more likely because services are 80% of the U.K. gdp, and fishing is worth fuck all.
So the eu gets to cripple our economy, whilst giving us some crumbs for the 0.05%
The big Brexit thread - news, updates and discussion
- Thread starter brogdale
- Start date
more likely because services are 80% of the U.K. gdp, and fishing is worth fuck all.
So the eu gets to cripple our economy, whilst giving us some crumbs for the 0.05%
editor
hiraethified
More control back for Britain! Well done Brexiteers!
www.theguardian.com
UK shoppers face Brexit duties on holiday and online purchases
UK shoppers may have parcels held at post office until fees paid as red tape introduced from 1 January
Serge Forward
Just enjoyin' my coffee.
Still, we're set up for a proper Lexit now 
Lucy Fur
Well-Known Member
DieTory
pseudonarcissus
fluttering and dancing
Insurance contracts are now being written in the EU...the marine insurance P&I clubs have moved a lot of underwriting to EU subsidiaries. I suspect the claims handlers will then drift to the EU, followed by the lawyers.
I suspect we'll see English law arbitration in the EU becoming a thing.
I suspect stuff like Euro clearing doesn't employ many people, certainly not many we'd miss. But London is no longer the obvious choice for a financial services HQ.
I don't think it's crippling, just the start of a slow decline. I may be wrong.
I have a senior position in a multinational insurer (edit to point out that is only relevant to show that I know what I’m talking about on this, because I’ve been directly involved in making the operations Brexit-proof). We reorganised our European operations in 2018, as did all the rest of the multinational insurers based in London. The way the company is managed is largely unaffected — it’s just the legal structure of the statutory entities that the business is written through that has been changed. In short, Instead of the head office of the EU group being in London, it’s been changed to be one of what was previously an EU branch. The business is still being managed out of London just as it was before, though, albeit with governance changes surrounding where board meetings are officially held etc. And the Lloyd’s syndicate is able to fulfil its EU commitments through Lloyd’s Brussels operation. There is some tax revenue on unallocated profit that would have gone to the UK exchequer and now doesn’t, but that’s relatively minor. Otherwise, it’s operationally as you were.
Claims handling mostly happens locally, by the way, with phone operations wherever it’s cheapest.
Basically, the whole thing was set up to cope with a worst-case no deal scenario. What’s actually happened is well within what has been allowed for. There is no need to alter anything further at this point.
Insurance is an truly international business with the expertise heavily based in London. Given that you can have your governance systems located in different places to your actual operations, I can’t see why there would be a drift in those operations away from where the expertise lies. If it hasn’t happened in the past twenty years despite the expense of operating in London, I don’t think that this small change in regulatory arrangement will do it. (And that’s before we get into the fact that a lot of insurance business written out of London is US based anyway).
Last edited:
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
It's only worth an auld sovereign
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
As I understand it the EU can give equivalence (that is allow financial services) at will, but this can also be taken away without warning, there was stuff in the papers about this recently
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
'Equivalence’ with the EU on financial services
Equivalence is a system which can be used to grant domestic market access to foreign firms in certain areas of financial services.
Winot
I wholeheartedley agree with your viewpoint
This is what I am hearing from a friend who works for Goldman Sachs too - that they set up EU-based ops to prepare for no deal.
In my bit of law we have had to open a German office and employ Germans in order to continue to act in the EU.
It will be ironic if one result of Brexit is to increase cross-border trade in services.
ska invita
back on the other side
Under New (Labour) Management
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
Ultimate Labour
Artaxerxes
Look out, he's got a gnu!
I think you and Westminster have a very different idea of sovereignty.
Sovereignty is everyone doing exactly what the people in Downing Street say to do.
Vicious Commie-Liberal Treason is questioning or asking how.
Conclusion Labour.
The39thStep
Urban critical thinker
EHIC to be replaced by UK Global Health Insurance Card (GHIC)
www.nhs.uk
Applying for healthcare cover abroad (GHIC and EHIC)
Find out if you're eligible to apply for a new UK EHIC or UK Global Health Insurance Card (GHIC).
www.nhs.uk
brogdale
Coming to terms with late onset Anarchism
That's good news, though why the scheme get's the tag 'global' is a little less obvious. It seems that there's nothing beyond agreement with the EU, so 'global' seems to relate more to Johnsonesque bluster than any basis in reality.EHIC to be replaced by UK Global Health Insurance Card (GHIC)
Applying for healthcare cover abroad (GHIC and EHIC)
Find out if you're eligible to apply for a new UK EHIC or UK Global Health Insurance Card (GHIC).
elbows
Well-Known Member
Also from the nugget hunt department:
The text cites "modern e-mail software packages including Outlook, Mozilla Mail as well as Netscape Communicator 4.x."
Brexit deal mentions Netscape browser and Mozilla Mail
Experts suggest officials saved time by copying and pasting text from old legislation.www.bbc.co.uk
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
Services are still to be agreed betweeen the EU and UK. The "deal" does not cover this.
It was Thatchers "Big Bang" in the City that changed London to the financial centre it is now. Brexit may see gradual decline as has been posted elsewhere. It was not inevitable that London got to be big international centre of finance.
It might be a positive thing if this decline happened. But that would be if there was a plan to change the London economy away from being based on the servicing the City ( which a lot of people I know rely on for work).
Slightly off topic but the pandemic could have long term effect on the City. More than Brexit.
Im going around empty offices in the City. WFH has shown that prestigous offices in City are not necessary. People Ive talked to say companies are still functioning ok. Few people come in- postroom/ IT and some who were coming in a few days a week.
Given these big City companies are international it might make them think is being based in City of London necessary?
To me its what happens to all those workers in service industries in long term that is the issue.
Some of the people I work with also voted Remain partly as they were concerned Brexit might effect the London economy based on the City- which provides them jobs
Its not so much as how it will effect the financial services- they will survive here or in another city- its how it affects those in relatively low paid service industries who can't just wfh or move.
Last edited:
Serge Forward
Just enjoyin' my coffee.
Cul-de-sac Labour.
pseudonarcissus
fluttering and dancing
"LONDON (Reuters) - Europe will see its biggest transfer of share trading in more than two decades when stock exchanges open for business in 2021, with Brexit shifting its centre of gravity away from London"
___________
"Ryanair and Wizz Air will strip UK investors of their voting rights from 1 January to comply with European Union rules on airline ownership.
After the Brexit transition period ends, UK and other non-EU shareholders will not be able to vote at annual general meetings, the two airlines said in separate statements."
What’s that got to do with anything?
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
Looking this up. According to FT financial services are not part of the deal yet. Discussions will take place early next year. This will result in a Memorandum of Understanding. This does not have the same weight as a treaty.
From FT:
Way I read it the MofU would mean that EU could still remove these rights at some future date with 30 days notice.
So Im not saying the finance service industry is crippled but comes across to me that EU have the whip hand in future over ability of financial services to operate in EU. It will be a card that EU will potentially play in future.
Also read this James Meadway article today ( he was advisor to McDonnell ) he points out that financial services are made up from different sectors who do not all have the same needs. Insurance/ pension funds/ hedge funds/ banks
At this time the threat to financial stability is from political decisions more:
,
Boris Johnson admits Brexit deal is limited for financial services
UK must wait until new year for details on market access, says Brussels
Does Labour really need to 'repair' its relationship with the City? | James Meadway
These are the three issues the opposition should keep in mind, says James Meadway, associate fellow of the Institute for Public Policy Research
Last edited:
I think what you’re missing, Gramsci , is that those rules apply to ‘U.K. companies operating in Europe’. But that’s not how financial companies are set up now. You can’t think of a multinational insurance company, for example, a just being a single entity, like a manufacturer. The insurer will set up entities in every country that they operate from, either to be branches of some central statutory entity or to be statutory entities in their own right. Those parts within the EU can then all feed into an EU parent company, whilst non-EU parts feed into a non-EU parent. (That’s an example — there are other ways of doing it). The EU group is subject to EU regulation and EU licensing whilst the other parts of the group follow the rules of wherever they are located instead. There’s no need to obtain equivalence in London for the part of the group you are locating in Holland.
The thing is, though, that’s just the legal structure for governance purposes. The whole massive group can actually be managed and staffed from countries other than those they sure registered in, subject to meeting all regulatory criteria regarding local representation. There’s nothing in principle stopping you having an EU head office in Luxembourg that is essentially just a brass plaque and running the company from London.
The thing is, though, that’s just the legal structure for governance purposes. The whole massive group can actually be managed and staffed from countries other than those they sure registered in, subject to meeting all regulatory criteria regarding local representation. There’s nothing in principle stopping you having an EU head office in Luxembourg that is essentially just a brass plaque and running the company from London.
not-bono-ever
meh
future of ful passporting is fickle and subject to the whims of the regulatory players. anything can be traded anywhere but the guts of the transactional process is now in centrally cleared for risk management. the UK has the biggest clearing structures outside the US, 90% of the Eur denominated swap hedges are pushed across to london. the euro bourses and houses have been unable to dent this traditional process despite banging billions into the game. The participants can easily move to a secure EU jurisdiction clearer- it doesnt matter who, as the regimented processes are the same. at present, big euro players use london cos everybody always has done. where it becomes a pain in the arse to work through london, they will switch- and it is literally a switch of yer transaction routing to do this. this is a huge concern for the BoE ( a registered EUR clearer and depositary btw) and is currently all hands on deck to see how it can be averted. a few tempters from europe and cheaper processing costs could swing it very quickly. zzzzzzzzzzz i know
Similar threads
- Poll
