So on origin, it’s getting a bit hard to keep up with all the rumours so here is where I think we are with this (correct me if I missed something)

/1 https://t.co/N5dDcbH7u7

Claiming origin.
Two ways for traders to claim origin under the EU-UK deal:

1⃣ Self-certification by the exporter (standard) – normally requires an authorisation, I’m hearing that might not be needed for UK-EU trade – waiting for guidance or more info

/2
2⃣ Self-certification by the importer (new(ish), in the EU-Japan deal and some continuity deals). UK importers have little experience with this one, but helpful guidance available given initial uncertainty around using this form of certification

/3
Retrospective claims.
For up to 3 years under each side’s domestic regulation – conditions, circumstances to be determined by both sides.

Careful here cause you might be required to have a good justification for why it wasn’t submitted at the time of import. Guidance needed
/4
Additional easements
On the UK side, this is part of the 6 months phase-in period– if you’re deferring a customs declaration you’re also deferring submitting an origin claim. If you're not deferring than origin documentation required at the time of import.

/5
Let’s be clear, this will be an area of risk for many companies ‼️

Advisors and customs practitioners will spend the next 6 months talking to companies about the need to meet rules of origin. Commercial risks here too.

/6
There is a question around the supplier's declaration.

Normally this is a document that you use if you're not the manufacturer of the product or if you rely on the origin of the parts and components you're using.

It's a way to track origin throughout the supply chain

/7
You normally need them before claiming originating status. Now we have a derogation, a simplification. And while that means more time for businesses and suppliers to understand what is needed - it's a massive area of risk.

/8
And I do not want to sound ungrateful - I'll take all the simplifications I can get but just not sure how this is going to play out in terms of compliance... It's hard enough to get these on time as it is...

/9
Interestingly the UK guidance covers EU side too. Which brings me to my last point - further simplifications on the EU side...? 🤷‍♀️

As far as I can see this is where we are for now.

/10
I keep hearing things... so this might not be over.

We still have 3.5 days left so plenty of time before all this is implemented.

/end

More from Brexit

Two excellent questions at the end of a very sensible thread summarising the post-Brexit UK FP debate. My own take at attempting to offer an answer - ahead of the IR is as follow:


1. The two versions have a converging point: a tilt to the Indo-pacific doesn’t preclude a role as a convening power on global issues;
2. On the contrary, it underwrites the credibility for leadership on global issues, by seeking to strike two points:

A. Engaging with a part of the world in which world order and global issues are central to security, prosperity, and - not least - values;
B. Propelling the UK towards a more diversified set of economic, political, and security ties;

3. The tilt towards the Indo-Pacific whilst structurally based on a realist perception of the world, it is also deeply multilateral. Central to it is the notion of a Britain that is a convening power.
4. It is as a result a notion that stands on the ability to renew diplomacy;

5. It puts in relation to this a premium on under-utilised formats such as FPDA, 5Eyes, and indeed the Commonwealth - especially South Pacific islands;
6. It equally puts a premium on exploring new bilateral and multilateral formats. On former, Japan, Australia. On latter, Quad;

You May Also Like