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

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.