Brexit matters

[Falcon1200]

For me I voted Remain but I have accepted the result to a degree but IMO any attempt to rejoin will require a referendum in which voters are better informed than the last one

I very much agree, having also voted Remain, but I too have accepted the result (as I have of course with the other recent referendum which did go my way, here in Scotland).

Any political party campaigning to rejoin the EU would surely have serious questions to answer on what conditions would be imposed on us, and these would have to made clear, and guaranteed by the EU, before any second referendum; eg would we get the same deal we had before (very doubtful IMHO), would we have to join the Euro, etc.

 

[brad465]

Yesterday was the final Mock the Week episode and one of 2 compilations looking back over its history. An analogy on Brexit by James Acaster featured, which was described at the time as "the smartest thing anyone has said in the last 2 months". 6 years later it's about as old as it was then:

 

[Luke McDonnell]

A frustrating thing that is Brexit related is the Northern Ireland situation with the DUP not nominating a deputy first minister until they get there way on the Protocol yes I know that the DUP are not happy about the Protocol as they believe that its existence threatens NI's position as part of the UK and from there POV they see NI being treated as a foreign territory from Britain for customs territory purposes (in a nutshell as I understand it). Also, I understand that they have claimed that they have a democratic mandate from the last Stormont election to stay out of government until they get there way on the Protocol. But I find the ability of them (or any other party - does anyone remember that Sinn Fein did the same for nearly 3 years over the RHI scandal and Irish Language legislation) quite unacceptable why cannot the next largest unionist party (UUP) who are opposed to the protocol but have said they don't see it as a barrier to forming a government step up and nominate (with relevant legislation changed to allow them to do so)?

So any thoughts of what will happen over NI as IMO they have got to get this sorted out sooner rather than later with a deal on the protocol significantly reducing the number of checks - there should be some sort of scheme where goods that are destined for NI only are not subject to customs checks but goods that are crossing the border into the South are subject to checks? Or they should be a change in the Stormont legislation to enable the UUP to step up and nominate a DFM enabling a government to be formed in the absence of the DUP - yes, I have heard commentators saying that doing this is a violation of the Good Friday Agreement and it risks destroying it or making things even worse (why?), but I think that trying this is better than leaving NI ungovernable on a semi-permeant basis or direct rule from Westminster?

Also what do you think will happen if (hopefully not) the NI problem is left on the plate of a potential incoming Labour UK government to deal with (which is possible if Stormont is down for as long as it was last time with Sinn Fein refusing to take part) - do you think that a Labour government maybe more likely to try a solution that increases dynamic alignment with the EU which reduces the need for Customs checks as Labour would politically have more room for manoeuvre on this than the Tories - so would in this scenario a Labour government at Westminster make resolution and Stormont revival more likely?

 

[AlterEgo]

A frustrating thing that is Brexit related is the Northern Ireland situation with the DUP not nominating a deputy first minister until they get there way on the Protocol yes I know that the DUP are not happy about the Protocol as they believe that its existence threatens NI's position as part of the UK and from there POV they see NI being treated as a foreign territory from Britain for customs territory purposes (in a nutshell as I understand it). Also, I understand that they have claimed that they have a democratic mandate from the last Stormont election to stay out of government until they get there way on the Protocol. But I find the ability of them (or any other party - does anyone remember that Sinn Fein did the same for nearly 3 years over the RHI scandal and Irish Language legislation) quite unacceptable why cannot the next largest unionist party (UUP) who are opposed to the protocol but have said they don't see it as a barrier to forming a government step up and nominate (with relevant legislation changed to allow them to do so)?

So any thoughts of what will happen over NI as IMO they have got to get this sorted out sooner rather than later with a deal on the protocol significantly reducing the number of checks - there should be some sort of scheme where goods that are destined for NI only are not subject to customs checks but goods that are crossing the border into the South are subject to checks? Or they should be a change in the Stormont legislation to enable the UUP to step up and nominate a DFM enabling a government to be formed in the absence of the DUP - yes, I have heard commentators saying that doing this is a violation of the Good Friday Agreement and it risks destroying it or making things even worse (why?), but I think that trying this is better than leaving NI ungovernable on a semi-permeant basis or direct rule from Westminster?

Also what do you think will happen if (hopefully not) the NI problem is left on the plate of a potential incoming Labour UK government to deal with (which is possible if Stormont is down for as long as it was last time with Sinn Fein refusing to take part) - do you think that a Labour government maybe more likely to try a solution that increases dynamic alignment with the EU which reduces the need for Customs checks as Labour would politically have more room for manoeuvre on this than the Tories - so would in this scenario a Labour government at Westminster make resolution and Stormont revival more likely?

I think you’ll really struggle to get people outside of Northern Ireland to care very much about the place. Its separateness, geographically and culturally, and its continuing situation of being the lowest priority part of the United Kingdom are the fundamental reason it’s always, always had a raw deal.

Ulster Unionism and loyalism are sneered upon by “mainlanders” as an errant franchise, most charitably described as “cringe” and less charitably as rampantly colonial, exclusionary, parochial and backward.

On the subject of the Good Friday Agreement, no, customs checks are not part of that Agreement and never were, so there is no fundamental breach. The GFA was a product of its time, most of the ideas were from the Sunningdale Agreement a couple of decades before it anyway. The GFA dealt with cultural, citizenship, human rights, identity and institutional issues etc… and customs checks are quite a long way outside its scope because they simply weren’t considered to ever be likely when the GFA was drafted. In any case it’s a bit rich for the DUP to suddenly claim offence under said Agreement because they hated it and its ideas and frankly asking anyone other than them to care about the DUP’s issues is a non starter. Nobody outside Northern Ireland likes them or cares to understand them.

 

[Annetts key]

In my humble opinion, sorting out the DUP is relatively easy. In a private meeting, the U.K. government reads the riot act to them, saying that if there is no functioning government in NI within three months (after the Elections in January), then Westminster will take direct control on a temporary basis while negotiations take place with the Republic of Ireland to reunite the whole country… With that rocket launched, maybe the DUP will come to their senses.

Unfortunately, the current fudge over the custom arrangements can never be properly fixed while the conflicting situation of the U.K. being outside of the E.U. single market, the Republic of Ireland being in the E.U. single market and there being no ‘hard land border’ between the two exists.

Whatever arrangements the politicians come up with, someone somewhere will be upset. And there will be opportunities for criminals and smugglers to find ways around the arrangements…

Plus these fudges increase complexity and hence increase costs for everyone, including tax payers.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

In my humble opinion, sorting out the DUP is relatively easy. In a private meeting, the U.K. government reads the riot act to them, saying that if there is no functioning government in NI within three months (after the Elections in January), then Westminster will take direct control on a temporary basis while negotiations take place with the Republic of Ireland to reunite the whole country… With that rocket launched, maybe the DUP will come to their senses.

I certainly wouldn't go that far, and I'm not sure that's even workable. It would be extraordinarily undemocratic to seek to unify Ireland in the absence of a referendum plus majority support in Northern Ireland for that: Arguably, morally even worse than what the DUP are currently doing. And I rather imagine the Irish Government would recognise that problem and refuse to negotiate unification under those circumstances anyway: They may well want unification in principle, but I'm sure they don't want to be stuck with ungovernable Northern Ireland, the majority of whose residents wanted to stay in the UK!

Having said that, the DUPs actions in trying to hold the UK to ransom over the Brexit agreement are appalling. I'd probably be thinking of something not too dissimilar from your suggestion, but much less drastic: Tell the DUP that if they are not willing to be part of a Northern Ireland Government, then the UK Government will change the law to allow a Northern Ireland Government to be formed without them. I suspect that would also bring the DUP to their senses, since the alternative would be a Sinn Fein-lead Government that excludes them - and I'm sure they don't want that!

 

[duncanp]

I certainly wouldn't go that far, and I'm not sure that's even workable. It would be extraordinarily undemocratic to seek to unify Ireland in the absence of a referendum plus majority support in Northern Ireland for that: Arguably, morally even worse than what the DUP are currently doing. And I rather imagine the Irish Government would recognise that problem and refuse to negotiate unification under those circumstances anyway: They may well want unification in principle, but I'm sure they don't want to be stuck with ungovernable Northern Ireland, the majority of whose residents wanted to stay in the UK!

Having said that, the DUPs actions in trying to hold the UK to ransom over the Brexit agreement are appalling. I'd probably be thinking of something not too dissimilar from your suggestion, but much less drastic: Tell the DUP that if they are not willing to be part of a Northern Ireland Government, then the UK Government will change the law to allow a Northern Ireland Government to be formed without them. I suspect that would also bring the DUP to their senses, since the alternative would be a Sinn Fein-lead Government that excludes them - and I'm sure they don't want that!

Yes, it is all very well Sinn Fein taking the moral high ground at the moment, but they conveniently forget that they collapsed the Northern Ireland Executive for three years, ostensibly over the green energy scandal, but in reality they were trying to force the UK government to pass an Irish Language Act.

See the extract below from the BBC website.

Stormont collapsed in January 2017 when the two biggest parties - the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) and nationalist party Sinn Féin - split in a bitter row over the DUP's handling of a green energy scandal.

Since then, the Northern Ireland Assembly has been suspended.

The parties clashed after Sinn Féin said it would not go back into an executive (or power-sharing arrangement) with the DUP, unless legislation for an Irish language act was implemented

The whole Good Friday agreement needs to be overhauled, with the power sharing arrangements abolished, and a government in Northern Ireland formed in the same way as it is in Scotland and Wales, based on the results of the assembly elections. The cross community Alliance Party would act as a moderating influence on the extremists from both sides, and force the formation of a government in Northern Ireland that puts the interests of the people before party political considerations.

 

[JonasB]

eg would we get the same deal we had before (very doubtful IMHO)

No, that is something the treaty is clear on. A country that has left the EU and wishes to rejoin need to apply for membership the same way as any other country that wishes to join.

 

[najaB]

A country that has left the EU and wishes to rejoin need to apply for membership the same way as any other country that wishes to join.

Which doesn't, in itself, negate the possibility of getting opt-outs and concessions during the negotiations (as unlikely as we would be to actually receive them).

 

[Cloud Strife]

So any thoughts of what will happen over NI as IMO they have got to get this sorted out sooner rather than later with a deal on the protocol significantly reducing the number of checks - there should be some sort of scheme where goods that are destined for NI only are not subject to customs checks but goods that are crossing the border into the South are subject to checks?

It simply isn't workable. How can you track the goods once they're in NI? The border is wide open, and there are some buildings that are built across the border too. An infamous example is the (former?) IRA Chief of Staff's house. The house here is located physically within Northern Ireland, but the border is literally outside the front door, so if you leave the house, you step into the Republic of Ireland and therefore the EU. Some of the buildings bisect the border, others are in the North, others in the South. And all this is his property.

Imposing customs checks on the Irish border also won't receive consent from nationalists, which is a key component of the GFA.

Or they should be a change in the Stormont legislation to enable the UUP to step up and nominate a DFM enabling a government to be formed in the absence of the DUP - yes, I have heard commentators saying that doing this is a violation of the Good Friday Agreement and it risks destroying it or making things even worse (why?), but I think that trying this is better than leaving NI ungovernable on a semi-permeant basis or direct rule from Westminster?

Yes, this is my view. The rules should be changed so that if the largest community party doesn't step up, then the next biggest party is offered the job. The DUP (and previously, Sinn Fein) were only blocking the Executive because they could. The other option is that if the two largest community parties refuse to form an Executive, then they immediately lose all financing relating to the Stormont elections as well as the second largest party getting a chance.

But there is one other thing: Is Northern Ireland necessarily a governable state? I would argue that it isn't, given the history since the 1950s.

Which doesn't, in itself, negate the possibility of getting opt-outs and concessions during the negotiations (as unlikely as we would be to actually receive them).

There are always some concessions when a member state joins. In the case of the UK, being such a big and important economy, I'd say that it's almost certain that the UK would be allowed to remain outside Schengen and the Euro.

The whole Good Friday agreement needs to be overhauled, with the power sharing arrangements abolished, and a government in Northern Ireland formed in the same way as it is in Scotland and Wales, based on the results of the assembly elections. The cross community Alliance Party would act as a moderating influence on the extremists from both sides, and force the formation of a government in Northern Ireland that puts the interests of the people before party political considerations.

It wouldn't work. Take the 2016 elections: the DUP, UUP and TUV had 55 out of 108 seats, which would have resulted in a Unionist majority. Nationalists will never agree to sole Unionist rule, so it's a non-starter. While demographics are changing, there needs to be a mandatory power sharing in order for the NI Executive to function.

 

[E27007]

If the controls and checks of the protocol were dropped and goods "leaked" without checks between Northern Ireland, and the Republic of Ireland and vice-versa, what would be the total cost of those goods? What would be that cost in scale to all the sheer expense of Brussels, tax avoidance (Luxembourg) , bureaucratic waste (Eu Commission) ,EU red tape, EU accounts which cannot be signed off, etc etc etc,

 

[najaB]

If the controls and checks of the protocol were dropped and goods "leaked" without checks between Northern Ireland, and the Republic of Ireland and vice-versa...

I'm not sure I understand the question. There aren't any checks between NI and ROI - that's the whole point of the protocol - the checks are made between GB and NI.

The issue isn't goods leaking between NI and ROI but rather between GB and the EU via NI.

 

[E27007]

I'm not sure I understand the question. There aren't any checks between NI and ROI - that's the whole point of the protocol - the checks are made between GB and NI.

The issue isn't goods leaking between NI and ROI but rather between GB and the EU via NI.

I'm aware the checks do not take place between NI and ROI, the border is virtual, "The Irish Sea", the issue of goods and leakage is likely to be between NI and ROI, it is the logical path.
ROI has a population of 5 million, a tiny percentage of the EU population, unless those 5 million discover a great latent talent for trade of goods which have leaked from UK via NI, I do not foresee much scope for "contamination" of the trading principles of the EU

Are you sure the issue is between GB and the EU? GB is England Scotland Wales, the UK is the England, Scotland Wales plus Northern Ireland

 

[Annetts key]

The issues are fundamental principles. What is the point of having standards if you allow people or organisations to be able to bypass or ignore them?

Plus if you start making exceptions, soon lots of others will want their own exceptions. Then you just get a huge mess.

 

[AM9]

I'm aware the checks do not take place between NI and ROI, the border is virtual, "The Irish Sea", the issue of goods and leakage is likely to be between NI and ROI, it is the logical path.
ROI has a population of 5 million, a tiny percentage of the EU population, unless those 5 million discover a great latent talent for trade of goods which have leaked from UK via NI, I do not foresee much scope for "contamination" of the trading principles of the EU

Are you sure the issue is between GB and the EU? GB is England Scotland Wales, the UK is the England, Scotland Wales plus Northern Ireland

@najaB didn't say that the issue was between GB and the EU, - that's your words. The post said: "goods leaking between NI and ROI but rather between GB and the EU via NI" which is obvious because GB is the only part of the UK outside the single market. Once in NI, the goods are in the single market, so if they aren't checked before entering NI then there is a leakage path to the single market.
It was explained by Theresa May way back in 2016 that this problem would arise but Brexiteers pretended that it wasn't a problem and their followers in the electorate believed that, (along with all the other lies).

 

[E27007]

The issues are fundamental principles. What is the point of having standards if you allow people or organisations to be able to bypass or ignore them?

Plus if you start making exceptions, soon lots of others will want their own exceptions. Then you just get a huge mess.

I see your point, the many exceptions to the Stability and Growth Pact and convergence criteria for adoption of the Euro

 

[najaB]

Are you sure the issue is between GB and the EU? GB is England Scotland Wales, the UK is the England, Scotland Wales plus Northern Ireland

Yes. I am sure of that.

The UK decided that we want to erect a trade border between us and the EU. If we want that border then there are three options:

• Between the ROI and the EU. Unacceptable and unenforceable since the UK government has no power to enforce laws in ROI (despite what the Honourable Member for the 18th Century might believe)
• Between ROI and NI. Unacceptable and unenforceable since it would contravene the Good Friday Agreement and provide fresh air for the simmering sectarian conflict in NI
• The only workable option is to place the border between NI and GB.

If you can find a solution that keeps the whole of the UK outside of the customs union and ROI inside the customs union and which also doesn't involve a border between GB and NI I'm sure that HM Government are accepting answers on a postcard.

 

[Annetts key]

I see your point, the many exceptions to the Stability and Growth Pact and convergence criteria for adoption of the Euro

Well, so far, no one has been able to give me a good reason why we still use the devaluated pound sterling. You know, the only major currency of a first world country that not long ago was dropping quicker in value than any other. And sovereignty apparently means benefiting from worse (as in higher) inflation and interest rates, plus most likely a recession.

 

[E27007]

Yes. I am sure of that.

The UK decided that we want to erect a trade border between us and the EU. If we want that border then there are three options:

• Between the ROI and the EU. Unacceptable and unenforceable since the UK government has no power to enforce laws in ROI (despite what the Honourable Member for the 18th Century might believe)
• Between ROI and NI. Unacceptable and unenforceable since it would contravene the Good Friday Agreement and provide fresh air for the simmering sectarian conflict in NI
• The only workable option is to place the border between NI and GB.

If you can find a solution that keeps the whole of the UK outside of the customs union and ROI inside the customs union and which also doesn't involve a border between GB and NI I'm sure that HM Government are accepting answers on a postcard.

I accept and understand your three "bullet" points.
If there are no customs borders / control between ROI and NI whatsoever, there will inevitable be a a "leakage " of goods between the markets typically via the EU member the ROI and non-EU NI.
The question is: what would be the scale and value of the leakage of goods between the two?
If the leakage is viewed a form of fraud or underhand economic activity, as a % of all the fraud and underhand activity within the Brussels budget how much of an issue are we really looking at?

My postcard would read, both parties agree to not have a border between ROI and NI, and both parties accept the leakage of goods due to a lack of borders as the leakage is not financially significant in terms of the economic size of the EU

 

[edwin_m]

If the controls and checks of the protocol were dropped and goods "leaked" without checks between Northern Ireland, and the Republic of Ireland and vice-versa, what would be the total cost of those goods? What would be that cost in scale to all the sheer expense of Brussels, tax avoidance (Luxembourg) , bureaucratic waste (Eu Commission) ,EU red tape, EU accounts which cannot be signed off, etc etc etc,

I accept and understand your three "bullet" points.
If there are no customs borders / control between ROI and NI whatsoever, there will inevitable be a a "leakage " of goods between the markets typically via the EU member the ROI and non-EU NI.
The question is: what would be the scale and value of the leakage of goods between the two?
If the leakage is viewed a form of fraud or underhand economic activity, as a % of all the fraud and underhand activity within the Brussels budget how much of an issue are we really looking at?

My postcard would read, both parties agree to not have a border and both parties accept the leakage of goods due to a lack of borders as the leakage is not financially significant in terms of the economic size of the EU

The problem there is that this would literally be an open door for smugglers, something the terrorist groups used to indulge in before the Good Friday agreement to fund their other activities, and presumably there are people still out there who would be glad of the opportunity to resume both. When you create a loophole that it's worth people's while to exploit, then the usage of it would be likely to continue growing until someone had to put a stop to it.

 

[Falcon1200]

The problem there is that this would literally be an open door for smugglers

What would actually be smuggled now as opposed to pre-Brexit though? Given that there is no border between the ROI and NI, and that taxation on goods is (presumably) the same in NI and GB, but not necessarily the same as the ROI - That has not changed AFAIK. Is the issue not more that the EU is unwilling to trust the UK to continue to meet the same standards as its members, therefore requiring a hard border somewhere, which in the interests of peace has to be between GB and NI?

(I recall a fairly recent episode of Countryfile, in which two NI farmers discussed the impact of Brexit; One trades (cereal IIRC) mainly with the ROI, so is happy with the post-Brexit arrangements, whereas for the other they are a nightmare as he exports cattle to GB. No simple answer!)

 

[najaB]

Is the issue not more that the EU is unwilling to trust the UK to continue to meet the same standards as its members, therefore requiring a hard border somewhere, which in the interests of peace has to be between GB and NI?

It's not a matter of trust. They offered standards alignment and we specifically rejected the idea, hence the UKCA mark on goods.

 

[nw1]

Yes. I am sure of that.

The UK decided that we want to erect a trade border between us and the EU. If we want that border then there are three options:

• Between the ROI and the EU. Unacceptable and unenforceable since the UK government has no power to enforce laws in ROI (despite what the Honourable Member for the 18th Century might believe)
• Between ROI and NI. Unacceptable and unenforceable since it would contravene the Good Friday Agreement and provide fresh air for the simmering sectarian conflict in NI
• The only workable option is to place the border between NI and GB.

If you can find a solution that keeps the whole of the UK outside of the customs union and ROI inside the customs union and which also doesn't involve a border between GB and NI I'm sure that HM Government are accepting answers on a postcard.

The solution of course, is just to rejoin the goddamn customs union. Then there's no need for any hard trade border anywhere. Not between the continent and ROI. Not between ROI and NI. And not between NI and GB.

This is a stupid problem of the UK Government's own making. They messed up a perfectly fine system just because they wanted votes from the more militant and extreme type of Brexiter, the type that wasn't satisfied with merely leaving the EU, but insisted on ending free trade and freedom of movement as well.

Nothing will get done about it with Sunak in power of course, but I do think we will rejoin the customs union at some point, when we have a government that understand the ridiculousness of leaving it. But only when there's a change of government as this lot will do nothing, because they want to save face and not admit that they messed up.

 

[AM9]

It's not a matter of trust. They offered standards alignment and we specifically rejected the idea, hence the UKCA mark on goods.

I would imagine the EU's concern goes much deeper than that, - the brexiteer governments that we've had since 2016 have increasingly hinted that they want to throw away all the quality controls that we've had as a member of the EU, and showing an unhealthy interest in the much more lax 'buyer beware' approach endured in the land of the free.

 

[Annetts key]

The solution of course, is just to rejoin the goddamn customs union. Then there's no need for any hard trade border anywhere. Not between the continent and ROI. Not between ROI and NI. And not between NI and GB.

This is a stupid problem of the UK Government's own making. They messed up a perfectly fine system just because they wanted votes from the more militant and extreme type of Brexiter, the type that wasn't satisfied with merely leaving the EU, but insisted on ending free trade and freedom of movement as well.

Nothing will get done about it with Sunak in power of course, but I do think we will rejoin the customs union at some point, when we have a government that understand the ridiculousness of leaving it. But only when there's a change of government as this lot will do nothing, because they want to save face and not admit that they messed up.

Yeah, I agree with what nw1 says. The Boris Johnson lead Conservative government wanted to leave everything that involved European cooperation including agreements and organisations that are nothing to do with the E.U.

Remember, the majority of businesses were not best keen on brexit in the first place, and we already know that exports have dropped drastically since brexit.

The logical solution is to apologise, admit that mistakes have been made, and negotiate to rejoin the customs union and to adopt E.U. standards again.

 

[reddragon]

The solution of course, is just to rejoin the goddamn customs union. Then there's no need for any hard trade border anywhere. Not between the continent and ROI. Not between ROI and NI. And not between NI and GB.

This is a stupid problem of the UK Government's own making. They messed up a perfectly fine system just because they wanted votes from the more militant and extreme type of Brexiter, the type that wasn't satisfied with merely leaving the EU, but insisted on ending free trade and freedom of movement as well.

Nothing will get done about it with Sunak in power of course, but I do think we will rejoin the customs union at some point, when we have a government that understand the ridiculousness of leaving it. But only when there's a change of government as this lot will do nothing, because they want to save face and not admit that they messed up.

No there was a simpler reason.

EU law now bans off shore tax havens (true reason for Brexit) and they are now taxed on tax haven investments. The super rich Tory donors are not going to accept that and Sunak would have to pay tax!

The sad thing is that the Muppets that read the Daily Fail fell for it hook line & sinker for it, normal workers who now pay for the cost if this disaster. Whilst our economy enters recession, the EU economy recovers from Covid unaffected by Brexit.

Who actually pays for this? Those nationalist workers who thought they had the most to gain!

 

[Cloud Strife]

• Between ROI and NI. Unacceptable and unenforceable since it would contravene the Good Friday Agreement and provide fresh air for the simmering sectarian conflict in NI

From a legal point of view, it is questionable whether it contravenes the GFA. The GFA is quite silent on the issue, and Customs matters are reserved to Westminister, so there's no problem with the NI Assembly.

The second point: absolutely. I'd fully expect the UK to return to the pre-1993 state of affairs, where only people doing legitimate business were bothering to report to the UK customs posts.

What would actually be smuggled now as opposed to pre-Brexit though?

So, let me answer this. Before 1993 (which was when the Single Market came into effect and customs posts were closed), the standard scam involved exporting goods on one side of the border and then not importing it officially on the other side. Let's take two scenarios:

- Lorry load of meat from the RoI. The meat is exported officially at the Irish border (in 1992, the customs post was in the middle of Dundalk), then the truck would simply cross the border at Killeen and vanish.

- Lorry load of televisions from the UK. The goods would be exported (and VAT returned) at the Newry customs post, which was on the NW side of Newry. The televisions would then be smuggled into the Republic, either by crossing the border at night when the customs posts were closed, or as was more common, they would simply be unloaded and reloaded within one of the many farms that biseect the border.

It wasn't such a big deal for the EU in those days, because the goods couldn't be exported from the UK/RoI without crossing a customs border. Now that there's the Single Market, a truck full of televisions can be smuggled anywhere in the EU because of the lack of controls between the RoI and the rest of the EU.

With VAT at 20% in the UK and 23% in the RoI, there is a huge incentive to smuggle in both directions. It gets even more serious when you think about excisable goods, such as fuel or cigarettes. Let's say that you export a tanker of fuel. You'll get quite a substantial refund on duties and VAT at the UK border, which can then be sold in various dodgy outlets in the RoI, and vice-versa.

Let's say that fuel is cheaper in NI. You buy a tanker of fuel at xx price, get roughly 60-70% back on export, then sell it for perhaps 20% off the pump price in the RoI. It's easy to see why the IRA were smuggling fuel with that kind of profit on offer.

 

[JamesT]

No there was a simpler reason.

EU law now bans off shore tax havens (true reason for Brexit) and they are now taxed on tax haven investments. The super rich Tory donors are not going to accept that and Sunak would have to pay tax!

The sad thing is that the Muppets that read the Daily Fail fell for it hook line & sinker for it, normal workers who now pay for the cost if this disaster. Whilst our economy enters recession, the EU economy recovers from Covid unaffected by Brexit.

Who actually pays for this? Those nationalist workers who thought they had the most to gain!

Ah, this old chestnut. Brexit had no effect on tax avoidance, as we had already legislated for the new rules. See https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/50168357 for the details.

The EU is likely to enter recession too, for similar reasons to us: https://www.ft.com/content/dbef6a09-a688-42d5-a640-cea055bccb9b
(Can't share the article contents, against FT T&Cs)

 

[reddragon]

Ah, this old chestnut. Brexit had no effect on tax avoidance, as we had already legislated for the new rules. See https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/50168357 for the details.

The EU is likely to enter recession too, for similar reasons to us: https://www.ft.com/content/dbef6a09-a688-42d5-a640-cea055bccb9b
(Can't share the article contents, against FT T&Cs)

Really

EU agrees to force multinationals to disclose tax, piling pressure on UK

Companies with revenues above €750m will be required to publish a country by country breakdown

www.theguardian.com

The EU has agreed it will force large multinational companies to publish a breakdown of the tax they pay in each of the bloc’s member states and in tax havens such as Seychelles, piling pressure on the UK government to follow suit.

 

[najaB]

Ah, this old chestnut. Brexit had no effect on tax avoidance, as we had already legislated for the new rules. See https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/50168357 for the details.

That was purely down to timing. Don't forget the multiple Article 50 trigger period extensions that we benefitted from.