The economic consequences of Brexit

[davepoth]

jamoor said:

Yes,

How long will it take to get a car cleared through customs in say, Vietnam or Belize once it hits the dock if the vehicle was exported from the UK.

How long will it take a car to get cleared through Dutch customs in say, Zeebrugge once it hits the dock if the ship and vehicle came in from Hull?

Do you think both will take the same amount of time?

No, it'll take weeks and weeks and weeks to clear a car in Vietnam or Belize, but that's the nature of Vietnam and Belize. Developed nations do tend to have more efficient processes in place, as we do.

My understanding is that since all of the vehicles imported from outside the EU are covered by a type approval that was previously obtained, all that's needed is a declaration to customs that the vehicle matches that type approval and the vehicles will be released in a matter of hours as any general cargo might be.

http://www.dft.gov.uk/vca//vehicletype/ecwvta-fram...

[Garvin]

Regarding Nissan, do they not export their vehicles from Sunderland to non-EU counties already? If so, do they not already have the systems set up to deal with paperwork required to export to these countries? If so, will the additional paperwork cost to export to the EU following Brexit, if required, not be pretty insignificant? Is all this talk not just the proverbial hareng rouge?

[b2hbm]

As someone who knows absolutely nothing about the mechanics of import/export on a large scale I'd like to ask a question of those who do.

Why is this paperwork such a big deal ? If you want 1, 5, 10 or 50 bits of paper isn't that something that need every time and therefore you get a computer to spit it out for you ? Or maybe "electronic paperwork" where it's all emailed/whatever to the export country ?

I can understand the irritation if every consignment has a unique set of papers or if it needs to be written with quill pen on vellum, but surely paperwork these days is just clicking on "print" ?

That's a genuine question BTW, not an attempt to wind anyone up so I am interested in why it's such a big deal.

[JagLover]

don4l said:

jjlynn27 said:

It's not 'Fair point to some extent'. You were demonstrably, 100% wrong.

There are nine people on MPC and all of them voted to reduce rates. All of them infinitely more qualified for the job than you are. To suggest that all of them, if that's what you are suggesting, are desperate to reverse referendum decision is beyond stupid. Not surprising, but downright stupid.

I think that they were guided by that idiot, Carney.

Throughout history, when the Pound lost value, the resposnse was to increase rates. This time, they did the opposite.

Very odd.

Indeed

and people "far more qualified" than me have also been questioning that decision.

The position that we are in is that every single economic problem over the next few years will be attributed to Brexit, but the UK economy had fundamental problems before 23 June and then you add to that the impact of economic decisions made since (such as the 1/4 point rate cut and further QE)

Edited by JagLover on Monday 24th October 07:32

[JagLover]

Cobnapint said:

don'tbesilly said:

///ajd said:

Should be a bit more grateful.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/mark-carney-ba...

Really?
Time to go, the opposing view, and how he got it so wrong and continues to do so:

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/10/time-gloomy-m...

Sometime ago, Andrew Neil pointed out on one of his programmes what a dimwit he was.

He might look the part and sound a right clever dick, but when his words and decisions are back checked - things aren't so complementary.

The recent slash of interest rates to 0.25% was a totally flawed kneejerk reaction to something that hadn't actually happened.

All it's done is help keep house prices unnecessarily high, reduced returns on savings even further and narrowed his room for manoeuvre should the st really hit the fan.

The root of the problem

Carney said:

The policies are done by technocrats. We are not going to take instruction on our policies from the political side.

We elect our government, who chooses the "technocrats" and, failing Plato's enlightened despots, how do we ensure that they act in the interests of the people?

Edited by JagLover on Monday 24th October 07:31

[joscal]

This is interesting http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-tax-id...

[powerstroke]

Is Scotland still part of the UK or did they vote to leave ??
Just confused by the pillock on R4 telling us they voted to remain in the EU
or maybe he is confusing the UK with the EU....

[B'stard Child]

jamoor said:

Have you ever had a container scanned and the contents scrutinised when coming in from outside the EU?

Funny story - Place I worked at had a supply agreement with a plant in Columbia - just one key material which they couldn't source locally at a commercially viable price.

They stopped making the product and had 250 kgs of stock left over and asked if we could take it back - they paid for shipping

Can you imagine how long it took to get 250 Kgs of white powder from Columbia into the UK

It wasn't quick or easy and we got asked a lot of questions!!!!

[///ajd]

joscal said:

This is interesting http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-tax-id...

Cut corp tax from 20% to 10%?

That would slash tax take from £43Bn to £21Bn - a loss of well over £350m/week - just to stand still on passporting.

Edited by ///ajd on Monday 24th October 09:07

[sidicks]

///ajd said:

Cut corp tax from 20% to 10%?

That would slah tax take from £43Bn to £21Bn - a loss of well over £350m/week - just to stand still on passporting.

Really, there'd be no offsetting effects whatsoever?

No reduction in tax avoidance, no companies choosing to relocate here etc etc?

No increase from income tax (paid at a higher rate) as lower corporation tax leads to increased dividends?

[230TE]

sidicks said:

Really, there'd be no offsetting effects whatsoever?

No reduction in tax avoidance, no companies choosing to relocate here etc etc?

The only possible outcome for Britain is to remain in the EU. No other scenarios are allowed to be considered. It is obvious that reducing CT would only have bad effects, because not EU. Got that?

[///ajd]

230TE said:

sidicks said:

Really, there'd be no offsetting effects whatsoever?

No reduction in tax avoidance, no companies choosing to relocate here etc etc?

The only possible outcome for Britain is to remain in the EU. No other scenarios are allowed to be considered. It is obvious that reducing CT would only have bad effects, because not EU. Got that?

Did I say that?

Pretending spend that £350m ten times over like some SNP magic money tree is not the answer though is it?

Funny to see how £20Bn is nothing when it suits.

I'm aware reducing CT can have beneficial effects - thats why they are proposing it! It was the similarity with the red bus number that caught my eye. This kind of thing is not obvious to some readers

[PurpleMoonlight]

joscal said:

This is interesting http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-tax-id...

Oh, I like that.

Can we have that please?

[PurpleMoonlight]

///ajd said:

Cut corp tax from 20% to 10%?

That would slash tax take from £43Bn to £21Bn - a loss of well over £350m/week - just to stand still on passporting.

Edited by ///ajd on Monday 24th October 09:07

It's coming down to 17% anyway by 2020 so 10% is not that much of a fantasy.

We've had 0% and 10% corporation tax rate bands before now.

[Digga]

///ajd said:

230TE said:

sidicks said:

Really, there'd be no offsetting effects whatsoever?

No reduction in tax avoidance, no companies choosing to relocate here etc etc?

The only possible outcome for Britain is to remain in the EU. No other scenarios are allowed to be considered. It is obvious that reducing CT would only have bad effects, because not EU. Got that?

Did I say that?

Pretending spend that £350m ten times over like some SNP magic money tree is not the answer though is it?

Funny to see how £20Bn is nothing when it suits.

I'm aware reducing CT can have beneficial effects - thats why they are proposing it! It was the similarity with the red bus number that caught my eye. This kind of thing is not obvious to some readers

I don't see it that way. Rather I see it as a very significant and powerful bargaining tool. The high-tax-and-spend economies like France will be very concerned at the potential for passporting to suddenly become a lot less relevant than other cost considerations for a great many firms FS or non-FS alike.

This is a case of walk quietly, but carry a big stick.

[voyds9]

///ajd said:

joscal said:

This is interesting http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-tax-id...

Cut corp tax from 20% to 10%?

That would slash tax take from £43Bn to £21Bn - a loss of well over £350m/week - just to stand still on passporting.

Edited by ///ajd on Monday 24th October 09:07

Remind me what the corporation tax rate is in Ireland and why they did that.

[230TE]

///ajd said:

Did I say that?

Pretending spend that £350m ten times over like some SNP magic money tree is not the answer though is it?

Funny to see how £20Bn is nothing when it suits.

I'm aware reducing CT can have beneficial effects - thats why they are proposing it! It was the similarity with the red bus number that caught my eye. This kind of thing is not obvious to some readers

As I understand it, reducing CT to 10% wouldn't be politically possible if we remained in the EU. The Irish just about get away with 15% because it's a small economy. I think you were asking a while back for examples of how leaving the EU would give us more freedom. You're looking at one now.

Do you work for TfL? You seem to have a thing about red buses.

[sidicks]

///ajd said:

Did I say that?

Pretending spend that £350m ten times over like some SNP magic money tree is not the answer though is it?

Funny to see how £20Bn is nothing when it suits.

I'm aware reducing CT can have beneficial effects - thats why they are proposing it! It was the similarity with the red bus number that caught my eye. This kind of thing is not obvious to some readers

It appears you still don't understand the potential economic impact of the proposed change, which could lead to increased tax take, not a reduction.

[pim]

Cut corporation tax?

Besides all the taxhavens and non payment of tax by so many large companies in the U.K.Who is going to pay for our services the working poor.

350 million a week for our N.H.S The big lie.Theresa May can promise all sorts to many people unless she wants to turn the U.K into desert island.

[sidicks]

pim said:

Cut corporation tax?

Besides all the taxhavens and non payment of tax by so many large companies in the U.K.Who is going to pay for our services the working poor.

It appears you don't understand economics and taxation either.

pim said:

350 million a week for our N.H.S The big lie.Theresa May can promise all sorts to many people unless she wants to turn the U.K into desert island.

Someone else with a red bus obsession!