I think most of the current "teething" problems are a direct result of the UK Gov CHOOSING NOT TO be clear about the new non-tariff barriers for the last 5 years.
These are niche issues but not that niche - it was a clear choice to pretend like they don't exist and focus on the sunny uplands.
/2
HMRC and DEFRA have done a fair job trying to communicate the upcoming changes in the second half of 2020 (perhaps the tone could have been more urgent).
But by then it was too late (plus everyone was pre-occupied with covid)
/3
5 year of "fantastic, tariff-free deal", "throw your paperwork in the bin and give me a call" and other such, I don't know what to call it, propaganda?
Where was the - "look we voted for this, things will have to change, there will be new barriers and we all need to adapt"?
/4
He says "we've been made a fool of" and I'm pretty sure the reason he feels that way isn't necessarily that there are new barriers but that 1) the industry wasn't ready for them cause 2) they weren't informed.
If you keep telling ppl there won't be any red tape, that the deal you signed means no non-tariff barriers don't be surprised they are seriously ticked off when they realise that non of it was true.
/6
A classic example of overpromising and underdelivering, which is never a good idea.
It still gets me and I still get upset by this because it all could have been handled so much better.
/7
Same as with covid, it didn't have to end up being such a mess. And it's just a real shame.
/end
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
First though, in the run-up to Jan, I was often asked about the likelihood of border distributions and kept pointing out the multitude of actors and processes involved. (Also how I start most of my presentations). Borders are complex!
/2
Everything needs to be synchronised. Especially since UK's border points are well... ports.
It's all obviously doable but it requires planning, synchronisation and coordination. And all this requires time.
So why is Shane saying the BOM is what UK Gov "hopes" will happen?
/3
The time to express concern over the range of new non-tariff barriers and be vocal about the fact what an FTA means for the private sector was when we opted for an FTA.
While NTBs may be a surprise for SMEs, MNCs must have known about a lot of these changes.
/2
This is simply not true. The fact that goods need to originate to be traded tariff-free under a tread deal is part of *checks notes* every single FTA out there.
Important to remember that trade deals (FTAs) weren't designed with such a high degree of economic integration in mind.
So some of the standard RoO provisions will seem incredibly restrictive under the UK-EU deal.
/2
Minimal operations or insufficient processing is a standard part of an FTA. Most, if not all FTAs, include a provision on minimal processing – processing not considered sufficient to confer originating status even if rules of origin have been met.
/3
Also probably worth pointing out that the UK Gov is hoping that these benefits will result from other, non-customs related, incentives and measures e.g. tax cuts and other simplifications.
/2
This is because customs-related benefits 1) are available under other, simpler procedures 2) would be extremely limited as per 👇analysis by @pholmes8
Not that directly impacts exporters. As we know tariffs are paid by importers, but it affects competitiveness.
2. Process
Is pretty much the same. Unless you need an origin certificate or there are other trade policy measures in place.
/2
But the process has to be the same. Part of non-discrimination. So the act of exporting is clearly defined.
3. Regulatory requirements
Here it's more about behind the border barriers and things like SPS controls. This is where the difference is.
And it's significant
/3