It's only true if you are talking about us to other EU countries under WTO or EU rules. The Tariffs only apply in place of an agreement. Agreements would be very quickly put into place.... What would have been fairer (and much more useful comparison) is EU to other NON EU countries and that contrasted to WTO.
This is exactly why we would have had a free trade deal with the EU (without our remain parliament and the EU doing the lets make us remain negotiations) as we have a massive trade deficit with them. If these tariffs were applied the UK would have a net gain Vs the EU. WTO transition is up to 10 years anyway - I do not know why people argue these tariff rates as reason to remain other than they are scaremongering the people who succumbed to project fear. Listed to Ann, she knows Peter is a cockwomble perhaps
Its a real PITA to check and REALLY tedious as you have to know the code for the exact product you're referring to and which country its coming from amongst other things like pack sizes etc however, the above tweet is not untrue but is not giving the entire picture. It's comparing the average tariff applied to a large group of products if sourced from (who knows where) with the tariff applied if the goods are sourced from another EU country whilst the UK is still part of the EU. IMPORTANTLY what it omits to say is what is the tariff to get that product into the EU in the first place in order it may move at 0% within the EU. Take cars for example the EU applies a 10% tariff to import a 2ltr petrol engine car, so no change there from WTO. Oranges, as another example are 10%, so no change there, Boiled sweets (sugar confectionary) are up to 35% so no change there. It's a misleading tweet.
It is entirely possible, as long a the eu don't mind us applying the exact same standards upon them (a point remainers have continually avoided mentioning for the last 3 years). It is known that the eu and the U.K. have yet to discuss in the future relationship just what the terms would be Unlike your tweeter who must have agreed everything without the eu's and U.K.'s knowledge
You know that's not how people tweet or post. Brexiteers do the same. The bare minimum is put down and that sends everyone into a frenzy. The reality is NO ONE (and I include me, you and exige in this statement) knows what the hell is going on nor what will happen in the end.
To whom are these tariffs actually paid? If it’s to the UK Government for goods coming into the UK, the Government has options of reducing VAT to avoid some costs rising here once out of the EU. That wouldn’t help with exports to the EU though.
‘The reality is NO ONE (and I include me, you and exige in this statement) knows what the hell is going on nor what will happen in the end.’ Que?
Well it's Thursday and she huffed and she puffed and....nothing happened. She knows full well her stumbling block is the pound/currency and meeting the Prodi Doctrine.
aye, yous in the know couldnt even get they day right *facepalm* but meh, lests talk about Peckham, i think they contribute more than 60bill (excluding oil) annually in tax revenues is worth more than 200bill (excluding oil) in trade anually. with more than a trill in tangable, here and now assets. (excluding oil) but re the parish council leader. her statement yesturday was v,sturgionesqu. considerd, consillitory and the "steady as she goes" approach. suits me sir. anyhoos. you can make yer own mind up. i aint debating it with the noobsters. if you make it to the Q+A at 30 odd mins, you may notice somthing unusual. can you spot it?
I agree. Just my opinion, but I think the remain campaign / arguments since the referendum have been the worst in this respect.
Just my opinion, but I believe the leave AND remain campaign arguments have been as bad as each others.
Well yes, what I meant was the remain side have been worse for ‘knowing’ how it will all end. It takes a fair bit of digging behind most headline facts from both sides to determine what may or may not be true.
Nothing there at all fin, her speech was wednesday when she promised she would clarify indi instead she said she thought it should happen within her administrations run and before the next election. Not it will, not that it might but she hoped and little more. Now for the Prodi amendment, if I say currency is Scotlands irish border moment when it comes to their indi. The eu demands that any break away part of a former member must apply as a new country and not as the snp have insisted before, because they used to belong to a member country so should be able to "just slide in" The other part Prodi demands is a breakaway state would have to leave the Union and could then only be let back in if it has gained independence in accordance with constitutional law in the member state it left. using a blocks currency after you have left it, is not independence as everything would still be controlled by the bank of england
The tariff is charged at the point of entry into the country and is collected by Customs, in the UK's case by HMRC, and thus ends up in the UK's general tax coffers. If the UK leaves with no deal and ends up trading on WTO terms then it would levy WTO tariffs on goods coming in and would exporters would have to pay WTO tariffs on goods going into another country. Thus a BMW car assembled in Poland and shipped into the UK would become 10% more expensive. Likewise a Jaguar assembled in the UK and shipped into Poland would become 10% more expensive there. But......it's not that straightforward with cars as their parts are made all over Europe before final assembly. It's all very complex but in short the Govt will trouser the tariff.
Which would be a net gain to the UK coffers due to the large trade deficit with the EU, so I really don’t see EU industry wanting anything but a free trade deal, apart from the unelected idiots wanting to ‘punish us’ We had all the cards and TM and parliament purposefully threw them all away
Nobody has "coffers" any more. Can you old relics stop talking about "coffers" and other things that were relevant in your youth, back in the 14th Century.
