As someone whose been researching BREXT, TRUMP + RUSSIA for a couple of years, it's pretty amazing to see the media suddenly starting to ring alarm bells - after yesterday's FASCIST COUP attempt! Too many have been positively incurious or complicit with boosting TRUMP + BREXIT.

Japanese companies in the UK who have moved their product distribution hub to the EU in anticipation of what is now happening. One in a long thread, just to make a point that *some* companies have been preparing for worst case Brexit for years 1/13

Allegro MicroSystems Europe, semiconductors and ICs, owned by Sanken Denki, now importing into EU via Netherlands rather than UK. Amano Enzyme Europe transferred EU stock to warehouse in EU 2/13

Anritsu EMEA (sales and service of testing and measuring solutions to communications industry) all EU deliveries now go to second transport hub in Netherlands. Audio Technica established European Distribution Centre in Netherlands for Brexit (bit of a 🇳🇱theme here) 3/13

Eisai Europe (manufactures pharmaceuticals in Hatfield) transferred centralised marketing authorizations to Frankfurt, established testing and storage facilities in Antwerp. Electric Glass Fiber holding stock in EU for Brexit 4/13

Enplas Europe (semiconductors) acquired warehousing in NL for Brexit. Fujichem Sonneborn opened warehouse in Spain for Brexit. Furukawa Electric Europe shifted warehouse and distribution to Germany. 5/13

Many Brits live under the false impression that the UK has a Special Relationship with the US. In reality, it's far more transactional, especially for the Americans. This delusion is especially dangerous as post-Brexit UK seeks a new place in the world

While the two do have a very close relationship on security and defence built on post-war efforts, it would be foolhardy to expect any US president to place much emphasis on the UK's economic interests over any other third country

The problem Boris Johnson has is that a close relationship with the White House is more important than any time since the war, given the UK's new status outside the EU. What a headache, then, that the US is having an election with 2 v different candidates

On one hand: Trump likes Brexit, dislikes the EU and might see benefit in disrupting the EU by teaming up with the UK in a way that helps the UK economically. However, Trump is wildly unpopular in the UK and Boris does not want to be seen as his best mate

On the other: Brits are generally more pro-Democrat & more pro-America when a Dem is in the White House. However, Biden clearly does not support the UK's Brexit position, especially when it comes to Northern Ireland.

Been a lot of discussion recently around services trade in the deal between the UK and EU. Having read through the agreement over the past couple of days, my impressions👇

First off, services is definitely included. Question for service providers, is will it be enough?

1/N

My overall impression is that the EU has offered among the best in class for its FTAs similar to Canada and Japan.

But this access is a far cry from access to the Single Market and how is constructed as part of a trade agreement for the EU reflects that.

2/n

Unlike for goods trade, once you've got a product through all the customs and regulatory procedures into the EU, it can be sold anywhere in the EU, or its "entered circulation".

For services trade, that isn't the case. Its still done on a member state by member state level.

3/n

This is even true in the trade agreement itself where although the provisions set out in the Services and Investment chapter sounds awfully good - lots of principles about the freedom to establish and allowing the cross-border trade in services.

It's only when...

4/n

You get to the annexes and you realise both the EU and individual member states have put entry conditions across huge areas of different services sectors both now (existing measures) & in the future. Don't worry too much about the future reservations, it's the existing ones.

5/n

Today's UK-EU trade deal reflection - what is rarely stated in discussions about the deal's shortcomings is that they reflect UK government policy choices - in particular that control of immigration and a US trade deal are a higher priority than an EU deal.

Thus, why was it not a UK government priority to secure for UK musicians the rights to tour the EU? Because that would probably have required a reciprocal right to be given to those in the EU, which we didn't want to give. Choice.

Meanwhile why did the UK government not seek or secure a reduction in food inspections for GB products going to the EU? Because that would probably have required fixing food regulations in a way that might have been an obstacle to a US trade deal.

Works the other way as well. Why did the EU refuse UK requests on mutual recognition of industrial testing? In part at least because of UK lack of commitment on maintaining the previous EU system of standards and conformity assessment which might be a problem in a US deal.

One of the strangest opinions in the London politics bubble is that the UK government isn't that bothered about a US trade deal, as it so obviously goes against the evidence. There might be domestic opposition, but this was to be Brexit Dividend Number 1.