Connect with us


Brexit Britain goes looking for a new direction



FT premium subscribers can click here to receive Trade Secrets by email.

Hello from Brussels. It seems a bit surreal to be talking about food hygiene regulations and rules of origin when the US just survived a violent insurrection, and yet here we are.

Maybe, fresh from its investment agreement with China (debate about which continues to rumble on), the EU should now pitch a new trade deal with the US to export human rights and democracy there. Those are, after all, fine European values, so long as no one looks too closely at Hungary and Poland. More substantively, the chaos on Capitol Hill will undoubtedly be cited in Brussels as evidence that the EU cannot rely on the US as a stable partner. Anyway, today’s main piece looks at where UK trade policy will go now (answer: the far side of the world), while Tall Tales mops up some of the Brexit nonsense still floating about. Charted Waters looks at how the breakdown in relations between Beijing and Washington did little to dissuade US investors from buying Chinese stocks.

Don’t forget to click here if you’d like to receive Trade Secrets every Monday to Thursday. And we want to hear from you. Send any thoughts to or email me at

Welcome to the UK, new jewel of the Asia-Pacific

Right, so that’s Brexit done. Now what?

If any UK ministry had a good 2020, it was the Department for International Trade. Being kept out of the chaotic Brexit negotiations (handled by the Cabinet Office, the department that supports Downing Street) makes anyone look competent by comparison. But even objectively, DIT’s great horde of civil servants, many learning very rapidly on the job, got a lot done.

They managed to roll over the bulk of the EU’s bilateral trade deals into new agreements with the UK, hugely helped by the deferral of the original deadline of March 2019. Notable successes that looked touch-and-go until quite recently included Japan, Canada, Singapore and, though rules of origin still need fixing, Turkey.

OK, so the UK has proved it can roll over. But can it fetch new deals, or will it just have to sit and stay? (It’s a dog-training metaphor. Sorry.)

There are two big projects for this year: joining the eleven-member Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) and negotiating a deal with the US. The animating idea is to navigate away from the sclerotic EU and towards the fast-growing economies of Asia and the UK’s fellow Anglosphere nations.

The problem with this is evident upon looking at an atlas and briefly perusing the academic literature on trade. The fast-growing economies of the Asia-Pacific are a long way away from northern Europe, and the biggest ones in the CPTPP — Japan, South Korea, Mexico and Canada — already have trade deals with the UK via the EU rollovers. Liz Truss, DIT secretary of state, has insisted that the distance effect in gravity models is smaller than traditionally thought, but she has yet to overturn the standard economic thinking on that topic.

Boris Johnson signs the UK’s trade deal with the EU © Andrew Parsons/No 10 Downing Street

Let’s accept that CPTPP is mainly a signalling device. Will the UK persuade existing members to let it in? Ironically the biggest barriers to entry are probably what Empire-nostalgic Brexiters like to think of as Britain’s Anglospheric cousins, Australia and New Zealand, with whom the UK is also negotiating parallel bilateral deals. Said nostalgics presumably haven’t met many Aussie or Kiwi beef and dairy lobbyists, who have little sentiment about historical allegiances and see two separate opportunities to prise open access to UK markets.

Other potential issues with CPTPP include investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS), on which Japan remains keen. As a founding member, New Zealand negotiated some ISDS carve-outs, but latecomers such as Britain are less likely to get an easy ride. “It’s a matter for negotiation, but basically we will be expecting all the applicants to CPTPP to agree to all the rules,” a senior Japanese official told us. “Our initial perception is that the original contracting parties are somewhat different to new applicants.”

Britain’s problem here is part of a wider one we identified a while back: the government doesn’t know what the public thinks about trade issues and hence ministers find it hard to give directions. There were demonstrations against ISDS outside British hospitals during the EU’s trade negotiations with the US under the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership a few years ago. However, campaigners back then could rouse protesters by citing the threat of rapacious American companies to the NHS. Will they be less concerned about the Japanese? Seems possible, but nobody knows.

There’s another just-as-well-the-Americans-aren’t-here issue in the CPTPP: agriculture. In theory the UK could be subjected to US-style sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) food hygiene rules, with boatfuls of hormone-riddled beef and chemical-washed chicken turning up in British ports. In practice, though, the actual SPS text in the CPTPP isn’t hugely different to existing World Trade Organization rules. And since the US didn’t join the CPTPP, its government won’t be there to insist on specific promises to let American produce in to the UK.

As for the US-UK bilateral itself, be prepared for a long wait. Trade Promotion Authority, the White House’s ability to put a trade deal to Congress for an unamendable up-or-down vote, expires on July 1 and it’s unlikely the Biden administration will immediately want to take on the big battle of renewing it. That doesn’t leave much time to negotiate an entire trade deal. Given the controversies involved, the UK might even secretly be quite relieved to have talks deferred indefinitely. 

There are other issues (including data flow) and policy forums (including the G7, which the UK chairs this year, and the WTO) where Britain is keen to make a mark. These are big subjects we’ll come back to later. For the moment we’ll just observe that the DIT has assembled a good civil service machine and has a plan to change the subject from Brexit by signing some new trade deals. What it doesn’t have is partners for those agreements large and geographically close enough to Britain that workers and businesses are likely to notice much difference.

Charted waters

Column chart of proceeds from equity offerings by Chinese groups in the US, by year ($bn) showing Chinese companies have raised north of $140bn in the US since 2000

One might think that the breakdown in trade relations between Washington and Beijing might have put global investors off buying equities of Chinese groups listed on US exchanges. That was far from the case in 2020, however. Indeed, as the chart above shows, Chinese groups raised about three times as much from US equity markets last year than they did in 2019. The figure for 2020 was on a par with the level seen in 2014, the year of Alibaba’s IPO.

Tall Tales of Trade

Apologies for raising false hopes in the piece above: Brexit isn’t really done. It never will be. It will continue to involve many tall tales being invented and quickly vaporising on contact with reality.

Prime minister Boris Johnson’s Brexit-related trade claims have a very short consume-by date, generally going rancid in weeks, sometimes days. Euronews has done a fine job here collecting and then disassembling nine of them. Perhaps Johnson’s best was his absurd claim, made on Christmas Eve just after striking the deal with the EU, that there would be no non-tariff barriers to trade. This was so patently wrong he didn’t try to defend it himself less than a week later in the House of Commons.

But the one that had us giggling this week was disintegration of the absurd claim that there would be no trade barriers of any kind down the Irish Sea. It turns out that GB to Northern Ireland exports are already experiencing serious frictions thanks to the extra permissions and paperwork, just as we all said they would. The best bit was a Brexiter that Johnson himself elevated to the House of Lords whingeing and mewling that Northern Ireland was becoming “an economic colony of the EU”. Well, yes. Told you so. It’s one thing to spin tall tales to try to convince the public or confuse the media. It’s quite another to believe them yourself.

Don’t miss

  • Simon Kuper writes on the triple threat to London’s reputation as a top global city. A combination of Covid-19, Brexit and a decline in the role of English could cost the UK’s capital dearly, he writes.
    Read more

  • Our Middle East editor Andrew England has interviewed Qatar’s foreign minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman al-Thani, who told him that the Gulf state will not alter its relations with Iran and Turkey. That’s being read as a sign that Qatar has made few concessions after securing a deal with Saudi Arabia and its allies to end a bitter dispute between rivals in the region.
    Read more

  • Phil Stafford writes that the EU share trading that flooded out of the City of London after the end of the Brexit transition is unlikely to return, banks and asset managers have warned.
    Read more

Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Berlin under fire over attempt to interfere with Wirecard inquiry




Germany’s finance ministry has come under fire over an attempt to secretly interfere with the questioning of a key witness during a parliamentary inquiry into Wirecard, a potential breach of parliamentary etiquette.

The collapse of the German payments company last summer sent shockwaves through Germany’s financial and political elite. A parliamentary inquiry has exposed multiple regulatory failures and led to the departure of the heads of three supervisory agencies.

Days ahead of Friday’s final parliamentary debate on the committee’s final report, the finance ministry disclosed that one of its senior officials tried to intervene in the inquiry’s work in the run-up to the questioning of Munich chief prosecutor Hildegard Bäumler-Hösl, a key witness.

The government revealed this in a written answer to a question raised by Fabio De Masi, an MP for the hard-left Die Linke party, which was seen by the Financial Times.

The ministerial official was not named, but can be identified by the description of his role, as Reinhard Wolpers, the head of the subdivision financial market stability. Wolpers is one of three finance ministry employees who are members of BaFin’s administrative council. The finance ministry declined to comment on his identity.

In the run-up to the questioning of Bäumler-Hösl in January, Wolpers approached BaFin’s then-vice president, Elisabeth Roegele, and asked her to provide questions for Bäumler-Hösl which he then would pass on to MPs.

The government has no constitutional role in the inquiry, which is being pursued by parliament and has powers akin to a court. Moreover, Roegele was also nominated as a witness and had not yet been questioned by MPs at that point. She was forced out of her job by the government alongside President Felix Hufeld in late January.

“Wolpers’ behaviour is a clear violation of rules,” De Masi told the Financial Times, adding that the government official showed a “lack of respect for the Bundestag”.

BaFin and Munich prosecutors are embroiled in a blame game over the controversial 2019 short selling ban which investors regarded as a vote of confidence in the disgraced company. BaFin imposed the ban after receiving information from Munich prosecutors about an allegedly imminent short selling attack against Wirecard.

Several BaFin employees told MPs that Munich prosecutors had stated that the information was highly credible. Bäumler-Hösl denied that and said she just passed it on to BaFin without commenting about its validity.

The short-selling ban is potentially toxic for German finance minister Olaf Scholz, who is the Social Democrats’ candidate for chancellor in September’s federal election.

The finance ministry scolded the watchdog publicly for the short selling ban, saying it was based on poor and insufficient analysis.

The ministry’s response to De Masi disclosed that Wolpers approached Roegele via email and text messages days ahead of Bäumler-Hösl’s testimony. The ministry said Wolpers “acted upon his own, personal initiative and did not co-ordinate with other employees of the finance ministry”. It added that the executive level “at no point” was informed about the behaviour but only became aware of the matter because of De Masi’s inquiry.

“The communication of [our] employee with Ms Roegele was eventually without a result, as Ms Roegele did not submit such suggestions for questions,” the ministry said, adding that “no information” was passed on to members of the inquiry committee from the ministry.

Lisa Paus, a Green MP, said that the “authority of the finance ministry” was misused for the political interest of the Social Democrats. “That’s an absolute no-go.”

Florian Toncar, an MP for the pro-business Free Democrats, said that it would be “very surprising” if Wolpers’ actions were “not approved or even requested by the ministry’s senior level”.

Jens Zimmermann, SPD representative on the inquiry, said he was unable to comment on internal procedures at the ministry “as I don’t have any insights [into them]”, adding that his only contact was with the ministry’s official representatives in the committee. “I did not receive any suggestions for potential questions to Ms Bäumler-Hösl,” Zimmermann said.

Wolpers and Roegele did not respond to FT requests for comment. Munich prosecutors declined to comment.

Source link

Continue Reading


UK exporters get more than £12bn in government financial aid




UK exporters have been given more than £12bn in state financial support to keep Britain trading with the rest of the world through Brexit and the pandemic.

UK Export Finance, the government’s export credit agency, provided British businesses with the highest level of financial support in 30 years in the 12 months to the end of March, according to its annual report published on Wednesday. This is almost treble the amount from the previous financial year, to help exports to 77 countries.

The agency aims to support viable UK exports with loan guarantees, insurance and direct lending to help them win, fulfil and get paid for international business where there are gaps in private sector provision. 

UKEF provided more than £7bn in support to companies disrupted by the pandemic, such as Rolls-Royce, Ford, easyJet and British Airways, with a mixture of trade guarantees and insurance to encourage private sector lending to exporters.

It also helped exporters facing Brexit risks, for example providing a £480m guarantee on a £600m commercial loan in March 2021 after a carmaker committed operations to the UK. 

UK exporters, especially smaller businesses, have complained about extensive red tape and costs arising from trading with the EU after Brexit.

Many have also warned that the trade deals struck by the government have yielded little benefit so far, instead causing them to rejig operations and move production and distribution overseas.

“We are opening up the world’s fastest-growing markets through the trade deals we are negotiating so that the UK can recover as quickly as possible from the pandemic,” said minister for exports Graham Stuart.

Support through finance and guarantees was given to 549 companies, more than double the number helped over the previous two years.

The agency also underwrote its largest ever civil infrastructure project, with £1.7bn in guarantees to build two monorail lines in Cairo and provide the trains, the first such exports in more than 12 years.

The export agency is now planning to increase its coverage of businesses focused on zero carbon initiatives. 

Stuart will say on Wednesday that UKEF will create a renewables, energy and carbon management team to underwrite activity across sectors such as wind power, solar, green hydrogen, grid resilience and decommissioning. UKEF has also committed to ending support for new fossil fuel projects overseas. 

Last year, UKEF launched a new scheme to encourage trade after Brexit and for small businesses to take advantage of new trade agreements.

Under this, exporters could apply for larger loans from the UK’s five high street banks backed by an 80 per cent guarantee that can be used both to cover costs linked to exports and also to scale up business operations.

Marcus Dolman, co-chairman of the British Exporters’ Association, said that such new products were “already proving their value to UK exporters and to supporting UK jobs”.

Source link

Continue Reading


What unites and divides Germany’s potential coalition partners




Guten Morgen and welcome to Europe Express.

Germany’s election season is kicking into gear and both Angela Merkel’s centre-right CDU/CSU and the up-and-coming Greens have published their election manifestos. With polls indicating the two parties could end up bedfellows in the first post-Merkel government, we compare their Europe-related policies.

The Uefa Euro 2020 football championship is in full swing and gripping fans across the continent. But we explore a darker reality that has spilled out in stadiums and pitches: culture wars.

In Luxembourg, EU affairs ministers meet today to prepare for a summit, hear the latest on EU-Swiss relations and discuss the rule of law in Hungary and Poland.

This article is an on-site version of our Europe Express newsletter. Sign up here to get the newsletter sent straight to your inbox every weekday morning

Berlin calling

Germany’s ruling Christian Democratic Union and its Bavarian sister party, the Christian Social Union, have laid out their joint election manifesto after the Greens published theirs in past weeks. It is well worth looking at what unites and divides the potential government allies in the post-Merkel era.

In brief, the CDU/CSU wants to return to how things were before the coronavirus pandemic, especially on fiscal rules and the sacrosanct schwarze Null (a balanced budget). They seem lukewarm on disruptive digital and green policies and made a libertarian push for a retreat of the state from many areas of society under the motto: “throwing money at problems isn’t always the best way to solve them”.

Meanwhile, the Greens have put forward a transformational plan. Their ambition is to turn Germany into a carbon-neutral economy in the next 20 years. Here are three areas to watch closely:

Debt and spending 

  • The CDU/CSU have insisted that once the pandemic is over, so should be any relaxation of fiscal rules. They support the EU’s unprecedented, mutual-debt-fuelled €800bn recovery plan, but say it should be a one-off. They oppose consistent debt mutualisation across the bloc. (Here is Armin Laschet’s take in an interview with the FT)

  • The Greens are less dogmatic about what other EU nations should do in terms of borrowing. They even suggest a relaxation of Germany’s debt brake to allow public investment in schools and infrastructure, to be financed with more debt. 

Climate goals

  • The CDU/CSU have embraced the goal of CO2 neutrality by 2045 and a 65 per cent cut in carbon emissions by 2030. But there are caveats for some industries and climate activists have pointed to inconsistencies and omissions in the conservative parties’ manifesto — notably their vague commitments on a “stable, fair and transparent” price for carbon.

  • The Greens are seeking to raise the carbon price to up to €60 per tonne in 2023, along with subsidies and incentives to cushion the social impact of a greener economy. 

Europe and foreign policy

  • The CDU/CSU were more dovish on China and Russia and they failed to mention the controversial Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline. The Greens were more hawkish and maintained their opposition to the pipeline for environmental and geopolitical reasons (they worry about circumventing Ukraine, depriving it of transit revenues, and increasing energy dependence on Russia).

  • Both the CDU/CSU and the Greens favour majority voting in EU foreign policy, replacing the current model of unanimity. The Greens would also abolish the need for unanimous EU decision-making on taxation.

The September 26 election result will determine how much of these manifestos get translated into actual policy — and how much one or both political groups will have to compromise.

Chart du jour: Europe’s Covid bill

Bar chart of Government debt as GDP (%) showing National debt in Eurozone countries spiked in 2020

Public debt in the eurozone rose 14.1 per cent in 2020 compared with the previous year, the biggest leap in two decades, driven by the pandemic. Greece and Spain have recorded the biggest single increase in debt loads, while Ireland only recorded a marginal increase.

Beautiful game, uglier realities

International football’s biennial jamborees usually offer a few weeks of summer escapism for avid fans and newbies alike, writes Mehreen Khan in Brussels.

But this year’s European championships have become an extension of the psychodramas and culture wars that dominate political life on the continent.

The list of controversies runs long (and we are only 11 days in). Last month, France’s far-right kicked off a movement to boycott Les Bleus over a rap song. In England, the national team has defied criticism in the tabloid press by continuing to take the knee in support of Black Lives Matter, despite jeering from some of their own fans. 

Further east, Ukraine’s football association was ordered by governing body Uefa to partly modify its kit design. Russia had complained that the jersey included a map of Crimea, which Moscow annexed in 2014.

Greece has also complained to Uefa about neighbouring North Macedonia using the acronym “MKD”. The Greeks (who didn’t qualify for the tournament) say the abbreviation violates the terms of the 2018 agreement under which Macedonia changed its name to North Macedonia.

The latest conflagration came this weekend, when German captain and goalkeeper Manuel Neuer became the subject of an investigation by Uefa for wearing a rainbow armband in support of LGBT+ rights. News of the probe prompted senior EU officials to express support for the player.

The inquiry has since been dropped by the governing body, which concluded that the armband did not constitute a breach of its rules prohibiting the display of “political symbols”. 

Neuer’s Germany faces off tomorrow against Hungary, where LGBT+ rights have come under political assault from Viktor Orban’s ultranationalist government. Munich’s Allianz arena is preparing to welcome the visitors by lighting up the stadium in rainbow colours.

Separately, Uefa on Sunday said it was investigating “potential discriminatory incidents” during Hungary’s two opening matches in Budapest, where TV images captured homophobic banners among the 55,000-strong crowd. Monkey chants were also reportedly directed at French players on Saturday. 

Brussels risks getting ensnared in the politicisation of the world’s most popular game. EU diplomats have told Europe Express that the incoming Slovenian presidency, led by rightwing prime minister Janez Jansa, wants leaders to sign off on summit conclusions this week on the governance of sport. 

Under the banner of the European Way of Life, Jansa is pushing for leaders to agree language “reaffirming the uniqueness of the organisation of sport in Europe”. The request has baffled diplomats, particularly as the EU has little legal authority over sport.

Slovenian diplomats said the push was needed to prevent schisms such as the scuppered European Super League that rocked world football earlier this year. Jansa also has a long-running grudge against his compatriot and president of Uefa Aleksander Ceferin, often taking to Twitter to send pointed jibes at football’s governing chief.

Between all the spats and controversies, viewers could be forgiven for forgetting that some football is also going on.

In the dock

Poland and Hungary will be in the spotlight during ministerial meetings in Luxembourg today as member state ministers discuss Article 7 procedures against the two countries, writes Sam Fleming in Brussels.

These procedures allow the European Commission, European parliament or member states to take action against countries for serious breaches of the rule of law under threat of punishments such as the suspension of EU voting rights.

The commission triggered the process against Poland in 2017, while the parliament launched it against Hungary the following year.

In Poland, incursions into judicial independence have continued, as have apparent threats to the primacy of EU law. In Hungary, there are mounting concerns about the judiciary, anti-corruption frameworks, media pluralism and human rights. Last week, Hungary passed an anti-LGBT+ law that sparked criticism from rights groups. The commission said it would look into whether the legislation breached EU laws.

Nevertheless, the two countries can shield each other from punishments under the Article 7 regime by wielding their vetoes. The question ahead is whether the commission can obtain better results by deploying powers agreed last year to withhold EU funds over breaches of vital principles.

Commission vice-president Vera Jourova is due to address the ministers in the General Affairs Council, setting out the state of play in both countries.

“The last hearing on Poland took place in December 2018 and on Hungary in December 2019, and many things happened since then,” she told Europe Express. “Unfortunately most of them continued to raise our concerns.”

What to watch today

  1. EU affairs ministers meet in Luxembourg

  2. Germany’s chancellor Angela Merkel receives European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen in Berlin

Notable, Quotable

  • United front: French politicians from left to right have persuaded a Green candidate to withdraw from the second round of regional elections on Sunday. The move is aimed at ensuring that Marine Le Pen’s far-right Rassemblement National does not take control of the southern Provence-Alpes-Côte d’Azur region.

  • Belarus sanctions: EU foreign ministers approved sanctions against a further 86 individuals and organisations in Belarus and set their sights on industries including finance, potash and petroleum products to put pressure on President Alexander Lukashenko’s regime.

  • Government collapse: In a first for Sweden, the country’s prime minister Stefan Lofven has lost a no-confidence vote in his government. The vote, engineered by rightwing opposition party Sweden Democrats, means Lofven has a week to call an election or build a new ruling coalition.

  • German tech offensive: Germany’s Federal Cartel Office added Apple to the Big Tech companies in its crosshairs, launching a probe into whether the iPhone maker has established market dominance through its “digital ecosystem”.

  • St Schuman: “Founding father” of the EU Robert Schuman may soon become a saint. The former French prime minister was given the title of “venerable” in a decree by Pope Francis over the weekend, which is one of the steps that could lead to sainthood.

Recommended newsletters for you

FirstFT Europe — Our pick of the best global news, comment and analysis from the FT and the rest of the web. Sign up here

Free Lunch — Your guide to the global economic policy debate. Sign up here

Are you enjoying Europe Express? Sign up here to have it delivered straight to your inbox every workday at 7am CET. Do tell us what you think, we love to hear from you:

Today’s Europe Express team:,,, Follow us on Twitter: @Sam1Fleming, @MehreenKhn, @valentinapop.

Source link

Continue Reading