Here is thread with few facts relevant to current drama on Brexit deal or rather more likely NO DEAL - FOR NOW!
1.) If we have to go to ‘no deal’ (/Australia deal) we will be doing what most members of World Trade Organisation (WTO - covering virtually every country in world) do.

2/ 2/3rds of trading in world is done under WTO rules. USA exports more than UK does to EU but does so under WTO rules; so does China.
2.) If tariffs have to be imposed under ‘no deal’ WTO rules, the EU will pay £12bn in tariffs a year and the U.K. £5bn (ref: Civitas) -
3/ (ref: Civitas) - because tariffs hit mostly agricultural EU goods, such as 40% on cheeses & 12% on wine;
3.) The £12bn income from tariffs will come to UK Treasury, not Brussels. Effectively these will be UK consumer taxes that could perhaps go towards reducing COVID debt?;
4/ 4.) 43% of UK exports do yes go to EU; but this is small proportion of our actual economy: only 7.5% UK GDP are goods exports to EU; 13.5% with services. Only 8% UK companies even trade with EU. (@BBCNews please show balance on this). Most of our trade is internal within UK.
5/ over 2/3rds (SNP take note!); so tariffs will effect a small proportion of UK exports (though some sectors will be hit hard;
5.) By definition, 57% of U.K. exports go to Rest of the World. Growth outside of Europe is forecast to be 90% of all growth over next 15-20 years.
6/ When we joined EEC around 60% UK exports went to EEC. We now have UK trade deals with over 100 countries despite pessimists saying too difficult;
6.) Whilst UK has trade surplus with USA and most Commonwealth countries, we have massive deficit with EU in goods - £95bn a year.
7/ Meaning EU Single Market currently works badly for UK. Trump would go ballistic at such an imbalance if this was US trade deal;
7.) UK is 5th largest economy in world, the same sized economy as India with 1.3 billion population, & 20% larger than geographically massive Russia;
8/ 8.) If there is no deal, UK could incentivise import substitution (within WTO rules parameters) - so there is more ‘re-shoring’ to British based companies and suppliers, and to non-EU suppliers such as Commonwealth at the expense of EU exporters;
9/ 9.) No deal would really be ‘no deal - for now’. Negotiations could start again & have more urgency as UK tariffs started to bite, such as 10% on German built cars., 40% on cheeses & meats, 12% wines. The key difference is the ‘political punishment’ guidelines used by EU now -
10/ to punish & restrain an independent UK - will be gone; & more trade based guidelines - to ensure freer access to EU’s 2nd biggest market - used instead;
10.) Normally, only about 4% of containers arriving into U.K. are checked physically and this is mostly intelligence led
11/ tip offs; strange companies; not trusted regular traders). Most checks done electronically such as customs declarations via HMRC. The UK has already set up a new Customs Declaration System (CDS) replacing current Customs Handling of Import or Export Freight (CHIEF)
12/ For first 6 months, UK will be very flexible about letting EU goods into UK to allow procedures to bed down. Only 30% UK food comes from EU, 50% UK; 20% ROW.
11.) We have had 4.5 years to prepare! We don’t need any more time. Deadlines must be met.
ENDS!

More from Brexit

A quote from this excellent piece, neatly summarising a core impact of Brexit.

The Commission’s view, according to several sources, is that Brexit means existing distribution networks and supply chains are now defunct and will have to be replaced by other systems.


Of course, this was never written on the side of a bus. And never acknowledged by government. Everything was meant to be broadly fine apart from the inevitable teething problems.

It was, however, visible from space to balanced observers. You did not have to be a trade specialist to understand that replacing the Single Market with a third country trade arrangement meant the end of many if not all of the complex arrangements optimised for the former.

In the absence of substantive mitigations, the Brexit winners are those who subscribe to some woolly notion of ‘sovereignty’ and those who did not like freedom of movement. The losers are everyone else.

But, of course, that’s not good enough. For understandable reasons Brexit was sold as a benefit not a cost. The trading benefits of freedom would far outweigh the costs. Divergence would benefit all.

You May Also Like