Quite aside from the humour in the acronym, the real problem with the idea of a low alignment deal with the EU in the future is it isn't clear one would be available. It feels like another attempt to ask for everything we want without offering anything in return.
Just in case you missed all previous tweets on the subject, free trade agreements provide preferential access to a market, in return for offering preferential access to your own market. If the other market is larger than your own (EU, US) you probably need to offer more...
Thus e.g. the EU market is larger than the UK market, and likely to have higher WTO tariffs. A zero tariff deal gives the UK more economic benefit than the EU, so we'll need to offer extra for that access. Such as, perhaps, access to our fishing waters or labour market...
And the same with the US, larger than the UK, though both relatively low tariff. But we'll still need to offer more access, which in the case of a US deal means accepting their food standards. Might mean something for the NHS as well.
The aim of trade agreements is to create a balanced package where both sides can point to gains. Easy for the smaller country accessing a larger market. Less obvious in reverse...
