Consequences Of Britain Leaving The Eu

Consequences Of Britain Leaving The Eu
Consequences Of Britain Leaving The Eu Image link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Issues_in_the_United_Kingdom_European_Union_membership_referendum,_2016
C O N T E N T S:

KEY TOPICS

  • A Brexit do-over would be complicated--all 27 other EU members would have to agree--but since Britain leaving is also disadvantageous for the rest of the EU, they have incentives to welcome back the prodigal.(More...)
  • Britain would trade with the EU under the WTO?s "most favoured nation" status, preventing either side from imposing punitive tariffs, but the move away from frictionless zero-tariff trade is certain to drive up prices in the shops.(More...)
  • Businesses in a variety of sectors have predicted that leaving the European Union will take a bite out of profits and could lead to job cuts.(More...)
  • British Prime Minister Theresa May arrives for the European Union leaders summit at the European Council on December 14, 2017 in Brussels.(More...)
  • This feature is part of Culture after Brexit - a conversation curated by the British Council, about the future of the cultural relationship between the UK and the European Union after Britain exits the EU. (More...)
  • That said, a report published last year by economics Professor Patrick Minford, who is a prominent Leaver, claimed that GDP would be 6 percent higher as a result of Britain leaving the European Union.(More...)
  • There is another part of the problem rarely debated: what is the impact for the EU of having the UK leaving the single market?(More...)

POSSIBLY USEFUL

  • Much of the public debate in the UK around Brexit has been focused on the binary choice of "soft? or "hard Brexit?, which relates to whether the UK should stay in the Single Market and the Customs Union, or have a clean break from both and set up new trade arrangements with other countries.(More...)
  • Several countries, including Norway, Iceland, and Liechtenstein, are members of the European Economic Area and therefore part of the single market, but not part of the EU. These countries benefit from the single market, and make annual payments to the EU (only at a slightly lesser amount than the U.K. does per head), but they have no vote in determining how it is run.(More...)

RANKED SELECTED SOURCES

KEY TOPICS

A Brexit do-over would be complicated--all 27 other EU members would have to agree--but since Britain leaving is also disadvantageous for the rest of the EU, they have incentives to welcome back the prodigal. [1] With the EU and UK issuing guidance on preparations for a no-deal Brexit, here are some pointers on what leaving the EU without a withdrawal agreement on March 29th, 2019 might mean. [2] Here are the practical implications and cold numbers behind the hot-headed rhetoric about no deal with the EU being "better than a bad deal" for Britain: should the UK "crash" out of the EU by late March 2019 the Dutch companies trading with the UK will have to secure a total of no less than 4.2m exporting and 750,000 importing licences. [3] The option of leaving the EU with no deal and simply applying World Trade Organization (WTO) rules would lead to the greatest economic losses for the UK. The analysis of this particular scenario shows that trading under WTO rules would reduce future GDP by around five per cent ten years after Brexit, or $140 billion, compared with EU membership. [1] Accompanying the study is an online calculator, allowing policymakers and economists to alter key trade assumptions in order to understand their economic impact on the UK, EU and U.S. It also allows users to create other scenarios for examination as Brexit negotiations develop and trade talks begin. [1] The study also aimed to create a better understanding of how a variety of factors might affect the outcome of Brexit negotiations between the UK and EU. Finally, the study explored the potential implications of Brexit for the U.S., including the effects on its economic, political and security interests. [1] The economic effects of Brexit will depend crucially on the outcome of the ongoing negotiations between the UK and the EU. But our results show that even before Brexit has actually taken place, the referendum shock of June 2016 has already had substantial economic costs. [4]

On Thursday the Dutch government published a report drawn up by the consultancy firm KPMG analysing the consequences of a "no-deal" Brexit in which the UK leaves the EU without an agreement on 29 March 2019. [3] Opponents of a no-deal Brexit warn that major manufacturers in sectors like automotive, aerospace and pharmaceuticals would shift operations from the UK into the remaining 27 EU states in order to avoid delays and disruption to products and components crossing the border. [2] Brexit negotiations around trade are likely to be complicated for the UK and EU, particularly as a common position between all the parties could be difficult to achieve. [1] The Brexit negotiations appear to be particularly challenging for the UK, as it attempts to disentangle its current ties with the EU while also negotiating arrangements for a future UK-EU trading relationship. [1] The referendum increased uncertainty and led to a decline in the likely future openness of the UK to trade, investment, and immigration with the EU. Consequently, financial markets downgraded their beliefs about the UK?s economic future, leading to the decline in sterling. [4] The seven other trade scenarios would be considerably better for the UK than WTO rules, but most would still lead to economic losses compared its current status as an EU member. [1] Trying to avoid the worst-case economic option of 'no deal' is likely to be at the top of the agendas for both the UK and EU as trade talks begin. [1]

Protections for expatriates agreed as part of withdrawal negotiations could be torn up, creating uncertainty over the legal rights to live and work of 1.3 Britons in EU states and 3.7 million Europeans in the UK. [2] A UK strategy of trying to pick apart European unity is unlikely to work since it is in the best interests of all EU member states to work together. [1] Some legal experts believe the EU could take the UK to the International Court of Justice to recoup the cash, which represents payments to which Britain committed itself while a member. [2] Under WTO rules, the EU would also lose out economically, but nowhere near the same proportion as the UK. The economic loss to the EU could be about 0.7 per cent of its overall GDP ten years after Brexit. [1] After Brexit, political and security effects would be the more important to the U.S. The potential economic gains and losses for the U.S. in Brexit are small,, apart from the TTIP-like arrangement which would result in substantial economic gains for the U.S. The U.S. will miss the influence and global perspective that the UK brings to the EU decision-making process, particularly around foreign policy, security and defence. [1] RAND explored eight plausible post-Brexit trade scenarios involving the UK, EU and U.S. after Brexit. [1] The economic analysis shows that the UK will be economically worse-off outside of the EU under most plausible scenarios. [1] If the UK leaves the EU with no trade deal it could lose 4.9 percent of GDP, or $140 billion, after 10 years. [1] On 23 June 2016, the UK voted to leave the EU. As soon as the result became clear, sterling depreciated sharply and, since the vote, UK inflation has dramatically increased. [4] Financial institutions in the City of London and other centres around the UK would lose their "passporting" rights to operate in EU countries, and could activate contingency plans to move some or all of their operations overseas. [2] The WTO outcome would likely move the UK decisively away from EU standards and result in significantly increased non-tariff standards, harming the ability of UK businesses to sell services to EU countries. [1] Professionals may find that qualifications obtained in the UK are no longer recognised in EU states, and may have to obtain new authorisations in order to continue to practise. [2] ••• Campaigners join Nigel Farage, leader of the UK Independence Party, in their support for the 'Leave' campaign for the EU Referendum aboard a boat on the River Thames on June 15, 2016 in London, England. [5] "Should the UK crash out of the EU by late March 2019 the Dutch companies trading with the UK will have to secure a total of no less than 4.2m exporting and 750,000 importing licences.? [3] Both the UK and the EU have declared their intent to have a positive partnership, but if discussions over the divorce arrangements and future accord are negotiated consecutively rather than concurrently, it could lead to the two parties being unable to reach mutually advantageous accommodations. [1] It is in the best interests of the UK to cooperate with its EU partners to find a new relationship with Europe. [1]

A range of different trade opportunities and arrangements are possible between the UK and European Union (EU), and other countries, such as the United States, post-Brexit. [1] Relevant EU laws would be transferred onto the UK statute book under the terms of the EU Withdrawal Act, so there would be no black holes in Britain?s lawbook. [2] Overall, it is in the best interests of the UK, and to a lesser extent the EU, to work together to achieve some sort of open trading and investment relationship post-Brexit. [1] The logic is simple: while the economic shock of a British crash out of the EU will hurt the Dutch economy, blowing up the EU from within by giving Britain a sweet special deal is even more damaging. [3] For EU member states the negative economic fallout of a British crash departure is far more preferable than the utter catastrophe of the single market imploding. [3] It is clear that the average British household is already paying a price for voting to leave the EU. But not all households are equally affected. [4] Financial services and aviation fall outside the WTO regime, meaning that after a British no-deal departure both sectors must stop trading with the EU overnight. [3] Tariffs raise the cost of exports, making British products higher-priced and less competitive than other EU countries' exports. [5] On March 19, 2018, the United Kingdom and the EU agreed to a 21-month transition plan that is similar to a soft Brexit. [5] Northern Ireland will remain with the United Kingdom, while southern Ireland remains a part of the EU. Prime Minister May rejected the EU proposal that there be a customs border between Northern Ireland and Great Britain. [5]

Not as far as Britain is concerned of course because "no deal" for the UK means the severe disruption of not just one trade flow - as it is for the Netherlands - but of 27. [3] The UK would be 7.1 percentage points of GDP better than the WTO rules scenario, which is even slightly better than continued EU membership would be. [1] While both Britain and the EU will feel the pinch, the UK is set to be worse off. [6] Lloyds Banking Group ( LLOY.L ), Britain's largest mortgage lender and the only major British retail bank without a subsidiary in another EU country, is close to selecting Berlin as a European base to secure EU market access. [7]

Britain would trade with the EU under the WTO?s "most favoured nation" status, preventing either side from imposing punitive tariffs, but the move away from frictionless zero-tariff trade is certain to drive up prices in the shops. [2] Painful as it will be, no deal with Britain is indeed better for the EU than a bad deal. [3] Much like Donald Trump, the Brexiteers have proven themselves immune to information or insight that does not meet their emotional needs. This must be why they continue to hope and insist that in order to avoid this proliferation of new barriers to trade, the EU will relent and allow Britain to have its cake and eat it - to forget about the obligations of EU membership while continuing to enjoy its many advantages. [3]

Companies are reassessing their long-term investments in Britain, fearful of how Brexit might affect trade across the European Union. [8] There are even bigger deals on the horizon - international trade pacts that Britain wants to finalize not only with the European Union but also with the dozens of countries with which the bloc has agreements. [8] While Britain and Europe are negotiating over what happens to European Union citizens who now work in Britain (as well as Britons who work in other European Union countries), no one is sure how those talks will go. [8]

Brexit is the June 23, 2016, referendum where the United Kingdom voted to leave the European Union. [5] All three scenarios are likely to lead to modest financial losses to the UK economy compared to the current arrangement of EU membership. [1] As the EU's third most populous state, with over 12% of the Union's population, the UK is an influential player in the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union. [9] A confidential report prepared for the British government and leaked on Monday suggests that all UK industries will be hurt by leaving the European Union, Buzzfeed News reported. [10]

Backed into a corner: The leak was published hours after ministers from the 27 other EU states endorsed the terms for the transition period between Britain's leaving and finalizing its new relationship with the bloc. [10] Many people, the majority of whom would have voted to remain, are strongly opposed to Britain leaving the EU. [11]

Businesses in a variety of sectors have predicted that leaving the European Union will take a bite out of profits and could lead to job cuts. [8]

Britain's international trade secretary Liam Fox a prominent 'Brexiteer' said that Britain leaving with no deal was the most likely scenario. [12] While the trade impact of Brexit on the UK is likely to be significantly negative, its impact on the EU is also expected to be negative, but small. [9] Brexit highlighted deep divides within the UK. While Scotland and London voted to remain in the EU, Northern England and the Midlands, as well as Wales, voted to leave. [13] Bank of America said in August that its businesses and results could be adversely affected and it may have to incur additional costs if Brexit limited the ability of its UK entities to conduct business in the EU. [7] Their report, sent to Quartz, warns that a "hard Brexit" will mean a 17 billion ($22.7-billion) fall in annual EU export revenues across key UK manufacturing sectors. [6] European Council President Donald Tusk holds a news conference after receiving British Prime Minister Theresa Mays Brexit letter in notice of the UKs intention to leave the bloc under Article 50 of the EUs Lisbon Treaty to EU Council President Donald Tusk in Brussels, Belgium March 29, 2017. [14] Not only do new trade deals take time (a recent one between the EU and Canada took seven years to work out ), they require giving up some level of sovereignty (again, something the British hoped to reclaim with Brexit), and since the British economy is only 18 percent the size of the EU economy, the U.K. doesn?t have the same negotiating power that the EU does. [15] We examined the extent to which British industries depend on trade with the EU. On the basis of an analysis of global trade patterns across 43 countries and 54 industries, we were able to calculate a Brexit risk-exposure index. [16] EU ministers said the UK could keep its membership benefits for a further 21 months, but said the British government could not block or have input on new EU laws during the transition. [10] As a member of the latter, the UK's departure would weaken the liberalist bloc as the UK has been a sizeable and fervent proponent of an economically liberal Europe, larger trade deals with third countries and of further EU enlargement. [9] Should UK manage to agree to a comprehensive trade deal with the EU, but remain outside the single market and customs union, growth would be 5 percent lower than current forecasts. [10] In a "hyper-competitive scenario" - where UK industries can rapidly adjust to life outside the single market by sourcing parts in the UK that are currently sourced from the EU - our findings suggest that increases in UK employment and GDP could be about one-third of the losses in a no-deal scenario. [16] The UK and the EU would become each other's largest trading partner but some states, notably Belgium, Cyprus, Ireland, Germany and the Netherlands, are more exposed to a Brexit-induced economic shock. [9] Many of these services are not only exported directly to EU countries, but are also sold to UK manufacturing firms who then export to the EU. [16] Asked by DW, a UK government spokesman said: "We have already set out that the government is undertaking a wide range of ongoing analysis in support of our EU exit negotiations and preparations." [10] That?s the conclusion of a recent study that compared the impact of an EU exit on the UK versus other EU member states. [13] All of them are at odds with the spirit of the agreement, but one of them will prevent the UK from agreeing to the customs "backstop" solution, which aims to prevent a hard border in Northern Ireland--something the EU has said the entire withdrawal agreement hinges on. [17] Deutsche Bank warned in April that up to 4,000 UK jobs could be moved to Frankfurt and other EU locations - the highest potential move of any bank. [7] For the four main sectors in the report--automotive, consumer, technology and healthcare--the UK takes in just 9% of the EU?s exports, whereas the EU receives a huge 49% of UK exports. [6] The sectors across the EU that would be most hit by the UK's withdrawal are motor vehicles and parts (the UK is a large manufacturer and depends on an EU chain of supply for parts), electronics equipment and processed foods. [9] The reason for the shortfalls: Increased prices for UK exports could make EU consumers switch to domestically produced goods instead. [6] The UK has been a key asset for the EU in the fields of foreign affairs and defence given that the UK is (with France) one of the EU's two major military powers, has significant intelligence capabilities, soft power and a far reaching diplomatic network. [9] After removing about 7 billion that the UK receives in EU subsidies, the loss to the EU budget comes to about 5% of the total. [9]

The findings are the latest embarrassment for British Prime Minister Theresa May's government, which has faced renewed criticism from other EU leaders about the lack of a coherent Brexit strategy. [10] In addition to immigration concerns, there are several potential reasons why British citizens voted to leave the EU. For one, the U.K. pays billions of pounds annually to the EU (all member countries contribute to the EU budget). [15] Why it's concerning: The report heightens the deep uncertainty that followed the June 2016 decision to leave the EU. In the months after, the British pound fell sharply against the dollar and euro, and while the UK economy grew 0.5 percent in the final three months of 2017, annual economic growth was at the weakest rate since 2012 at 1.8 percent. [10] New British trade deals with the U.S., China, India and other countries would boost growth, but not enough to make up for the lost EU revenue, according to the forecast. [10]

Brexit proponents argued that the U.K. would save money by leaving the EU since it would no longer be subsidizing poorer member countries. [15] That brings the total cost of leaving the EU to between six and nine percent, based on whether the U.K. goes with a soft or hard Brexit, respectively. [15] Britain?s June 2016 vote did not initiate the process of the U.K. leaving the EU. That was done in March 2017, when the U.K. triggered article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, which began the actual divorce proceedings. [15] Proponents said leaving the EU would save the U.K. money, but that isn?t the case. [15] " The costs and benefits of leaving the EU: Trade effects." [15]

In these circumstances, a report by Chris Giles and Emily Cadman (2016), FT. 03.01.2016, explained "there are few issues that unite UK economists and Brexit is one of them: they overwhelmingly believe leaving the EU is bad for the country's economic prospects. [18] Politically, Britain will be more isolated because Britain is a crucial member of the EU. It was thanked for the UK, we could immediately start our integration of Ukraine and Georgia, who suffered the most from Russian aggression. [11]

On June 23, 2016, the United Kingdom held a referendum vote on whether or not Britain should stay in the EU. By a vote of 52 percent to 48 percent, British citizens voted to leave. [15] It has 450 staff working in the EU now, mostly in the British capital. [7]

Theresa May hopes that by appearing to prepare for a no deal Brexit, European countries will be incentivized to give Britain a deal she can confidently present to the British parliament after October. [12] Around 10,000 finance jobs will be shifted out of Britain or created overseas in the next few years if the UK is denied access to the single market, a Reuters survey of firms employing the bulk of workers in international finance shows. [7]

A leaked UK government forecast reportedly predicts that the British economy will suffer no matter what trade deal is struck with the European Union. [10] The U.K. has until March 2019 to negotiate its divorce from the European Union, and what happens will affect the economic lives of 65 million British citizens, along with millions more across Europe. [15] If British lawmakers or more than seven E.U. countries reject whatever deal the U.K. forges with European negotiators, that transition period will not come into place -- and Britain will face an uncertain future from March 29 next year. [12] Financial service companies need a regulated subsidiary in an EU country to offer products across the bloc, which could prompt some to move some operations out of Britain if it loses access to the European single market. [7] The U.K. would still have access to the single market, and would continue to allow EU citizens to live and work in Britain. [15]

As Britain negotiates its exit from the EU, two distinct possibilities are emerging as the most likely: a soft Brexit, or a hard Brexit. [15] Although it has been over a year since Britain voted to leave the EU, recent opinion polls have shown little shift amongst the views of voters. [13] A "leave" campaign advertisement claimed Britain could redirect 350 million pounds each week from the EU to Britain?s National Health Services. [15] Many in Britain also thought the U.K. would be able to work out better trade deals than it has under the EU, but that is highly unlikely, Van Reenen said. [15] In the best probable case, in which Britain remains in the EU single market, but as a nonmember of the bloc, the decline would be 2 percent. [10] A protestor waves an EU flag as he walks past the Houses of Parliament in central London, Britain September 22, 2017. [7] UBS ( UBSG.S ) is weighing up whether to move banking jobs in London to Frankfurt, Madrid or Amsterdam to cope with Britain's planned EU departure, Chief Executive Sergio Ermotti said in July. [7] EU ministers have approved a new set of guidelines for a transition period following Great Britain's exit from the bloc. [10]

The reason is that the Midlands and north of England are much more dependent on EU markets for their trade than London, the South-East or Scotland. [16] If no deal is reached, Britain would withdraw from the E.U. on March 29, 2019 without any of the trade, customs and regulatory measures May's government is currently negotiating to smooth Britain's transition. [12] Critics say that Britain would be the only large country in the world to trade with the E.U. on WTO rules, and warn that it would introduce huge uncertainty for businesses. [12]

As the U.K. takes part in a summit in Brussels on Thursday and Friday to assess the progress of its EU divorce talks, the cost of leaving the political bloc continues to climb for Britain. [19] Britain balanced their words while remaining EU. Leaving the EU undermined Britain?s political power, and will give Britain to have more trouble with. [11]

Do British people regret leaving the EU? - Quora This page may be out of date. [11] Much depends on the nature of the Brexit deals that the UK makes with the EU and other nations + the impact of Brexit on UK growth and government finances. [20] In the referendum held on June 23, 2016, the UK voted to exit the EU in a move known as Brexit. [18] Restricting movement for EU citizens does not make it easier for artists from other parts of the world to enter the UK. There are strong and admirable attempts to loosen visa restrictions for artists, but Brexit has given the UK permission to close its doors rather than open them. [21] There are some reasons to believe why costs may increase in a post-Brexit scenario: first, higher tariff barriers between the UK and the EU; second, higher non-tariff barriers to trade (emerging from different regulations, borders controls, etc.) between the UK and the EU; and last but not least, the UK won't be involved in the coming EU negotiations concerned with further integration and lower non-tariff barriers. [18] It will also reckon debate about the fate of UK when Scots refused to leave the EU, and stemmed a future disintegration of the union. [11] The main reason the UK voted to leave the EU was because many migrants were supposedly taking jobs that British people should?ve had. [11] The tough scenario outlined by the British Prime Minister, Theresa May, confirms the previous concern about the position and rights of EU workers currently in the UK. Between 2001 and 2011, EEA immigrants contributed 34% more than they took out of the UK fiscal system, with the net fiscal contribution of about 221 billion. [18]

British Prime Minister Theresa May arrives for the European Union leaders summit at the European Council on December 14, 2017 in Brussels. [14] The 6-page document on Wednesday called for zero tariffs and quotas on goods but placed a rider that the European Union should continue to have full fishing rights in British waters. [14]

The United Kingdom is set to leave the European Union on March 29, 2019. [14]

Before Britain's 2016 referendum on membership of the European Union, Britain's then-prime minister David Cameron adamantly refused to make plans for what his government would do if the country voted to leave. [12] Japan's Mizuho Financial Group ( 8411.T ) said it would set up a subsidiary in Frankfurt, the latest Japanese bank to choose the German city as its new base in the European Union as Britain prepares to leave the bloc. [7] Standard Chartered will need to spend around $20 million making Frankfurt its European base in order to secure market access to the European Union when Britain leaves the bloc, Chief Executive Bill Winters told Reuters in August. [7]

"When you start taking these into consideration, then leaving the European Union by reducing trade is going to be a lot worse than the one-and-a-half to three percent costs. [15] Ireland?s prime minister even went so far as to warn that planes leaving the UK could be prevented from using Irish airspace. [17] When the United Kingdom and Ireland joined the EU's predecessor in 1973, French was the dominant language of the institutions. [9] While the U.S. is a major direct investor in Britain, official U.S. data suggests that most of this investment is aimed at supplying the UK domestic economy rather than for export platforms aimed at the rest of the EU. Our assessment is that what really matters to the U.S. is the potential effect of Brexit on European cohesion. [22] The UK will need to agree its own MRAs with the countries who currently have MRAs with the EU. This should be possible but will add to the MHRA's work in the short term conducting any assessments needed and additional inspections if there is a lag between the UK leaving the EU and the signing of UK MRAs. [23] Without the EU, the UK would have significantly less of this soft power as well as peacebuilding and conflict prevention capabilities since arguably, leaving the EU will decrease the UK?s influence globally. [24] Without this security net, these companies will have to demonstrate that their work complies with EU standards, which could prove time-consuming and expensive, possibly resulting in these companies leaving the UK. [25]

Our analysis suggests that an FTA between Britain and the U.S. would not help the UK as much as an FTA with the EU would. (The FTA with the U.S. is only 2.4 percentage points, or $70 billion, of GDP better than under WTO rules, and 20 percent worse than the value of an EU FTA.) [22]

This feature is part of Culture after Brexit - a conversation curated by the British Council, about the future of the cultural relationship between the UK and the European Union after Britain exits the EU. [21] 'For the EU cultural sector, losing the UK will reduce the overall pool of talent, reduce the Creative Europe budget and affect the quality of projects. [21] The Creative Industries Federation surveyed its members and found that 96 per cent wanted to remain in the EU. Maintaining a diverse, international workforce was one reason - so was the importance of EU funding for the arts, cultural and creative industries in the UK. [21] The majority of economic analysis and the opinions of many commenters point out that the UK can survive and might even thrive as an independent player outside the EU. The economic costs of exit might not be great, and there could be more benefits in the long run, under some presumptions. [18] That electorate excludes people under 18 years old, and three million EU citizens who contribute professionally, socially and financially to UK society. [21] Creative Europe?s figures show that the UK is the second most successful recipient of EU culture funds after France. [21] The reality proves that United Kingdom is completely in charge of its public spending; the UK government paid around 8.8 billion to the EU budget, which represents slightly more than 1% of its total public spending of 735 million, in 2014-15. [18] Well this question would get two different answers: strong Brexiteers would say that they do not regret the decision made whilst remainers would say that British people do regret the decision to leave the EU. [11]

Brexit could cause a loss of as many as 75,000 jobs in the banking and insurance industry, as major firms such as Goldman Sachs, Deutsche Bank and UBS Group question whether to shift operations and staff elsewhere in the EU, Sam Woods, Britain's top banking regulator, told lawmakers last month. [19] This stance is considering Britain's gross contribution to the EU; when Britain gets money back the account shows less than 161 million a week. [18] It will weaken Britain as a defender, like how Russia increased their aggression on our Eastern European EU members. [11] Britain has agreed to pay the EU $54 billion to honor existing budget commitments on everything from EU officials' pensions to investments in European infrastructure. [19]

That said, a report published last year by economics Professor Patrick Minford, who is a prominent Leaver, claimed that GDP would be 6 percent higher as a result of Britain leaving the European Union. [26] In the Treasury report on the long-term effects of Britain leaving the European Union published in April 2016, for example, all the leave scenarios were pessimistic. [26]

R ocketing food prices, medicine shortages, gridlock on Kent?s motorways, administrative and economic chaos No doubt we?ll hear many more of these scare stories about the potential consequences of Britain leaving the EU without a deal as the Article 50 talks continue to go nowhere fast. [27] Open Europe's report (2015 ) stated: "The UK's GDP could be 2.2% lower in 2030 if Britain leaves the EU and fails to strike a deal with the EU or revert into protectionism". [18] Even if Britain leaves the EU on time with a deal, the cliff edge may not disappear completely. [28] RAND's analysis shows that if Britain leaves the EU without agreeing to a new trade deal with the bloc, its GDP could lose 5%, or $140 billion, over 10 years. [19] Brown voted to leave the EU so the country could save money and stop people coming to Britain to use its services. [29] They say Britain would do fine trading with the EU on World Trade Organisation (WTO) terms, like most third countries. [28] A key attraction for global banks and financial service firms is that Britain offers relatively easy access in an English-speaking setting to markets in 27 other EU countries. [19] Mrs May hopes that talk of one can give her a bargaining chip to persuade the EU to be more flexible towards her Chequers plans for a trade deal that gives Britain full access to its single market for goods. [28] Rejecting EU means it will make Britain lost their position as economic powerhouse, as it would shift to Germany and France. [11] The RAND Corp. published a study this week that suggests Britain is likely to be economically worse off outside of the EU under most scenarios. [19] The House of Lords, some of May’s own Conservatives and the opposition Labour party have been trying to revise the legislation to keep Britain close to the EU after Brexit. [29]

Prime Minister Theresa May faced down yet another rebellion over her key legislation on leaving the EU in parliament on Wednesday, and the battles aren’t over. [29]

Since the United Kingdom (UK) decided to become a member of the European Union (EU) in 1973, GDP per capita of the UK has doubled, outpacing other prosperous non-EU English-speaking countries. [18] In 2015, the European Union accounted for 43.7 percent (223 billion British pounds) of UK goods and services exports, and 53.1 percent (291 billion British pounds) of UK imports, therefore making it the UK?s largest and most important trade partner. [20] Manick Govinda of UK arts producing organisation Artsadmin is an advocate for the UK?s vote to leave the European Union. [21] On June 23rd 2016 the UK voted in a referendum to leave the European Union. [20] The majority of the votes in Scotland were in favour of the UK staying in the European Union and there is a huge resentment among Scottish political leadership which can lead to another referendum. [18]

The optimist case: the UK remains a member of the EEA- European Economic Area (like Norway and Switzerland), in which case it will continue enjoying the same access to the EU's internal market. [18]

LONDON -- Eighteen months after Britons narrowly voted to leave the European Union, Brexit is having a growing negative impact on the United Kingdom. [19] The United Kingdom is learning that leaving the European Union is likely to have real costs, in the short term (the "divorce bill," covering future obligations it committed to) and the longer term (its economic relations with the rest of the EU face transactional barriers even in the best of circumstances). [22] On 30 March 2019 the UK is set to leave the European Union (EU), a process that has become popularly known as Brexit. [30]

How much is Brexit costing Brits? A lot -- and the tab keeps rising Britain is not due to leave the European Union before March 2019, but it's already taking a hit economically. [19] Prime Minister Theresa May hailed 'a new sense of optimism' in Brexit talks on Monday, telling parliament Britain and the European Union should sign off on a deal at a summit this week. [19] Britain and the European Union are working towards a withdrawal treaty and a framework agreement for future trade. [28] Britain is not due to leave the European Union before March 2019, but it's already taking a hit economically. [19] Seven of the top ten export markets for Britain are with European Union countries. [20]

There is another part of the problem rarely debated: what is the impact for the EU of having the UK leaving the single market? I agree with you that the outcome (soft vs hard) of the Brexit is still unpredictable, but we can expect reactions from the EU side given the significance of trades with the UK. [31] The United States, for example, has been able to produce more food efficiently and cheaply than the UK and EU. In one key area, livestock farming, the U.S. leverages efficiencies by using growth hormone to increase production and yield, a practice that is banned in the EU. As a result, the U.S. supplies only 0.1% of Britain's beef in contrast with supplying 20% of the world's beef. [31] This settlement would leave Britain in control of immigration, though more access to Britain for EU citizens would doubtless be bargained off against more access to the EU for British products. [32] It highlights Cameron?s failure, as far as the majority of the British public was concerned, to secure a substantive "renegotiation? of the UK?s terms of membership with the EU. It outlines the key strategic messages of the Leave and Remain campaigns, with the former focused on "taking back control," particularly of immigration, and the latter on the economic and security risks of leaving. [33] The second thing we need to remind people of is that the direct economic effects of leaving the EU, Deal or No Deal, are a sideshow compared with the underlying performance of the British economy. [27] More importantly, the assertion is not of central relevance to an assessment of the economic consequences of leaving the EU single market, which has shaped the UK economy in important ways for decades. [33]

What will UK pharmaceutical legislation look like moving forward outside of the EU? It all depends on the outcome of the negotiations between the UK and the EU. The most logical outcome for medicinal products would be for the UK to adopt the Swiss model; i.e. the UK would adopt EU pharmaceutical legislation into UK law so that UK medicines law shadows EU medicines legislation while it remains outside of both the EU and the European Economic Area (EEA). [23] This would be the most drastic option whereby the UK would abandon its European premise and use the established trade rules and norms of the WTO to forge bilateral trade agreements with the EU, resulting in a model similar to the rest of the world (that includes tariffs on trade with the EU, customs taxes etc.). [25] The European Pharmacopoeia (PhEur) is prepared, published and distributed by the European Directorate for the Quality of Medicines and Healthcare which is part of the Council of Europe, not the EU. So, providing the UK remains a member of the Council of Europe, which has a total of 47 member countries including Switzerland, not too much should change. [23] Abstract : The discussions on Brexit so far have mainly focused on its domestic legal implications, and its possible political consequences for both the EU and the UK. As Article 50 TEU is triggered, however, and the process of negotiating Brexit and a new deal between the UK and the EU has started, the focus shifts to the details of EU law. [34] Brexit could also leave the EU without the important strategic thinking, expertise and political leverage that the UK has contributed to the EU?s peacebuilding activities such as the EU?s development support and CSDP missions and operations. [24] Some in the industry, whilst acknowledging the potential negative impacts of Brexit, even hailed independence from the EU as an opportunity for the UK to leverage its life science sector. [25] In late August 2017 the UK government published its Brexit position paper, Continuity in the availability of goods for the EU and the UK. [23] At some stage, the UK political will and appetite for Brexit will simply burn itself out, requiring another general election or a second EU referendum for the log-jam to break. [35] Amazon?s UK boss has warned that the country could face "civil unrest" if Britain leaves the EU without a deal. [36] In the interdependent global economy, shared sovereignty has provided large economic and security benefits, even to large members of large trade blocs (such as the UK in the EU). [22] It is the UK government's desire to maintain the "deeply integrated trade and economic relationship" between the UK and the EU after Brexit, and to provide legal certainty and avoid disruption for business and consumers with respect to the continued availability of goods in the EU and the UK. The position paper states that "In doing this, it makes sense to recognise our common regulatory systems and the UK's ambition for cooperation in the future." [23] The EU is an essential market for pharmaceutical companies in the UK. To prevent the exodus of pharmaceuticals companies currently based in the UK, the government must renegotiate trade conditions with the EU that are comparable to those pre-Brexit. [25] Adopting an EEA model would therefore protect the status quo, allowing for continued organisation and efficiency between the UK and the rest of the EU in terms of R&D, clinical trials, manufacturing, marketing, distribution etc. This model would also enable pharmaceutical companies that are only based in the UK to benefit from the new reform starting in 2018 which will introduce a single EU portal for clinical trials. [25] The EU remains the largest single export market for UK pharmaceutical companies. [25] This is especially relevant to those EU pharmaceutical companies that have no offices or manufacturing plants outside of the UK. Unless the UK joins the EEA, these companies will likely relocate to EU or EEA countries in the pursuit of operational ease and business security, as it will be disruptive and time-consuming to establish new legislative practices within a changing business environment to boot. [25] Not committing to the full implementation of the European Falsified Medicines Directive (FMD) would deprive the UK of the EU?s efforts to prevent falsified medicines entering EU countries and thus reaching UK patients. [25] An end to cooperation with the EU on matters of European pharmacovigilance (PV) and future medical device databases (EUDAMED) will diminish the ability of the UK to detect side effects and respond to safety issues. [25] The UK is the first Member State to leave the EU, and is still negotiating its future relationship with Europe. [30] Once the UK leaves the EU and the EMA, it will be considered a "third country? in economic terms. [30] Once the transition period is over - and both the EU and the UK say it should be limited in time - one of the other scenarios, along with its economic consequences, will become Britain?s reality. [22] If MRAs are not place when the UK leaves the EU, product exported from the UK to the EU would need to be re-tested on importation to the EU. The UK could choose if it also wishes to test product coming into the UK from the EU. On a practical level this could mean that hundreds of analytical methods would need to be transferred. [23] If the UK chooses to follow the Swiss model, this translation would need to occur when the UK leaves the EU. This regulation is due to be implemented sometime during 2019, around the same time or after the UK formally leaves the EU on 29 March 2019. [23] The UK?s departure from the EU might therefore arguably leave not only the UK but also the EU more inward-looking and less engaged in world affairs. [24] Once the UK leaves the EU, clinical trial sponsors in the UK will no longer automatically benefit from the new regulation. [30] The government has admitted that it is stockpiling medicines in the event that the UK will crash out of the EU without a deal. [36] The government says it "wants to avoid unnecessary disruptive transfer of activities between the EU and the UK, and these ongoing activities being duplicated for both markets, particularly where the UK's aim is for this activity to be recognised as part of a future relationship." [23] If the Conservative government insists on withdrawing the UK from the EU it will, of course, hurt the EU. But if it does so against the wishes of Scotland and Northern Ireland, it will destroy the UK. [34] If a mutual recognition agreement (MRA) or an agreement on conformity assessment and acceptance (ACAA) is agreed prior to the UK exiting the EU, not much will change between the UK and the EU. Without MRAs or ACAAs, UK companies would be subject to inspections by EU authorities and the MHRA would be required to inspect in EU Member States, which it does not have sufficient inspection resources to do at present. [23] As the UK continues to negotiate with the EU during the transition period, current EMA guidelines for pharmaceutical and biotech companies may change. [30] This report aims to inform on the possible options available to the UK pharmaceutical sector now that its relationship with the EU faces potentially drastic changes. [25] This will guarantee access to the EU FPs and enable the UK to maintain its current dominance in the life sciences R&D sector. [25] Regardless of the UK?s path in terms of EU market access, there will be an increased authorisation burden for the UK, as drugs that have already been centrally approved by the EMA would need additional authorisation in the UK. [25] Loss of alignment with the EU on data protection could further endanger the UK?s leading position since the current UK Data Protection Act is insufficient to enable pan-European data sharing. [25] In this document the Commission reminds companies that from midnight on 30 March 2019 the UK is no longer part of the EU and becomes a third country. [23] Obviously, if the UK is no longer in the EU, UK QPs will no longer be able to accept certification of products by EU QPs and vice versa. [23] Where the UK is a Concerned Member State in an established EU MRP/DCP, pan-EU variations procedures will no longer apply in the UK, leading to a significantly bigger workload for the MHRA; the UK will have to assess changes for all previously EU-based MAs, with the consequential increase in approval times. [23] For existing MAs linked to an EU procedure, where the UK is the Reference Member State (RMS), in the long term, the role of the RMS will need to migrate to another EU Member State. [23] QPs who became eligible in another EU Member State and are named on UK manufacturing or importation authorisations (MIAs) would be an issue. [23] Focusing on the divorce settlement, where all 27 members of the EU share a strong interest in obtaining as much transitional funding as possible from the UK also makes it easier to hold the 27 tightly together on strategy. [22] The paper states that "This would avoid business and authorities in both the EU and the UK needing to undertake significant duplicative compliance activity after exit, for example to re-inspect approved manufacturing plants or collect and submit data again." [23] This approach has become an integral part of peace operations and other post-conflict actions of intergovernmental organisations such as the UN, the AU and the EU. The departure of the UK, one of the key global players in peacebuilding, from the EU could have normative, operational and financial implications not only for the role of the UK as a global peacebuilding actor but also for actions of other actors and the international norm of peacebuilding as such. [24] Bilateral engagements would be more expensive, and politically and internationally more impracticable for the UK on its own than through the EU. Establishing new partnerships would be difficult for the UK when considering that many non-EU countries are keen to cooperate with the EU in international peacebuilding efforts. [24] The UK MHRA has always had significant input into the development of GMP and other medicinal product guidance and the EU GMP guide has been heavily influenced by the UK inspectors. [23] Since 2004, the UK has been party to the EU Clinical Trials Directive (CTD), 2001/20/EC EUCTD, which has received criticism for adding red tape, whilst bringing few tangible benefits and perhaps encouraging clinical trials to take place outside the EU. Sir Michael Rawlins, current chair of the Medicine and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), referred to the original CTD as a "catastrophe". [25] Should the UK not adhere to Regulation EU No. 536/2014, innovation could be hindered as opportunities for doctors and academics to conduct clinical trials will be restricted and companies will begin to look elsewhere to carry out theirs. [25] This could be detrimental to drug launches in the UK, as companies are likely to prioritize applying for regulatory approval in the considerably larger (500 million) EU market; the UK only constitutes 3% of the world?s market for new medicines (60 million). [25] The EU now represents less than half of total UK pharmaceutical exports. [25] Until recently most EU pharmaceutical legislation has been issued as directives, which means that these directives have already been transposed into UK legislation; mostly in The Human Medicines Regulation 2012 (Statutory Instrument 2012-1916). [23] It is possible that the UK could choose not to follow this breakup of GMP, especially if the Pharmaceutical Inspection Co-operation Scheme (PIC/S) chooses to also depart from the EU model. [23] Abstract : Competition law and policy is an area where the EU legal framework has had a particularly significant impact on the evolution of UK law. [34] In a worst-case scenario, the BMA said there might be no reciprocal health arrangements between the UK and the EU. That would mean thousands of UK nationals who currently live in the EU would need to use the NHS for their health care. [36] According to the paper, a "key element" of delivering a "smooth, orderly exit" from the EU for business and consumers is ensuring that products can be lawfully marketed in the UK and the EU. This includes goods that are placed on the market before the date of withdrawal but cross the UK/EU border after exit. [23] This is likely to increase the workload for QPs in the UK and in the EU for product coming from the UK. [23] This would require the least re-writing of the existing UK legislation and could be applied to future EU changes whether they are issued as directives or regulations. [23] Game theory also helps explain why the EU is insisting first on settling the terms of the "divorce settlement," before moving on to discussions on a future relationship, which holds more benefits for the UK. [22] Through the recent vote on Chagos Islands, the UK already felt the importance of the support from its EU partners. [24] Post-Brexit regulation will also depend on whether the UK passes the EU Withdrawal Bill, which would mean that EU law no longer takes precedent over UK legislation. 6 If this bill is passed, the UK parliament will be able to amend and repeal individual laws. [30] Clinical trials in the EU, including the UK, are currently authorised and monitored by national regulatory bodies, not the EMA. The consequence of this is that the clinical trial sponsors must apply for authorisation in each country in which they wish to conduct the trial. [30] The EU rules have functioned as both catalyst and model for the equivalent UK provisions, while the broader influence of EU competition law extends considerably beyond the confines of the field itself. [34] The role of the QP is already enshrined in UK law by SI 2012-1916, so providing that the UK agrees to mirror EU legislation, as described above, there should be no change in terms of the requirements to become a QP in the UK or in a QP's role in the certification of batches. [23] If the UK does not elect to join the EEA, it will become a third country as far as the EU is concerned and this will lead to much more profound changes. [23] If the UK is not added to the list, the MHRA will have to issue written confirmation of GMP compliance for every API exported from the UK into the EU. [23] Debate on this subject points to a third solution for the UK post-Brexit, that of the WTO, which is in fact the model that the UK will automatically revert to on exiting the EU. [25] Given a fixed deadline and the fact that the UK has more to lose, the leverage belongs almost entirely to the EU. [22] The UK has done so through multilateral organisations, notably the UN and the EU. This is in line with the international norm on peacebuilding. [24] The UK's proposals may well be perceived by the EU as yet another example of the UK wanting to "have its cake and eat it too." [23] Departing the EU will not prevent the UK from engaging in peacebuilding through the UN. But, even the UN has promoted regional approaches to peacebuilding and supported the efforts of regional actors, such as the EU, in developing their own capacities. [24] Although 19% of the world?s most cited life science academic publications in 2012 were produced by the UK, 60% of all internationally co-authored papers are with EU partners. [25] Although over 80% of the EMA?s 900 employees stated they would move to Amsterdam, the reality is that only EU citizens can work for the EMA, meaning that any UK citizens will not be allowed to move with the agency. [30] Degrees of regulatory disruption and chaos will be inevitable over the coming months, even if the MHRA introduces some pragmatic processes to migrate licences linked to EU procedures into UK national procedures. [23] To avoid issues with the supply of medicines we need sensible, pragmatic decisions from both UK and EU politicians. [23] The UK would most likely continue its cooperation with the EU in peacebuilding. [24] In 2011, the UK economy benefited by around 30 billion from pharmaceutical and chemical exports to the EU, which is just one of many figures serving to underpin the importance of investigating the impact of Brexit on this industry. [25] We assess that in such a case the economic loss to the UK, compared to EU membership, would be 4.9 percent of GDP, or $140 billion, after 10 years. [22]

While Britain slumps into deep Brexit gloom, UK equity markets are still surprisingly upbeat. [35] In negotiating with the U.S., Britain would be in a similarly weak negotiating position because from the U.S. standpoint an FTA with the UK would have a relatively trivial benefit (0.22 percent of GDP after 10 years, less than 10 percent of the relative value it would hold for Britain). [22]

Brexit could lead to a more inward-looking Britain - a tendency which can already be witnessed with the British government preoccupied with its internal affairs and absent from international peace supporting initiatives. [24]

Galsworthy M, Davidson R. Debunking the myths about British science after an EU exit. [25] "As experts in delivering health services and providing care for our patients, we have a duty to set out the consequences of leaving the EU with no future deal in place." [36] In: Maintaining and growing the UK?s world leading Life Sciences sector in the context of leaving the EU " 2016. http://www.abpi.org.uk/our-work/library/industry/Documents/UK-EU-Steering-Group-Report.pdf. [25]

By understanding the current state of pharmaceutical sector, the potential effect of leaving the European Union (EU) on this successful industry can be better understood. [25]

When Britain?s Prime Minister Theresa May initiated the two year process of leaving the European Union on March 29, 2017, many members of the British government feared an immediate economic crisis. [37] According to Business Insider, ~30% of the UK food and drink manufacturing workforce are European migrants, and the Brexit vote already appears to be deterring EU workers from moving to Britain. [31] Closely linked to the Brexit vote was the expression of a desire for unchecked EU migration to the UK to be curbed. [31] In the event of a 'hard' Brexit, tariffs would likely be placed on imports from the EU. This would have disastrous consequences for UK retailers, including Tesco. [31] Many of these are working in the UK from the EU, and could have their citizenship status and right to work revoked in the event of a 'hard' Brexit. [31] The Netherlands is one of the countries that is highly vulnerable to the economic consequences of Britain?s planned exit from the EU. As the Netherlands? third-biggest trading partner, the UK accounts for roughly 3.3% of total employment and nearly 3% of nominal Dutch GDP through trade. [38] For Brexiteers who want a clean break from the EU?s system, the question has become a litmus test on whether the UK is really "out? of the EU. Pro-Europeans argue that some kind of customs union with the EU is necessary to avoid major disruption to trade and supply chains, inflicting serious economic damage. [39] Only one in 20 Leavers in the Ashcroft polls said that their main concern was economics, that "when it comes to trade and the economy, the UK would benefit more from being outside the EU than from being part of it?. [27] "We need to be crystal clear that we will commence no negotiations on the new relationship--particularly a new economic and trade relationship--between the UK and the EU before all these questions are resolved." [38] The question of the UK?s future trade relationship with the EU is also relevant to one of the key goals agreed by both sides: avoiding a hard border between Northern Ireland - part of the UK and in future outside the EU - and the Republic of Ireland, an EU member state. [39] As the UK is adamant to take itself out of the EU, many banks wishing to continue operating in the European market will have to relocate. [38] The obvious secondary question to that is whether Tesco and other retailers with global supply chains will pressure Theresa May's government to minimize the effect of the forthcoming legislative move to formally depart from the EU. At the same time, the rise of Scottish nationalism and the threat of a second referendum to leave the UK imposes even more risk on Tesco and its competitors, as they could suddenly find their stores subject to yet another set of new laws. [31] Leading Brexiteers such as Liam Fox and Boris Johnson argue that the UK surrenders its trade policy to Brussels if it remains in a customs union with the EU. [39] Johnson has argued that changing trade patterns make the EU less important for the UK. Figures show that the proportion of UK exports going to the EU has fallen over the past decade, although their value has risen. [39] The politics concerning the various options are complicated, but the outcome will determine how smooth trade will be between the UK and the EU - as well as the nature of the Irish border. [39]

EU membership and UK science. https://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201516/ldselect/ldsctech/127/127.pdf. [25] Britain and the EU reached a conditional deal on December 8 on the terms of the Brexit divorce after May rushed to Brussels for early morning talks. [22] Some Leavers have argued that a reason for Brexit is that outside of the EU Britain would be able to negotiate FTAs with the U.S. and other countries much more easily than the EU could. [22] By using its leverage to commit Britain to painful terms of financial settlement before entering into trade negotiations, the EU is likely to discourage other would-be leavers. [22] The worst outcome for Britain by far would be if it crashed out of the EU with no special preferential trade arrangements - the so-called "no deal." [22] A transition agreement that kept Britain in the Single Market for a time would help the economy, basically for as long as the transition period lasted and Britain?s exit from the EU is postponed. [22] In recent years, Britain has slumped from being the toast of the Group of Seven economies to bottom rung of the EU growth table. [35] "Britain used to be one of the best places in the world to do clinical trials until the EU Clinical Trials Directive arrived in 2004," Dalgleish said in his 2016 article in The Telegraph. [30]

In our book Brexit: Why Britain Voted to Leave the European Union, we criticize the Treasury report on several grounds and conclude that the long-term forecasts of the consequences of Brexit were essentially meaningless. [26] If so, forget about Brexit, it is Bremain - or Britain remaining in the European Union - which investors need to fear. [35]

As they voted in the June 23 2016 referendum, many a British voter might have thought that Brexit -- the process of withdrawing from the European Union -- would be simple, quick and low-cost, if not economically beneficial. [22] Joining the EEA should therefore protect the UK pharmaceutical industry from the organisational chaos and economic detriment of pharmaceutical companies leaving the UK. [25] Unfortunately, Britain?s longer-term scorecard looks much less promising, leaving UK financial markets a short-term, high-risk gamble. [35]

The European Union has intimated that any trading relationship must offer the United Kingdom significantly worse terms of trade than it currently enjoys. [34] LONDON--If Britain leaves the European Union without a deal, it will increase the risk of a Europe-wide pandemic, a leading medical association has said. [36]

Abstract : Leaving the European Union has been characterised as potentially one of the greatest protectionist acts in the United Kingdom's history. [34] Once the Article 50 process is started, the leaving country stares at a certain date two years out when it will no longer have any of the benefits of EU membership, unless EU members unanimously agree to extend the transition, or unanimously agree on a new relationship. [22] Because of the two year 'delay? process of leaving the EU, the full effects of Brexit have yet to be fully actualized. [37] Britain's Secretary of State for Exiting the EU David Davis, Theresa May, European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker, and EU's chief Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier meet at the European Commission in December 2017 in Brussels. [40] In the medium-term, the retailer will be forced to make inevitable changes in its supply chain once the UK officially leaves the EU and international sourcing becomes too costly. 50% of the butter and cheese consumed in the UK comes from milk imported from the EU which will undoubtedly shift Tesco?s sourcing efforts to local producers. [31] The weak pound is also a detriment for Dutch exports to the UK. In the first half of the year, exports of goods to the UK fell 2%, lagging behind the rest of the EU. Furthermore, the Dutch manufacturing sector has an export dependency rate of around 70%: For every euro earned, 70 cents result from export-oriented activities. [38] The UK would be outside EU regulatory agencies, threatening sectors such as pharmaceuticals and aviation. [39] Or will the EU agree to keep tariffs at 0? Similarly, as a financial center will EU residents be able to work/travel in the UK? Or will getting a work permit prove really hard, and a short-term visit require a visa obtained in advance? After all, a lot of the business is with the EU, and a lot of the workers are from the EU. If they have to go home, London will go into a tailspin. [37] These were the UK?s financial dues, the rights of EU and UK citizens, and avoiding a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Irish Republic. [39] The Irish border conundrum is intensified by the fact that a majority in Northern Ireland wanted the UK to stay in the EU. [39] I wonder if there will be a large negative impact on the economy once the UK officially withdraws from the EU. [37] The central strength of these core chapters (4-7) lies in the detailed and rigorous data analysis, which highlights the complex ways in which "calculations, emotions and cues? interacted to drive the UK public?s perceptions of the EU in the decade leading up to the referendum and in the context of the referendum campaign and vote itself. [33] Scotland voted heavily to remain in the EU, and the result revived questions concerning Scottish independence from the UK - which was rejected in a 2014 referendum. [39] Although the UK will remain a part of the EU and its single market until at least March 2019, meaning that business should continue somewhat as normal until then, some effects are already beginning to appear. [38] When the UK exits the EU, and by default the single market, EFTA membership would be a prerequisite for re-accessing the single market. [38] Nor does it consider the ways in which the UK has been a shaper (as well as taker) of EU policy (for instance, the single market project) and the ways in which it has managed to evade certain supposed threats to its sovereignty/democracy, through, for instance, its non-participation in Schengen and the single currency. [33] In a 'no deal' scenario, the UK and EU would resort to WTO trading arrangements, with some estimating food tariffs would reach 22% ( https://www.ft.com/content/7f0c732c-93b8-11e6-a80e-bcd69f323a8b ). [31] The UK should be able to negotiate new trade deals more easily than the EU, they argue, because talks will no longer have to cater for more than two dozen countries? special interests. [39] The question also remains over whether UK nationals will have the right to retain EU citizenship after Brexit, giving them the right to travel, live, study and work throughout the bloc. [39] What will tariffs be on UK exports to the EU? In the auto industry, they're currently zero, but could rise to 10% (the base tariff) which would lead to factories closing. [37] An uncertainty that will remain top of mind for the entire UK relates to the magnitude of the exit from the EU and the corresponding post EU trading bloc arrangements. [31] Such an issue could be compounded, Redwood said, by the UK "imposing import tariffs on the EU, raising import prices." [41] Mr Johnson supported his case by saying the EU contribution for the UK was 362 million a week for 2017/18. [42] Theresa May has said she wants the UK and the EU to remain close partners. [39] On money, the UK has agreed to pay into the EU budget as now until the current round ends in 2020. [39] EU citizens in the UK and Britons living on the continent will retain current rights to live and work on each side of the Channel right through the transition period until the end of 2020. [39] EU citizens in the UK and Britons on the continent may find their status up in the air again. [39] The prime minister?s latest proposal for a "backstop solution", involving the UK matching EU tariffs temporarily, has prompted internal dissent in her Cabinet. [39] Ongoing negotiations between the British government and the European Commission reach a crucial point at the end of June at an EU summit in Brussels. [39] If the EU were to prove punitive, if it decided to make UK-EU supply chains awkward, British companies could find, or expand trade with, existing suppliers in other parts of the world. [27] I believe that British citizens would have made a different decision to leave the EU if they were fully aware of the risks associated with their decision and the disruptive implications it would have on their lifestyles. [31] Today, many British people easily travel to and visit countries that are not in the EU. Airplanes fly, border controls are passed. [27] Claims that food imports from the EU would be hit with an average tariff of 22 per cent ignore the fact that it would be a British decision, not a WTO or EU one, to impose that tariff. [27] If the EU is really going to treat British traders worse than Chinese and American ones, it will be difficult for it to claim that it wants to be a "good neighbour?, never mind the increasingly ludicrous idea that it is a force for global cooperation and peace. [27] It is true some British firms have traded only with the EU, and have no experience of worldwide trading. [27]

On June 23 rd 2016, the United Kingdom ("UK") voted to leave the European Union ("EU") and Prime Minister David Cameron subsequently resigned from office, causing the largest ever one-day plummet in value of the Pound Sterling ("GBP") against the U.S. Dollar ("USD") and the Euro ("EUR"). [31] The government's new analysis of the impact of Brexit says the UK would be worse off outside the European Union under every scenario modelled, BuzzFeed News can reveal. [40] The UK voted by 52 to 48 percent to leave the European Union - an economic and political partnership of 28 countries - at a referendum in June 2016. [39] As a couple of you mentioned, the vote and subsequent Cabinet decision was to leave the European Union, but the UK won't actually be on its own until April 1, 2019. [37]

Some of these can be minimised if Britain were to remain in the single market via the EEA, and the impact can also be partly offset through domestic policy or trade deals with the U.S. and others, but the losses cannot be eliminated altogether once the UK is outside the customs union. [40] Britain, as an independent trading country, could decide to reduce UK tariffs below the current EU-wide levels, or even abolish some or all of them. [27]

"Remember that leaving without a deal would mean that the UK wouldn't have to pay its (front-loaded) Brexit 'divorce bill' of 40bn odd, equivalent to around 2% of GDP. This money could be used to offset the adverse effects on the economy." [41]

Anxieties about leaving the EU without a deal ignore the fact that there are many (reasonably) prosperous countries outside the Single Market that interact economically with it. [27] A point of interest over the next few years will be the decisions other EU members make as to staying or leaving the consortium of nations. [37] Both sides have given arguments about what leaving the EU will do to our healthcare service. [42]

They say that being outside the EU will enable Britain to exploit new opportunities, with the trade secretary highlighting services and digital industries. [39] Britain could leave the EU with no deal at all, bar arrangements to keep the trade and commerce basics in place. [32] Some Remainers hanker after voting one down so that Britain can stay in the EU. And some Leavers yearn to vote one down so that there is no deal, and we trade with the EU on basic WTO terms. [32] Without an exit deal, Britain will simply join this long list of "third countries? which successfully trade and interact with the EU. Being a sovereign country doesn?t mean, metaphorically, having an impenetrable wall down the middle of the Channel and the North Sea. [27] MSPs (Members of the Scottish Parliament) making up Holyrood?s Health Committee are worried that if the benefits of the S1 scheme are lost once Britain leaves the EU, "significant" implications could be felt by the NHS. [42] If Britain ever does leave the EU, the relationship it will have with Europe would be far from unknown or unprecedented, either to most of its people or to most of its businesses. [27] The choice was to remain in or to leave the EU. Britain voted to leave in what the government told everyone was our "once-in-a-generation decision?. [27] The Scottish government to outline exactly how it plans to respond to any financial pressures on the NHS once Britain has left the EU. [42] The EU, or any other member of the WTO, cannot stop Britain reducing its average food product tariffs to 10 per cent or five per cent or to zero, as long as the same tariffs are applied equally to all importers. [27] To be fair, getting the full benefits in customs simplification with EU countries would depend on the EU not withholding "mutual recognition? status from Britain. [27] That all said, this is not primarily a book about the future of Britain or of the EU and these problematic chapters are not central to its core argument or purpose. [33]

The United Kingdom is due to leave the EU at the end of March 2019. [39] All of these stories offer us something in terms of trying to make sense of both the decision to hold a referendum on EU membership and the seismic outcome in 2016, which saw the British public narrowly vote to leave the EU. [33]

After the creation of European Union regulations, it became very hard to continue trading with the UK. The result? Supply of Brazil nuts to London decreased, and prices skyrocket. [31] With other countries who were considering having their own "exit" from the European Union, I am curious as to whether this would hold true or if it speaks to the strength of the British economy. [37] This month marks two years since the United Kingdom voted to leave the European Union. [39]

In less than a year's time, at 11am on Friday 29th March 2019, Britain will leave the European Union. [42]

A government source said: "As part of its preparations for leaving the European Union, officials from across Whitehall are undertaking a wide range of ongoing analysis. [40]

POSSIBLY USEFUL

Much of the public debate in the UK around Brexit has been focused on the binary choice of "soft? or "hard Brexit?, which relates to whether the UK should stay in the Single Market and the Customs Union, or have a clean break from both and set up new trade arrangements with other countries. [1] About 200,000 Dutch jobs are involved in trade with the UK and, according to calculations by the prestigious government agency CPB, a hard Brexit could make every Dutch person poorer by an average of 1,000. [3] Brexit may pose more immediate challenges to UK and European security rather than to defence. [1] The economic consequences of Brexit are likely to be negative across a wide range of scenarios, including the most likely outcomes that the UK now faces. [1] Brexit is forecast to have substantive economic costs for the UK. Most forecasts analyse long-run effects and are based on the assumption that economic barriers with the continent will rise once Brexit occurs (Aichele and Felbermayr 2015, HM Treasury 2016, Dhingra et al. 2017). [4] Our estimates imply the Brexit vote increased UK CPI inflation by 1.7 percentage points in the year following the referendum. [4] Households that buy a lot of imported goods have faced bigger price rises than households that mostly purchase products produced in the UK. This allows us to study the distributional consequences of the Brexit vote. [4] Our estimates imply inflation in Northern Ireland increased by 0.47 percentage points more than the UK average because of the Brexit vote. [4]

If by this time both states have a functioning customs system in place - a big if for this consistently incompetent UK government - costs for companies are between 80 and 130. [3] It finds that the referendum result pushed up UK inflation by 1.7 percentage points, which amounts to an annual (and potentially permanent) cost of 404 for the average British household. [4] None of the "soft Brexit? scenarios would be as beneficial to the UK as the trilateral UK-EU-US agreement. [1] Without a trade deal for goods, the UK would have to fall back on World Trade Organisation rules, which require tariffs on products ranging from 4 per cent on liquefied natural gas to 9.8 per cent on cars and 32 per cent on wine. [2] This does not mean it is too soon for the Brexit vote to be affecting the UK economy. [4]

It would also abide by the European Court of Judgment and EU laws without being allowed to vote. [5] The withdrawal plan must be approved by the European Council, the 20 EU countries with 65 percent of the population, and the European Parliament. [5] As the date of Britain?s departure comes closer and Theresa May?s government continues its kamikaze policy of demanding the politically unthinkable from the EU, it is time for Europeans to wake and begin preparing for the worst. [3] In March 2018, Prime Minister May said many laws would be similar to EU laws so the U.K. can keep trade and capital access. [5] The U.K. wants a "customs union" with the EU. They will not impose tariffs on each other's imports. [5] It can buckle and accept the EU?s conditions for continued "frictionless trade", or it becomes a "third country" on the periphery of Europe - like Morocco or Turkey, except that Turkey will have more privileges because of its customs union with the EU. [3] The chosen trade arrangement will largely depend on the UK?s negotiations with the EU. This will involve a complex set of talks between both parties involving multiple issues. [1] The UK?s annual contributions of around 13 billion to EU budgets would cease, providing an instant windfall to the Government. [2] The U.K. often voted against many EU policies that other members supported. [5] The EU will require a cash settlement from the U.K. to meet existing financial commitments. [5] In return, the U.K. must abide by all EU environmental, social, and customs rule. [5] U.K. companies risk losing the ability to bid on public contracts in any EU country. [5] It would no longer be the base for companies that use it as an English-speaking entry into the EU economy. [5] It could then decide to join the EU on its own, as some countries within the kingdom of Denmark have. [5] Younger voters and those in London, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland wanted to stay in the EU. They were outnumbered by older voters who turned out in droves. [5]

The issue of "Brexit" remains divisive in Britain, with little agreement on how it will affect the country?s economy. [8] Around 10,000 finance jobs will either be moved away from Britain, or created overseas, if the country is denied access to the European Union?s single market, according to one survey. [8] Britain would no longer be bound by the rulings of the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg. [2]

Another warns that more than a quarter of major financial companies in Britain say they will move staff members or operations overseas, or are reviewing their domicile status. [8] If there is no deal before the March 2019 deadline, Britain could experience food shortages due to customs delays. [5] Britain will almost certainly be out of the bloc by the end of March 2019, and Prime Minister Theresa May wants it to be a clean break. [8]

British officials are hopeful about a trade deal with the United States (President Trump is certainly positive about the prospect of such an agreement), and they are holding informal talks with the World Trade Organization. [8] International Monetary Fund Director Christine Lagarde said, "The years are over when Europe cannot follow a course because the British will object." [5] The British economy appeared to weather the negative forecasts that followed the referendum. [8] The plans are just a few examples of moves that some fear could harm the health of London?s financial center, known as the City, which represents a big chunk of the British economy and contributes a disproportionately large slice of the country?s tax revenue. [8]

Scotland's leader has also warned she may call for another referendum to leave the United Kingdom. [5] The services sector, including financial services, dominates the UK economy, contributing to around 80 per cent of its GDP. [1]

A rally in London in March to protest Britain?s plan to leave the European Union. [8] The effects of the vote to leave the European Union, however, are becoming clearer. [8] European Union member states have a method for dealing with unsatisfactory referendums, called a do-over. [1]

Major ratings agencies have warned that they could could downgrade Britain?s credit rating if it emerges from negotiations on leaving the bloc with a poor deal. [8]

Several countries, including Norway, Iceland, and Liechtenstein, are members of the European Economic Area and therefore part of the single market, but not part of the EU. These countries benefit from the single market, and make annual payments to the EU (only at a slightly lesser amount than the U.K. does per head), but they have no vote in determining how it is run. [15] The EU is a group of 28 European countries in a political and economic union. [15]

These areas, which voted to leave the EU, are worst exposed to the economic impact of Brexit. [13] The EU has set out its draft guidelines for trade talks which warn that the U.K.' s current position on Brexit will result in "negative economic consequences." [14] They indicate how much the industry has to restructure its supply chains and employees to mitigate against the losses caused by reduced post-Brexit trade and movement with the EU. This gives us a picture of which industries are likely to be hit hardest by a no-deal Brexit and which ones will most likely remain virtually unaffected. [16] In the case of a soft Brexit, the U.K. would likely work out an agreement similar to the one Norway has with the EU. [15] Leaders from the U.K. and EU are well into negotiations over their divorce, but whether the U.K. will ultimately push for a hard or soft Brexit is still unknown. [15] The relationship between euro and non-euro states has been on debate both during the UK's membership (as a large opt-out state) and in light of its planned withdrawal from the EU. The question is how Brexit might impact the balance of power between those in and out of the euro; namely avoiding a eurozone caucus out-voting non-euro states. [9] The UK?s exposure to Brexit is some 4.6 times greater than that of the rest of the EU as a whole. [13] Buzzfeed News reported that the analysis, dated January 2018 and titled "EU Exit Analysis -- Cross Whitehall Briefing," looks at three probable Brexit scenarios. [10] Donald Tusk, the European Council president, circulated the draft Wednesday which noted that the U.K.' s current proposals to leave the EU would "limit the depth" of a future partnership between the two parties. [14] Danuta Hner, the head of the European Parliament Committee on Constitutional Affairs, has argued that after Brexit, English would no longer be an official EU language: "We have a regulation ? where every EU country has the right to notify one official language. [9] While leaders in the U.K. are ready to discuss trade agreements, those in the EU are putting that on hold until they can iron out details over EU citizens living in the U.K., Britain?s border with Ireland, how much the U.K. will pay to the EU in the divorce settlement, and other issues. [15] "Divergence in external tariffs and internal rules as well as absence of common institutions and a shared legal system, necessitates checks and controls to uphold the integrity of the EU single market as well as of the U.K. market ? This, unfortunately, will have negative economic consequences," it said. [14] In an attempt to break negotiation deadlock, May has asked for a two-year transitional period, which would leave the relationship between the U.K. and the EU largely unchanged as they continue to work out an arrangement. [15] The ruling Conservative party in the U.K. currently want to exit both when the country leaves the EU. [14]

The EU's customs union is a trade agreement that eliminates customs duties between EU member states. [14] EU members sell their goods to a larger market, and by importing high-quality goods from other EU countries, merchants can improve the quality of their products. [15] As part of the single market, EU members can sell their goods in any member country without tariffs or border taxes. [15] French banks could shift about 1,000 jobs from London to Paris to keep staff in the EU, the French Banking Federation said. [7] The bank has estimated that it would need to "move 1,500 people" from London to the EU to retain full passporting rights, according to Chairman Axel Weber. [7]

This is still significant, but it is low in comparison to many other sectors - largely because the financial services sector is already highly globalised and therefore displays a low dependence on EU markets. [16]

The impact of Brexit on the European Union (EU) will result in economic changes to the Union, but also longer term political and institutional shifts. [9] Raquel Ortega-Argil received funding from the ESRC for the project "The Economic Impacts of Brexit on the UK, its regions, its sectors and its cities" via UK in a Changing Europe. [16] We did this for each UK sector under a "no deal" Brexit scenario in which much of UK trade faces severe disruptions and impediments. [16] However Brexit also produced new opportunities for European defence cooperation, as the UK has consistently vetoed moves in this direction, arguing it would undermine NATO. [9] BNP Paribas ( BNPP.PA ) may move up to 300 London investment bank staff because of Brexit, depending how clients adapt and the French bank's efforts to win new UK business, a source said. [7] Julius Baer is opening three new UK offices as it looks to the bank for wealthy residents spooked by Brexit. [7] The very areas of the UK which voted Leave in June 2016 are likely to be the ones hardest hit by Brexit. [16] U.S. President Donald Trump would be far tougher in Brexit negotiations than UK Prime Minister Theresa May has been to date. [10] We also put together a "hyper-competitive" scenario in which UK industries can rapidly adapt and mitigate against the effects of losing single market access. [16] "We have heard a lot about how much Europe exports to the UK, for example, in the automotive sector," said Ross Denton of Baker McKenzie in a statement. [6]

Chuka Umunna, Labour MP and chair of the Brexit watchdog group Leave Watch, accused the government of failing to protect the British people's interests by withholding the impact report. [10] Van Reenen has crunched the numbers and found that with a soft Brexit, the average loss of income for each British household would be 1.3 percent, or more than $1,000 per year. [15] Workers in the jobs at risk are on average slightly more productive than the average British worker - so Brexit is likely to exacerbate the UK?s productivity problems. [16] Without common regulations, Europeans will have no guarantee that British products have been manufactured to the E.U.' s strict standards. [12]

"An argument that was made in favor of Brexit was that by restricting Europeans coming into Britain, it would create an economic boon," said MIT Sloan professor John Van Reenen, an economist who studies Brexit and its economic implications. [15] A soft Brexit is deeply unpopular with hardliners who want to leave the bloc, considering it would prevent Britain from controlling immigration-- one of the main reasons voters opted to leave. [17] Euroskeptic lawmakers say that instead of accepting May's softer version of Brexit, Britain could simply walk away without a deal at all. [12] German Chancellor Angela Merkel has said she firmly believes a Brexit deal can be reached despite a lack of details from Britain. [10] In July, French pharmaceutical company Sanofi said it was stockpiling medicines in Britain to prepare for supply disruptions in the event of a 'no deal' Brexit, increasing stocks from 10 to 14 weeks' worth. [12]

The U.S. bank, which bases the bulk of its European staff in Britain, will have to move up to 1,000 jobs in sales and trading, risk management, legal and compliance, as well as slimming the back office in favor of locations overseas, one source told Reuters. [7] Those negotiations started in March 2017, when May set the clock ticking by triggering Article 50, a never-before tested legal instrument that gave Britain exactly two years to negotiate a deal before its exit date. [12] If Britain fails to secure an exit deal, the risk is that supply chains designed to put fresh food in stores within hours will grind to a halt on March 29. [12]

RBS Chief Executive Ross McEwan said the bank will enact its Brexit plans by the end of March 2018 if no clarity emerges about Britain's ability to retain access to the single market. [7] One in five businesses would consider relocating to Europe if Brexit negotiations deteriorate, according to a report released by Britain's Institute of Directors on Friday, which called on the government to speed up its publication of 'no deal' guidance. [12]

The report's findings could strengthen the case for the softest possible Brexit or a second referendum on EU membership after negotiations with Brussels have concluded. [10] The possibility of the U.K. having to leave the E.U. without a working relationship with its closest neighbors -- a 'no deal' Brexit -- is beginning to look increasingly likely. [12] One study found U.K. trade with the E.U. solely on WTO rules would fall by 40% in ten years. [12] The guidelines rejected the possibility of full access to the EU's single market for crucial U.K. sectors such as finance and pharmaceuticals, stating there can be no "cherry picking" through participation based on a sector-by-sector approach. [14]

"The reality is that trying to strike these types of deals is going to be pretty tough for the U.K. If it does strike deals, it?s going to be worse off than it would if it were part of the European Union," Van Reenen said. [15]

As a member state, Britain can trade with other members unburdened by customs checks or tariffs. [12] Calculations suggest that economic growth could fall by as much as 8 percent over a 15-year period if Britain fails to strike a future trade deal with Brussels. [10] As such, cabinet ministers have been undertaking diplomacy across Europe to convince foreign leaders to cut Britain some slack. [12]

The years are over when Europe cannot follow a course because the British will object. [9] In 2016, he received the Medal of the Order of the British Empire for services to economics and public policy making. [15] Almost every sector of the British economy, except for agriculture, would be negatively affected and London's status as a financial center would be seriously eroded. [10] The focus of government discussions tends to be on those sectors and regions which are actually the least exposed parts of the UK economy. [16]

Financial services is a key sector potentially affected by Brexit but a mass exodus from UK is most unlikely. [20] Brexit carries a risk for both Europe and the UK. Economic migration will continue to depend on the relative growth and its relation to the number of immigrants. [18] Following the referendum result, the effects of Brexit might also lead to the fragmentation of UK. [18] Thirty-seven per cent of the UK electorate voted for Brexit. [21] Nearly a quarter of total UK overseas trade in goods and services is done with the United States and Germany. [20] Prime Minister Theresa May told the UK Parliament that preparations for a "no deal" scenario would be stepped up. [43]

"We?re in a situation where there?s no obvious parliamentary majority for any form of Brexit, which is viable, we?ve got various asymmetric negotiations with the EU-27 (the other countries in the EU), there?s very little flexibility on the EU-27 side ? The last 48 hours have shown that essentially the U.K. may be reaching the limits of the concessions that it?s able to make and yet we are still nowhere near a sort of credible, realistic package," he added. [43] BREXIT is due to happen on March 29th 2019, two years after Theresa May invoked Article 50, the withdrawal provision of the EU treaty. [28] At the same time many Tory MPs and voters think Chequers concedes too much to the EU. In the end, a no-deal Brexit will probably be avoided, but the early months of next year could be quite nerve-racking. [28] She is confident that there will be a deal with the EU before the end of this year -- one in which the U.K. and the EU will have a relationship relatively similar to the one they currently have. [43] The U.K. voted in June 2016 to leave the EU, but the process to leave the bloc has proven long and rich in technical details. [43] The majority decision to leave the EU after the UK?s public referendum has revealed a striking division among the public. [21] "The UK?s vote to leave the EU comes at a time when many developing economies are already facing multiple shocks: lower oil and commodity prices, a stronger U.S. dollar and a slowing Chinese economy." [20] As the consequences of the vote to leave the EU sap Britain?s political energy, the causes of it remain. [29] The bill could climb before the country leaves the EU in March 2019. [19] Switzerland is the most prominent EFTA member and is required to strike bilateral treaties with the EU to secure access to the Single Market for specific services only. [20] The EU has made it clear that this is incompatible with access to the Single Market. [20]

Uncertainty about the UK's relations with the EU, and notably about any future trade agreement would trigger a retrench among them. [18] EU and WTO rules would require customs inspections and tariffs on much bilateral trade, which would cause long queues at Dover and disrupt just-in-time supply chains, as well as imposing a hard border in Ireland. [28] The terms of the UK?s new economic relationship with the EU remain uncertain. [20] The pessimist scenario will put an end to the UK's right to access the internal EU market as well as it will terminate the corresponding obligation to offer unrestricted access to its own market. [18] In visual arts, 53 per cent of a-n?s members who travelled to the EU had average stays of four to seven days. [21] The survey showed that 70 per cent of performers travel overseas for work, and some musicians travel to the EU to work more than 40 times a year, staying for an average eight days. [21] Depends on scope / scale / timing of trade deals with EU and other countries. [20]

LONDON -- The United Kingdom's Brexit plans hit another major bump Friday when global aviation giant Airbus threatened to pull out of the country if the government leaves the European Union without a deal on future trading relations. [44] Investors should start preparing for a scenario in which the U.K. does not reach an agreement with the European Union over Brexit, a political analyst told CNBC Tuesday. [43]

Britain could leave next March with no deal at all: a cliff-edge Brexit. [28] With only months to go until Britain leaves the E.U., Prime Minister Theresa May has been buffeted by a series of storms as she steers legislation underpinning Brexit through the House of Commons. [44]

Jonathan Portes, a professor of economics and public policy at King's College London, said that due to volatility in currency markets and an increasingly uncertain business environment, Brexit has already knocked about 1% off of Britain's GDP. [19] Companies operating in Britain's services sector -- hotels, restaurants, banks -- raised prices in November at the fastest pace in nearly a decade, according to data firm IHS Markit and the Chartered Institute of Procurement and Supply. [19]

Even if - as some argue - the arts sector is out of touch with that 37 per cent, it isn't necessarily out of touch with the British public. [21] What’s turned into the biggest dilemma facing British politics for more than 40 years has turned into more of the same for one of the poorest parts of northern Europe. [29] In the year after the June 2016 vote, the British pound lost 16% of its value against the dollar, according to Bloomberg data. [19]

Getting their voices heard is important to locals in the city that became synonymous with Britain’s vote to leave the European Union. [29] She scored a rare victory on Wednesday, when the E.U. Withdrawal Bill was passed by only a handful of votes, but negotiations with the trading bloc have barely begun and major questions such as border controls and customs arrangements remain unanswered. [44]

Industry similarities and Switzerland?s economic success outside of the EU makes it unsurprising that many leave campaigners are championing a Swiss-inspired model as Brexit negotiations take shape. [25] Other potential scenarios that could result from a no-deal Brexit include EU nationals being unable to work for the NHS; uncertainty about the UK?s medical regulation; disruption to timely access to medical radioisotopes used in treating cancer; and difficulty diagnosing as many as 1 million people who have rare diseases. [36] "We should be under no illusion--if we fail to reach a good agreement on the EU and UK?s future relationship, that could be a significant threat to public health," Niall Dickson, co-chair of the Brexit Health Alliance, said in a statement. [36] As a consequence of Brexit, the EMA is mandated to move its offices from London to a remaining EU Member State and last month scientists waited with baited breath to hear the announcement that it would relocate from London to Amsterdam. [30] There are therefore subtle differences in how Norway operates compared to that of EU member states, which could make it easier to sell this as a solution to the majority who voted for Brexit. [25] The European Medicines Agency (EMA) has to move its headquarters from London to another EU Member State. [23] The MHRA has shared its regulatory expertise with Malta, Latvia and the Czech Republic in a bid to help countries that have recently joined the EU to develop the systems necessary to playing an active part in European regulation. [25] The European Commission has published plans and draft text that fragment EU GMPs, with separate GMPs for marketed products, IMPs and ATMPs. [23] REGULATION (EU) No 536/2014 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 16 April 2014 on clinical trials on medicinal products for human use, and repealing Directive 2001/20/EC. 2014. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uricelex:32014R0536. [25] This will finally happen next year, when the new EU Clinical Trials Regulation (Regulation 536/2014) comes into effect, allowing sponsors to submit a single application when conducting trials in multiple countries. 4 The new law will directly apply in each Member State, making clinical trial regulation more consistent across the EU. [30] As Switzerland is not also a member of the EEA (the Swiss rejected the idea in 1992), it has its own bilateral agreements with the EU, which took two years to finalise and cover all areas from trade to transport. [25] Trade in services (Britain?s strength) would also be impeded because of EU regulatory requirements. [22] Switzerland and Norway never voted to leave the EU because they were never member states in the first place; Switzerland rejected joining the EU in 2001 with a vote of 76.8% and Norway likewise turned down the idea on smaller margins in referendums in 1972 and 1994. [25] The EEA model can be considered a poor deal for Norway since it is so similar to that of EU member states. [25] To be involved in these programmes in the same manner as EU member states, these countries must pay a fee which is calculated based on their GDP and on further negotiations. [25] Negotiations Ahead of the UK's EU referendum: Settlements Process Timeline. [45] This exercise shows that trends in growth, unemployment, and inflation remain essentially the same after the EU Referendum as they were before, reinforcing the point that some of the gloomier predictions about what would happen to the economy following the referendum have proved false. [26]

The only thing that is certain following the UK's momentous decision to leave the European Union (EU), so called Brexit, is that the pharmaceutical industry, as all others, is facing at least two, and probably many more, years of unprecedented uncertainty. [23] Combining this insight with an outlining of the current state of the UK pharmaceutical sector should provide clearer understanding of where the priorities lie for pharma in these crucial Brexit negotiations. [25] The UK Pharmaceutical Industry is arguably one of the most important industries to consider in the negotiations following the Brexit vote. [25]

It makes clear that the economic consequences of Brexit are likely to be negative across a wide range of scenarios, including the most likely outcomes that the UK now faces. [22] As the UK is finding, Brexit will be more difficult to negotiate, and the likely after-Brexit economic future less rosy, than it may have first appeared. [22] Markets may be sensing Brexit is never going to happen, given the impossible odds stacking up against the UK ever striking an acceptable exit deal with Europe. [35] As no member state has ever left before, it remains unclear exactly how Brexit will affect legal and regulatory requirements for the biopharmaceutical industry in the UK and Europe. [30] The global glut of easy money is always on the lookout for good news to plunder and UK asset markets could be a short-term winner if the Brexit trade unexpectedly turns into a Bremain bonanza. [35] This contribution reviews the likely impact of Brexit, following which UK competition law faces the prospect of being cut adrift from its foundational influences. [34] The gravity of the potential disruption to the industry is reflected in the fact that the UK government has outlined science and innovation as one of the 12 "negotiating priorities? of Brexit. [25] Middle Temple Library has compiled a frequently updated annotated list of online resources on the legal implications of the UK referendum and Brexit. [34] Steve Bates, BioIndustry Association CEO, has called for an early agreement on issues such as regulation of medicines and the ability of non-UK nationals to work in the UK life science ecosystem, whilst the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations has warned that "disruption could lead to delays in medicines reaching patients". [25] David Jeffreys, spokesperson for the Association of British Pharmaceutical Industries and Vice-President of Eisai, a Japanese pharmaceutical firm, says, "The early innovative medicines will be applied for in the USA, in Japan and through the European system and the UK will be in the second, or indeed the third, wave - so UK patients may be getting medicines, 12, 18, 24 months later than they would if we remained in the European system." [25] Reports and commentaries were found through regulatory body websites and pharmaceutical associations such as "European Medicines Agency", "Association of British Pharmaceuticals" and "UK Biotech Association". [25]

Any reductions in public funding could result in a decline in private R&D spending from pharmaceutical companies who, in 2014, spent 16% of their European R&D budget in the UK. [25] The UK is the main location in Europe for venture financing of pharmaceutical companies, accounting for over a third of the total Venture Capital (VC) raised in the pharmaceutical sector in Europe. [25] The UK life sciences sector contributed 30.4 billion in UK GDP, supported 482,000 jobs and contributed 8.6 billion in taxes in 2015, a significant portion (over half) due to the pharmaceutical industry. [25] The pharmaceutical sector employs approximately 70,000 people in the UK and provides jobs in a number of areas: manufacturing, distribution, clinical trials and R&D. [25] In considering the post-Brexit options for the UK pharmaceutical industry, there are three key variations to be discussed: EEA (specifically Norway), EFTA (specifically Switzerland) and World Trade Organisations (WTO) (Fig. 4 ). [25] The loss of influence in the European system could deter regulatory experts from living and working in the UK, and result in the future implementation of regulations that are less favourable to UK interests, damage that will worsen if the EMA relocates. [25] The UK government plans to introduce a bill to repeal the European Communities Act 1972, which will simply transpose the existing provisions unchanged, at least initially. [23] If the European Investment Bank (EIB) funding pipeline is broken, UK SMEs will suffer and fewer start-ups will be created. [25] Since the referendum result, lobbying by Universities UK (UUK) has sought to put pressure on the UK government to push negotiations for "associated country? status. [25] The UK government has been focusing on cost reduction measures in recent years and this has included emphasising the use of generic drugs. [25] This option could potentially offer the UK flexibility and the clean slate that leave campaigners rooted for, but it is the most ambiguous at this stage and would likely take many years to implement. [25] UK Prime Minister Theresa May ?s recent suggestion of a seven-year transition period for the British exit simply kicks the can further down the road of political procrastination. [35] The British pharmaceutical company, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), headquartered in Brentford, UK, even saw its share price rise in the immediate aftermath of the vote, highlighting the robustness of the industry. [25] British consumers, normally the backbone of the economy, are dispirited while UK manufacturing investment has gone into post-Brexit slumber. [35] British officials have also expressed hopes that the UK would continue to be part of the CSDP and, for this purpose, also hold an observer seat in the Political and Security Committee (PSC) of the Council after Brexit. [24] What we can say at the start of the New Year is that so far, Brexit is turning out to be a good thing for important aspects of the British economy. [26]

Europe has its own internal frictions to cope with over Italy?s unstable new government and might even throw the UK a carrot to stay put. [35] The collection includes blog posts, papers prepared by the UK government, legal advice issued by leading lawyers, and open access journal articles and book chapters. [34] Presumably the UK will no longer have access to these post-Brexit, so new centralised reporting requirements started in November 2017. [23] The UK will need to apply to go on to the Commission's white list of non-EU acceptable active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) exporting countries. [23] Two of the world?s largest pharmaceutical companies, AstraZeneca and GSK, are headquartered in the UK and almost all notable multinational pharmaceutical companies maintain a presence in the country. [25] Rawlins has also suggested the possibility of launching a system giving provisional licenses to new medicines whilst more real-world data is being collected, which would make the UK market more attractive for pharmaceutical companies. [25] Many companies and institutions across the UK have expressed fears that customs, border, and trading arrangements won't be in place by March 2019. [36] It is likely that clinical trials in the UK will require a separate authorisation from the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA). [30] Rather than making unrealistic forecasts about the consequences of Brexit, it is much better to look at what has happened to the UK economy in the 18 months since the referendum. [26] Limitations in available literature excluded topics relating to: customs union, future trade risk and new British professional standards. [25] There are around 70 contingency measures due to be announced by the government to advise British citizens and businesses on how to prepare should a no-deal scenario happen. [36]

Parallel imports of pharmaceutical products were prohibited in Sweden until it joined the EU in 1995; evidence suggests that, since then, parallel imports have reduced pharmaceutical prices. [25] Third parties can purchase branded pharmaceuticals in EEA member states with lower prices and then resell them in other EU member states. [25] The reverse is also true with UK-origin QPs no longer being able to be named on MIAs in the remaining 27 EU States. [23] Access to EU funding beyond Horizon 2020 is still unknown, which is particularly worrying in the Life Sciences sector where projects can require extended periods of time. [25] This will ensure a harmonised process for approval of clinical trials across the EU and enable participating nations to access and share clinical trial information on an EU database. [25]

Politically, advocates of Brexit in Britain expect it will mean renewed sovereignty over economic and social policy. [22] Britain is already paying the price of deep-rooted Brexit uncertainty, with the economy close to stalling and just a whisker away from recession. [35] Blitz R, Lewis L. Pound tumbles to 30-year low as Britain votes Brexit. [25]

As noted, an FTA between Britain and the U.S. would have a negligible impact on the much larger U.S. economy. [22]

Developments surrounding the " Brexit " or vote on the Referendum of the United Kingdom's Membership of the European Union are evolving. [45] Alongside this, the United Kingdom has no ambition to be either part of the customs union or the single market. [34] In the past, before the Single Market launched in 1993, and even before the UK joined the European Economic Community in 1973, people went to European countries on business or for a holiday. [27] Capital Economics' Vicky Redwood examined the potential economic impact of a no deal Brexit on the UK. [41] One option would be a hard Brexit, in which the UK walks away without a deal and trade resumes under World Trade Organization (WTO) rules. [38] Brexit supporters argue that the lack of an agreement is no barrier to trade, and the UK could cut or get rid of tariffs altogether. [39] The draft treaty drawn up in March highlights more unresolved issues: they include governance of the Brexit deal and how to resolve disputes, the extent of ECJ jurisdiction in the UK, nuclear material, intellectual property, and security and defence cooperation. [39] The IMF recently projected that a No Deal Brexit would cause a hit to UK gross domestic product of just below four per cent over the long-term. [27] Reports quoting government analysis have suggested that some parts of the UK which voted strongly for Brexit will be most heavily impacted, if there is no deal. [39] Redwood is, however, much less pessimistic than some forecasters, saying that it is unlikely a no deal Brexit will "plunge the UK into recession." [41] Two years after the referendum, the UK is still wrestling with a fundamental question over Brexit. [39] What I?m most concerned by is the impact that Brexit may have on the cost/prices of goods produced within the UK (and the implications go well beyond dairy). [31] Having grown up in the UK, your essay piqued my interest in uncovering what the potential impacts Brexit may have on smaller retailers versus a behemoth such as Tesco. [31] Euromonitor did an interesting analysis of which CPG companies will be most affected by Brexit, based on the premise that exposure to Brexit losses is driven not only by amount of UK sales the company has, but also by the elasticity of the category the CPG plays in. [31] One finding was that Nestle is most exposed to Brexit financially, even though Unilever has the most UK sales, because Nestle?s core products (pet care, bottled water) are generally more elastic. [31] The UK has been accused of failing to prepare for customs checks and a "no deal scenario" generally - even by some "Leave" supporters. [39]

I simply want to note that a country doesn?t have to be inside the EU, or inside the Single Market and/or Customs Union, to trade and deal economically with EU member countries. [27] For business, well over half of Britain?s foreign investment today is in countries outside the EU. What would be so much more complicated about businesses investing in a post-No Deal EU? Similarly, about half of Britain?s trade takes place with countries outside either the EU or the area covered by EU preferential trade agreements. [27] Japan, too, still remains on that list, since the recently announced EU-Japan Economic Partnership Agreement still needs to be approved by EU member states and the European parliament. (This reminds us of the difficulties the EU-Canada Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement faced in getting EU approval in 2016. [27] Such optimism is based on the potential economic losses likely to be incurred by EU member states in the case of a "hard" Brexit. [33] The longer the Government fails to agree a position on customs, the shorter the time left for it to negotiate one with the EU in the Brexit talks. [32] The government wants trade with the EU to be as frictionless as possible but ministers have been unable to agree on a suitable customs model. [39] The simple average WTO tariff the EU uses for countries with which it does not have a trade agreement currently stands at 5.2%, although levies vary per product group. [38] The assessment, which is titled "EU Exit Analysis - Cross Whitehall Briefing" and dated January 2018, looked at three of the most plausible Brexit scenarios based on existing EU arrangements. [40] At the outset, the European Commission - mandated by EU leaders to conduct negotiations - quickly established priority issues concerning the UK?s departure to be resolved before future relations could be considered. [39] Moving away from the existing set of rules and standards would also make it harder to trade with the EU in the future, and would be politically controversial domestically. [40] To trade with the EU today from within the Single Market, businesses still require procurement processes, and tax and regulatory compliance procedures. [27]

The prospect of a no deal Brexit reared its head again this week, as the government admitted it is stockpiling food and medicines in preparation for such an occurrence, and Trade Minister Liam Fox told Business Insider that Britain should "leave without a deal" if one has not been secured by the end of the Article 50 period. [41]

RANKED SELECTED SOURCES(45 source documents arranged by frequency of occurrence in the above report)

1. (58) Evaluating the impact of Brexit on the pharmaceutical industry | Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice | Full Text

2. (34) Brexit Implications for the UK Pharmaceutical Industry - NSF International

3. (28) Economic Implications of Brexit | RAND

4. (28) What's happening with Brexit: 2 year update | Euronews

5. (26) Brexit, explained

6. (22) The True Cost of Brexit Is Far More Than Leavers Expected

7. (21) No Deal is nothing to fear | British politics | Economy | For Europe, Against the EU | spiked

8. (19) Brexit Consequences: for UK, EU, and U.S.

9. (18) Brexit will leave UK worse off in every scenario, leaked report predicts | News | DW | 30.01.2018

10. (17) Brexit vs. Tesco: Will Britain?s Largest Grocer Stand the Ultimate Test? Technology and Operations Management

11. (16) Britain Is Preparing For a "No Deal? Brexit. What That Means | Time

12. (16) Factbox: Impact on banks from Britain's vote to leave the EU | Reuters

13. (15) Socio-Economic Consequences of Brexit | STUDENTS FOR LIBERTY

14. (14) Brexit: The cost for Brexit keeps rising for UK

15. (14) How "Brexit? Could Change Business in Britain - The New York Times

16. (13) Europe must wake up to the drastic consequences of a hard Brexit | Joris Luyendijk | Opinion | The Guardian

17. (13) The impact of Brexit on the life sciences - how bad could it be?

18. (13) Impact of Brexit on the European Union - Wikipedia

19. (12) How Brexit will hit different UK regions and industries

20. (12) Two insider views on how Brexit will affect UK arts | British Council

21. (11) Brexit: What happens to Britain if the UK leaves the EU without a deal?

22. (11) Brexit | tutor2u Economics

23. (11) Brexit and the Consequences for International Peacebuilding

24. (11) Whether it?s Brexit or Bremain, the UK is in long-term economic decline | South China Morning Post

25. (10) EU Brexit trade plan rejects UK desire for access to the single market

26. (10) BREXIT - United Kingdom Legal Research - LibGuides at University of Melbourne

27. (10) Consequences of Brexit for UK inflation and living standards: First evidence | VOX, CEPR Policy Portal

28. (9) Do British people regret leaving the EU? - Quora

29. (9) No-Deal Brexit Could Have 'Catastrophic' Consequences, British Medical Association Warns | medical | no-deal

30. (8) What would happen if Britain left the EU with no deal? - The Economist explains

31. (8) Impact of Brexit on Unemployment, Inflation, and Wage Growth in Britain Econ 102 Macro Principles

32. (8) Brexit: Potential Impact on the Dutch Economy

33. (7) Brexit: Why Britain Voted to Leave the European Union by Harold D. Clarke, Matthew Goodwin and Paul Whiteley EuropeNow

34. (6) Has Brexit Boosted the British Economy? - Foundation for Economic Education

35. (6) The City That Defined Brexit Has Given Up - Bloomberg

36. (6) This Leaked Government Brexit Analysis Says The UK Will Be Worse Off In Every Scenario

37. (5) How will Brexit affect me? UK regions that voted leave could be worst affected -- Quartz

38. (5) What would happen to the UK economy after a no deal Brexit - Business Insider

39. (5) EU Business News - Brexit and the NHS

40. (5) What a no brexit deal means for markets

41. (5) "Hard Brexit" impact on UK manufacturing, trade and exports to the EU -- Quartz

42. (4) The consequences of Customs Union indecision. How Britain could end up with EEA-lite formally or informally. | Conservative Home

43. (3) Hard Brexit: EU, Ireland, and the UK prepare for the worst-case scenario -- Quartz

44. (3) Airbus warns it will leave Britain if there's no E.U. deal on Brexit

45. (2) Brexit - European Union - Library Guides at UC Berkeley

s2Member®
Skip to toolbar