Content

Housing is the key focus of the first episode of this relaunched podcast series, discussing at length the government’s housing pledge, and why generations of governments have failed to build enough homes. Allan Williams and Mike Spicer also review events of the previous fortnight, from train timetables to inflation.

Whichever of the two options being considered by the Cabinet to replace the existing customs union with the EU is chosen, it will not be in place before Brexit happens, and one of them will cost businesses in the UK billions.

This possibility was explained to Members of Parliament’s (MPs) Treasury Committee by Jon Thompson, Chief Executive of HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC), the man charged with examining the practical problems of implementing the two systems.

The Prime Minister is said to favour a “customs partnership” under which the UK would collect tariffs set by the EU customs union on goods coming into the country.

Some members of the Cabinet, including particularly Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, have backed what is known as the maximum facilitation (max fac) option, relying on technology and trusted trader arrangements to minimise customs checks at borders.

However, according to Mr Thompson’s calculations, firms would have to pay £32.50 for each customs declaration under the latter system – adding up to between £17 billion and £20 billion a year (more than the UK paid the EU in 2016).

The customs partnership model could end up being cost neutral but, according to Nicky Morgan, who chairs the Committee: “It will take three to five years to get new customs arrangements in place depending on which of the two options is chosen, but that can’t even start until a political decision has been made.”

Given that HMRC has more than 1000 staff working on Brexit at the moment, at a cost of £360 million, she asked Mr Thompson if it would be a relief if Parliament “just voted for a customs union”.

He said that was for MPs to decide.

Downing Street responded to his evidence to the Committee by saying: “The Prime Minister has asked for work to be done on both customs models. That work is ongoing and therefore any speculation about implementation is just that.”

The US announcement took the EU by surprise, as it was believed that exemptions previously agreed with the bloc – and also with Canada and Mexico – would be extended.

China was hit by exactly the same tariffs in March this year, but negotiations between the USA and the EU, Canada and Mexico were widely anticipated to result in the threat against them being dropped.

The Secretary of State for International Trade, Liam Fox, described the US move as “patently absurd” and said that the UK was prepared for a “tit-for-tat” response.

Speaking for the EU, Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmström said that President Trump’s decision marked a bad day for world trade.

The Commission confirmed that it would open a dispute settlement case at the World Trade Organization (WTO) and would also impose “rebalancing measures” and take any necessary steps to protect the EU market from any trade diversion caused by the US action.

It has also drawn up a target list of 100 US goods worth €2.8 billion, which is reported to include Bourbon whiskey, Levi’s jeans and Harley-Davidson motorbikes.

However, commenting on the news for the CBI, Ben Digby warned that there would be no winners in a trade war, and that the tariffs could lead to a protectionist domino effect, damaging firms, employees and consumers in the USA, UK and many other trading partners.

“Now is not the time for a disproportionate escalation” he said, “and we urge the EU to consider this when initiating its response.”

For the British Chambers of Commerce (BCC), Dr Adam Marshall observed that, as the UK leaves the EU, the US decision to impose punitive tariffs is a helpful reminder that self-interest looms large in trade negotiations.

Ministers, he suggested, should reflect on this carefully before they pursue any future trade deal between the UK and the USA.

The economic round robin debate at the Norfolk Chamber Planning & Development Group meeting last night highlighted that the development, planning and construction sectors are quiet at present.

The Group are looking at ways to boost growth in Norfolk and want to build upon the success of their National Planning Policy Framework debate with the local authorities in July and continue to keep the dialogue going with the local authorities and their planners. They also want to establish good relationships with the utility companies, the Highways Agency and the Environment Agency. Jonathan Cage, M.D. of Create Consulting Engineers and the chair of the Chamber Planning & Development Group said “We are keen to engage with these organisations to establish what their perceived barriers are to bringing forward growth and to work together to boost the economy and growth in Norfolk.”

Matt Wood from the Lucas Hickman Smith Group presented his ‘white paper’ on ‘Self-Build Norfolk’ to the Chamber Planning & Development Group. He highlighted the opportunities and benefits of self build homes. It was discussed that if more homes in Norfolk were self builds, this would also benefit local building contractors, suppliers and architects who were involved in these projects.

The Planning & Development Group also welcomed the news that £3.5m has been made available by Norfolk County Council for groups such as parish councils, voluntary groups and charities to apply for funding for community projects i.e. sports facilities, play areas etc.

The economic round table discussion, at a recent meeting of the Norwich Chamber Council, highlighted that business are still finding it tough, with many business playing safe and being cautious. However there are some signs of improvement. Broom Boats advised that they have orders for two new hire boats for next year and will be re-launching their own hire boats. WLP also advised that some of their clients are becoming more optimistic, particularly those who have managed to adapt to the changeable economic conditions.

The group also heard about the proposed plans for the former RAF Coltishall from Mike Britch, Group Managing Director, NPS Property Consultants. Mr Britch highlighted that 400 acres of the 600 acre site would be returned to agricultural use. Some of the remaining 200 acres would be used for allotments, self build and community projects, whilst the rest would be for commercial use, which could include options for storage facilities, manufacturing etc. The heritage of the site would also be preserved and Mr Britch confirmed that once details had been finalised, business open days would be held to launch the site, possibly in October

Recent revelations by HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) about the possible cost of customs checks after Brexit (see It will cost you) have done little to settle business nerves about what lies ahead.

Nor will any export directors be feeling any more relaxed after leading accountancy firm RSM calculated that the additional costs arising from post-Brexit customs changes could be even higher than the £20 billion mentioned by the chief executive of HMRC to the Treasury Select Committee.

Brad Ashton, indirect tax partner at RSM, said: “Whilst HMRC has taken a rough median cost of £32.50 for a customs declaration, the actual cost is more likely closer to £40 – costs for similar customs declarations in the EU tend to be higher.”

He also highlighted that the lead time required for both solutions currently under consideration by the Cabinet would probably require an extension to the transition period, as they tend to rely on technology which is not yet in place or on co-operation with the EU that has not yet been agreed.

One of those alternatives – the so-called Max Fac option – has been totally dismissed by the manufacturers’ organisation, EEF, with the idea that it could be implemented by 2020 described as “naïve” and “wholly unrealistic”.

EEF Chief Executive Stephen Phipson has written to Business Secretary Greg Clark describing a recent visit during which he was able to see at first-hand how technology operates across the USA/Canada border.

Mr Phipson revealed that, despite a decade of substantial investment on both sides of the border by two willing partners, only 100 of the most trusted Canadian companies are able to use a “fast track” system across the border.

The vast majority of goods are, he warned, still subject to normal customs checks.

His comments were reinforced by Eurotunnel which has warned that UK businesses and consumers will face serious economic costs if the Government adopts either of the post-Brexit customs models being considered by the Cabinet.

Nothing can be done until the Government and the EU decide which system they want to use, Eurotunnel’s Director of Public Affairs John Keefe said, and it could then take several years to build the system, develop the necessary infrastructure, recruit and train new staff and educate transporters from across Europe in its use.