The economic consequences of Brexit (Vol 3)
Discussion
PurpleMoonlight said:
Is that to remind you to vote next time if there is a second referendum?
andymadmak said:
PurpleMoonlight said:
Is that to remind you to vote next time if there is a second referendum?
b
hstewie said:
hstewie said: I recall hearing this being mentioned a few days ago on a radio piece.
It won't matter, it'll be the EU punishing us or Project Fear.
I'm starting to think there's no point pointing these things out any more as they'll simply be dismissed out of hand.
It is like listening to 14 million Iraqi information ministers.It won't matter, it'll be the EU punishing us or Project Fear.
I'm starting to think there's no point pointing these things out any more as they'll simply be dismissed out of hand.
frisbee said:
It is like listening to 14 million Iraqi information ministers.
Tiresome. Why not try contributing to the debate? Do you think that the EU has the power of veto over other country's trade policies? Is it your belief that the EU could veto any future deal between the UK and, say, Japan, USA, Australia, Canada, Brazil, China?
How would the EU achieve this? What laws would they invoke?
Or you could just post another silly meme and make yourself look foolish....
p1stonhead said:
wst said:
Head of WTO warns that disruption may follow.
Turns out that while we have reserved a seat at the WTO, we still have to be allowed through the front door...
Turns out that some of the proposed arrangements we would have with the EU may make negotiating with the WTO... difficult.
Turns out that WTO members will hold all the cards when negotiating with us, because we can't actually sever our links with the rest of planet Earth.
Everyone knows this already. Getting agreed terms for the WTO isn’t going to be a walk in the park. Especially considering who we have in charge.Turns out that while we have reserved a seat at the WTO, we still have to be allowed through the front door...
Turns out that some of the proposed arrangements we would have with the EU may make negotiating with the WTO... difficult.
Turns out that WTO members will hold all the cards when negotiating with us, because we can't actually sever our links with the rest of planet Earth.
Were you not aware that the person we have in charge is Crawford Falconer and his past credentials as ambassador and permanent representative to the WTO. His work in the background appears to have found favour with the CBI. https://www.civilserviceworld.com/articles/news/cr...
TM and Oily Robbins aren't fans though...……. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/no10s-man-close...
Edited by Crackie on Saturday 25th August 12:32
andymadmak said:
Tiresome.
Why not try contributing to the debate? Do you think that the EU has the power of veto over other country's trade policies? Is it your belief that the EU could veto any future deal between the UK and, say, Japan, USA, Australia, Canada, Brazil, China?
How would the EU achieve this? What laws would they invoke?
Or you could just post another silly meme and make yourself look foolish....
Whoosh!Why not try contributing to the debate? Do you think that the EU has the power of veto over other country's trade policies? Is it your belief that the EU could veto any future deal between the UK and, say, Japan, USA, Australia, Canada, Brazil, China?
How would the EU achieve this? What laws would they invoke?
Or you could just post another silly meme and make yourself look foolish....
The whole point of the picture is that you can't debate with Brexiters.
frisbee said:
andymadmak said:
Tiresome.
Why not try contributing to the debate? Do you think that the EU has the power of veto over other country's trade policies? Is it your belief that the EU could veto any future deal between the UK and, say, Japan, USA, Australia, Canada, Brazil, China?
How would the EU achieve this? What laws would they invoke?
Or you could just post another silly meme and make yourself look foolish....
Whoosh!Why not try contributing to the debate? Do you think that the EU has the power of veto over other country's trade policies? Is it your belief that the EU could veto any future deal between the UK and, say, Japan, USA, Australia, Canada, Brazil, China?
How would the EU achieve this? What laws would they invoke?
Or you could just post another silly meme and make yourself look foolish....
The whole point of the picture is that you can't debate with Brexiters.
not just a load of handwriting whining cowardly doom laden condescending drivel ...
frisbee said:
andymadmak said:
Tiresome.
Why not try contributing to the debate? Do you think that the EU has the power of veto over other country's trade policies? Is it your belief that the EU could veto any future deal between the UK and, say, Japan, USA, Australia, Canada, Brazil, China?
How would the EU achieve this? What laws would they invoke?
Or you could just post another silly meme and make yourself look foolish....
Whoosh!Why not try contributing to the debate? Do you think that the EU has the power of veto over other country's trade policies? Is it your belief that the EU could veto any future deal between the UK and, say, Japan, USA, Australia, Canada, Brazil, China?
How would the EU achieve this? What laws would they invoke?
Or you could just post another silly meme and make yourself look foolish....
The whole point of the picture is that you can't debate with Brexiters.
TonyToniTone said:
Is the combined economy ten times ours?
Much more like 5-6 x ours.And over 40% of the EU ex-UK GDP is down to France & Germany.
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-eurosta...
Edited by sidicks on Saturday 25th August 15:37
TonyToniTone said:
PurpleMoonlight said:
The EU may seek to flex its trade agreement muscles with third countries to try to protect its markets. Why shouldn't they. That's the power of a combined economy ten times ours.
Is the combined economy ten times ours? andymadmak said:
Do you think that the EU has the power of veto over other country's trade policies? Is it your belief that the EU could veto any future deal between the UK and, say, Japan, USA, Australia, Canada, Brazil, China?
Not a veto, But trade deals are inter-related: Rules of Origin, Most favoured nation clauses, Tariff rate quotas, etc. For example the EU-Korea FTA has an MFN clause which means if Korea agreed an FTA with UK that had significantly better terms than the EU-Korea one, EU can say to Korea "Thanks very much - we'll trade with you on those improved terms too."
This paper goes into it quite well. It's looking at "grandfathering" in the wider sense rather than just papers with "EU" crossed out, and "UK" written in with crayon.
http://blogs.sussex.ac.uk/uktpo/files/2017/12/PBri...
silentbrown said:
Not a veto, But trade deals are inter-related: Rules of Origin, Most favoured nation clauses, Tariff rate quotas, etc.
For example the EU-Korea FTA has an MFN clause which means if Korea agreed an FTA with UK that had significantly better terms than the EU-Korea one, EU can say to Korea "Thanks very much - we'll trade with you on those improved terms too."
This paper goes into it quite well. It's looking at "grandfathering" in the wider sense rather than just papers with "EU" crossed out, and "UK" written in with crayon.
http://blogs.sussex.ac.uk/uktpo/files/2017/12/PBri...
You with your talking sense. It will end in tears. For example the EU-Korea FTA has an MFN clause which means if Korea agreed an FTA with UK that had significantly better terms than the EU-Korea one, EU can say to Korea "Thanks very much - we'll trade with you on those improved terms too."
This paper goes into it quite well. It's looking at "grandfathering" in the wider sense rather than just papers with "EU" crossed out, and "UK" written in with crayon.
http://blogs.sussex.ac.uk/uktpo/files/2017/12/PBri...
silentbrown said:
Not a veto, But trade deals are inter-related: Rules of Origin, Most favoured nation clauses, Tariff rate quotas, etc.
For example the EU-Korea FTA has an MFN clause which means if Korea agreed an FTA with UK that had significantly better terms than the EU-Korea one, EU can say to Korea "Thanks very much - we'll trade with you on those improved terms too."
This paper goes into it quite well. It's looking at "grandfathering" in the wider sense rather than just papers with "EU" crossed out, and "UK" written in with crayon.
http://blogs.sussex.ac.uk/uktpo/files/2017/12/PBri...
How much better is significantly and who decides?For example the EU-Korea FTA has an MFN clause which means if Korea agreed an FTA with UK that had significantly better terms than the EU-Korea one, EU can say to Korea "Thanks very much - we'll trade with you on those improved terms too."
This paper goes into it quite well. It's looking at "grandfathering" in the wider sense rather than just papers with "EU" crossed out, and "UK" written in with crayon.
http://blogs.sussex.ac.uk/uktpo/files/2017/12/PBri...
silentbrown said:
Not a veto, But trade deals are inter-related: Rules of Origin, Most favoured nation clauses, Tariff rate quotas, etc.
For example the EU-Korea FTA has an MFN clause which means if Korea agreed an FTA with UK that had significantly better terms than the EU-Korea one, EU can say to Korea "Thanks very much - we'll trade with you on those improved terms too."
Are you looking at Section B, Article 2.5 3.?For example the EU-Korea FTA has an MFN clause which means if Korea agreed an FTA with UK that had significantly better terms than the EU-Korea one, EU can say to Korea "Thanks very much - we'll trade with you on those improved terms too."
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/...
The FTA said:
3. If at any moment a Party reduces its applied most-favoured-nation (hereinafter referred to as ‘MFN’) customs duty rate after the entry into force of this Agreement, that duty rate shall apply as regards trade covered by this Agreement if and for as long as it is lower than the customs duty rate calculated in accordance with its Schedule included in Annex 2-A.
I can't find any other clause in the FTA that looks relevant. However, I believe this clause means that if Korea reduces its MFN duty rates (which are the duty rates it levies on goods from WTO member countries with which it doesn't have an FTA) below the rates agreed with the EU, then the lower rate will apply. My understanding would be therefore be that if Korea greed a rate below the EU rate as part of an FTA it wouldn't change the MFN rate, so the EU would not automatically gain from it.
I do agree in that as the number of FTAs in force around the world increases the complexity, especially surrounding rules of origin, is becoming more difficult to manage. I'm in the middle of trying to understand the impact of Brexit in terms of potential triangular cumulation, and it's really causing me a headache.
davepoth said:
I can't find any other clause in the FTA that looks relevant. However, I believe this clause means that if Korea reduces its MFN duty rates (which are the duty rates it levies on goods from WTO member countries with which it doesn't have an FTA) below the rates agreed with the EU, then the lower rate will apply.
My understanding would be therefore be that if Korea greed a rate below the EU rate as part of an FTA it wouldn't change the MFN rate, so the EU would not automatically gain from it.
No, I think it's stuff like article 7.8. and 7.14My understanding would be therefore be that if Korea greed a rate below the EU rate as part of an FTA it wouldn't change the MFN rate, so the EU would not automatically gain from it.
EU-Korea FTA said:
1. With respect to any measures covered by this Section
affecting the cross-border supply of services, unless otherwise
provided for in this Article, each Party shall accord to services
and service suppliers of the other Party treatment no less
favourable than that it accords to like services and service
suppliers of any third country in the context of an economic
integration agreement signed after the entry into force of this
Agreement.
affecting the cross-border supply of services, unless otherwise
provided for in this Article, each Party shall accord to services
and service suppliers of the other Party treatment no less
favourable than that it accords to like services and service
suppliers of any third country in the context of an economic
integration agreement signed after the entry into force of this
Agreement.
Vanden Saab said:
How much better is significantly and who decides?
It doesn't need to be "significant". And I assume it's a choice of the the EU (in my example): If they feel the terms we agree with SK are more favourable than their current terms they can choose to adopt them. If they don't, they don't. The terms are each-way, so if we agree a better deal with the EU than SK currently have, then SK can ask to trade with the EU on those same terms. There are plenty of exemptions, but the principle's fairly clear.
Disputes would be handled by WTO, at a guess.
silentbrown said:
It doesn't need to be "significant". And I assume it's a choice of the the EU (in my example): If they feel the terms we agree with SK are more favourable than their current terms they can choose to adopt them. If they don't, they don't. The terms are each-way, so if we agree a better deal with the EU than SK currently have, then SK can ask to trade with the EU on those same terms.
There are plenty of exemptions, but the principle's fairly clear.
Disputes would be handled by WTO, at a guess.
Isn't this the case with all WTO members anyway? MFN applies across the board, not just especially for Brexit. It doesn't prevent agreements being made, and doesn't enforce complete uniformity between all agreements, just that when we impose restrictions on other countries (such as import tariffs) we must do so fairly.There are plenty of exemptions, but the principle's fairly clear.
Disputes would be handled by WTO, at a guess.
silentbrown said:
davepoth said:
I can't find any other clause in the FTA that looks relevant. However, I believe this clause means that if Korea reduces its MFN duty rates (which are the duty rates it levies on goods from WTO member countries with which it doesn't have an FTA) below the rates agreed with the EU, then the lower rate will apply.
My understanding would be therefore be that if Korea greed a rate below the EU rate as part of an FTA it wouldn't change the MFN rate, so the EU would not automatically gain from it.
No, I think it's stuff like article 7.8. and 7.14My understanding would be therefore be that if Korea greed a rate below the EU rate as part of an FTA it wouldn't change the MFN rate, so the EU would not automatically gain from it.
EU-Korea FTA said:
1. With respect to any measures covered by this Section
affecting the cross-border supply of services, unless otherwise
provided for in this Article, each Party shall accord to services
and service suppliers of the other Party treatment no less
favourable than that it accords to like services and service
suppliers of any third country in the context of an economic
integration agreement signed after the entry into force of this
Agreement.
affecting the cross-border supply of services, unless otherwise
provided for in this Article, each Party shall accord to services
and service suppliers of the other Party treatment no less
favourable than that it accords to like services and service
suppliers of any third country in the context of an economic
integration agreement signed after the entry into force of this
Agreement.
It would be at least possible to agree an FTA with Korea that didn't touch anything in those two clauses (whether that would be sensible is another matter entirely), so it would be fair to say that
"The EU-Korea FTA provides for both parties to improve their market access for services and establishment in certain market sectors in line with subsequently agreed FTAs, where they are not regional trade agreements that rely on such market access for border liberalisation."
Or something like that.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff