UK in the EU ?
The reality is without the strong British economy all that's left to bail out the rest is Germany and even the German taxpayers are getting tired of this.
The game is very nearly up.Even without Brexit the EU experiment is doomed. Brexit will simply speed up the inevitable end.
Latest clutch of polls shows support for Brexit on the rise. If the EU is such a good thing then it is doing a terrible job of persuading the average person.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
