MP details please

[Loz]

Green Goose Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I welcome comments.

Either Reuben is a complete idiot, or he is in desperate need of 10k. The EU is neither, so that particular game theory is utterly irrelevant.

Unless you mean the UK is Reuben.

[rendelharris]

I would comment that our negotiations with the EU over Brexit are likely to be slightly more complex than the "Spilt or Steal" finale to Golden Balls with Jasper Carrott. But hey, you're the expert.

[Green Goose]

Interesting article in today's Times...........

QUOTE

July 25 2016, 12:01am, The Times

If we play clever, we can keep our EU trade

Dominic Raab

To deliver independence, Nelson Mandela quipped, his country had to break the ?vicious cycle of dependence imposed on us by . . . those in command of immense market power?. As we negotiate Brexit, we need to step out of the shadows of Brussels? more benign but still debilitating hold, and grasp the virtuous cycle that independence from the European Union offers.

The referendum was won on the clear basis that Britain would take back control of its borders, money and democracy. When the prime minister says Brexit means Brexit, she is signalling that exit negotiations won?t involve haggling on those issues. They are non-negotiable. Ending free movement of people from the EU is a given, not a bargaining chip. What is on the table is the extent to which we can retain maximum access to the single market for British companies.

It makes sense to secure terms before we leave because they could then be agreed by a qualified majority of EU governments, not dependent upon a unanimous vote. The deal would be less vulnerable to being held hostage by any one country?s special interests, or isolated political spitefulness.

Either way, going into any discussion you need to know your Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement (Batna). The British Batna is to leave the EU with no deal and rely on World Trade Organisation rules. The average EU tariff for non-members is 3.6 per cent, rising to 10 per cent on cars and 22 per cent on agricultural goods.

Of course, even inside the EU, barriers to trade in services are rife. Outside, we would continue to trade with our European friends at a strong clip. But how can we minimise new trade barriers in the Brexit negotiations?

We?re not negotiating from scratch. Our starting point is strong. We have tariff-free access, and EU businesses sell British consumers ?68 billion more each year in goods and services than our companies sell back. New trade barriers would hit continental exporters disproportionately, costing them sales and jobs. That?s why groups such as the German BDI, representing 100,000 businesses and eight million workers, oppose new tariffs on Britain.

The more Britain expands its global trade, the more competitive pressure we exert on our existing trade partners and the stronger the EU?s commercial interest in minimising trade barriers with the UK becomes. To maximise that leverage requires a close partnership between the two big names on the British side of the negotiations ? David Davis, who is leading talks with the EU, and Liam Fox, who is charged with reaching free trade agreements (FTAs) beyond Europe.

Let?s buy wine from Australia without the EU?s 32 per cent tariff

Dr Fox can?t bring any FTAs into force until we leave the EU, but he can tee them up for the day after. UK trade envoys can be dispatched immediately to Australia and New Zealand, the fourth and fifth biggest exporters of wine to the UK, to explain that we wish to sign FTAs so we can drink far more of their chardonnay ? without the EU?s 32 per cent tariff. Good news for British consumers, a sobering message to the French who will face stiffer competition for their share of the UK wine market. Will they really want their politicians to squeeze them further by pressing, out of pique, for more barriers to trade with the UK?

On their way home, those British trade emissaries might stop off in Japan, the fifth biggest exporter of cars to the UK, to explain that we?d like to buy more of their Mazdas ? shorn of the EU?s 10 per cent tariff on cars. Continental carmakers, used to a protected slice of the UK market, will take note. German manufacturers will have no truck with erecting trade barriers against Britain, which would cost German jobs.

Mr Davis and his team should tour the continental business groups and trade fairs and meet union leaders to extol the virtues of European trade, explain Britain?s global strategy and make the case against beggar-thy-neighbour tariffs that would hit their members hardest.

Of course Britain?s new global trade strategy is about more than buying cheaper goods from abroad. It?s also a golden opportunity to sell more planes, cars and pharmaceuticals to the growth markets of the future. The City will have the chance to sell more UK financial services worldwide in markets long neglected under EU trade deals. Scotland can build on its mercantilist tradition, selling more oil and whisky to markets from Latin America to Asia. Beefing up international trade will help to address low productivity, one of the systemic weaknesses of the British economy, by incentivising exports and strengthening competitiveness at home.

The dynamic linking Britain?s openness to trade and our potential to boost exports is powerful. The more we dismantle the barriers that the EU imposes on imports into the UK, the more nations around the world will lower their barriers to our trade. That, in turn, will heap pressure on our EU partners to safeguard their businesses and jobs by resisting calls for tariffs on British goods. This is Brexit?s virtuous circle.

Britain?s strategy must be to increase the international and domestic pressures on the EU politicians sitting across the negotiating table. With elections in Germany and France in 2017, French farmers and the powerful German business lobby will have something to say about politicians threatening their livelihoods and workers with vindictive protectionist gestures aimed at Britain.

UNQUOTE

[Loz]

> Dr Fox can?t bring any FTAs into force until we leave the EU, but he can tee them up for the day after.

That's wildly optimistic. Most trade agreements take many years to negotiate and Fox doesn't actually have any trade negotiators employed as yet. He has zero chance of putting a few together within 24-30 months.

And, the other side of the argument, why the EU has to cause Britain as much economic pain as possible.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jul/24/eu-britain-must-suffer-for-brexit

"The first argument for hurting the UK is by now well rehearsed: prevent another reckless exit on the basis of lies. Europhobe parties across Europe are anxious to repeat the feat of their British counterparts: using distortions, half-truths, racism and delusional fantasies to cheat their way to victory."

[uncleglen]

shouldn't take long to remove tariffs....

[Green Goose]

The key item is the 32% tariff currently imposed by the EU on wines from elsewhere in the world. So, as I said before let wine from Australia,Chile, USA, New Zealand, South Africa, etc etc come in duty free whilst we impose 32% tariff on French wines, now that would really make the French sit up and take notice. That and French elections next year ( watch Le Pen) will see a massive change in sentiment in France.

Now we could let the German and Italian wine imports off relatively lightly just to show that we not at all baised.

Whilst letting the Gerries off on the wine trade we need to hit their car exports hard with say a 20% tariff on their luxury cars. The UK is the biggest market in the world for them 810,000 pa!!

Project fear failed so don't let the same crew tell us that we dont have a strong bargaining position with Europe on Brexit. We have, and we should exploit it fully.

GG

[Loz]

Green Goose Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The key item is the 32% tariff currently imposed

> by the EU on wines from elsewhere in the world.

Well, if that is your 'key item' you can forget about it, because you are utterly wrong. You are confusing current EU tariffs with the standard WTO tariff. Or, in other words, if they fall back to the standard WTO rates, that is what the UK will charge come Brexit for ALL imports of wine. Gee, thanks, Brexiteers. As if collapsing the pound didn't put prices for wine up enough already.

Current EU tariffs on imported wine (of less than 15% ABV) are between 10% and 15% (depending on strength and whether it is bottled or bulk). Chilean wine has no tariffs applied, as they have an FTA with the EU.

And also, to completely ruin your argument, WTO rules would prevent the UK from favouring one country over an

other except in the context of free trade agreements. So unless an FTA is in place, slapping 32% on French wine and 0% on Australian wine would be in contravention of WTO rules.

[Jeremy]

Surely you won't reading it properly, Loz. We need to stick it to the Froggies and the Gerries!! Hit 'em where it hurts!

[Green Goose]

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Green Goose Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > > The key item is the 32% tariff currently imposed

> > by the EU on wines from elsewhere in the world.

> Well, if that is your 'key item' you can forget

> about it, because you are utterly wrong. You are

> confusing current EU tariffs with the standard WTO

> tariff. Or, in other words, if they fall back to

> the standard WTO rates, that is what the UK will

> charge come Brexit for ALL imports of wine.

You just don't get it do you.

We don't have to fall back on WTO tariff rates. We can make a tariff rate at whatever %age we want on selected items like French wines -just like the EU do at 32% on non-EU wine imports. Same as we can set the rate for German cars. That's when it will really hit home to the French and the Gerries.

The UK imports much, much more from Germany and France than we export to them - hence we have the whip hand on the negotiations.

The French and Germans are the two countries that run the show in Brussels and that's why Teresa May went to Berlin and Paris last week. The other members of the EU are relatively insignificant in terms of influence.

If we set out now to agree free trade with other countries (eg USA, Japan, Canada, Korea, Australia, China etc etc) in advance of leaving the EU, then we hve massive leverage against the EU when it comes to negotiating with them. They have more to loose than the UK.

[Loz]

Green Goose Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> > Well, if that is your 'key item' you can forget about it, because you are utterly wrong. You are

> > confusing current EU tariffs with the standard WTO tariff. Or, in other words, if they fall back to

> > the standard WTO rates, that is what the UK will charge come Brexit for ALL imports of wine.

>

> You just don't get it do you.

>

> We don't have to fall back on WTO tariff rates. We can make a tariff rate at whatever %age we want on

> selected items like French wines -just like the EU do at 32% on non-EU wine imports.

Which part of 'you are utterly wrong' were you having trouble with?? The EU does NOT charge 32% on non-EU wine imports.

> We can make a tariff rate at whatever %age we want on selected items like French wines

You are also having sever difficulty with the concept of WTO rules as well. Even if you don't use the default WTO tariff rates, you are still bound by WTO rules. Everybody is. Look up the 'Most Favoured Nation' principle. What you are proposing is impossible and illegal.

And if you are telling us we can negotiate FTAs with "USA, Japan, Canada, Korea, Australia, China etc etc" in two years you are just carrying on with the sort of Brexit lies that got us into this mess in the first place.

[DaveR]

The EU tariffs on wine are not any %age - they are charged per litre on a sliding scale determined by alcohol content. The tariff on a normal bottle is about 10p.

[Loz]

Apologies DaveR - you're right. My sentence earlier should have read:

Current EU tariffs on imported wine (of less than 15% ABV) are between 10 eurocents and 15 eurocents per litre (depending on strength and whether it is bottled or bulk).

[Green Goose]

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Apologies DaveR - you're right. My sentence

> earlier should have read:

>

> Current EU tariffs on imported wine (of less than

> 15% ABV) are between 10 eurocents and 15 eurocents

> per litre (depending on strength and whether it is

> bottled or bulk).

Loz,

Well no lessa wine expert than Jancis Robinson reckons 32% applies .

Here is an excerpt from http://www.jancisrobinson.com/articles/what-would-brexit-mean-for-wine-lovers

QUOTE

Because the UK has negotiated as part of the EU at the World Trade Organisation (WTO), it is likely that it would inherit the EU's tariff regime at the time of leaving, meaning, at least initially, higher prices would be faced by consumers buying imports from the EU and those countries with which the EU has trade agreements. Without any change, a 32% tariff would be levied on imports of wine, for instance.'

Yes, you read that correctly, 32% ...

This is a worst case, however. An alternative is most likely to be agreed as part of a negotiated position between the UK and EU following Brexit. The UK market is such a big market for Spanish, French and Italian wine producers that you would expect that the removal or significant reduction in the WTO's 32% tariff would have to be part of any deal.

UNQUOTE

[DaveR]

Jancis Robinson? I hope I never bought a car from you. These are straightforward factual matters, so please get it right.

Link here to the tariff database operated by the European Commssion:

http://madb.europa.eu/madb/datasetPreviewFormATpubli.htm?datacat_id=AT&from=publi

It's not the easiest to navigate, so link here to a report published last year by the Australian Government, entitled "Impact of tariffs on Australian wine in the European Union"

http://dfat.gov.au/trade/agreements/aeufta/submissions/Documents/australian-grape-and-wine-authority-eufta-submission.PDF

Tables 1 & 2, pages 4-5.

As an aside, watching Green Goose and Lordship 516 coming to blows on this is like watching two schookids trying to solve General Relativity by seeing who can pee furthest up the wall.

[Green Goose]

OK, I accept the source of the figures but I dont think they tell the whole story.

Here is the take from another wine expert. He says the WTO rate is 32%.

http://wine-pages.com/community/threads/wine-and-the-eu.1484/

GG

[DaveR]

But you said this:

"The key item is the 32% tariff currently imposed by the EU on wines from elsewhere in the world."

Which was wrong. It doesn't get any righter because other people were/are wrong about it.

The 'whole story' is that this fact is inaccurate, and any argument premised on it's correctness needs to be re-examined. Not by me - I couldn't give a toss - but really by you, if you're going to keep posting. IMHO.

[Cardelia]

Green Goose,

If you read the article on Jancis Robinson's site, you'd have noted that it wasn't actually written by Jancis. Instead, it was a guest contribution by a guy called Simon Reilly. He happens to run the wineloon.com site and if you look at the front page of that you'll note the following:

My name is Simon Reilly. I am a wine writer who lives in Forest Hill, London.

Wine writing is my hobby and passion. I have a job outside of wine. I have no wine qualifications. I am a consumer first and foremost.

(my emphasis)

Even if he did have a "wine qualification" I'm pretty sure that the WSET syllabus doesn't cover the economic implications of Brexit or the finer details of WTO import/export tariffs so I don't know why you'd cite a "wine expert" when it comes to economic and political matters. Especially when, as Dave R points out, he is wrong.

Secondly, Jonathan Hesford is a winemaker from the Roussillon region of France, so he actually does knows a little bit about import/export tariffs because it's part of his job. He is NOT saying that the EU imposes a 32% tariff on wines imported from outside the EU. Instead, he's saying that that 32% is the default WTO tariff for wine imports if no alternative trade agreement is reached. Which is what Loz has been saying all along...

[Loz]

Green Goose Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Here is the take from another wine expert. He says the WTO rate is 32%.

Yes, I've been saying all along that the default WTO rate is 32%. I've also being saying all along you are confusing that with the EU tariff.

And you've just done it again.

Face it GG, your grand plan for forcing France to submit at the negotiating table is about as plausible as the ?350m a week claim.

[Loz]

Cardelia Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Even if he did have a "wine qualification" I'm pretty sure that the WSET syllabus doesn't cover

> the economic implications of Brexit or the finer details of WTO import/export tariffs

Coincidentally, I have two WSET qualifications. Perhaps in GG's book that makes me a 'wine expert' and GG will finally believe me!

[Abe_froeman]

The World Trade Organisation does not set tariffs, it's individual members do. At the moment our membership of the WTO is managed through the EU and all of our international trade arrangements are EU trade arrangements.

When Brexit is implemented we will set our own tariffs but it is a fundamental condition of WTO membership that you cannot impose different tariffs on different countries without a free trade agreement in place. This is beneficial to the UK because it means that EU countries won't be able to impose punitive export duties on products they sell to the UK without also putting those duties on every other non-EU, non-EU free trade agreement country (such as the US, Japan, China, Australia etc etc). The quid pro quo is that we can't pick and choose which countries' products we out tariffs on, it's all or nothing.

[Green Goose]

OK, if we cannot employ differential tariffs against individual countries, why dont we stick it to the French with non-tariff barriers on wine exports. Like, all wine exports to the UK must be bulk imported (as is much Australian wine nowadays) and then bottled locally.

[Loz]

Just about all bulk shipments are for wines under the ?6 mark, so you would essentially be banning imports of all wine above that level. That would, in turn, wipe out just about all non-supermarket wine retailers in the UK at a stroke. French winemakers supporting that price level would adapt in a very short time period.

I just hope that the real trade negotiators don't succumb to such moronic, idiotic, short-sighted, half-witted ideas.

[Abe_froeman]

And the reason they're bottled locally is because its much lighter and therfore cheaper, to ship just the wine in a huge container than it is to put into bottles and ship those too.