Amid all the talk by the Chancellor about the Brexit dividends, one could forget that the OBR has updated its assessment of the economic impacts of Brexit:

1) Import and export intensity reduced by Brexit, consistent with the OBR's 2016 assumption of a 15% reduction in each

2) Trade volumes down, estimated 15% lower than had we stayed in the EU
(The OBR cites the analysis that @JohnSpringford has done isolating the effects of Brexit)
3) The OBR notes (rightly) that, because the UK-EU TCA is yet to be fully implemented, trade barriers will "rise further" and "probably take several years to come through"
4) Most importantly, the OBR claims that Brexit will lead to a 4% reduction in long-run potential productivity.

In other words, Brexit will have made the UK poorer by 4% in the long run.
All of which is consistent with most of the pre-referendum (and post-referendum) estimates of the impacts of Brexit. Coincidentally, by the same experts that, as a senior member of the current government once said, people had enough of.

More from All

You May Also Like

Recently, the @CNIL issued a decision regarding the GDPR compliance of an unknown French adtech company named "Vectaury". It may seem like small fry, but the decision has potential wide-ranging impacts for Google, the IAB framework, and today's adtech. It's thread time! 👇

It's all in French, but if you're up for it you can read:
• Their blog post (lacks the most interesting details):
https://t.co/PHkDcOT1hy
• Their high-level legal decision: https://t.co/hwpiEvjodt
• The full notification: https://t.co/QQB7rfynha

I've read it so you needn't!

Vectaury was collecting geolocation data in order to create profiles (eg. people who often go to this or that type of shop) so as to power ad targeting. They operate through embedded SDKs and ad bidding, making them invisible to users.

The @CNIL notes that profiling based off of geolocation presents particular risks since it reveals people's movements and habits. As risky, the processing requires consent — this will be the heart of their assessment.

Interesting point: they justify the decision in part because of how many people COULD be targeted in this way (rather than how many have — though they note that too). Because it's on a phone, and many have phones, it is considered large-scale processing no matter what.