Brexit What Happens Next Thread ---multiple merged threads.

[Snugglybear]

26 minutes ago, Bulltulip said:

I'm not sure if this has been covered previously but when foreign companies located to the UK in order to gain access to the EU market e.g. Nissan, Honda, BMW Mini, Big American Banks, etc, did they make the UK their global headquarters or simply create a new UK entity; I think the latter. There is now the concern of course that these companies would close down the UK entity and open a new one within the EU thus retaining free trade within the EU, although now potentially incurring extra costs importing into the UK which is a significant market for them.

If this is the case then what is stopping all of the UK companies that are moaning about losing access to the EU, from opening a new EU entity in much the same way that the foreign companies have down with the UK? In fact I would be very surprised if most UK companies trading with the EU at present didn't already have a presence in the EU. For example a friend of mine works for a UK based asset management company and they already have a Luxembourg based subsidiary that all EU sales are placed through.

Similarly, for an EU based companies selling significant amounts into the UK, they may choose to create a new UK entity to avoid import costs into the UK. Could the UK in fact end up beneffiting from more EU companies locating to the UK for free access to teh UK market and also as a close location to avoid restrictive EU rules?

Of course I don't know of all the implications but whenever you read about tax avoidance cases it always seems that most companies are not just a single company but made up of many different companies in different locations. That is what I expect will end up happening. Most companies will end up with Europe EU presence and a Europe non-EU presence and work the system to their benefit as necessary.

I expect they will.  Just as Swiss banks set up branches and subsidiaries in London to take advantage of passporting, before the Brexit vote.

The point is that UK companies will move jobs that need to be in the EU to an EU member state, taking the taxes their employees pay, and the money they spent in the UK economy, with them. What taxes they can't avoid will be paid to that member state, not to the UK.

I'm not sure I know what you mean by "..for an EU based companies selling significant amounts into the UK, they may choose to create a new UK entity to avoid import costs into the UK".  Do you mean that EU based companies importing goods from outside the EU for sale in the EU including the UK at present, will instead set up UK entities in order to import goods directly into the UK for sale here?

[rollover]

1 hour ago, Confusion of VIs said:

Apparently, as predicted much earlier on this thread, there will be no repatriation of anyone either already in the UK or arriving up to the before the day before we leave: 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/07/every-eu-migrant-can-stay-after-brexit-600000-will-be-given-amne/

 

 

Every EU migrant can stay in UK after Brexit

 

[rollover]

Theresa May is following Enoch Powell – by actually listening to what British people want

Many will recall the conflict in the Conservative party in the late 1960s and early 1970s between its then leader, Ted Heath, and its great ideologue, Enoch Powell. Powell took issue with Heath on various points, and two resonate today. 

One was mass immigration

The other was Heath’s ill-fated project to take Britain into what was then called the Common Market

Edited October 8, 2016 by rollover

[Sheeple Splinter]

2 hours ago, Confusion of VIs said:

I thought, Cameron's agreement would have been a good starting point as it established that the UK would have a permanent opt out from the requirements to join the Euro and ever closer union, it also enabled us to end the benefits tourism and repatriated control over financial services.

Moving on from that we could have pushed for more control of FoM, I suspect that we could have achieved that within the time it will take us to leave the EU.

Overall our aim should have been to have the best of both worlds, taking any desire for the rest of the EU to move to a closer union as an opportunity to take more power back from Brussels while remaining within the single market.

Not quite:

Quote

Final deal: All of the above, including a declaration that the four-year brake will be available to Britain for “a period of 7 years”. This is a ‘win’ for Cameron, although he had reportedly demanded up to 13 years availability.

On the negative side, Mr Cameron’s negotiators were unable to remove the “tapering mechanism” which will see EU migrants start to receive benefits when they start to contribute to the system – probably after their first year of work.

Critics will point out that deal only fully denies in-work benefits for one year, not four. There is also no mention of the benefits changes being protected by treaty change, which some critics have warned could leave them vulnerable to challenge in the European Courts.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/19/eu-deal-what-david-cameron-asked-for-and-what-he-actually-got/

Moreover, the stepped increases in the minimum wage is still a significant pull factor as far as FOM is conerned.

Quote

Overall our aim should have been to have the best of both worlds, taking any desire for the rest of the EU to move to a closer union as an opportunity to take more power back from Brussels while remaining within the single market.

I thought this is the main strand of May's plan? 

[Sheeple Splinter]

1 hour ago, Futuroid said:

What we have done is the equivalent of asking for a divorce. You do not expect the same level of cooperation and loyalty after asking your partner for a divorce as you expected beforehand. To do so is... amusing!

We are now going to be "gloves off" competitors with the 27 biggest trading nations closest to us. We have an economy on the rocks, and have been living above our means for quite some time.

Yes, having contributed roughly £250 billion in membership fees since joining, the attitude and threats from the benign EU reminded me of the quote,

"Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned."

Will the divorce settlement allow the UK another rebate?

[Sheeple Splinter]

24 minutes ago, rollover said:

 

Every EU migrant can stay in UK after Brexit

 

Eric?

[spyguy]

5 minutes ago, hotairmail said:

Are we supposed to be shocked at the parallel between May and Powell?

If you knew your modern history well, you would realise that Powell is a very bright and thoughtful man - not the 'racist' he has been painted as unfairly. He is a maverick and is cut from the same sort of cloth as Anthony Wedgwood Benn, an expert on our constitution and the dangers that lurk therein.

Sadly we no longer seem to have these sorts of giants on the political stage, the political visionaries who can see (and fear) where we may end up. Interesting that they, and other mavericks from both ends of the political spectrum, are drawn to the anti EU cause and its nightmare anti democratic tendencies.

I would suggest that Powell was probably the first and most high profile case of being vilified by the media for being a 'racist', almost a quasi fascist in the Nazi mould (still fresh in the memory) when raising the issues that mass immigration would cause. The 2 issues have been deliberately conflated ever since to shout down any misgivings voiced.

 

Wierdly, the migrants then were te result of business lobbying for cheap labour to compete.

You know rather yhan making capital investment they wanted cheap mipuris to work in faxtories. 40 yrars later..... look at that centre of enterrise and work that is Bradford.

[canbuywontbuy]

2 hours ago, canbuywontbuy said:

Question to Remainers: when the next Eurocrisis occurs, and the Euro currency dives while the pound rises, and attention is focused away from Britain to the EU - will it not make you doubt your views on the EU?

 

2 hours ago, WageWar said:

The pound is diving now, not the Euro. What planet are you on?

 

I see.  There can be no future Eurocrisis of any kind.  All is well.  Sorry for the bizarre hypothetical.  As you were. 

 

[pig]

1 hour ago, hotairmail said:

Are we supposed to be shocked at the parallel between May and Powell?

If you knew your modern history well, you would realise that Powell is a very bright and thoughtful man - not the 'racist' he has been painted as unfairly. He is a maverick and is cut from the same sort of cloth as Anthony Wedgwood Benn, an expert on our constitution and the dangers that lurk therein.

Sadly we no longer seem to have these sorts of giants on the political stage, the political visionaries who can see (and fear) where we may end up. Interesting that they, and other mavericks from both ends of the political spectrum, are drawn to the anti EU cause and its nightmare anti democratic tendencies.

I would suggest that Powell was probably the first and most high profile case of being vilified by the media for being a 'racist', almost a quasi fascist in the Nazi mould (still fresh in the memory) when raising the issues that mass immigration would cause. The 2 issues have been deliberately conflated ever since to shout down any misgivings voiced.

 

Well, in a way there is a subtle difference between a Patriot and a Nationalist.

On the other hand Jo Cox was a true patriot whereas her murderer was a nationalist scumbag.

There is plenty of conflation going on here. There is the Leave vote with The British Public. There is 48% with 1%. There is the real and present effects of perhaps one of the most disastrous governments I can remember, with real flaws in the EU. Immigration with a whole host of 2007/8 and hpc related issues. And so on.

But If you (not you personally) don't like being conflated with racists then don't align yourself with UKIPs nationalist drivel.

If you don't like being called stupid, then have some sort of rational response to the prospect of smashing the relationships with a third of our closest, long-standing trading partners.

And really, that doesn't include RW willy-waving over Enoch Powell - we've heard it all before ad nauseum - anymore than it does attacking furreners in the streets - we've seen all that before ad nauseum.

We are staring into the abyss. It doesn't have to be that way but it will be unless in particular Brexiters - yes Brexiters- start getting their head around the idea that BREXIT IS REAL and not some jolly jingoistic jape.

[Bulltulip]

2 hours ago, Snugglybear said:

I expect they will.  Just as Swiss banks set up branches and subsidiaries in London to take advantage of passporting, before the Brexit vote.

The point is that UK companies will move jobs that need to be in the EU to an EU member state, taking the taxes their employees pay, and the money they spent in the UK economy, with them. What taxes they can't avoid will be paid to that member state, not to the UK.

I'm not sure I know what you mean by "..for an EU based companies selling significant amounts into the UK, they may choose to create a new UK entity to avoid import costs into the UK".  Do you mean that EU based companies importing goods from outside the EU for sale in the EU including the UK at present, will instead set up UK entities in order to import goods directly into the UK for sale here?

I suppose I was thinking that trade deals with the EU are notoriously difficult and take a long time e.g. Canada, TTIP, etc. (have to be agreed between 27 EU countries). If the UK were able to quickly negotiate competitive trade deals with countries around the world e.g. Australia, NZm Canada, US, etc. is there a chance that EU companies may set up a UK entity in order to capitalise on these new trade deals. This is effectively the flip side of a non-EU company creating an EU entity to capitalise on the competitive trade deals between all the countries of the EU. The UK entity would be able to capitallise on all of the competitive trade agreements outside the EU. Could it be that for every UK based company that creates an EU entity and moves jobs accordingly, that it is replaced with an EU company creating a UK entity and moving jobs to the UK.

[canbuywontbuy]

33 minutes ago, Bulltulip said:

I suppose I was thinking that trade deals with the EU are notoriously difficult and take a long time e.g. Canada, TTIP, etc. (have to be agreed between 27 EU countries). If the UK were able to quickly negotiate competitive trade deals with countries around the world e.g. Australia, NZm Canada, US, etc. is there a chance that EU companies may set up a UK entity in order to capitalise on these new trade deals. This is effectively the flip side of a non-EU company creating an EU entity to capitalise on the competitive trade deals between all the countries of the EU. The UK entity would be able to capitallise on all of the competitive trade agreements outside the EU. Could it be that for every UK based company that creates an EU entity and moves jobs accordingly, that it is replaced with an EU company creating a UK entity and moving jobs to the UK.

Could be - I would have thought that the UK could become a true alternative base for EU-state businesses who wanted to work under alternative trade agreements to whatever the EU has to offer.  The UK isn't all bad, and the EU isn't all good.  I actually think it could be a real benefit to EU state businesses that they have a strong economic country close to them that isn't in the EU - it can offer them alternative trade deals and legislation.  Who knows - the UK might even be seen as a bit of a hedge if the EU really goes downhill.

[Riedquat]

4 hours ago, Futuroid said:

What we have done is the equivalent of asking for a divorce. You do not expect the same level of cooperation and loyalty after asking your partner for a divorce as you expected beforehand. To do so is... amusing!

We are now going to be "gloves off" competitors with the 27 biggest trading nations closest to us. We have an economy on the rocks, and have been living above our means for quite some time.

What you're asking for is to not have a divorce whatever abuses are going on because the spurned partner will attack you if you leave. Some divorces happen amicably. You'd hope that leaders and diplomats wouldn't behave like that in a field where they shouldn't be behaving like spoiled children, but I don't expect mature behaviour from the EU. As I've said numerous times before if they were ever likely to act sensible we wouldn't be leaving. You're making yet another supposedly pro-EU argument that just paints the EU in a bad light.

You're right that we've been living beyond our means for some time, I regard being forced to face that as a good thing.

[canbuywontbuy]

1 hour ago, pig said:

But If you (not you personally) don't like being conflated with racists then don't align yourself with UKIPs nationalist drivel.

If you don't like being called stupid, then have some sort of rational response to the prospect of smashing the relationships with a third of our closest, long-standing trading partners.

Rational, according to you?

Personally, I don't think basing marginal GDP growth on net 330,000 immigration growth per year is a rational economic policy.  The infrastructure can't keep up with it, and it's entirely based on the premise that wages are supported through tax credits and that a structural deficit is yet another "new normal" (amongst all the other "new normals"). 

Edited October 8, 2016 by canbuywontbuy

[pig]

1 hour ago, canbuywontbuy said:

Rational, according to you?

Personally, I don't think basing marginal GDP growth on net 330,000 immigration growth per year is a rational economic policy.  The infrastructure can't keep up with it, and it's entirely based on the premise that wages are supported through tax credits and that a structural deficit is yet another "new normal" (amongst all the other "new normals"). 

I mean rational, for example, as in the idea of making stuff and trading with other countries ?

[Confusion of VIs]

5 hours ago, Sheeple Splinter said:

1 Not quite:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/19/eu-deal-what-david-cameron-asked-for-and-what-he-actually-got/

2 Moreover, the stepped increases in the minimum wage is still a significant pull factor as far as FOM is conerned.

3 I thought this is the main strand of May's plan? 

1 Near enough to pushed ahead with and let someone take us to the EU court if they wished

2 Well we sorted that by trashing Sterling

3 Plan you seriously think there is a plan?  May is winging it.

[Confusion of VIs]

1 hour ago, Riedquat said:

What you're asking for is to not have a divorce whatever abuses are going on because the spurned partner will attack you if you leave. Some divorces happen amicably. You'd hope that leaders and diplomats wouldn't behave like that in a field where they shouldn't be behaving like spoiled children, but I don't expect mature behaviour from the EU. As I've said numerous times before if they were ever likely to act sensible we wouldn't be leaving. You're making yet another supposedly pro-EU argument that just paints the EU in a bad light.

You're right that we've been living beyond our means for some time, I regard being forced to face that as a good thing.

But now we may have to learn to live within our means and at the same time cope with the reduction in those means of at least 4% (Hammond's central path of the best case exit scenario)

[Confusion of VIs]

5 hours ago, Sheeple Splinter said:

Negotiation tactic? UK moves first and now the EU will have difficulty not reciprocating.

Confused by this part, I thought EU countries invoiced each other?

 

The only person from either side who has mentioned this as a possibility is May, even Farrage thought it was a bad idea.

[Futuroid]

5 hours ago, hotairmail said:

Yet that is what you want to retain.

And if you recall, there have long been complaints about the lack of free trade in services (our supposed strength) in the EU. When they make the rules, they try to cripple London and the City. It is better outside in the long run, like a Singapore or Hong Kong.

I don't want to retain it forever. But I think we will need to retain it for more than two years and five months. 

We can't rebalance the economy away from financial services in the kind of time we have (Gidiot Osbrowne didn't manage to rebalance it at all and he had five years).

The financial sector to the UK is like booze to a drunk. And just like acute alcohol withdrawal can in some cases actually kill the patient, going cold turkey on finance in the time-frame we are talking about is economic suicide.

We have to face the facts - even in the 70s the UK was not a manufacturing powerhouse comparable to Germany now.

[ThePiltdownMan]

49 minutes ago, pig said:

I mean rational, for example, as in the idea of making stuff and trading with other countries ?

There is nothing to indicate that will come to and end. The governments of those countries may choose to make that more difficult but if they do it's to their own detriment too.

[Futuroid]

Awww shoot.. turns out that Brexit bounce was more of a splat!

UK trade deficit doubles as sliding pound does little to boost exports, factory output also fell in August, the Office for National Statistics said
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/brexit-pound-value-trade-deficit-doubles-exports-a7350001.html

[spyguy]

43 minutes ago, Futuroid said:

I don't want to retain it forever. But I think we will need to retain it for more than two years and five months. 

We can't rebalance the economy away from financial services in the kind of time we have (Gidiot Osbrowne didn't manage to rebalance it at all and he had five years).

The financial sector to the UK is like booze to a drunk. And just like acute alcohol withdrawal can in some cases actually kill the patient, going cold turkey on finance in the time-frame we are talking about is economic suicide.

We have to face the facts - even in the 70s the UK was not a manufacturing powerhouse comparable to Germany now.

Itsnot reblancing. Ik fin sector is shrinkinf rapidly.

so are other countries.

finserv was a dumb choice for prosperity. ate the host.

[One-percent]

2 minutes ago, spyguy said:

Itsnot reblancing. Ik fin sector is shrinkinf rapidly.

so are other countries.

finserv was a dumb choice for prosperity. ate the host.

Have you been for a visit home spy?  Your accent has suddenly got very strong 

[Riedquat]

1 hour ago, Confusion of VIs said:

But now we may have to learn to live within our means and at the same time cope with the reduction in those means of at least 4% (Hammond's central path of the best case exit scenario)

4% isn't a number that strikes any fear into my heart. It's a "That's all? So there's no economic worry about leaving either" type number.

[spyguy]

8 minutes ago, One-percent said:

Have you been for a visit home spy?  Your accent has suddenly got very strong 

Grill yer fish gin drinker!

Tablet was updating again.

Clarksons doing his homage at the mo. Big tent in marina car park.

[One-percent]

Just now, spyguy said:

Grill yer fish gin drinker!

Tablet was updating again.

Clarksons doing his homage at the mo. Big tent in marina car park.

 

is he up,there again for fish and Chips?  Must be really special bloke as he is allowed to drive on the pier. Plod didn't like it at all when I tried