Brexit discussion thread XII (Please read OP before posting)

moon2 · 05-02-2020 07:06PM

brickster69 wrote: »

This EU budget should be fun to watch.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say: yes! It will be fun to watch these negotiations occurring. It will be a welcome change of pace to watch them result in a mutually agreeable compromise.

SantaCruz · 05-02-2020 07:22PM

RobMc59 wrote: »

I would say I'm pro EU but I'm alarmed by the apparent rhetoric coming out of Brussels in regards to what the EU wants from negotiations. I believe it fuels jingoism and anti EU sentiment which is manna from heaven to right wing UK politicians and the hawkish US who along with Russia, want the EU to implode.
Regarding the fishing rights,it's not just about selling fish its also about people's livelihoods,ie:the fishermen of many nations who rely on fishing in UK- it's a major bargaining chip imo.

Why would this be of concern to the EU? There's crazy stuff going on in lots of non-member countries.

SantaCruz · 05-02-2020 07:26PM

roots2branches wrote: »

I find this attitude odd in Ireland. Let's suck it to the Brits, how dare they leave!
Bad attitude to take to our biggest trading partner. Leo talks the hard talk but we all know when he gets booted out of office he'll be heading to the EU gravy train leaving Ireland in a worse position.

Greetings, recently registered poster. I look forward to hearing lots of novel opinions and keen insights on the EU from you.

serfboard · 05-02-2020 08:11PM

sondagefaux wrote: »

Nominated commissioners must be approved by a majority vote of MEPs in the European Parliament.

As I said, it's not in the gift of the Irish government to simply appoint a member of the Commission.

Sure, but you can be sure that they lobbied like hell to get their chosen candidate approved.

sondagefaux wrote: »

I'm pretty sure the Irish presidency isn't an EU position...

Never said that it was, but I don't think that it can be pointed out too often what a disgrace it was that the former Commissioner got to be President for 14 years without ever having been elected.

brickster69 · 05-02-2020 09:41PM

sondagefaux wrote: »

OMG! The EU members are haggling over the budget.

Like they do every time it's up for discussion.

True, but this time someone has to plug a 14 billion / year hole in it.

Akrasia · 05-02-2020 09:47PM

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

You can see him doing it already. Swinging cuts in all government departments just weeks after announcing that austerity is over, but Brexit! Bad EU! Rule Britannia!

And when growth falters and factories close and the pound drops and inflation starts biting - bulldog spirit! Blitz 2.0! EU so bad that freedom is worth the price!

And all of this is, and was, so depressingly predictable

SantaCruz · 05-02-2020 09:47PM

brickster69 wrote: »

True, but this time someone has to plug a 14 billion / year hole in it.

Which is peanuts in the greater scheme of things. The price of a 7 cups of coffee a year per citizen, or thereabouts.

KildareP · 05-02-2020 09:50PM

brickster69 wrote: »

True, but this time someone has to plug a 14 billion / year hole in it.

Only about £9bn really (net contribution), well below €20 per person per year.

And yet despite having an extra £9bn to play with, we get this:

Financial Times calculations suggest that the lower rates of sustainable economic growth forecast by the BoE would leave the chancellor with a £12bn deficit by 2022-23, instead of the £5bn surplus laid out in the Conservative’s election manifesto.

{...}

With the government finances now looking tight, Mr Javid has written to other ministers seeking suggestions for 5 per cent savings from their budgets so the government can prioritise public spending in the autumn spending review.

https://www.ft.com/content/27b81994-4690-11ea-aeb3-955839e06441

brickster69 · 05-02-2020 10:00PM

KildareP wrote: »

Only about £9bn really (net contribution), well below €20 per person per year.

And yet despite having an extra £9bn to play with, we get this:

https://www.ft.com/content/27b81994-4690-11ea-aeb3-955839e06441

And the 5 billion tariff money sent to the eu each year, which the UK will keep ?

brickster69 · 05-02-2020 10:04PM

UK average tariffs = 4.4 % / export

UK contribution to EU = 7.5 % / export

Irish Praetorian · 05-02-2020 10:12PM

brickster69 wrote: »

And the 5 billion tariff money sent to the eu each year, which the UK will keep ?

Does that include the tariffs which are levied on goods being shipped to the UK to go further on into the EU market and thus are not likely to be directed to the UK in future, or the potential income to be levied from tariffs on UK produce which may or may not fall under the remit of a free trade agreement between the UK and the EU?

SantaCruz · 05-02-2020 10:15PM

brickster69 wrote: »

And the 5 billion tariff money sent to the eu each year, which the UK will keep ?

You do understand who pays tariffs, right?

brickster69 · 05-02-2020 10:19PM

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

Does that include the tariffs which are levied on goods being shipped to the UK to go further on into the EU market and thus are not likely to be directed to the UK in future, or the potential income to be levied from tariffs on UK produce which may or may not fall under the remit of a free trade agreement between the UK and the EU?

2nd part. A bit like saying are UK export goods to Rotterdam counted as EU exports when they are forwarded on to non EU countries. Probably evens out give or take a bit.

brickster69 · 05-02-2020 10:21PM

SantaCruz wrote: »

You do understand who pays tariffs, right?

Yes, the importer. Why who pays it in Ireland ?

listermint · 05-02-2020 10:22PM

brickster69 wrote: »

Yes, the importer

The customer.

The end.

SantaCruz · 05-02-2020 10:27PM

brickster69 wrote: »

Yes, the importer. Why who pays it in Ireland ?

The customer, same as everywhere else.

brickster69 · 05-02-2020 10:28PM

listermint wrote: »

The customer.

The end.

Incorrect. The importer pays the tariffs initially.

SantaCruz · 05-02-2020 10:30PM

brickster69 wrote: »

Incorrect. The importer pays the tariffs initially.

I genuinely laughed out loud.

Right, the importer pays tariffs. It comes out of their pockets. Gotcha.

brickster69 · 05-02-2020 10:32PM

SantaCruz wrote: »

I genuinely laughed out loud.

Right, the importer pays tariffs. It comes out of their pockets. Gotcha.

Of course it comes out of the importers pocket. How do you think it gets into the country. Think about it !

Bit cynical · 05-02-2020 10:37PM

SantaCruz wrote: »

I genuinely laughed out loud.

Right, the importer pays tariffs. It comes out of their pockets. Gotcha.

Brickster is correct, I'm afraid. The importer pays the tariffs to the importing country. However the importer is free to pass on costs to the consumer.

listermint · 05-02-2020 10:37PM

brickster69 wrote: »

Of course it comes out of the importers pocket. How do you think it gets into the country. Think about it !

Ah yes I forgot the importer holds on to the goods and doesn't sell them with the tariff cost on top recouping the cost at their consumers.

How silly of me.

brickster69 · 05-02-2020 10:37PM

Bit cynical wrote: »

Brickster is correct, I'm afraid. The importer pays the tariffs to the importing country. However the importer is free to pass on costs to the consumer.

Why are you afraid ?

sondagefaux · 05-02-2020 10:38PM

brickster69 wrote: »

Yes, the importer.

Not necessarily.

It depends on whether the Incoterms are Delivered Duty Paid (DDP) or not.

Either Lidl or Aldi require all their suppliers to deliver on DDP Incoterms to them.

https://iccwbo.org/resources-for-business/incoterms-rules/incoterms-2020/

DDP – Delivered Duty Paid (named place of destination) Edit
Seller is responsible for delivering the goods to the named place in the country of the buyer, and pays all costs in bringing the goods to the destination including import duties and taxes. The seller is not responsible for unloading. This term is often used in place of the non-Incoterm "Free In Store (FIS)". This term places the maximum obligations on the seller and minimum obligations on the buyer. No risk or responsibility is transferred to the buyer until delivery of the goods at the named place of destination.[16]

The most important consideration for DDP terms is that the seller is responsible for clearing the goods through customs in the buyer's country, including both paying the duties and taxes, and obtaining the necessary authorizations and registrations from the authorities in that country. Unless the rules and regulations in the buyer's country are very well understood, DDP terms can be a very big risk both in terms of delays and in unforeseen extra costs, and should be used with caution.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incoterms

A Dub in Glasgo · 05-02-2020 10:39PM

Talk that the importer absorbs any tariffs is way off the mark

SantaCruz · 05-02-2020 10:40PM

Bit cynical wrote: »

Brickster is correct, I'm afraid. The importer pays the tariffs to the importing country. However the importer is free to pass on costs to the consumer.

Not even technically correct.

Come on, what's the point of discussing stuff if you're going to be so disingenuous?

brickster69 · 05-02-2020 10:41PM

sondagefaux wrote: »

Not necessarily.

It depends on whether the Incoterms are Delivered Duty Paid (DDP) or not.

Either Lidl or Aldi require all their suppliers to deliver on DDP Incoterms to them.

https://iccwbo.org/resources-for-business/incoterms-rules/incoterms-2020/

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incoterms

DDP means what ? Duty has already been paid. Who paid it, the seller ?

Bit cynical · 05-02-2020 10:43PM

listermint wrote: »

Ah yes I forgot the importer holds on to the goods and doesn't sell them with the tariff cost on top recouping the cost at their consumers.

How silly of me.

However they may not get to pass on the costs in full. If the only source of the product is from imports at a given tariff then the full costs can be passed on. However if the importer is competing with domestic producers or imports from low or non-tariff countries then it is possible that only part of the tariff can be recouped thus lowering profit.

brickster69 · 05-02-2020 10:49PM

Bit cynical wrote: »

However they may not get to pass on the costs in full. If the only source of the product is from imports at a given tariff then the full costs can be passed on. However if the importer is competing with domestic producers or imports from low or non-tariff countries then it is possible that only part of the tariff can be recouped thus lowering profit.

That's up to the seller he can sell the goods for less than what he paid for them. At the end of the day he paid the tariffs.

Bit cynical · 05-02-2020 10:55PM

brickster69 wrote: »

That's up to the seller he can sell the goods for less than what he paid for them. At the end of the day he paid the tariffs.

However I was talking about how much of it he can pass on.

It is much the same as any other cost. If you are a monopoly for a product with inelastic demand and, say, your electricity costs go up, then you can pass on most of the increased cost to the consumer. If, however, you have a competitor whose electricity cost has not gone up, then you can't pass all that on and must absorb some of the cost.

brickster69 · 05-02-2020 11:01PM

Bit cynical wrote: »

However I was talking about how much of it he can pass on.

It is much the same as any other cost. If you are a monopoly for a product with inelastic demand and, say, your electricity costs go up, then you can pass on most of the increased cost to the consumer. If, however, you have a competitor whose electricity cost has not gone up, then you can't pass all that on and must absorb some of the cost.

If an importer buys a product for £10 and pays the correct tariff eg. 10% he can sell it for 1 million Euros if he wants or he can sell it for nothing.

Brexit discussion thread XII (Please read OP before posting)

Comments