I have long campaigned against freeports.
When they were first announced, and the opportunity to meet with the government was offered to those who objected to them was made available I was one of just two people from civil society who took part in these meetings, the other being from Transparency International, as I recall.
I have always thought them to be both a massive folly, and a deeply misguided and even dangerous attempt to recreate offshore tax environments within the UK.
In that case, an article in the FT is interesting. As it has reported this morning:
Just six businesses are using customs sites at “freeports” across the UK, more than three years after the tax-free import scheme was announced as a way to bolster Britain's economy after leaving the EU.
What this means is that neither of the freeports in Scotland have the customs of this sort, and nor do some in England either, including Felixstowe, which was always potentially the largest.
Business obviously knows what Rishi Sunak, who was always the driving force behind these things, did not, which is that they simply do not provide any real benefit to business for the hassle involved.
Despite that. Labour remains committed to the idea, as we would now expect. After all, any mad neoliberal idea appears worthy of its continuing support. And what is more, the article implies that the government is still trying to drum up support for this crazy idea.
Freeports should be cancelled now to save more money being wasted on them and to end what was always meant to be an abusive tax regime that could only favour a very few large companies.
But, will Labour have the courage to do that? I doubt it.
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:
The Freeport policy was always hot air designed to make the Tory government look dynamic with new ideas. That there are only 6 users says all we need to know.
On the face of it why bother with getting rid of them? Well, it is very important. Just as their introduction sent a message that tax was “bad” and avoidance was OK, their abolition says “we are a government that is about fair treatment of all”. Failure to do that would send all the wrong messages about “one rule for ‘them’, another for ‘us”.
Agreed
I can’t read the FT article behind the paywall, but presumably some of those six businesses are operating at more than one report? Perhaps there is no need for more than one glorified customs warehouse at each freeport?
And do we know how many businesses are making use of the other tax (not customs) reliefs at freeports – SDLT , capital allowances, NICs, etc. – and the other regulatory relaxations?
Don’t get me wrong – I think freeports are nonsense. We don’t need special onshore “Wild West” zones where the normal laws are switched off. The evidence for previous versions having any kind of positive effect is thin, and they often simply give incentives for activity that would have happened elsewhere anyway.
There are six in total – 3 in Liverpool and three elsewhere
There is no one using the Freeport status at mist sites, it would seem.
What is a “mist Sites”?
Most sites
Too much haste
Was the intention simply to have them for financial dodges and to keep us from deBrexit for 25 years?
There’s no such thing as a free lunch nor port!!
Aren’t most freeports in the world in less-developed nations and intended purely to boost the US economy?
Why even a desperate tory government would latch onto this form of overt exploitation is beyond me.
That Tory-boy Starmer likes it is no surprise anymore.
Good god, hasn’t this nonsense been disposed of yet? One of the last government ‘s many appalling ideas. The wet dream of Tufton Street loony libertarians.
If labour are thinking of sticking with this it is proof how clueless and spineless they are. Pathetic. Again.
The freeports dont seem to have had much publicity – and maybe most people arent really aware of them.
Starmer and co. must be scared that the ‘free press’ would damn them if they had the temerity to get rid of them – but if they had said freeports were a complete waste of time and money – as well as encouraging tax-dodging etc etc – the public would have accepted that.
But its no surprise that they are doing nothing, not even ‘make freeports work’ as in ‘make Brexit work’…..
The fiscal uturn is inevitable – as in Mazzuccato etc gently but firmly saying to Reeves public investment immediately is essential.
Of course “Wide Boy” Starmer will be up for Freeports as he’s shown he’s always up for Freebies for the Few but “Tighten Your Belt Financial Blackholes” for the Many. His approach to the issues facing this country is now very clear a continuation of the failed policies of the last fourteen years along with vast dollops of gaslighting the electorate with the help of the Tory owned or managed press.
I noticed another ‘good idea’ which doesn’t seem to have paid off, at least, so far.
Hunt’s ‘full expensing ‘ -tax cuts against investment, which Labour has adopted.
The article claims a reduction of £30 billion in revenue has resulted in only £10 billion of new investment.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/sep/22/corporate-uk-tax-breaks-to-cost-20bn-more-than-they-generate-study-finds
Indeed….
@EuropeanPowell on X.com has also been following this.
There is new “crazy idea ‘ exciting Silicon Valley tech entrepreneurs and crypto bros – Network States. This endpoint of elite online communities was imagined by an infamous tech investor. So no stranger to chaos.
Network States appear to propose a post democracy alternative to nation states and I suspect a new turbo charged take on secrecy juristictions. A long read about Nation States by the meticulous jounalist, Gabriel Gatehouse as just been published by the BBC.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwyl171lyewo
Well worth reading – and consistent with what my colleagues at Sheffield and elsewhere are discovering