Brexit: Now What? Part III

[The Don]

Here's some concrete plans for financial services companies to move out of London:

Two international banks have confirmed they are planning moves out of London ahead of the UK's exit from the EU.

Standard Chartered has said it is in talks with regulators about making Frankfurt its European base.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39789915

Stories about Standard Chartered have been around for a while.

Can't wait for the Brexit good news

 

[Aepervius]

House of Lords analysis:

https://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201617/ldselect/ldeucom/125/12511.htm







Short version: without an exit agreement, the EU cannot force the UK to pay.

Short version : that's the HoL analysis which can be right on money or just plain wrong. I will go for partially wrong otherwise it would make no sense to continue calculation by EU, and it would not be the first time somebody in UK has quite a false estimate on the situation with respect of brexit.

 

[Klimax]

Here's some concrete plans for financial services companies to move out of London:



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39789915

Stories about Standard Chartered have been around for a while.

Can't wait for the Brexit good news

Just don't hold your breath.

 

[jimbob]

Here's some concrete plans for financial services companies to move out of London:



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39789915

Stories about Standard Chartered have been around for a while.

Can't wait for the Brexit good news

Where *is* Ceptimus?

 

[The Don]

Where *is* Ceptimus?

I assume Ceptimus is too busy exploiting the business opportunities which have presented themselves since Article 50 was triggered.

One way or another it'll be transformational for the UK economy

 

[GnaGnaMan]

House of Lords analysis:

https://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201617/ldselect/ldeucom/125/12511.htm


Short version: without an exit agreement, the EU cannot force the UK to pay.

What if the ECJ decides otherwise?

 

[GnaGnaMan]

Not the same framework, sure, but many of the same governments are involved. It's hypocritical for them to demand we pay every penny of some back-of-a-postit-note demand when they routinely fail to pay their own bills.



Weaseling out is fine, I'm talking more about when commitments are agreed then flagrantly breached with barely a mention.

Can you give an example?

 

[Newtons Bit]

What if the ECJ decides otherwise?

How would it enforce payments?

 

[GnaGnaMan]

How would it enforce payments?

The usual way but - despite the nonsense in the british press - I have a hard time imagining the UK going the deadbeat route.

 

[Newtons Bit]

The usual way but - despite the nonsense in the british press - I have a hard time imagining the UK going the deadbeat route.

Can you explain what the usual ways are?

 

[abaddon]

How would it enforce payments?

Tariffs.

 

[Newtons Bit]

Tariffs.

The UK (probably) gets lowered economic in return. The UK retaliates by doing some of its own trade war crap. Everyone loses, but the EU citizens end up paying the bill, as they're the ones paying increased prices, not the UK.

 

[GnaGnaMan]

Can you explain what the usual ways are?

Seizing assets, of course. It's a very tedious process for private individuals but states have rather different means at their disposal. It would be interesting to see how it would play out.

 

[GnaGnaMan]

Tariffs.

Does the WTO allow tariffs in such cases?

 

[Newtons Bit]

Seizing assets, of course. It's a very tedious process for private individuals but states have rather different means at their disposal. It would be interesting to see how it would play out.

I think that would be a dangerous game for the EU to play. The UK would just retaliate by seizing EU money in the accounts from UK based banks, and failing to find enough funds there, they would seize ships that pass through the Channel or North Sea. That doesn't sound interesting to me, that sounds terrifying.

 

[Giz]

Seizing assets, of course. It's a very tedious process for private individuals but states have rather different means at their disposal. It would be interesting to see how it would play out.

The EU has two choices:

1) Negotiate a mutually beneficial deal

2) Impose a punitive deal

While a punitive deal may sound appealing to some in Brussels... it's rather poor timing to disrupt European harmony and security just as Russia becomes ever more belligerent. (But then historically, Europe doesn't have anywhere near the statesmanlike wisdom of the Brits.)

 

[Degeneve]

I think that would be a dangerous game for the EU to play. The UK would just retaliate by seizing EU money in the accounts from UK based banks, and failing to find enough funds there, they would seize ships that pass through the Channel or North Sea. That doesn't sound interesting to me, that sounds terrifying.

Assuming there is still EU money in the UK banks once the Brexit is completed

And seizing ships in international waters would be nothing else than State organized piracy...

 

[GnaGnaMan]

I think that would be a dangerous game for the EU to play. The UK would just retaliate by seizing EU money in the accounts from UK based banks, and failing to find enough funds there, they would seize ships that pass through the Channel or North Sea. That doesn't sound interesting to me, that sounds terrifying.

That would be piracy; acts of war. Even so-called rogue states don't do that.

 

[GnaGnaMan]

The EU has two choices:

1) Negotiate a mutually beneficial deal

2) Impose a punitive deal

While a punitive deal may sound appealing to some in Brussels... it's rather poor timing to disrupt European harmony and security just as Russia becomes ever more belligerent. (But then historically, Europe doesn't have anywhere near the statesmanlike wisdom of the Brits.)

How would the EU impose a punitive deal?

 

[baron]

Can you give an example?

Of what?