Blog Post

Getting accustomed to Brexit – UK and the customs union scenario

The Labour Party’s support of customs union membership has the potential to change the course of Brexit, with 13 months left to close negotiations. This week we review the commentary around the possibility of a post-Brexit EU-UK Customs Union.

By: Date: March 5, 2018 Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance

Monday, 26th February 2018, 10.56 AM. Speaking about Labour’s vision for Britain after Brexit, Jeremy Corbyn communicates the party’s support for a future customs union:
“Labour would seek a final deal that gives full access to European markets and maintains the benefits of the single market and the customs union (…) with no new impediments to trade and no reduction in rights, standards and protections.”

The debate around the shape that trade relations between the EU and the UK will take after Brexit is not new. Concerning Labour’s position in particular, the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg notices “the party’s tip toes towards this policy have been long anticipated”. In the blogosphere and the media, the conversation has been revolving around the existing trade agreements between the EU and third-countries, so as to try and understand which existing agreement could better provide a model for negotiations.

As André Sapir explains: “At the momentthe UK by virtue of being a member of the EU, is a member of both the European Single Market and the European Customs Union. The Customs Union and the Single Market are two different ‘animals’. Being in the Customs Union means that basically, there are no customs duties, no tariffs in trade between the UK and the rest of the EU; Being a member of the Single Market means that, in addition, there are also no regulatory differences between the UK and the EU.” 

The possibility of an EEA-type of solution (the “Norway” solution) has been raised. André Sapir clarifies that: “Norway is not a member of the EU but it belongs to the European Single Market. However, Norway does not belong to the EU Customs Union.” What this means is that “there is a border, there are customs duties, but there is no paperwork as far as the regulation is concerned”Jean-Claude Piris, among others, has pointed out that this would involve contributing to the EU budget, abiding by the rules of the single market and ultimately giving up some sovereignty. These countries have formally accepted the four freedoms and have agreed to be bound by the judgments of the EFTA court. In case of divergence with the EU court on internal market law, the EU court would prevail.

Turkey can provide an alternative source of inspiration, as Wolfgang Münchau writes for the FT: “The UK cannot stay in the European customs union simply because it is only available to member states. But the UK could have a bilateral customs union agreement with the EU, perhaps one that is similar to the deal the EU has with Turkey (…) [thoughthe EU would impose tough rules on Britain because its economy is much bigger than Turkey and geographically closer to the EU’s economic centre.

Dan Roberts from The Guardian says: “The catch, however, is that a customs union automatically implies a common external trade tariff with third-party countries. […] Such a diminution of international influence would be a tough sell for any British government.[…] But insisting that Brussels continues to consult the UK when it negotiates with countries such as the US and China is not quite as far-fetched as some critics have been suggesting in the wake of Corbyn’s speech. A deal struck between the EU and US that failed to involve the UK and that subsequently also led to the unravelling of the post-Brexit cross-Channel trade arrangements would be almost as undesirable for future Brussels trade negotiators as it is now. A genuine alliance of UK and EU negotiators operating as a unified bloc may also stand a much better chance of getting what it wants in Washington or Beijing than either could hope for operating alone.”

But a tailor-made bilateral customs union agreement is far from a silver bullet for all Brexit problems, the most salient being the Irish border. Put very simply by Sapir: “Customs union [without a] single market means that a border would remain.” Former UK deputy prime minister Nick Clegg argued on Twitter that: “Up to 17km queues and 30-hour waits at the Turkish/Bulgarian (EU) border show that a Customs Union only gets you so far. Customs Union without Single Market, just as Single Market without Customs Union (see checks at the Norway/Sweden border), leads to delays and queues.”

A reduction of regulatory barriers to trade is likely to be highly priced by the EU, judging by the recent positions on issues of state aid, taxation and labour and environmental standards, claims Aarti Shankar. Simon Wren Lewis goes further: “The UK was always going to stay in a customs union with the EU the moment that the EU put the Irish border as one of the three items to be settled at the first stage of negotiations. (…) To avoid a hard border Northern Ireland has to be in a customs union with the EU and in the Single Market for goods. (…) If this is helpful for goods, why not services which are the UK’s comparative advantage?”

Outside the scope of future trade relations, Chris Dillow adds that it is “poor management; lack of entrepreneurial spirits; insufficiently skilled workers; lack of investment; credit constraints; a lack of price competitiveness; and so on”, that are keeping the UK from exporting more – not membership of a customs union.

Thus far Theresa May has ruled out the possibility of a customs union. On the other side of the Channel, the president of the European Council, Donald Tusk, said on March 1, 2018:“London has definitively confirmed its red lines, including ‘no customs union’ and ‘no single market’. We acknowledge these red lines without enthusiasm and without satisfaction. But we must treat them seriously. With all their consequences. And one of the possible negative consequences of this kind of Brexit is a hard border on the island of Ireland. The EU wants to prevent this scenario. 

“Hence, if no other solution is found, the proposal [is] to ‘establish a common regulatory area comprising the Union and the United Kingdom in respect of Northern Ireland’. And, until now, no-one has come up with anything wiser than that. […]There can be no frictionless trade outside of the customs union and the Single Market. Friction is an inevitable side effect of Brexit. In a few hours I will be asking in London whether the UK government has a better idea.

Facing this, there are four scenarios on the table, as summarised by Guntram Wolff: (a) either UK remains in customs union and single market or (b) has a creative new idea or (c) accepts some form of border control between UK and Northern Ireland or (d) goes back onfudge and accepts a border within [the] island of Ireland.


Republishing and referencing

Bruegel considers itself a public good and takes no institutional standpoint. Anyone is free to republish and/or quote this post without prior consent. Please provide a full reference, clearly stating Bruegel and the relevant author as the source, and include a prominent hyperlink to the original post.

View comments
Read about event

Upcoming Event

May
30
12:00

Financial services after Brexit - what path for the EU27 and the UK?

How will the European financial services industry develop after Brexit?

Speakers: Dashiell Caldwell and Richard Knox Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance, Finance & Financial Regulation Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

The effects of Brexit on UK growth and inflation

The full consequences of Britain’s vote to leave the European Union were never going to be immediately perceptible. As we approach the second anniversary of the UK’s Brexit referendum, we can compare the subsequent economic data for the UK and the euro area and see how it diverges from the trends established before the vote.

By: Francesco Papadia Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: May 23, 2018
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Argentina’s troubles

Argentina has abruptly called on the International Monetary Fund for financial help, amid currency pressures. We review recent economists’ position on this.

By: Silvia Merler Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: May 22, 2018
Read article More on this topic

Blog Post

Completing Europe’s banking union means breaking the bank-sovereign vicious circle

Several euro area leaders, including the German chancellor, her finance minister, and the French president, have recently referred to the need to “complete the banking union.”. These public calls echo those made in more formal settings, and inevitably raise the question of what criteria should be used to assess the banking union’s completeness.

By: Isabel Schnabel and Nicolas Véron Topic: Finance & Financial Regulation Date: May 17, 2018
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Opinion

What does Europe care about? Watch where it spends

The European Union says it wants to focus on new priorities. First it will have to cut spending in sectors that have long enjoyed support.

By: Guntram B. Wolff Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: May 14, 2018
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

200 Years of Karl Marx

May 5th 2018 marked the 200th anniversary of the birth of Karl Marx. We review some economists’ takes on the controversial philosopher’s legacy.

By: Silvia Merler Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: May 14, 2018
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Did Economics Fail?

The debate about rethinking economics keeps rambling. We summarise newest contributions to this important discussion.

By: Silvia Merler Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: May 7, 2018
Read article More on this topic

Blog Post

How large is the proposed decline in EU agricultural and cohesion spending?

Cohesion spending is proposed by the Commission to increase by 6% in the next MFF, but inflation is expected to reduce the real value of such spending by 7%. The gradual convergence of the least developed regions to the EU average reduces the need for cohesion spending. Common agricultural spending is proposed to be cut by 4%, while if we consider inflation too, the reduction in real value is 15%.

By: Zsolt Darvas and Nicolas Moës Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: May 4, 2018
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

The cost of remittances

Remittances flows are very important for developing countries. In 2009 the G8 pledged to reduce the cost of remittances to 5%, a commitment that was endorsed by the G20 in 2011 and 2014, and included in the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals in 2015. What is the cost today, and what are economists’ suggestions to reduce it?

By: Silvia Merler Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: April 30, 2018
Read article Download PDF More on this topic

Policy Contribution

Making a reality of Europe’s Capital Markets Union

It is high time to make the CMU project real.The authors of this publication suggest that capital markets will only transform with concrete action and that ESMA reform should be a priority but cannot be the only one. Policymakers need to set priorities that will move the project forward.

By: André Sapir, Nicolas Véron and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: April 27, 2018
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Trade Wars: what are they good for?

Following the US announcements in early March of their intent to impose steel and aluminum tariffs, and the subsequent threats from China to retaliate with their own tariffs, the global trade picture remains uncertain. The IMF and the World Bank Spring Meetings set off amid US-Japan bilateral negotiations and Trump’s hot-and-cold approach to the TPP. This week we review blogs’ views on tensions over international trade and how they can impact world economic growth.

By: Inês Goncalves Raposo Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: April 23, 2018
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

The debate on euro-area reform

A paper jointly written by 14 French and German economists set off a debate about the reform of euro-area macroeconomic governance. We review economists’ opinions about it.

By: Silvia Merler Topic: Finance & Financial Regulation Date: April 16, 2018
Load more posts