Could UK U-turn on Referendum Result (Vol 2)

[Deptford Draylons]

johnxjsc1985 said:

Will this Topic be closed tomorrow?

Keep it, just rename it to ' The ///ajd & Jawknee cry in '

[anonymous-user]

///ajd said:

skahigh said:

Mrr T said:

If the UK leave with no deal then the rEU will deal with the UK under the same rules the UK currently deals with non EU countries.

I think the above is what you intended to write?

In which case, yes, you would be correct however, that would only cover the duties applied by the EU nations on our exports.

The unknown in this is the duties that we (the UK) would choose to apply on our imports whether they be from the EU or anywhere else.

Consequently, the affect of us trading under WTO rules is somewhere between difficult and impossible to calculate at the current time.

You are right, but if our UK car exports were carrying 10% tariffs, would you expect our car industry to lobby for 10% on BMWs for example?

Our car exports to the rest of the world and our car imports from the rest of the world already have 10% tariff's. Buy a car made in Japan, you pay 10% more than if we set our tariff rate at 0%, something we can do post leaving the EU. Sell a British made car to Japan, they have to pay 10% tariff on import.

[Mrr T]

skahigh said:

///ajd said:

skahigh said:

Mrr T said:

If the UK leave with no deal then the rEU will deal with the UK under the same rules the UK currently deals with non EU countries.

I think the above is what you intended to write?

In which case, yes, you would be correct however, that would only cover the duties applied by the EU nations on our exports.

The unknown in this is the duties that we (the UK) would choose to apply on our imports whether they be from the EU or anywhere else.

Consequently, the affect of us trading under WTO rules is somewhere between difficult and impossible to calculate at the current time.

You are right, but if our UK car exports were carrying 10% tariffs, would you expect our car industry to lobby for 10% on BMWs for example?

I deleted this post as I was unsure if I had misunderstood our ability to set tariffs under WTO terms but I think I had it correct.

The point is, you are presenting a scenario about car imports whereby you are making an assumption about the tariff that would be imposed.

That is conjecture (whether it turns out to be correct or not) and when multiplied by every import industry becomes completely useless in presenting known economic outcome of trading under WTO terms.

So let analyse this. The Department for Leaving the EU (DLEU) knows what tariff, and more importantly the exporting requirements, for the UK to export to the rEU on a hard brexit.

However, the department cannot predict what will happen, because if that happens the UK can set its own tariffs, importing requirements?

That makes no sense. Surly if we exit without any deal the DLEU must know what the UK plans to do.

[skahigh]

Mrr T said:

So let analyse this. The Department for Leaving the EU (DLEU) knows what tariff, and more importantly the exporting requirements, for the UK to export to the rEU on a hard brexit.

However, the department cannot predict what will happen, because if that happens the UK can set its own tariffs, importing requirements?

That makes no sense. Surly if we exit without any deal the DLEU must know what the UK plans to do.

It's potentially two or more years away from happening, why would our government be so rigid as to set their tariff policy now in a rapidly evolving international political landscape?

[anonymous-user]

skahigh said:

Mrr T said:

So let analyse this. The Department for Leaving the EU (DLEU) knows what tariff, and more importantly the exporting requirements, for the UK to export to the rEU on a hard brexit.

However, the department cannot predict what will happen, because if that happens the UK can set its own tariffs, importing requirements?

That makes no sense. Surly if we exit without any deal the DLEU must know what the UK plans to do.

It's potentially two or more years away from happening, why would our government be so rigid as to set their tariff policy now in a rapidly evolving international political landscape?

So he can then spend 2 years moaning about it.

Mrr T and his ilk will never be happy, no matter how this pans out. It's impossible for them to accept change.

[Murph7355]

Mrr T said:

Of cause.

The UK is current in the EU and trades with countries outside the EU. This is covered by EU rules on tariffs, processing, recognition of standards, etc, etc. Let’s refer to these as third country rules.

If the UK leave with no deal then the rUK will deal with the UK under the same rules the UK currently deals with non EU countries.

So when a poster suggests we do not know what will happen under a hard brexit, in terms of UK exports to the rEU they are wrong we know all the rules.

Ta.

So....just as a thought.

Those are the same rules that account for 56% and growing of our exports. One would think if they were an insurmountable barrier to trade and success that growth would not be happening? Nor, for that matter, that plenty of other non-EU nations still manage to do OK trading with the EU....

All of which assumes reverting to plain WTO with absolutely no other consideration. Which, as Davis notes, no one really wants on either side of the fence

Also...the other of the equation (what we elect to set tariff wise) is not yet understood and could have a material influence on outcomes of course.

[confused_buyer]

Andy Zarse said:

You forgot to mention nice Mr Clogg also got a proper walloping in the AV+ referendum too. I recall he became very very angry about it, blaming the Tories and the Tory controlled media because they were against any change to the current FPtP system. Not once did it appear to occur to him that people simply didn't like the idea of proportional representation or that he might simply have been wrong about everything.

Yes, I'd forgotten about that. He agreed to boundary reform if he got the referendum on AV. He got the referendum as agreed, lost it spectacularly and then he and his party reneged on the deal and voted down the boundary review citing House of Lords reform which has never been part of the arrangement. Decent honourable chap.

He also had an EU in/out referendum as part of his 2010 manifesto. He then got into Government, ignored it and whipped his party to vote against a Referendum Bill when it came before the Commons.

[Mrr T]

skahigh said:

Mrr T said:

So let analyse this. The Department for Leaving the EU (DLEU) knows what tariff, and more importantly the exporting requirements, for the UK to export to the rEU on a hard brexit.

However, the department cannot predict what will happen, because if that happens the UK can set its own tariffs, importing requirements?

That makes no sense. Surly if we exit without any deal the DLEU must know what the UK plans to do.

It's potentially two or more years away from happening, why would our government be so rigid as to set their tariff policy now in a rapidly evolving international political landscape?

If they did not want to do that then why say "no deal is better than a bad deal".

Blair’s claim on weapons of mass destruction could at least point to a dodgy dossier.

DD’s dream leave team seem to just make it up.

[///ajd]

skahigh said:

///ajd said:

skahigh said:

Mrr T said:

If the UK leave with no deal then the rEU will deal with the UK under the same rules the UK currently deals with non EU countries.

I think the above is what you intended to write?

In which case, yes, you would be correct however, that would only cover the duties applied by the EU nations on our exports.

The unknown in this is the duties that we (the UK) would choose to apply on our imports whether they be from the EU or anywhere else.

Consequently, the affect of us trading under WTO rules is somewhere between difficult and impossible to calculate at the current time.

You are right, but if our UK car exports were carrying 10% tariffs, would you expect our car industry to lobby for 10% on BMWs for example?

I deleted this post as I was unsure if I had misunderstood our ability to set tariffs under WTO terms but I think I had it correct.

The point is, you are presenting a scenario about car imports whereby you are making an assumption about the tariff that would be imposed.

That is conjecture (whether it turns out to be correct or not) and when multiplied by every import industry becomes completely useless in presenting known economic outcome of trading under WTO terms.

We were talking about "no deal" outcomes, or at least I thought we were.

Its a simple question. Under WTO we know its 10% from UK to EU. Why would the EU change this without a deal? The assumption under a no deal would be its 10%. Its a known tariff and I suspect Nissan and others would be rather annoyed if that was the outcome.

Maybe the UK can decide to waive the tariff the other way around - for imports. Do you think we would if the 10% applies to our exports under a no deal exit? Do you want your German car be 10% more? Maybe the manufacturer wouldn't pass on the tariff. Who knows. What do you think would happen?

[confused_buyer]

///ajd said:

Maybe the UK can decide to waive the tariff the other way around - for imports. Do you think we would if the 10% applies to our exports under a no deal exit? Do you want your German car be 10% more? Maybe the manufacturer wouldn't pass on the tariff. Who knows. What do you think would happen?

I couldn't care less about German cars being 10% more but UK made cars having 10% added to them when they hit the EU is a problem.

We wouldn't waive the tariff although I can see us having to compensate UK exporters with the tariffs received.

We are a long way from this actually happening anyway. No one wants it. No one thinks is anything but bad so there is a good chance common sense will prevail.

[skahigh]

///ajd said:

We were talking about "no deal" outcomes, or at least I thought we were.

Its a simple question. Under WTO we know its 10% from UK to EU. Why would the EU change this without a deal? The assumption under a no deal would be its 10%. Its a known tariff and I suspect Nissan and others would be rather annoyed if that was the outcome.

Maybe the UK can decide to waive the tariff the other way around - for imports. Do you think we would if the 10% applies to our exports under a no deal exit? Do you want your German car be 10% more? Maybe the manufacturer wouldn't pass on the tariff. Who knows. What do you think would happen?

I don't know, which is entirely the point. Nobody knows with any degree of certainty what our import tariffs will be after Brexit do they?

We can speculate but, that's not likely to give us a reliable economic forecast is it?

[///ajd]

confused_buyer said:

///ajd said:

Maybe the UK can decide to waive the tariff the other way around - for imports. Do you think we would if the 10% applies to our exports under a no deal exit? Do you want your German car be 10% more? Maybe the manufacturer wouldn't pass on the tariff. Who knows. What do you think would happen?

I couldn't care less about German cars being 10% more but UK made cars having 10% added to them when they hit the EU is a problem.

We wouldn't waive the tariff although I can see us having to compensate UK exporters with the tariffs received.

We are a long way from this actually happening anyway. No one wants it. No one thinks is anything but bad so there is a good chance common sense will prevail.

I agree a 10% export tariff would be a problem. Direct compensation is illegal though there are other ways to skin a cat - still taxpayers money at the end of the day, unless you just take it from the imported BMW. Which is still taxpayers money at the end of the day.

I think it should be inconceivable that we leave without a deal; is that what Davis is saying? May seems to be walking back on this but we'll see. It is an admission that we have to compromise with the EU to get a deal - there is no choice. Their wish list - no list of demands - is long. They have already out played May in status of EU migrants. Resolve it or no negotiations. 1-0 to the EU. Dept for Brexit=Amateurs!!

[///ajd]

skahigh said:

///ajd said:

We were talking about "no deal" outcomes, or at least I thought we were.

Its a simple question. Under WTO we know its 10% from UK to EU. Why would the EU change this without a deal? The assumption under a no deal would be its 10%. Its a known tariff and I suspect Nissan and others would be rather annoyed if that was the outcome.

Maybe the UK can decide to waive the tariff the other way around - for imports. Do you think we would if the 10% applies to our exports under a no deal exit? Do you want your German car be 10% more? Maybe the manufacturer wouldn't pass on the tariff. Who knows. What do you think would happen?

I don't know, which is entirely the point. Nobody knows with any degree of certainty what our import tariffs will be after Brexit do they?

We can speculate but, that's not likely to give us a reliable economic forecast is it?

Well you can speculate either way and assess what the impact would be.

This can inform your views on a subject.

Not necessarly you - but I get concerned when someone says "brexit is best" but then says "no one knows what might happen" in the same breath. This suggests they may have no idea why brexit is best, but just like the idea.

I suspect our own industry might insist on reciprocal tariffs to boost their own competitive edge in the UK to offset possible lost sales in the EU if tariffs bite. We'd launch our own protectionism measures, to not insignificant irony.

Or maybe we wouldn't, just let JLR make the best of it, and if that means relocating to the EU where they sell most of their cars, the tories won't mind.

Both options are pretty st aren't they? That's a 2 minute analysis of Hard Brexit for you. Its not difficult. Saying "we don't know" doesn't really cut it does it? Too much of an easy way to duck the consequences.

[Deptford Draylons]

///ajd said:

I agree a 10% export tariff would be a problem. Direct compensation is illegal though there are other ways to skin a cat - still taxpayers money at the end of the day, unless you just take it from the imported BMW. Which is still taxpayers money at the end of the day.

I think it should be inconceivable that we leave without a deal; is that what Davis is saying? May seems to be walking back on this but we'll see. It is an admission that we have to compromise with the EU to get a deal - there is no choice. Their wish list - no list of demands - is long. They have already out played May in status of EU migrants. Resolve it or no negotiations. 1-0 to the EU. Dept for Brexit=Amateurs!!

Out played May on EU immigrant status ? The EU is playing games with them you clot. Your ability to talk st is epic !

[///ajd]

Deptford Draylons said:

///ajd said:

I agree a 10% export tariff would be a problem. Direct compensation is illegal though there are other ways to skin a cat - still taxpayers money at the end of the day, unless you just take it from the imported BMW. Which is still taxpayers money at the end of the day.

I think it should be inconceivable that we leave without a deal; is that what Davis is saying? May seems to be walking back on this but we'll see. It is an admission that we have to compromise with the EU to get a deal - there is no choice. Their wish list - no list of demands - is long. They have already out played May in status of EU migrants. Resolve it or no negotiations. 1-0 to the EU. Dept for Brexit=Amateurs!!

Out played May on EU immigrant status ? The EU is playing games with them you clot. Your ability to talk st is epic !

No, they have quietly established who is in charge.

The UK has threatened EU migrant status to be put in doubt after "black/backward wednesday", or whatever we should call it. That was a bit stoopid of the brexiteers.

Now the EU is saying "can you take back all that bollcks UK and secure migrant rights please. Otherwise no negotiations. Your move, amateurs!"

The hot air and bravado is soon to be exposed for what it is. Singing Rule Britannia won't help.

Or perhaps you want to blame the EU for Davis being a lightweight moron?

[Dr Jekyll]

///ajd said:

Or maybe we wouldn't, just let JLR make the best of it, and if that means relocating to the EU where they sell most of their cars, the tories won't mind.

Rubbish. They do sell quite a lot in China and the US incidentally, despite working under WTO.

[pim]

Of course there has to be a compromise the UK has no choice.Unless we want to walk away from any deal with our largest trading partners.

Davis might do very little negotiations problaby a bright civil servant who has to do the dirty work.

Boris Johnson is not well liked by the continentals they look to him as a clown.Then we have the ex Doctor left who travelled with his boyfriend on his expense sheet

Theresa May must be scratching her head..

[Bertrum]

///ajd said:

Well you can speculate either way and assess what the impact would be.

This can inform your views on a subject.

Not necessarly you - but I get concerned when someone says "brexit is best" but then says "no one knows what might happen" in the same breath. This suggests they may have no idea why brexit is best, but just like the idea.

I suspect our own industry might insist on reciprocal tariffs to boost their own competitive edge in the UK to offset possible lost sales in the EU if tariffs bite. We'd launch our own protectionism measures, to not insignificant irony.

Or maybe we wouldn't, just let JLR make the best of it, and if that means relocating to the EU where they sell most of their cars, the tories won't mind.

Both options are pretty st aren't they? That's a 2 minute analysis of Hard Brexit for you. Its not difficult. Saying "we don't know" doesn't really cut it does it? Too much of an easy way to duck the consequences.

Your model assumes that all parts that go into that car are made in that country, or in that economic area even.....which they aren't so your logic is flawed.

Secondly the EU sets the terms on which we can trade with other nations, this means we are unable to negotiate an independent trade deal currently, another aspect that your model ignores.

(i'm calling it a 'model' but i'm pretty sure you don't have one)

You argue so enthusiastically which I applaud but you really need to do some homework.

Oh and JLR's biggest markets are China and the USA, Europe is small fry, but you know that

Edited by Bertrum on Tuesday 28th March 17:23

[gazapc]

///ajd said:

No, they have quietly established who is in charge.

The UK has threatened EU migrant status to be put in doubt after "black/backward wednesday", or whatever we should call it. That was a bit stoopid of the brexiteers.

Now the EU is saying "can you take back all that bollcks UK and secure migrant rights please. Otherwise no negotiations. Your move, amateurs!"

The hot air and bravado is soon to be exposed for what it is. Singing Rule Britannia won't help.

Or perhaps you want to blame the EU for Davis being a lightweight moron?

It's like that bit from Star Wars, "Let the hate flow through you".

///ajd said:

Now the EU is saying "can you take back all that bollcks UK and secure migrant rights please. Otherwise no negotiations. Your move, amateurs!"

Great news. UK Government policy will have got its way and lives of all those affected will be more secure. It's a shame the EU didn't allow this item be discussed many months ago and instead went ultra-hard EU.

[ralphrj]

Bertrum said:

Oh and JLR's biggest markets are China and the USA, Europe is small fry, but you know that

All 3 regions pretty much the same.

JLR retail volumes Q3 FY17:

China region 24%
Europe (excl. Russia & UK) 23%
North America 23%
UK 16%