8 November 2021
L. Alan Winters is Professor of Economics and Founding Director of the UKTP0 and Guillermo Larbalestier is Research Assistant in International Trade at the University of Sussex and Fellow of the UKTPO.
Key Findings:
- To date, the UK government has signed no new trade agreements relative to what it would have had as a continuing member of the EU.
- The Government estimates that the two agreements in principle announced this year (Australia and New Zealand) will increase UK Gross Domestic Product by between £200 and £500 million annually – that is, 0.01% to 0.02% (one to two ten-thousandths) of GDP or between £3 and £7 per head of population – and that only after they have bedded down over 15 years or so .
We were asked to sum up the economic benefits of the UK’s new post-Brexit trade agreements. Our first observation is that if we take as a starting point the trade agreements that the UK would have been party to as a member of the EU, the government has, to date, signed no new trade agreements!
There are two new trade agreements in principle. That with Australia was announced in June 2021 but has not yet been finalised, and that with New Zealand was announced last month. As the full details of these agreements have not yet been released (or perhaps determined), we do not know what their effects will be, but in June and July 2020 the government’s preliminary analysis (which is not likely to be an underestimate of the worth of the agreements) suggested that in the long run, the trade deal with Australia will raise UK GDP by between £200 and £500 million annually – that is, 0.01% to 0.02% (one to two ten-thousandths) of GDP or between £3 and £7 per head of population. The trade agreement with New Zealand is estimated to raise GDP by basically zero – minus 0.01% to plus 0.01%. (The long run ‘is generally assumed to represent around 15 years from implementation of the agreement.’)
Government analysis also treats the agreement with Japan (the Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement – CEPA) as new because the EU’s agreement was not fully operational when it was undertaken. In fact, however, CEPA is modelled extremely closely on the EU-Japan agreement, with a few small differences. These include extensions on, e.g., digital trade, and one major loss – the inability of UK exporters to the EU to be able to count Japanese parts towards meeting the EU’s requirements for getting zero-tariff entry to the EU. Relative to having no agreement, the government estimated that CEPA would raise UK GDP by £1.5 billion (0.07% or £22 per head), but relative to what the UK would have had without Brexit the gains will be negligible or negative.
Parts (A) and (B) of the table below give the numbers in more detail, along with estimates from the same sources of the effects of these agreements on UK exports and imports with the partners. Of course, all modelling results are uncertain, but the ranges quoted reflect the different trade liberalisation scenarios assumed in the government’s analysis. Thus, for example, the UK-Australia deal would raise UK exports by 3.6% under a ‘substantial’ trade liberalisation and by 7.3% under an even more ambitious one. [One can also see that increases in imports are predicted to substantially exceed those in exports, but that is a story for another occasion.]
The changes in trade with the partners look impressive, but remember two key facts:
- A trade agreement will divert some trade to, say, Australia from other partners, so total UK trade will increase by less, and
- Australia and New Zealand are small trading partners, accounting for 1.7% and 0.2% of UK exports and 1.0% and 0.2% of UK imports respectively (in 2019).
But the small shares of overall UK trade are not enough to explain the modest impacts. Even the proposed UK-US trade agreement, shown in part (C) and a key aspiration of the Government, was estimated to increase UK GDP by only a modest 0.07%-0.16%. Bear in mind that the US is the UK’s largest single-country trading partner accounting for 20.5% and 17.9% of total exports and imports, respectively, in 2019.
The UK has also signed nearly 70 other agreements that are new to the UK, but which are designed as closely as possible ‘to reproduce the effects of trading agreements that previously applied’ when the UK was a member of the EU. They add nothing to UK trade, and, because they are not perfect replicas, actually harm it very slightly.
The issue is not that trade agreements are worth nothing, but that they barely scratch the surface of the UK’s challenge to make up the GDP lost by leaving the EU, which the Office for Budget Responsibility puts at 4%.
Thus, one might ask ‘if the effects are so small, why bother?’ Among the possible answers are that:
a) while each agreement is small, cumulatively they could sum to a significant amount,
b) the current agreements could be stepping stones to bigger, regional agreements, such as the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership,
c) there are other impacts beyond GDP and trade, such as on longer-run innovation, investment and productivity impacts, which the assessments are not good at capturing,
d) there may be specific sectoral access issues;
e) there may be additional non-trade objectives related to climate and the environment, for example.
None of these is convincing economically. On (a) and (b), non-EU partners account for about half of UK total trade and so, to counteract the OBR’s 4% loss from Brexit, would require agreements with each and every one of them to induce trade changes that create a 4% increment to UK GDP. That is nowhere in sight in the numbers in the table.
Answer (c) is conceivably true but there has been no such evidence and one would have to explain why agreements with non-EU countries would have this effect while a deeper agreement with the EU would not. Similarly, on (d), there certainly are disproportionate gainers from these agreements, but what are they and why do we preference them? On (e), again it is conceivably true, but the dilution of the climate clauses with Australia suggests the opposite.
The sad answer is that
f) the government is happy to accept, on our behalf, the economic losses from Brexit in return for political benefits (sovereignty), and trade agreements with other countries are merely making the best of a bad job from an economic perspective.
Table: Summary of Government Estimates of the Economic Impacts of the UK’s post-Brexit Trade Agreements – differences from no agreement scenarios
UK GDP |
Exports to partner |
Imports from partner |
Total UK Exports |
Total UK Imports |
||
(A) New Agreements in Principle |
||||||
Australia1 |
0.01% – 0.02% |
£200 – £500 million |
3.6% – 7.3% |
7.4% – 83.2% |
0.1% – 0.3% |
0.0% – 0.1% |
New Zealand2 |
-0.01% – 0.01% |
n/a |
3.8% – 7.3% |
14.9% – 40.3% |
0.1% – 0.2% |
0.0% – 0.1% |
(B) Agreement closely modelled on previous EU agreement (no net gain to UK relative to continued EU membership) |
||||||
Japan3 |
0.07% |
£1.5 billion |
17.20% |
79.94% |
0.58% |
0.51% |
(C) Agreement not yet negotiated |
||||||
USA4 |
0.07% – 0.16% |
£1.6 – £3.4 billion |
4.3% – 7.7% |
4.1% – 8.6% |
0.7% – 1.3% |
0.1% – 0.2% |
Sources
[1] UK-Australia Free Trade Agreement The UK’s Strategic Approach (p.55)
[2] UK-New Zealand Free Trade Agreement The UK’s Strategic Approach (p52)
[4] UK-US Free Trade Agreement (p.56)
Disclaimer:
The opinions expressed in this blog are those of the author alone and do not necessarily represent the opinions of the University of Sussex or UK Trade Policy Observatory.
Republishing guidelines:
The UK Trade Policy Observatory believes in the free flow of information and encourages readers to cite our materials, providing due acknowledgement. For online use, this should be a link to the original resource on our website. We do not publish under a Creative Commons license. This means you CANNOT republish our articles online or in print for free.
Estimating the impact new trade deals will have on the UK is in the Public Interest and the Independent recognised this when it published your findings on 7.11.21.
Is it possible for you to quantify any additional costs that may be incurred by leaving the EU? For instance, the EU’s consumer requirements have already caused problems to both the UK’s fishing and financial service industries. And, fewer EU citizens are now working in the UK which has increased the difficulty in providing nursing care, driving HGVs, harvesting agricultural products etc.
If it possible to quantify some of these costs, the Independent could alert its readers that the data they published on 7.11.21 understates the losses that Brexit may cause. Achieving this would also be in the Public Interest.
All estimates of the costs of Brexit are imprecise, but to the extent possible I think that disruption due to differences in standards and frictions in the financial sector are taken into account. The costs of the migration component arguably have not been and it is something one might start to try to quantify. One of our colleagues is starting work on it, but it will be months before there are results because we do not really know yet how it will work out in the longer run and because labour shortages are rather specific so there are many cases to work through. In a rough quantification in late 2018 – ‘EU Exit: Long-term economic analysis’, November 2018 – the UK Government suggested that cutting immigration from the EEA to zero would increase the costs of Brexit by about 1.7% of GDP.
[…] of deals beyond the EU. The Australia and New Zealand deals, for example, are together expected to add up to just 0.01 – 0.03 percent to U.K. GDP. For the foreseeable future then, the pursuit of Indo-Pacific trade deals is primarily a political […]
I must say, I’m astonished. I rarely come across a blog that is both interesting and entertaining.
[…] UK has agreed two new trade agreements in principle (with Australia and New Zealand) and signed a new deal with Japan which closely […]
[…] UK has agreed two new trade agreements in principle (with Australia and New Zealand) and signed a new deal with Japan which closely […]
[…] UK trade – as they merely replicate conditions that we previously enjoyed within the EU. In fact, according to trade experts at the University of Sussex, these agreements are not perfect replicas and so have […]
[…] Since leaving the European Union, the UK has additionally agreed to fully new commerce agreements with it Australia And the New ZealandAnd the anyway Neither It’s nonetheless legitimate. The federal government estimates that in the long term these offers will enhance the dimensions of the British financial system £200 million and £500 million annually. […]
[…] Since leaving the EU, the UK has also agreed entirely new trade agreements with Australia and New Zealand, though neither is yet in force. The government estimates that in the long term these deals will increase the size of the UK economy by between £ 200 million and £ 500 million per year. […]
[…] Since leaving the EU, the UK has also agreed entirely new trade agreements with Australia and New Zealand, though neither is yet in force. The government estimates that in the long term these deals will increase the size of the UK economy by between £ 200 million and £ 500 million per year. […]
[…] Desde que abandonó la UE, el Reino Unido incluso ha firmado acuerdos comerciales completamente nuevos con Australia Y Nueva Zelanda, A pesar de que ni sigue siendo aplicable. El gobierno estima que, a derrochador plazo, estos acuerdos aumentarán el tamaño de la hacienda del Reino Unido en el medio £ 200 millones y £ 500 millones por año, […]
[…] Dopo aver lasciato l’UE, anche il Regno Unito ha stipulato accordi commerciali completamente nuovi Australia e Nuova Zelanda, anche se No ancora valido Secondo il governo, questi accordi aumenteranno le dimensioni dell’economia britannica a lungo termine 200 e 500 milioni di sterline all’anno. […]
[…] Išstojusi iš ES JK taip pat sudarė visiškai naujus prekybos susitarimus Australija ir Naujoji Zelandija, nors neigi dar galioja. Vyriausybė skaičiuoja, kad ilgainiui šie sandoriai padidins JK ekonomikos dydį £200 milijonų ir £500 milijonų per metus. […]
[…] Seit dem Austritt aus der EU hat das Vereinigte Königreich auch brandneue Handelsabkommen mit unterzeichnet Australien und auch Neuseeland, obwohl niemand noch gültig. Die Regierung schätzt, dass diese Deals langfristig die Größe der britischen Wirtschaft erhöhen werden £200 Millionen und £500 Millionen pro Jahr. […]
[…] Des que va sortir de la UE, el Regne Unit també ha acordat acords comercials totalment nous Austràlia i Nova Zelanda, però tampoc encara està vigent. El govern estima que, a llarg termini, aquests acords augmentaran la mida de l’economia del Regne Unit entremig 200 milions i 500 milions de lliures anuals. […]
[…] AB’den ayrıldığından beri, Birleşik Krallık aynı zamanda tamamen yeni ticaret anlaşmaları imzaladı. Avustralya Y Yeni Zelanda, Yine de hiç biri hala yürürlükte. Hükümet, uzun vadede, bu anlaşmaların Birleşik Krallık ekonomisinin büyüklüğünü iki yıl arasında artıracağını tahmin ediyor. Yılda 200 milyon £ ve 500 milyon £. […]
[…] Depuis qu’il a quitté l’UE, le Royaume-Uni a également conclu de nouveaux accords commerciaux avec Australie et Nouvelle-Zélande, pourtant aucun d’entre eux est toujours en vigueur. Le gouvernement estime que ces accords augmenteront la taille de l’économie britannique à long terme 200 millions et 500 millions de livres sterling par an. […]
[…] Since the UK left the EU, the UK has also agreed brand new trade deals with Australia and New Zealand, although neither is still in effect. The government estimates that in the long term these deals will increase the size of the UK economy by £200m and £500m a year. […]
[…] Des que va sortir de la UE, el Regne Unit també ha acordat acords comercials totalment nous Austràlia i Nova Zelanda, però tampoc encara està vigent. El govern estima que, a llarg termini, aquests acords augmentaran la mida de l’economia del Regne Unit entremig 200 milions i 500 milions de lliures anuals. […]
[…] Sinds het verlaten van de EU heeft het VK ook gloednieuwe handelsovereenkomsten getekend met Australië net zoals Nieuw-Zeeland, hoewel niemand nog geldig. De regering schat dat deze deals op de lange termijn de omvang van de Britse economie met £ 200 miljoen en £ 500 miljoen per jaar. […]
[…] Išstojusi iš ES JK taip pat sudarė visiškai naujus prekybos susitarimus Australija ir Naujoji Zelandija, nors neigi dar galioja. Vyriausybė skaičiuoja, kad ilgainiui šie sandoriai padidins JK ekonomikos dydį £200 milijonų ir £500 milijonų per metus. […]
[…] След като напусна ЕС, Обединеното кралство също се споразумя за изцяло нови търговски споразумения с Австралия и Нова Зеландия, все пак нито едното все още е в сила. Правителството изчислява, че в дългосрочен план тези сделки ще увеличат размера на икономиката на Обединеното кралство с между £200 милиона и £500 милиона на година. […]
[…] След като напусна ЕС, Обединеното кралство също се споразумя за изцяло нови търговски споразумения с Австралия и Нова Зеландия, все пак нито едното все още е в сила. Правителството изчислява, че в дългосрочен план тези сделки ще увеличат размера на икономиката на Обединеното кралство с между £200 милиона и £500 милиона на година. […]
[…] of the US, the one single deal that might ship a major financial increase — although such a deal would add only 0.16 per cent to the general measurement of the economic system at most, in response to the UK Commerce Coverage […]
[…] of the US, the one single deal that might ship a major financial increase — though such a deal would add solely 0.16 per cent to the general dimension of the financial system at most, in line with the UK Commerce Coverage […]
[…] the only single deal that could deliver a significant economic boost — even though such a deal would add only 0.16 per cent to the overall size of the economy at most, according to the UK Trade Policy Observatory at the […]
[…] the only single deal that could deliver a significant economic boost — even though such a deal would add only 0.16 per cent to the overall size of the economy at most, according to the UK Trade Policy Observatory at the […]
[…] one single deal that would ship a major financial increase — despite the fact that such a deal would add only 0.16 per cent to the general dimension of the financial system at most, in response to the UK Commerce Coverage […]
[…] of the US, the one single deal that might ship a big financial increase — although such a deal would add only 0.16 per cent to the general dimension of the financial system at most, in keeping with the UK Commerce Coverage […]
[…] the only single deal that could deliver a significant economic boost — even though such a deal would add only 0.16 per cent to the overall size of the economy at most, according to the UK Trade Policy Observatory at the […]
[…] the only single deal that could deliver a significant economic boost — even though such a deal would add only 0.16 per cent to the overall size of the economy at most, according to the UK Trade Policy Observatory at the […]
[…] the one single deal that would ship a big financial enhance — despite the fact that such a deal would add solely 0.16 per cent to the general measurement of the financial system at most, in response to the UK Commerce Coverage […]
[…] the only single deal that could deliver a significant economic boost — even though such a deal would add only 0.16 per cent to the overall size of the economy at most, according to the UK Trade Policy Observatory at the […]
[…] the only single deal that could deliver a significant economic boost — even though such a deal would add only 0.16 per cent to the overall size of the economy at most, according to the UK Trade Policy Observatory at the […]
[…] the only single deal that could deliver a significant economic boost — even though such a deal would add only 0.16 per cent to the overall size of the economy at most, according to the UK Trade Policy Observatory at the […]
[…] the only single deal that could deliver a significant economic boost — even though such a deal would add only 0.16 per cent to the overall size of the economy at most, according to the UK Trade Policy Observatory at the […]
[…] with the US, the one single deal that might ship a big financial enhance — though such a deal would add only 0.16 per cent to the general measurement of the financial system at most, based on the UK Commerce Coverage […]
Education as the root of freedom – ecllfactory
[…] only single deal that could deliver a significant economic boost — even though such a deal would add only 0.16 per cent to the overall size of the economy at most, according to the UK Trade Policy Observatory at the […]
[…] the US, the one single deal that might ship a major financial increase – though such a deal would add only 0.16 percent to the general measurement of the financial system at most, based on the UK Commerce Coverage […]
[…] with the US, the one single deal that might ship a big financial enhance — though such a deal would add only 0.16 per cent to the general measurement of the financial system at most, based on the UK Commerce Coverage […]
[…] with the US, the only deal that could provide a significant economic boost, even if such a deal would add only 0.16 percent according to the UK Trade Policy Observatory at the University of […]
[…] the one single deal that might ship a major financial enhance — despite the fact that such a deal would add only 0.16 per cent to the general dimension of the economic system at most, based on the UK Commerce Coverage […]
[…] the one single deal that would ship a important financial enhance — regardless that such a deal would add only 0.16 per cent to the general measurement of the economic system at most, in accordance with the UK Trade Policy […]
I would like to thank me for the effort and time that you put into it. I would also be happy to share the excellent Information. Keep up the great work.