Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

How Bright Are the Prospects for UK Trade and Prosperity Post-Brexit?

How Bright Are the Prospects for UK Trade and Prosperity Post-Brexit? So long as the UK government liberates itself from the protectionist mercantilist mindset of the European Union and reduces trade barriers after Brexit, and UK businesses respond positively to the challenge of increased international competition (through increased productivity and exports), the prospects for UK trade and prosperity post-Brexit are very bright indeed. The EU itself acknowledges that 90% of future growth in global gross domestic product will be outside the EU. The costs of remaining in the EU are very high and not all purely economic: the EU is no longer a force for global liberalisation. On the basis of both international and EU law, the monetary costs to the UK of leaving the EU should have been fairly low. Similarly, the frictional costs to both the UK and the EU of their post-Brexit trade relationship should also be low. However, as a consequence of both the concessions made by the UK in order to demonstrate its goodwill and the hard line taken by the EU in order to discourage other member states from leaving, these costs could well end up being much higher than they need be for both sides. Of particular concern is the EU’s “level playing field” demand, laid out in the (albeit non-binding) Political Declaration for a future trading relationship. This would effectively prevent the UK from achieving regulatory autonomy or from pursuing an independent trade policy. The Treasury predicts a 7.7% reduction in GDP in the event of “no deal” in which the UK retained the existing Common External Tariff with the rest of the world and also imposed the same tariffs on trade with the EU. However, EU barriers on trade in food and manufactures raise their prices by 20%. By leaving the Customs Union and reducing these barriers from 20% to 10%, UK GDP would rise by 4%. By leaving the Single Market and avoiding the costs of meeting its excessive regulatory standards, UK GDP would rise by another 2%. The total increase in GDP of 6% is similar to the 5.4% increase in GDP following Australia’s trade liberalisation in 1986. JEL codes: F13, F40, F59 Keywords: international trade; free trade agreements; protectionism; tariffs; non-tariff barriers; Brexit http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Self-Governance and Management Economics Addleton Academic Publishers

How Bright Are the Prospects for UK Trade and Prosperity Post-Brexit?

Download PDF
93 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/addleton-academic-publishers/how-bright-are-the-prospects-for-uk-trade-and-prosperity-post-brexit-3rG4yl7YuW

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Addleton Academic Publishers
Copyright
© 2009 Addleton Academic Publishers
ISSN
2329-4175
eISSN
2377-0996
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

So long as the UK government liberates itself from the protectionist mercantilist mindset of the European Union and reduces trade barriers after Brexit, and UK businesses respond positively to the challenge of increased international competition (through increased productivity and exports), the prospects for UK trade and prosperity post-Brexit are very bright indeed. The EU itself acknowledges that 90% of future growth in global gross domestic product will be outside the EU. The costs of remaining in the EU are very high and not all purely economic: the EU is no longer a force for global liberalisation. On the basis of both international and EU law, the monetary costs to the UK of leaving the EU should have been fairly low. Similarly, the frictional costs to both the UK and the EU of their post-Brexit trade relationship should also be low. However, as a consequence of both the concessions made by the UK in order to demonstrate its goodwill and the hard line taken by the EU in order to discourage other member states from leaving, these costs could well end up being much higher than they need be for both sides. Of particular concern is the EU’s “level playing field” demand, laid out in the (albeit non-binding) Political Declaration for a future trading relationship. This would effectively prevent the UK from achieving regulatory autonomy or from pursuing an independent trade policy. The Treasury predicts a 7.7% reduction in GDP in the event of “no deal” in which the UK retained the existing Common External Tariff with the rest of the world and also imposed the same tariffs on trade with the EU. However, EU barriers on trade in food and manufactures raise their prices by 20%. By leaving the Customs Union and reducing these barriers from 20% to 10%, UK GDP would rise by 4%. By leaving the Single Market and avoiding the costs of meeting its excessive regulatory standards, UK GDP would rise by another 2%. The total increase in GDP of 6% is similar to the 5.4% increase in GDP following Australia’s trade liberalisation in 1986. JEL codes: F13, F40, F59 Keywords: international trade; free trade agreements; protectionism; tariffs; non-tariff barriers; Brexit

Journal

Journal of Self-Governance and Management Economics – Addleton Academic Publishers

Published: Jan 1, 2020

There are no references for this article.