According to the Guardian:
May's principal aim is to finally get agreement on the knotty issue of customs, solving the problem of the Irish border. Her plans for a “third way” would involve the UK tracking goods as they come into the country and levying EU import taxes on them only if their final destination is inside the EU. That would allow the UK to set lower tariffs and strike its own trade deals — a key demand of the leavers.
The reference is, of course, to today's Chequers cabinet meeting.
Let me describe the consequence of May's suggestion. It would be massive fraud.
Fraud happens when boundaries (including, but not limited to borders) are crossed and rules can be arbitraged or records can be mismatched. That's about as short form an explanation as I can offer. It's also pretty comprehensive.
The EU suffers massive VAT fraud already. Maybe €50bn of that is on borders. New measures are finally coming in to tackle that. I happen to think the country of destination rules as they are called will work.
And now May wants to create a whole new opportunity for rule mismatch, and so fraud.
And that is precisely why Europe will say no to this. Why on earth should they take risk to appease the U.K. that wants to create an admin system that is bound not to work and will be a fraudster's idea of paradise? Anyone thinking they will has to go away and think again. It is not going to happen.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
And, as if to prove the point that the UK is such a well-run and trustworthy administration, aren’t the EU prosecuting HMRC for failure to collect import duties (on Chinese shoes, if I recall)?
Good point
And true
I recall being in various parts of Ireland fifty and more years ago when there was supposed to be a “hard” border. It was more honoured in the breach than the observance. Kindly locals were always willing to tell you about the other way round and for a pint of the best would draw you a map. Also, local shopkeepers adjusted their prices accordingly.
Corruption would appear to be endemic in human nature whether in the UK or EU, for example:-
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jan/01/jean-claude-juncker-blocked-eu-curbs-on-tax-avoidance-cables-show
Presumably the only way round for the EU being able to trust the UK collecting “destination taxes” on its behalf is to demand the right of observers in the UK at entry points. In other words the UK will need to accept policing.
All debate in this area feels like being restricted to Aristotle’s physics and biology texts in the 21st century. I shudder thinking about the same number of people voted NSDAP before the dictatorship as voted Brexit. Presumably most of the 17 million Germans wouldn’t have minded another vote as they realised what was really going on? The “will of the people” has been known fickle since Thucydides. Any “border” seems to be between a few people diligent with facts and pounding slogans to masses only capable of response to these (the methodology of ch. 6 of the vile Mein Kampf). Borders already do not prevent smuggling. Coffee chains and tech firms are little more than the smuggling bands controlling much of England in the 18th century.
Restraint of trade involved such as using the Royal Navy in the Baltic to stop wider trade with Russia (to profit a cabal at loss to the overall economy) and that “free trade” involving a 25% UK levy on goods bound for the continent and sometimes confiscation of seamen for our ships. This border talk has long been fatuous. We gave up on a fair deal as soon as the Tories sloganized their “negotiating genius” never remotely able to match the false promises of mega-bucks-a-day leave. It’s all face-management now before unconditional surrender and reparations. Democracy has died by free vote again. This has been worse than undergraduates playing Negotiation. The border is between the closeted Tories, what they are up to and free public dialogue. It boils down to ‘we’ve organised a pay cut for you lads in order to make the country undesirable for foreigners. We won’t need borders now as no one will want to come’. We’ve been done up like a kipper.
“Let me describe the consequence of May’s suggestion. It would be massive fraud.”
Pray, do tell, which element of the entire Brexit proposition is NOT fraudulent ?
This seems to me to have all the ingredients of the blame game.
1. Get your disunited and treacherous cabinet together in one place to solve the issue (thus appearing to be leading).
2. Get some sort of agreement in principle (even though you know it might be unworkable) so that it looks like you are
reasonable and working together for the good of the country.
3. Launch the new way forward at the EU who will reject it.
4. Blame the EU for being intransigent.
5. = Hard BREXIT – but it is all the EU’s fault – not the ‘cohesive’ Tory party who did their best. That is what I expect to see
happen next.
In short Chequers was just stage managed testicular material.
Maybe….