The ECJ regularly through judgments increase the scope and depth of EU laws. Today is a good example that migrants can now ignore inter-border Schengen. The UK lost a very big corporate VAT rebate ruling which cost the Government £billions. Now if this had been UK law it could have been revised so it worked as the UK government intended as it was EU law, there was zero chance of any change. Ask any MP how muchEU law imposes on what they can do compared to what they would like to do and all UK law has to pass the test of being fully complaint with EU law.
They don't extend the scope or depth. They interpret the laws that have been passed by the various EU bodies. On occasions one countries interpretation of these laws conflicts with another countries interpretation. The ECJ makes a determination on which (if either) interpretation is "correct". If the laws are badly drafted, or the countries involved didn't understand what they were signing up to then that's their fault, not the ECJ's.
In 1989 the EU was 54% of our export market. Where the majority of the EU is now a low growth area, so our exports to the rest of the world are growing at a faster rate then those to the EU. THE EU will not suddenly stop trading with us after 2 years as they sell much more to us than we do to them. It is the EU trade that give us our consistent worrying trade deficit.
No-one is saying the EU will stop trading with the UK after BRexit, but the damage caused by tarrifs/duties to the UK would be much worse than to the remainder of the EU. The EU accounts for 43.7% of UK exports. The UK imports account for around 18% of EU exports. So whilst it's true the monetary value of EU imports is higher (as you say trade defecit), the percentage impact is much worse on the UK. Worst case (which won't happen) the UK loses 43% of exports, and the EU loses 18% - who's would that hurt the most? It's difficult to imagine any scenario where the UK comes out as the "winner" (or more accurately best loser) in any post Brexit tarrif/duty war.
You are wrong that tax rules can't be imposed VAT is a classic example, once something is VATable, it can not ever be VAT free and carries a minimum VAT rate of 5% unless all of 28 EU countries agree a special exception like recently with women's sanitary towels. Although the harmonization of taxes is primary aimed at Euro countries, once it is implemented we will no longer have NI numbers but EU tax numbers and it is not difficult to work out what they will be used for! Likewise, it looks like corporation tax rules will also apply EU wide with a common rate to stop abuses tax competition. There is also a wide disparity between the low and high tax countries and it won't be the high tax countries that will be willing to cut. This will mean higher prices for all of us.
I'm not wrong. Your description of the VAT system is correct. The recent VAT ECJ cases have revolved around the UK not applying the EU rules that we have already agreed to and have been passed correctly. The UK may want to vary it's tax rates, but it has already agreed that it would follow EU rules. You can't agree to do something and then go off and unilaterally do something else.
There is no chance of EU wide NI or corporation tax unless all 28 countries agree. The UK will use it's VETO if it has to in order to stop it.
Norway have been fortunate, and another EEA country must also be very lucky where they have no oil or gas but have gone from in 1955 to having 63% of PPP wealth compared to the US to 105% in 2015. With small Government, low taxes and very strong democracy with an electorate right to call referendums, the luckier they seem to have got, that's right Switzerland. In comparison Sweden have been very unlucky, nothing to do with being in the EU, large government and high taxes, just bad luck.
Huh? Switzerland isn't a member of the EEA.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Supranational_European_Bodies-en.svgIt is in EFTA. In order to trade within the EU is pays roughly half what Norway does (per capita) into the EU coffers, and has a reciprocal free movement of people agreement with the EU.
Author
Topic: The "Leave" campaign (Read 44672 times)