The study aims to state the impacts of BREXIT over Trade and living standards in UK. Outcome obtained from EU (European Union) membership in UK’s referendum has potential for shaping up country’s relationship along with largest trading partners in EU membership. Membership of EU is likely to reduce the cost for trading between UK and rest of Europe (Dhingra et al. 2016). In obvious way, between EU members, the ‘customs union’ exists and this means that multiple tariff barriers are removed within EU. The removal of tariff barriers allows free trading of goods and services (Wadsworth et al. 2016). However, in equally important way, the reduction of trading cost is identified as lessening non-tariff value barriers that resulted into EU’s continue efforts for creating independent and single market in Europe.
As per UK background, the non-tariff barriers incorporate wider range of measures for increasing cost for trading such as threats of anti-dumping, checking rule of origin, border controlling, and the differences among the cross countries over various regulations for the standard of products and their safety as well. The trade barriers reductions can increase the trading value between EU and UK with these aspects. Before, in 1973, UK is a part of the European Economic Community, value-basis one-third of UK trading was connected with EEC (Kierzenkowski et al. 2016). In 2014, other 27 EU trading members include 45% exporting from UK and 53% exporting from UK is considered under other countries’ imports. Exports from EU includes 13% of national income and higher trading values can provide benefits to UK customers throughout lower price ranges with accessing better goods and services. To some extent, the UK workers and business entrepreneurs benefit upon from new export opportunities for leading to high value sales and profits in businesses.
The export opportunities allow UK for specializing over industries so that it can acquire competitive advantage. Along with the sales and service channels, the trade raising outputs increases income and improves living standards of UK (Dhingra et al. 2016). The standards provide effects over trading and this is understood over several other countries. In recent decades, the trade studies revealed that there are bigger effects of BREXIT in UK living standards and trading value.
This particular study has broad aim for stating impacts of BREXIT over Trade and living standards in UK. To achieve proper implications and outcomes, the consequences of BREXIT will be estimated considering two scenarios such as optimistic and pessimistic over the trade. This scenario consideration is completely based on secondary findings and study related outcomes. Furthermore, the dissertation aims to provide secondary study analysis and findings about future trade agreements that are related with UK living standards. This findings should be able to provide alternative trading procedures that is related to UK trade and living standard. The major impacts on migration, foreign investments, and regulation will be discussed in this study to depict BREXIT impacts over global economy.
Based on the background, the primary implication is stated as higher productivity and innovation can have major impact on other routes. The broad question is stated to be: how BREXIT can cast its impact on trading in UK and to find out what impacts BREXIT have on UK incomes? This dissertation is based on secondary study and several studies reveal that BREXIT has impact on UK living standards and this study aims to estimate the degree of influence that BREXIT cast upon UK living standards.
Depending on the stated aim of research topic, the research determines specific objectives and relevant research questions in later sections. Primary research objectives are included as following:
Identified objectives from the study can provide detailed outline over the dissertation. The objectives can formulate specific research questions so that study can achieve a proper format over the study.
The set of designed research questions for this specific research topic are as follows:
Rationale of the study states the study motivation in which the research will be completed in order to reach mentioned research objectives. The researchers have presented range of secondary study forecasting some estimation methods can be used as alternative along with different assumptions on relationship between UK and EU. The researchers follow narrow and static trading consequences of BREXIT besides considering particular ways through which BREXIT can put influence on UK economy along with considering migration and investment (Crafts 2016). As it is quite critical to assess the economic future of UK and BREXIT consequences as economic future of UK may bring several uncertainties in business. The researchers have studied BREXIT consequences with reducing trade along with lowering UK living standards. More prominently, for per capita the frequently falling income can result to much low trade even more than the offsets over different potential saving on UK. The saving can obtain reduction in fiscal contributions for EU budget so that baseline estimate can imply accounting over fiscal savings (Ebell and Warren 2016). Effect of BREXIT can be equivalent to fall in UK income between 1.3% to 2.6% with declining over average annual household income between £850 and £1,700 per year.
The research structure will be segmented under five chapters as Introduction, Literature Review, Research Methodology, Analysis, and Conclusion. The introduction chapter will determine aims, formulated objectives and questions, and state the research rationale. The introduction section is relevant for demonstrating background of the topic and detailed findings about agenda. Rationale of the study provides appropriate way to realize how the study should be completed within stipulated timeline.
The literature review section will present several secondary study outcomes regarding the topic to show findings related with BREXIT consequences in UK Trade and living standards. The research methodology chapter will present the overall methodology comprising of approach, design, format, and techniques. Research methodology section is essential for segmenting the activities under timeline basis so that entire research can be completed within time. Furthermore, the analysis chapter will provide analytical outcomes and implications. Analysis of collected data will provide suitable description. The analysis will be secondary as the study is based on cross-sectional aspect of agenda. The conclusion section will align the findings with objectives to demonstrate them and will present the future scope of the study. The final chapter deals with findings to show how the study reached the aims with meeting the research questions providing implications as well.
Based on the introduction chapter, it can be concluded that primarily, the study aims to identify influences of BREXIT over UK Trade and living standards. As per findings in background section, the reductions in trade barriers can increase the trading value between UK and EU with these aspects. In recent decades, the trade studies revealed that there are bigger effects of BREXIT in UK living standards and trading value. However, as per structure of the study, this dissertation is based on secondary study. The researchers have studied BREXIT consequences with reducing trade along with lowering UK living standards.
For performing estimation of BREXIT effects over UK trade and living standards, the researchers have used modern way of quantitative trade model over global economy. Quantitative trade model is relevant for accommodating the channels throughout trade effects so that this trade can influence customers, firms and workers (Dhingra et al. 2017). The trade model provides mapping over trade information to UK welfare providing numbers in which real incomes can be changed to various policies of trades. Some easily available information is considered for trade volunteers and for removing potential trade barriers (Ottaviano et al. 2014). The trade model utilizes most recent data collected from WIOD for dividing world economy under 35 major sectors along with 31 regions. The sector wise segmentation allows transitional inputs and ultimate outputs both from the good and service. Moreover, this model considers the effect of BREXIT over the trade of UK with EU relationship and trade of UK corresponding rest of the world data (Dhingra and Sampson 2016). For forecasting the consequences of BREXIT in UK aside from EU relationship, the researcher should consider some assumptions so that the trade change can be shown with BREXIT impacts.
The meaning of Brexit for USA
It is referred as the decision of the UK and known as the abbreviation of British Exit. The vote results the defined expectations as well as roiled global markets that causes British pound falling it to the level against the dollar in 30 years. The prime minister called the referendum as well as campaigned for Britain in order to remain in the EU.
History of the UK economy
The economic history of the UK deals with the economic history of the country. The nation is becoming one of the most prosperous economic regions in Europe. It led the industrial evolution as well as dominated the world economy during 19th century. It was one of the major innovators in machinery like system engines. On the other hand, the economic output per head of the population has rose by 500%. It generates an important rise in the living standards. On the other hand, it produces relative economic decline as other countries like the USA caught up.
The labor government of the UK has enacted a political program rooted in collectivism that includes nationalism of the industries as well as state direction of the economy. On the other hand, the concept of nationalization of the coalmines is accepted by principles. The major economic priority of the post-was required to raise exports. The required extension of rationing and balancing the dollar deficit are required to requisitioned for the export markets.
PESTEL analysis of UK
Political factors: The UK is a constitutional monarchy, which runs under the process of influencing parliamentary system. The UK industry is a fair and stable country with several opportunities in order to get the operating within as well as country as a whole. The government of the country is proactive and politically stable. It splits into national as well as local administrations. However, there is a strong economic position.
Economic factors: The economic position is related to different countries. It has a high GDP, diverse economy. However, the issues are helpful to look after the economic factors. The large population allows large public as well as private sectors. It increases foreign direct investment.
Social factors: The factors are significant in the analysis. In addition, there is any exception to the particular case of the UK. In addition, several public services, densely populated with more than 64.1 million inhabitants are included in the social factors. However, there is high and increasing dependency ratio.
Technological factors: There are quality innovation skills, expertise in IT and science as well as effective laws with regard to the intellectual properly. However, slow technological development in the country seems to be proper in hand with regard to future.
The fact is unknown that how exactly UK has positive relation with EU and that would be changed with following BREXIT consequences. Lack of clarity exists on BREXIT consequences for UK trade costs between UK and EU relationship (Mulabdic, Osnago and Ruta 2017). To overcome this particular difficulty and issue, the researchers have analyzed two different scenarios such as optimistic and pessimistic. The optimistic scenario considers a consequence that enhances the trade cost exists between United Kingdom and European Union in small variance and negative scenario considers bigger raise in trade costs (Busch and Matthes 2016). Optimistic scenario in discussion considers a major assumption in post-BREXIT world with UK trade relationship between EU and UK. Being the members of a European Economic area, a trade relationship exists for Norway. Free trading agreements are available for EU and this free trading agreement considers no tariff over trading between Norway and EU (Baker et al. 2016). Norway is referred to as a significant member in the European single market where it undertakes legal policies and regulations for designing to reduce the non-tariff barriers of single market. Though, from the custom union of UE, Norway is not defined as a significant member. Thus, Norway faces huge non-tariff barriers in their customs (Gudgin et al. 2016). These barriers are not applicable for the members of EU in form of the originals rule requirements and other activities those are anti-dumping.
The researchers have identified that Norway’s productivity growth is affected from fully participation from EU market integration programs. Moreover, in the pessimistic scenario of secondary analysis, the researcher have assumed that UK is not considered to be successful for negotiating to new trading agreement to EU and hence, the trading between UK and EU is followed with BREXIT (Springford and Whyte 2014). The trading is governed with World Trade Organization (WTO) rules of origin; the information implies that there exists bigger increase in trading cost rather than considering tariff costs within the optimistic scenario as one of the most superior nation (MFN) tariffs. According to the UK-EU trade agreement these are compulsory to consider. As WTO completed lesser development to reduce the non-tariff barriers over EU (Sampson et al. 2016). Increment in trading cost between UK and EU that follows BREXIT is divided under three sections such as:
According to the optimistic scenario, the researchers assumed that EU and UK can continue free trade agreement so that BREXIT cannot be leading to change in tariff barriers (Emmerson, Johnson and Mitchell 2016). Again, in pessimistic scenario, the trade is governed from WTO rule origin; the researchers have realized that the MFN tariffs are completely obligatory from the UK-EU trading products. After considering the No-tariff barriers all the positive scenario reflects that, the trade of UK-EU is to be subjected to one quarter for reduction of non-tariff barriers (Hatzigeorgiou and Lodefalk 2016). The barriers are considered in trading between United States and EU. Again, in pessimistic scenario, it is viewed that researchers have assumed bigger increment in three quarters of reduction of non-tariff barriers (Dhingra et al. 2016; Hunt and Wheeler 2016). Finally, the trade cost between countries within European Union (EU) can decline in approximate 40% much fast than the trading cost among the OECD countries. Over the BREXIT events, the rate of future reduction will unable to get benefit from UK and from intra-EU trade costs and as per positive environment, the researchers assumed that within ten years, intra-EU trade cost could fall to 20% much fast than other countries in global aspect (Sampson et al. 2016; Swinbank 2016). Again, in pessimistic scenario, the researcher assumed that intra-EU trade cost could continue to fall up to 40% much fast than other countries in global aspect. This outcome implies that over optimistic, it can be realized that non-tariff barriers within EU can fall to 5.7% over next decade (Armstrong and Portes 2016). On the contrary, pessimistic case implies that the non-tariff barriers within the EU could fall up to 12.8%; this estimation accounted fiscal the total rate of transfer between United Kingdom and European Union.
As the other members of EU, the budgets are contributed UK members in significant amount, total fiscal contributions of UK and EU budget are determined at approximately 0.53% of net national income. Particular profit of BREXIT is considered for UK is that it can reduce contribution to EU budget (Bruno et al. 2016). However, BREXIT is not necessary significant for UK to bring no such contribution to EU budget; in arrival, corresponding to the access of the single market, the members of EEA in Norway could make significant payment for the EU budget. Considering per capital base, Norway contribute financially to EU at a rate of 83% as high as UK’s contribution (McMahon 2016; Chadha 2016). Therefore, it is viewed that optimistic case addresses to assume the contribution of UK for the EU budget declining by 17% or failing as a national income by 0.09%.
Moreover, the researchers have focused on the fact collection over UK trade, it is found that fall in trade affects the countries. Considering both the optimistic and pessimistic scenarios, the outcomes and findings states that the distribution in income changes over per capita across the countries (Busch and Matthes 2016). All the EU members are inferior to this findings; large proportional loss are facing by Ireland from BREXIT along with Netherlands and Belgium. Both of these countries are losing income are mostly trading partners with UK and certain countries outside EU like Russia and Turkey can obtain as unfocused to -0.12% to -0.29% over GDP. The values are offset for 0.01% and 0.02% over gaining non European Union based countries (Portes 2016). The outcomes from the percentages, shows in global aspect, the world’s GDP value is bigger than UK. Therefore, whenever UK lose £26 billion and £65 billion, other countries in rest of the European Union (EU) countries lose £12 billion and £28 billion as inferior (Lea 2016). The BREXIT shock is considered as half as big for EU budget along with UK income consideration.
An alternative situation arises for Switzerland, as it is not under EEA however; it has several bilateral agreements with EU. The bilateral agreement gives access to solitary market to Switzerland (Dhingra and Sampson 2016). Besides Norway, Switzerland adopted all available regulations for covering the parts of single market with participating with allowing free payments and moving labor. From lower fiscal transfer, the benefits to EU are obtained for approximately 40% of contribution from UK, over per basis of capita (Coyle 2016). On the contrary, the agreement does not contain free trading services for EU considering disadvantages in UK economy; and UK economy has competitive advantage in services (Cumming and Zahra 2016). The researchers have simulated the effects of BREXIT, in Switzerland. This is an alternative positive scenario whose results are found as comparable to Norway. Loss of income of 1.3% is quite similar for Switzerland as well. However, fiscal transfers are much low in case of Norway; there are more offset with higher cost of trade in services (Oliver 2016; Bourne 2016). Along with BREXIT, UK will not be restricted with common external tariff on EU, on importing. For analyzing consequences of BREXIT and unilateral policy, the researchers have considered the optimistic and pessimistic scenario for including additional assumptions from UK with removing all tariff costs from importing goods.
Based in context with time, business can grow and anticipate innovative trade regime(s) for placing under 2019 and 2029 rime period. United Kingdom is place for triggering around 50 Article and before the March 2017 union can be exited not before than end of March 2019 (Lea 2017; Knight 2017; Kee and Nicita 2017). Based on this dates, trading between European Union and United Kingdom can be subjected as the interim regime (for instances depending on EEA regulations) or trading for reverting backward to the rule of WTO. It reverts to WTO rules can be fallen back for options within no comprehensive new deal can be reached. Prior experience from related studies shown multilateral FTAs can consider five to ten years of negotiation period for rational outcomes from national, regional, and from government (Burke 2016). This is improbable, that comprehensively fresh agreement will set on particular day that, UK can exit the European Union. It is more likely that some types of temporary regime can exist for two party’s negotiation along with future terms (Oliver 2016; Harvey and Hubbard 2016). Another concluding deal can be expected for earliest in 2024 considering final duration up to 2029; so that both parties can agree over and provide rating to deal procedures at national level.
BREXIT can influence over trade-based fiscal regulations over EU countries. Companies can transport products as well as services towards or even from the facilities over the different countries of EU for paying the taxes for other countries (Dhingra, Ottaviano and Sampson 2017; Bruno et al. 2016). For corrections over inter-company transaction, the products can be put under double-tax category over different other tax authorities. However, to some extent, the companies are currently avoiding the double taxing through EU to arbitration convention (Sampson 2017). Once, UK left EU; the UK would not be considered as a direct party of EU legislation. This can be asked that whether BREXIT can influence over the arbitration of EU and the convention so that it can be treaty for concluding with Member States (Dhingra et al. 2016). This convention is not considered in dispatch of EU and according to the principle, the revision for the convention can be asked for contracting Member States. Question is dealt with the part of negotiations BREXIT, for the subsequent views and willing nature of the Member States for practice resolving double-tax throughout the arbitration. These parties can stay grateful for going under convention.
For supply chain becoming more important towards competitive nature, the supply chains are considered as under global aspect for companies (Oliver 2014). The globalized supply chain management can decrease cost of sourcing, production, and delivery. Additional to these outcomes, the companies are aiming for getting high-level services as per customer expectations relevant to quality and speed of delivery increment (Bouoiyour and Selmi 2016). Moreover, as per outcomes and study of the implications of Global Council, the higher ratio of gross trading related with value-added services. UK’s trading is connected over global supply chain values. Among all value-added supply chain management, 41% of them are in exports and that coming to EU and rest 12% from US (Mendez-Parra, Papadavid and te Velde 2016). The importance of UK within the international supply chain has been emphasized after considering all other sectors. Moreover, both the financial and the professional services of UK industries, performs export in the mining, chemical products, transport system, telecom, retail and wholesale sectors as well (Steinberg 2017). These professional service and financial service providers of UK industries are essential to international supply chain management.
Once, UK left European Union, currently global supply chain for EU market should be redesigned. Uncertain situations from trade policies and influence on trade between EU and UK casts significant impact on investments for supply chain management footprint (Jafari and Britz 2017). Moreover, several companies exist for creating strategic financial investment for takng decisions about warehousing, factories, logistics abilities; could consider a location as UK. For pending uncertainty in BREXIT vote, the decisions might be postponed (Lea 2016). The decisions that could not be postponed should be considered as under bias for favor over non-UK based locations.
For the supply chain management, the organizations should calibrate to costing levels along with services leveling over nodes in supply chain management. In case transaction cost for trading becomes too high, the companies should reconsider current or existing locations in UK (Arnorsson and Zoega 2016). The value chain transformation should not only be considered as source for delivering; however, the functions as sales, R&D, marketing should be considered evaluating the cost-effective as well as strategic locations of trading from EU.
BREXIT influence can be spread to UK trading along with rest other countries in the world. Over the previous two decades, the EU have negotiated over 36 FTA along with 58 non-EU countries (Roy and Mathur 2016). Several other types of trade agreements are under processing for being activated or under negotiation for activation. UK would not be benefitted from the arguments as it left EU. The UK should choose renegotiation over trading deals for all the other countries; this situation will be time-consuming way and it can consume more expenditure (Davies and Studnicka 2017). In the same context, UK will consider limited access to the EU markets, multinational, and also the major supply chain anchors for reassessing all the features of UK to grip Europe.
The discussion has focused on the consequences of BREXIT on UK households for trading; moreover, BREXIT could influence over UK economy throughout changes in investment, migration, and regulation (Anderson, Mitchell and Crawfurd 2017). The researchers will examined the channels for closer evaluation in future reports; however, in one way; the findings interpreted that BREXIT may have economic benefit. The channels that have sufficiently large and positive impact on UK economy for outweigh negative effects over identification (Currie 2016). This is extremely unlikely for the entire case; BREXIT is likely for reducing foreign investments; this information has found for leading to higher productivity; for instance, Coulter and Hancke (2016) estimated that EU membership can add up to 2.25% for UK GDP through channel to foreign direct investment. On similar way, the migration is identified to aid growth and helping the reduction of budget deficit without making any serious damage to market effects.
Eurosceptics in most cases can pinpoint to the promise for better and lesser regulation as bigger benefits in post-BREXIT scenario. It is essential for realization for regulation that will not affect over single market; such as countries in Norway, Switzerland for adopting similar regulations with rest of the EU countries (Ryan 2016). The rest of the EU countries cannot have single vote on what regulations can be. The UK could lessen social, employment, and environmental regulations over some degree. However, when it could be politically possible and at that time, UK was considered as one of the most flexible employment and product market regulations over world as per OECD information (Keen 2017). The product regulation for United States can be stated second and third for United States and Canada for labor regulations.
Once, the GDP impact exists for such corresponding regulations being large at some point, the discussion is under controversy. Weakening the protection rule for US levels can make little yet positive economic difference (Doherty 2016). When UK can accept higher trade costs with removing high levels of access for EU market under pessimistic scenario. There will be scope for regulatory scenario for loosening. Onaran and Guschanski (2016) stated that 56 regulations that are derived from EU legislation can include UK Government’s impact assessment for finding out costs that overcome benefits. Wenger (2017) claimed that estimation of cost to these regulations is considered to be 0.9% of UK’s GDP value. However, several regulations among these rules can implement policies for UK government for committing to following either within the EU countries group or outside of EU countries group (Grant et al. 2016). For instance, half of total cost included from two simple policies such as renewable energy strategy and working time directives.
These regulations that are scrapped for abandoning UK’s renewable energy targets for removing entire rights so that entitlement for 20 days can be under paid annual leave (Sellers and Sellers 2017). In case, the regulatory cost of EU membership were under 0.9% under amount of GDP; this amount is lower than half as per estimation of net cost of BREXIT is considered in purely static case. Several cost figures fewer than 6.3% to 9.5% costs are under dynamic case for considerations (Stalford 2016). Some costs of regulation in UK can be considered for inefficient planning system. These identified problems can be under primarily homegrown, rather than importing from Brussels.
Several factors that can determine whether firm can choose for locating and investing. Improved marketing strategy can attract more firms that want to close the customers (Emmerson et al. 2016). UK has formulated strong rule on law for flexible labor marketing and with highly educated workforce employees. Moreover, these rules and regulations can make it attractive for FDI locations for stating whether under or not in EU countries. However, EU membership can reduce trade and investment costs so that it is likely for having an impact on controlling for those other factors (Weale 2017). For estimating size of effect for being in EU or FDI so that the researcher can provide new empirical analysis and in-depth outcomes.
The outcomes from statistical model can be based on bilateral FDL flow in between 34 OECD countries during year range of 1985 to 2013. Model can estimate why foreign investors choose for investing in UK; as opposing to other countries such as Germany, United States, and France (Baker, Ali and Thrasher, 2016). It is quite similar for ‘gravity model’ for following standard way to estimating the bilateral flow of exporting and importing. Bilateral FDL flow can be between any pair of countries that depend on respective market size that is measured from GDP. Geographical distance between the countries and other factors are considered such as GDP per capita (Somai and Biedermann 2016). The statistical model can address to question for FDI flow between two countries in case the sender and recipient joins EU countries. Once, the factors are accounted from FDI determinants as geographical distance with culture. The researcher can consider full control over looking at changes in FDI over determinants.
This chapter is prepared for defining appropriate method and depicting proper approach that would be suitable for attaining complete and detailed results of the process. Campos (2016) opined that theories and concepts can be used for research methodology so that better format of research can be achieved. Application of research design, approach, and data collection process makes the study outcomes detailed and justifying the research initiatives. However, Carrera, Guild and Luk (2016) pinpointed that in-depth analysis can provide appropriate outcomes within research constraints. The researcher applied proper method outline and research procedures in order to achieve outcomes related to BREXIT consequences in UK trade and living standards.
In this chapter, detailed research approach and techniques are used for analyzing BREXIT consequence in UK trade and living standards. Selected research approach is deductive so that the approach can allow the research for conducting study based on secondary study (Springford 2013). The deductive approach can make the study possible to conduct in appropriate manner. Descriptive design of study can help in defining the use of concept and application of theories with impact of study. The study considered major findings over relevant secondary studies to provide suitable level of discussion along with evidences from related studies.
Research onion is considered as methodology tool that helps in identifying primary divisions of research work along with ability to successful analysis of topic. Calhoun (2016) claimed that research onion is considered as proper tool to help academic study of agenda with proper stages of studying. Research onion has some layers and divisions and those are named as philosophies, approaches, strategies, choices, and timeline consideration techniques.
Based on research onion diagram, the onion helps in dividing study work into different layer of research techniques for increasing better analysis format and stages. Research requires following individual layer of study for appropriately following structured procedure in study.
In research methodology section, choosing research philosophy is another major way to address proper manner to obtain detailed outcomes. McKenna (2016) depicted that use of research philosophy explains considered assumptions that is undertaken for researchers to conduct the study. On the contrary, thinking process varies for researchers and therefore, selection of research philosophies varies (Lea 2017). Primary consideration is identified for choosing research philosophy is to align it effectively with research process. Major parts of research philosophy are identified as ontology, epistemology, positivism, realism, interpretivism, and axiology.
Ontology is identified as dependent on reality nature; it is segmented under two categories such as objectivism and subjectivism. Firstly, objectivism helps to convey certain positions where the social objects persever all reality for the social actors (Knight 2017). Secondly, subjectivism considers about social events that emerges from perceptions and consequences of social actors for existence. For instance, government is organizing Filmfare Award ceremony; where all international level celebrities and government official ministers are invited (Kee and Nicita 2017). The researcher requires mapping the crowd attitudes and temperaments; then subjectivism philosophy should be adopted.
Positivism is referred to as an approach for conducting natural work depending upon social entity (Tans 2017). To perform research based on this philosophy, primary data collection is required and structured hypotheses should be prepared. In order to facilitate the hypothesis, structured methodologies should have to be followed. The researcher cannot alter the collected information from the primary sources, as those data are completely dependent upon the research topic (Burke 2016). Now, the researcher will study some secondary literature sources for finding out factors such as importance, types, increased rates, future scopes, and others (Oliver 2016). Therefore, the researcher develops hypothesis to identify influential factors. In positivism, the hypotheses are tested and the outcome is confirmed from developed theory.
Realism is identified as another philosophy based approach where epistemology relates with scientific manner of responses. The basic feature of realism is it can identify the truth and the real existence of the objects (Harvey and Hubbard 2016). Realism is again segmented on two parts such as critical realism and direct realism. Critical realism can be completed in two different stages such as experience gathered from the world whereas; direct realism is about those data which are gathered from research areas. On the other hand, the interpretivism is a segment of epistemology in which differences are assessed from the social components (Dhingra, Ottaviano and Sampson 2017). In this philosophy, the interpretations of social rules are presented over perceived meaning. Axiology is identified as consideration of judgment, aesthetics, and ethics. Axiological approach can reflect over making decisions and judgment about outcomes.
In this research study, researchers aimed to perform secondary study and present the outcomes from previous works. Therefore, realism and interpretivism philosophy is likely for usage; however, realism philosophy is not acceptable for time-limited studies. Henceforth, the interpretivism philosophy is used for this research. Selection of interpretivism philosophy helps to depict several relevant studies and their associate outcomes for justifying the objectives of the research work.
The research approach defines the format of the study, following which the research should be conducted. An exact or particular research agenda is considered for conducting the study in two broader ways both for deductive and inductive (Bruno et al. 2016). Inductive approach is used to study the agenda in which several sources of data are available. Observation helps to gather different information for building proper way to study the agenda; this is the very initial phase of inductive research. On the other hand, in some extent, Dhingra et al. (2016) states that inductive approach can fulfill the purpose to build theories the agendas. On the other hand, deductive approach identifies a problem to discuss the practical application for different theories to obtain access over the content of the research content. Deductive approach follows particular aim for building theory so that proper specifications and concepts over data analysis (Sampson 2017). Furthermore, a research topic can provide different research approaches so that applied data analysis technique can be used to gain proper implications about the topic.
Particular approach is chosen for this study is deductive approach where consequences of BREXIT should be identified from UK trading and living standard aspect. Major consequences are identified in literature review section along with studying related agenda from previous works. The outcomes should be presented with deductive approach for suitable reasons about BREXIT consequences. Furthermore, the researchers have depicted the particular way to introduce BREXIT related financial and trading model for specifying theories to resolve the issues as well.
Research design adheres to consider explanation of theoretical framework for research topic in which proper collection and analysis approaches are required. In this data collection procedure, the most suitable approach should be selected for describing research design (Oliver 2014). Three different types of research design approaches such as exploratory, explanatory, and descriptive are there. Exploratory design helps to identify some ideas and concepts about the topic in order to provide discussion over the agenda. The exploratory design describes about occurrence of BREXIT consequences in UK trading aspect. Moreover, explanatory design is favorable for studying the research topic and corresponding event so that fishbone analysis, cause-effect analysis, and penetration study can be conducted (Bouoiyour and Selmi 2016). However, in this design, in-depth discussion and theoretical analysis is limited compared to other designs such as exploratory or descriptive.
Finally, descriptive design is appropriate for demonstrating the detailed outcomes about the topic and in-depth discussion. As per research nature and study requirements, the descriptive design should be prepared.
In order to conduct the secondary data analysis, to obtain related work resultants, for this particular research topic, descriptive research design in adopted. For gathering relevant articles and journals, descriptive research design is needed to be chosen. It helps to identify the analysis results and key findings in an accurate organized manner. Through this the whether the collected documents are supportive enough or not can also be indicated. Thus, from the overall research discussion it can be said that, selection of descriptive design is absolutely correct from the research topic perspectives. It can efficiently serve crucial information in a detail manner.
There are two different data collection processes are there such as primary and secondary. Based o the nature of the study it can be said that for this topic secondary data collection is the most suitable one (Steinberg 2017). Thus, in order to conduct the research work instead of survey journals and articles should be considered to meet the research objectives.
Two types of data sources are available such as primary and secondary, primary sources deals with data collected through conducting different survey whereas; secondary data is all about selection of online journals, news papers and yearly articles (Mendez-Parra, Papadavid and te Velde 2016). In order to demonstrate the particular research outcomes, secondary study materials should be identified. Primary data are collected from on-point evidence only such as questionnaire survey (Steinberg 2017). In order to serve different direct events, personnel, individual activities primary data source are used on the other hand; there are some more primary sources such as historical as well as legal documents (Jafari and Britz 2017). However, in order to obtain the research objectives appropriately the experimental outcomes, video and audio contents can also be considered.
The outcomes generated from interviews, survey, questionnaire investigation etc can be used as primary data sources and for making the communication approach perfect the medium those are chosen include email, blog, newsletters etc. In order to fulfill empirical analysis, from the social and natural science the primary data should be used (Lea 2016). Over the observation on direct outcome the research outcomes can be performed. Even some of the outcomes can be gained from different scholarly articles, results of conferences.
In order to describe, analyze, discuss, interpret, comment, evaluating and summarizing primary data secondary sources are widely used. For studying different well known magazines, articles, newspapers, the secondary data sources and secondary data materials are to be used. It also helps to demonstrate the primary research work of other person (Arnorsson and Zoega 2016). For giving justification over the research objectives, all secondary study outcomes should have o be analyzed accordingly.
There are two different types of data techniques such as qualitative and quantitative are available those are accordingly adopted by the researchers to conduct a research work successfully. In order to collect primary data and for gathering response from the respondents, quantitative data techniques are used by the researchers. On the other hand, qualitative data techniques are used for secondary data collection (Roy and Mathur 2016). In order to conduct the research work, the researcher is needed to collect secondary data for this particular research topic. For gathering data qualitative data techniques are selected by the researchers to conduct the research work successfully.
Ethical considerations in this research work are essential to perform the study without contradiction about data applications (Davies and Studnicka 2017). Ethical considerations in this study are included for adopting suitable set of behaviors to research work conducted. Researcher should perform analyzing consequences of BREXIT over UK trade and living standard with considering ethical implications. The ethical considerations are stated as:
Application of Data: Gathered data should be used for BREXIT consequences in order to understand impact of BREXIT impacts on UK trade living standards. The application of data can be used for secondary study and any commercial usage of data should be avoided (Anderson, Mitchell and Crawfurd 2017). The application of data should be limited to academic research works only so that ethically appropriate way can be followed in detailed study activities.
Convenient Citations and Referencing: As the study is to be conducted as secondary with considering all relevant studies from offline or online sources, the sources should be cited with putting in-text citation (Currie 2016). The major aspect of using someone else’s findings into new research paper is that those particular findings should be incorporated with appropriate referencing. The way of practicing referencing and citations is considered as best manner to utilize secondary data implications.
Confidentiality of data: The data confidentiality should be maintained with identifying information source from which data can be accessed someone else than research team. Confidentiality of data ensures the ethical means of keeping all secondary findings excluded from any published content or reports (Coulter and Hancke 2016; Ryan 2016). For peer-reviewed sources, secondary data should be used in other reports in such a way so that there will be no opportunity for other people to identify the source; even though no name is used.
Assessment of relevant components only: In the study, particular data or information components should be used that are clearly relevant to the program or research initiative that was conducted (Keen 2017). Major relevant findings from secondary data can have some irrelevant parts to the study context or research objectives. Therefore, the secondary findings that should be utilized in the study that has direct relevance with the research objectives and expected outcomes.
After comprising different research studies it has been found that, a research fails to reach the objectives due to some research limitations. These limitations should be resolves for successful accomplishment of a any research study (Doherty 2016). However, within the discussion essential restrictions should be kept those needs secure investigation. For this study the identified limitations are as follows:
Lack of data availability: The research scope and objectives automatically become bounded due to lack of availability of information. It will definitely fail to identify all significant trends and important relationships. However; these limitations cannot restrict the research objectives. Thus this study should be conducted considering limited number of secondary data sources.
Lack of relevant study conducted previously: Literature review is another essential part that has to be conducted accurately to collect prior information. It will help to identify the way through which the corresponding outcomes can be used as a part of discussion (Wenger 2017). However, according to some of the research agenda secondary sources are not necessarily all time significantly related. In order to avoid other issues the study approach must be changed for facilitating the maximum available outcomes.
Time and Budget Limitations: Due to the cross sectional nature of the study, time and budget are the two most important constraints to be considered. Due to lack of time and budget the researchers may fail to add on some important as well as specific findings.(Grant et al. 2016). Due to lack of economical support, research work may also be interrupted accordingly.
In order to accomplish the total research project successfully this is crucial for the researcher to segment the entire workload among the research team members. Based on the size and complexity of an activity, duration should be considered for each task, this is referred to as the timeline of the research work (Sellers and Sellers 2017). Based upon the activities the timeline should be prepared. It is assumed that if a researcher can successfully complete a task within the estimated timeline then, the cost will also be reduced accordingly. Thus, activity mapping is referred to as a major task to do. A realistic timeline should be prepared to successfully complete the research work. According to timeline mapping the research work should be completed and for this research work the time line prepared is shown below:
|
Activities |
Week 1 |
Week 2 |
Week 3 |
Week 4 |
Week 5 |
Week 6 |
|
Identification of the research area |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selection of appropriate research topic |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Secondary data collection |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Conduction of a literature review |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proper research methodology and approach identification |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Secondary data collection |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outcomes from secondary data |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Finding and analysis from data |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ultimate conclusion |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rough write up draft design |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Draft submission |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Approval form the desired changes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Final submission of the research paper |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Table 3: Timeline developed for the research
After considering all study outcomes the research should be conducted as a secondary research. In order to utilize the concept and theories those are supporting the secondary documents descriptive research design should be chosen by the researcher. After demonstrating the research philosophy and the background of this particular research topic, it has been found that, among realism, positivism and interpretivism, the interpretivism research philosophy should be adopted by the researchers. This philosophy helps to identify the related studies and their relevant outcomes as well to reach the research objectives. Again between inductive and deductive research studies, deductive method is selected for accomplishing the research topic area successfully. After considering all ethical implications, secondary data sources are to be utilized accordingly. In addition to this an appropriate timeline is also developed to reduce the work load and successfully completing each and every activity.
According to the Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis (CPB) used a research approach to show that BREXIT is more probable for decreasing bilateral trading between UK, EU. This particular study defines the significant changes in GDP within the real income per capita; thus high level of cost for trading between United Kingdom and European Union will translate that lesser competent allotment for the resources.
In case of resource loss that is directly linked with type of post-BREXIT EU-UK trading deal can be easily achieved. Though in some cases, the trading among EU and UK can revert back to the rule developed by WTO, to allow the rest of the 27 countries to get around 0.8% of reduced percentage of GDP before 2030 (Emmerson et al. 2016). BREXIT lost incurred from the scenario of FTA those are likely for a little severe with impact. On some of the particular agreements, these details are dependent to achieve. According to the FTA scenario, that is assumed from CPB so that UK can face 3.4% GDP decrease along with 0.6% decline in EU27 countries before 2030. The countries have experienced highest loss to GDP in Ireland, Belgium, and Netherlands (Weale 2017). As outline provided before, there is relatively large amount of trading between these countries in UK and this makes them particularly weak to BREXIT.
The outcomes gathered from UK EU referendum and alarming trade exit negotiations show that the trade flow already affected with budget flow between UK and EU (Baker, Ali and Thrasher 2016). The outcomes based on monitoring Europe’s BREXIT, the researcher will include discussion about currently included trade flow and corresponding possible impacts of BREXIT over intra-European trading.
In current aspect of internal market, the EU countries with UK can be entirely benefitted from EU’s single market. The discussion incorporates absence of responsibilities and quotas belonged to EU member states for business and UK trading (Somai and Biedermann 2016). Moreover, the principle of free moving people can facilitate the access for financial workers and services. Additionally, the customs based simplified procedures can be considered administrative burden for several companies among the trading of EU within minimum trading.
In the list of top 10 trading countries and partners in UK for 2015, seven countries are considered to participate in EU. In that mentioned year 2015, 44% of UK export can be directed to EU member states so that approximately 53% of the total import activity is originated to EU countries (Franks 2016). Some countries who are in deep trading with UK are considered to be most vulnerable for immediate economic impact with UK leaving to EU. However, Germany is identified as UK’s largest trading partner for EU in volume; Ireland is most dependent over UK trade in terms of share over total imports and exports activities.
Considering all western European countries, Belgium, Netherlands and Germany can export more significantly towards UK and the countries can import from UK (Duru, Hanquinet and Cesur 2017). Based on price elasticity and dependency on exporting products quality, the countries have witnessed a lack in terms of trading with UK. After BREXIT scenario, the outcomes from trading is increased in significant amount between UK and rest countries of EU; to some extent, the cost of trade can be damaging for UK and rest of EU countries (Booth et al. 2015). Among the other EU counties, those countries are involved with exporting most products to UK and the exporting size is relative to size of economics. Ireland is stated as top priority for the list of trading and Cyprus is on second to that list; following Netherlands and Belgium as third and forth countries in the list (Sumption 2017). Again for German export volumes, the exporting volume is considered to be largest for Europe due to sheer size; Germany has considered other important export destinations for compensating a decline in UK-bound export after BREXIT scenario.
Based on the above implications represented in graph, the countries are separated for different economic perspectives. The countries are separately discussed as for Ireland, Netherlands, Belgium, and Germany.
Some other sectors those will be impacted much harder than other sectors that left UK than leaving EU. Some sectors might experience bigger export impact in motor vehicles, parts, electronic equipments, and processed foods (Chang 2017). Motor vehicles can stand out to be most popular commodity for largest share in trading between United Kingdom and European Union because UK is one of the important producers for the motor vehicles and also motor parts. The sales market of vehicles is the second in Europe. European Union, accounted approximately 57.5% for the vehicle exporting and thus it is considered as the export market too (Zhang and An 2016). For UK, services sector is most impacted sector after BREXIT occurred. Services within industry that is considered with approximately 80% of the net economy of UK and based upon the HM treasury analysis it is stated similarly. London is global financial center being largest in all over Europe (Evlogias 2017). Part of both the insurance as well as financial services, those are exported from UK are again exported to EU also. Apart from this, UK has trade excess for EU along with GBP as approximately 19.8 billion. The following chart represents the information of impact over the financial services of BREXIT.
Impact on EU-UK trade can depend on relationship between UK and EU on post-BREXIT scenario. In most likely scenario, comprehensively Free Trade Agreement (FTA) can fall back to WTO rules and costs of trading between UK and EU will definitely increase (Van Reenen 2016). The cost of trading can be broadly defined under consideration of market access measurements for tariffs and quotas so that increment in administrative burden and behind-border rules can be defined. The administrative burden includes customs formalities and VAT tax and behind-border rules can define extent of non-tariff barriers (NTBs) for trading (Wielechowski and Czech 2016). Some instances from NTBs are considered as in health, environmental and safety standards along with rules of origin requirements. Increment in costs can be accounted for businesses and most likely scenario is that the cost can be passed to consumers.
According to the Free Trade Agreement (FTA) dependent relationship, UK and EU could negotiate terms of accessing specific sectors where standards and regulations can be applied for the particular sectors (Douch, Edwards and Milne 2017). As per EU tradition in harmony, the mutual recognition can mean for choice of UK that would likely for either adopting EU standards or firms to carry out cost of meeting over two different sets of standards. Tariff costs can be negotiated with free trade agreement (FTA) are likely for level closer to current and next-to-zero levels (Oehler, Horn and Wendt 2017). However, to some extent, the WTO scenario can increase the tariff costs for WTO’s favorable countries as in MFN (Most Favored Nation) level. Moreover, the tariff costs are higher than current level and may put impact on trade flows.
Based on terms of timing, business can grow and expect innovative trading regime(s) for placing under any time between 2019 and 2029. UK is set for triggering Article 50 before end of March 2017 and union can be exited not before than end of March 2019. Based on this dates, trading between EU and UK can either be subject to interim regime (for instances based on EEA rules) or trading for reverting back to WTO rules (Vergano and Dolle 2016). The reverting to WTO rules can be fallen back for options within no comprehensive new deal can be reached.
Prior experience from related studies shown multilateral FTAs can consider five to ten years of negotiation period for rational outcomes from national, regional, and from government. It is unlikely that comprehensively new agreement will set for in-place on particular day that UK can exit European Union (Dhingra et al. 2016). It is more likely that some types of temporary regime can exist for two parties negotiation along with future terms. Another final deal can be expected for earliest in 2024 considering final duration up to 2029; so that both parties can agree over and provide rating to deal procedures at national level.
BREXIT can influence over trade-based fiscal regulations over EU countries. Companies can transport goods as well as services towards to facilities over different countries belongs to EU for paying taxes for other countries (Wadsworth et al. 2016). For corrections over inter-company transaction, the products can be put under double-tax category over different other tax authorities. However, to some extent, the companies are currently avoiding the double taxing through EU to arbitration convention.
Once, UK left EU; the UK would not be considered as direct party for the EU economic legislation. Thus, it can be asked that whether the BREXIT can influence the arbitration of EU over and gathering so that is can be treaty for concluding with Member States (Dhingra et al. 2016). This particular convention is not considered within remit of EU and as per principle, revision for the convention can be asked for contracting Member States. Question is dealt with part of BREXIT negotiations for subsequent views and willing nature of Member States in order to practice resolving double-tax throughout arbitration (Kierzenkowski et al. 2016). The parties can remain obliged for going under convention.
For supply chain becoming more important towards competitive nature, the supply chains are considered as under global aspect for companies. The globalized supply chain management can decrease cost of sourcing, production, and delivery (Crafts 2016). Additional to these outcomes, the companies are aiming for getting high-level services as per customer expectations relevant to quality and speed of delivery increment. Moreover, as per outcomes and study of the implications of Global Council, the higher ratio of gross trading related with value-added services. UK’s trading is connected over global supply chain values (Ebell and Warren 2016). Among all value-added supply chain management, 41% of them is in exports and that coming to EU and rest 12% from US. Importance of UK in international supply chain is emphasized with considering some other sectors. Moreover, the financial services and professional services in UK industries, performs export in mining, chemical products, transport system, telecom, retail and wholesale sectors (Dhingra et al. 2017). These professional service and financial service providers of UK industries are essential to international supply chain management.
Once, UK left European Union, currently global supply chain for EU market should be redesigned. Uncertain situations from trade policies and influence on trade between EU and UK casts significant impact on investments for supply chain management footprint (Ottaviano et al. 2014). Moreover, several companies exist for making strategic capital investment decisions about warehousing, factories, logistics capabilities; can consider UK as location. For pending uncertainty in BREXIT vote, the decisions might be postponed (Dhingra and Sampson 2016). The decisions that could not be postponed should be considered as under bias for favor over non-UK locations.
For supply chain management, the organizations should calibrate to costing levels along with services leveling over nodes in supply chain management. In case transaction cost for trading becomes too high, the companies should reconsider current or existing locations in UK (Mulabdic, Osnago and Ruta 2017). The value chain transformation should not only be considered as source for delivering; however, the functions as sales, R&D, marketing should be considered evaluating cost-effective and strategic locations for trading to and from EU.
BREXIT influence can be spread to UK trading along with rest other countries in the world. Over the previous two decades, the EU has negotiated over 36 FTA along with 58 non-EU countries (Busch and Matthes 2016).
Several other types of trade agreements are under processing for being activated or under negotiation for activation. UK would not be benefitted from the arguments as it left EU. The UK should choose renegotiation over trading deals for all the other countries; this situation will be time-consuming way and it can consume more expenditure (Gudgin et al. 2016; Springford and Whyte 2014). In the same context, UK will consider the EU markets for the limitation in access, and the major supply chain systems for improving the beauty of United Kingdom to grip Europe.
The discussion has focused on the consequences of BREXIT on UK households for trading; moreover, BREXIT could influence over UK economy throughout changes in investment, migration, and regulation (Sampson et al. 2016). The researchers will examined the channels for closer evaluation in future reports; however, in one way; the findings interpreted that BREXIT may have economic benefit. The channels that have sufficiently large and positive impact on UK economy for outweigh negative effects over identification (Emmerson, Johnson and Mitchell 2016). This is extremely unlikely for the entire case; BREXIT is likely for reducing foreign investments; this information has found for leading to higher productivity; for instance, Hatzigeorgiou and Lodefalk (2016) estimated that EU membership can add up to 2.25% for UK GDP through channel to foreign direct investment. On similar way, the migration is identified to aid growth and helping the reduction of budget deficit without making any serious damage to market effects.
Eurosceptics in most cases can pinpoint to the promise for better and lesser regulation as bigger benefits in post-BREXIT scenario (Dhingra et al. 2016). It is essential for realization for regulation that will not affect over single market; such as countries in Norway, Switzerland for adopting similar regulations with rest of the EU countries. The rest of the EU countries cannot have single vote on what regulations can be (Hunt and Wheeler 2016). The UK could lessen social, employment, and environmental regulations over some degree. However, when it could be politically possible and at that time, UK was considered as one of the most flexible employment and product market regulations over world as per OECD information (Sampson et al. 2016). The product regulation for United States can be stated second and third for United States and Canada for labor regulations.
Once, the GDP impact exists for such corresponding regulations being large at some point, the discussion is under controversy. Weakening the protection rule for US levels can make little yet positive economic difference (Swinbank 2016). When UK can accept higher trade costs with removing high levels of access for EU market under pessimistic scenario. There will be scope for regulatory scenario for loosening. Armstrong and Portes (2016) stated that 56 regulations that are derived from EU legislation can include UK Government’s impact assessment for finding out costs that overcome benefits. Bruno et al. (2016) claimed that estimation of cost to these regulations is considered to be 0.9% of UK’s GDP value. However, several regulations among these rules can implement policies for UK government for committing to following either within the EU countries group or outside of EU countries group (McMahon 2016). For instance, half of total cost included from two simple policies such as renewable energy strategy and working time directives.
These regulations that are scrapped for abandoning UK’s renewable energy targets for removing entire rights so that entitlement for 20 days can be under paid annual leave (Chadha 2016). In case, the regulatory cost of EU membership were under 0.9% under amount of GDP; this amount is lower than half as per estimation of net cost of BREXIT is considered in purely static case. Several cost figures under 6.3% to 9.5% costs are under dynamic case for considerations (Busch and Matthes 2016). Some costs of regulation in UK can be considered for inefficient planning system. These identified problems can be under primarily homegrown, rather than importing from Brussels.
|
Project Cost-Benefit Analysis |
||||||||
|
Analysis Variables: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discount Rate Used |
5.00% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Annual Benefits |
£2,475,200.00 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Annual Operational Costs |
£2,811,000.00 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One-Time Development Cost |
£3,785,637.00 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year of Project |
|
|||||
|
|
|
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
TOTALS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Economic Benefit |
|
£ – |
£2,475,200.00 |
£ 2,475,200.00 |
£ 2,475,200.00 |
£ 2,475,200.00 |
£ 2,475,200.00 |
|
|
Discount Rate |
|
£ 1.00 |
£ 0.95 |
£ 0.91 |
£ 0.86 |
£ 0.82 |
£ 0.78 |
|
|
PV of Benefits |
|
£ – |
£2,357,333.33 |
£ 2,245,079.37 |
£ 2,138,170.82 |
£ 2,036,353.17 |
£ 1,939,383.97 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NPV of all BENEFITS |
|
£ – |
£2,357,333.33 |
£ 4,602,412.70 |
£ 6,740,583.52 |
£ 8,776,936.69 |
£10,716,320.66 |
£10,716,320.66 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One-Time COSTS |
|
-£3,785,637.00 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recurring Costs |
|
£ – |
-£2,811,000.00 |
-£ 2,811,000.00 |
-£ 2,811,000.00 |
-£ 2,811,000.00 |
-£ 2,811,000.00 |
|
|
Discount Rate |
|
£ 1.00 |
£ 0.95 |
£ 0.91 |
£ 0.86 |
£ 0.82 |
£ 0.78 |
|
|
PV of Recurring Costs |
|
£ – |
-£2,677,142.86 |
-£ 2,549,659.86 |
-£ 2,428,247.49 |
-£ 2,312,616.66 |
-£ 2,202,492.05 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NPV of all COSTS |
|
-£3,785,637.00 |
-£6,462,779.86 |
-£ 9,012,439.72 |
-£11,440,687.21 |
-£13,753,303.87 |
-£15,955,795.92 |
-£15,955,795.92 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Overall NPV |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-£ 5,239,475.27 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Overall ROI |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-0.3284 |
|
Break-even Analysis |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yearly NPV Cash FLOW |
|
-£3,785,637.00 |
-£ 319,809.52 |
-£ 304,580.50 |
-£ 290,076.67 |
-£ 276,263.49 |
-£ 263,108.09 |
|
|
Overall NPV Cash FLOW |
|
-£3,785,637.00 |
-£4,105,446.52 |
-£ 4,410,027.02 |
-£ 4,700,103.69 |
-£ 4,976,367.18 |
-£ 5,239,475.27 |
|
From the analysis, it can be said that Brexit will cost money for UK as the overall NPV has been estimated as -£5,239,475.27 which is a negative value. Hence, it has been determined that Brexit will not be profitable and UK will have to leave the European Union.
Several factors that can determine whether firm can choose for locating and investing. Improved marketing strategy can attract more firms that want to close the customers. UK has formulated strong rule on law for flexible labor marketing and with highly educated workforce employees (Portes 2016; Lea 2016). Moreover, these rules and regulations can make it attractive for FDI locations for stating whether under or not in EU countries. However, EU membership can reduce trade and investment costs so that it is likely for having an impact on controlling for those other factors (Dhingra and Sampson 2016). For estimating size of effect for being in EU or FDI so that the researcher can provide new empirical analysis and in-depth outcomes.
The outcomes from statistical model can be based on bilateral FDL flow in between 34 OECD countries during year range of 1985 and 2013. Model can estimate why the investors belongs to foreign countries choose UK for investing in; as opposing some other countries such as Germany, United States, and France (Coyle 2016). It is quite similar for ‘gravity model’ for following standard way to estimating the bilateral flow of exporting and importing. Bilateral FDL flow can be between any two countries those are based on the respective market size that are measured from GDP. According to the geographical gap between the countries and other factors are considered such as GDP per capita (Cumming and Zahra 2016). The statistical model can address to question for FDI flow between two countries in case the sender and recipient joins EU countries. Once, the factors are accounted from FDI determinants as geographical distance with culture (Oliver 2016). The researcher can consider full control over looking at changes in FDI over determinants.
There exists some more evidence over FDI that brings effects that are more beneficial over enhanced productivity. For instance, Bourne (2016) suggested that multinational companies can increase productivity for increased innovative along with technical and managerial practices. Top of direct effect, Campos (2016) found out the foreign investors spillovers for others; UK-owned firms are similar. However, over nation-wide impact of FDI on outcomes, the researcher required to factorize several difficult paths in which FDI influences people as well as firms over numerous parts of economy. This approach is referred to as a tricky part and risk; in which the researcher can draw out implications so that effect of changes in FDI can be estimated over growth rates for 73 countries (Carrera, Guild and Luk 2016). The researcher have found out that increasing FDI can provide big impression on the growth of GDP in positive value for countries such as UK with highly developed financial sector.
For becoming conservative, the researchers have assumed a scenario in which BREXIT induced fall in FDI for 10 years and the outcome reverts to current level (Springford 2013). With average of all estimated outcomes, so that income can be estimated to 3.4%. Over viewing to wider range, the researcher have obtained fall in income between 1.8% and 4.3%; so that the decline can be reduced. Value of FDI can be influenced from income as of 3.4% that is much big than the static elements from losses from trade (Calhoun 2016).
The changed effects of FDI can be equal to the loss of GDP approximatley £ 2,200 per different household elements. As per previous studies, McKenna (2016) estimated that EU membership could add with 2.25% up to UK GDP through FDI. FDI can grow with UK over estimated time; the researcher have found out that channel is becoming more essential for income reasons.
However, EU reacted to futuristic Free Trade Agreement with UK; question arises as how? This particular thing is to be remembered for pending negotiations between EU and UK. Apart from this, several countries of EU would require avoiding BREXIT to set up example for motivating other Member of the States for picking up or choosing different types of benefits and costs over EU membership. For avoiding this risk, incentive should be there to make exit terms favorable for UK. On the other hand, several EU countries can trade closely with UK and increasing tariffs for NTBs with hitting the countries. Favorable FTA with UK can diminish the EU costs. Generally, state members of EU are belongs to both eastern and southern Europe because they do not have that connection with UK through trade. These countries can incur lesser benefits from the Free Trade Agreement than other countries like Netherlands, Ireland, Germany, Belgium etc. Some of the negotiations even with UK, are expected to be tackled by the divisions made in Europe.
The ultimate agreement developed along with UK can again be subjected to unity of voting over the European Council. Additionally, scrutiny from European Parliament along with possible national and regional parliaments, UK also can be subject to unanimity. These outcomes have shown value of tasks and points towards different challenges and negotiation period.
Based on the introduction chapter, it can be concluded that primarily, the study aims to identify influences of BREXIT over UK Trade and living standards. As per findings in background section, the reductions in trade barriers can increase the trading value between UK and EU with these aspects. In recent decades, the trade studies revealed that there are bigger effects of BREXIT in UK living standards and trading value. However, as per structure of the study, this dissertation is based on secondary study. The researchers have studied BREXIT consequences with reducing trade along with lowering UK living standards.
After considering all the relevant study materials it can be said that, the overall study can be conducted through considering secondary data only. In order to utilize the concepts and theories of the research topic, descriptive research design approach is selected. For reaching the research objectives through revealing all hidden facts, interpretivism research philosophy is nominated during the research phase. It also helps to enable the research justification accurately. Besides this, among two different research approaches such as inductive and deductive, the deductive approach is selected because it helps to identify the consequences within the UK trades associated to BREXIT. Considering all ethical implications, the secondary data sources are highlighted to resolve all research level limitations. For successful completion of the research work a timeline or schedule is also developed considering all potential working areas.
Based on the relationship between UK and EU, the trade of EU-UK can be impacted on post-BREXIT scenario. The overall cost of UK-EU trading will automatically increase, due to the most likely scenario. Free Trade Agreement (FTA) can drop reverse due to the WTO regulations. The cost of trading can be broadly defined under consideration of market access measurements for tariffs and quotas so that increment in administrative burden and behind-border rules can be defined. The administrative pressure includes facility customization as well as VAT tax; rules behind the borders can be defined as an extent for the Non-tariff barriers in trading. Some instances from NTBs are considered as in health, environmental and safety standards along with rules of origin requirements. Increment in costs can be accounted for businesses and most likely scenario is that the cost can be passed to consumers.
In the list of top 10 trading countries and partners in UK for 2015, seven countries are considered to participate in EU. In that mentioned year 2015, 44% of export from UK can be directed to the members of States belongs to EU so that from the total import activity around 53% can be highlighted as developed to EU countries. Some countries that are in deep trading with UK are considered to be most vulnerable for immediate economic impact with UK leaving to EU. However, UK’s largest and most dependent trading partners in the field of import and export domain are identified as respectively Germany and Ireland.
Considering all European countries of western domain such as Belgium, Netherlands and Germany etc can export much appreciably towards UK and the countries themselves can import products from UK. Depending on the electricity price and dependency on exporting products quality, the countries have witnessed a lack in terms of trading with UK. After BREXIT scenario, the outcomes from trading is increased in significant amount between UK and rest countries of EU; to some extent, the cost of trade can be damaging for UK and rest of EU countries. Among the other EU counties, those countries are involved with exporting most products to UK and the exporting size is relative to size of economics. Ireland is stated as top priority for the list of trading and Cyprus is on second to that list; following Netherlands and Belgium as third and forth countries in the list. Again, for the sheer size; German export volumes and the exporting volume is considered to be largest for Europe. In order to compensate the declination within UK bound, German has also considered the necessity of export destination.
BREXIT can influence over trade-based fiscal regulations over EU countries. Companies can transport both products as well as services towards the facilities over various countries of EU to pay tax for other countries. For corrections over inter-company transaction, the products can be put under double-tax category over different other tax authorities. However, to some extent, the companies are currently avoiding the double taxing through EU to arbitration convention. Once, UK left EU; EU economic party is not directly involved with UK. Apart from this it can also be asked that whether EU arbitration can be influenced by BREXIT and to ensure the treaty for concluding with the members of the states. This particular approach is not considered within the dispatch of EU and according to the principle, convention’s proper revision can be asked to make contract with the members of the states. From the subsequent aspect, Question is dealt with part of BREXIT negotiations for subsequent views and willing nature of members of the states, questions deals with a part of BREXIT negotiation. It helps to resolve the issues of double tax. The parties can remain obliged for going under convention.
For supply chain becoming more important towards competitive nature, the supply chains are considered as under global aspect for companies. The globalized supply chain management can decrease cost of sourcing, production, and delivery. Additional to these outcomes, the companies are aiming for getting high-level services as per customer expectations relevant to quality and speed of delivery increment. Moreover, as per outcomes and study of the implications of Global Council, the higher ratio of gross trading related with value-added services. UK’s trading is connected over global supply chain values. Among all valued supply chain management, 41% of them are in exports and that coming to EU and rest 12% from US. The role of UK’s supply chain management in the international level is emphasized with considering some other sectors. Moreover, both the financial and professional services served in the industrial domain of UK, performs export in the industry mining, transport system, chemical foodstuffs, telecom, retail and even wholesale sectors also. These professional service and financial service providers of UK industries are essential to international supply chain management.
Once, UK left European Union, currently global supply chain for EU market should be redesigned. Uncertain situations from trade policies and influence on trade between EU and UK casts significant impact on investments for supply chain management footprint. About warehousing, logistic abilities, factories or industries located in UK, there are many companies which decide to make high strategic investment. All the awaiting decision of the BREXIT vote can be postponed. The decisions which cannot be postponed should be measured as under bias for favor over the locations outside UK.
For supply chain management, the organizations should calibrate to costing levels along with services leveling over nodes in supply chain management. In case transaction cost for trading becomes very much high, the originations should consider the current or existing location in UK again. The value chain transformation should not only be considered as source for delivering; however, the functions as sales, R&D, marketing should be considered to evaluate cost much effectively and should develop strategies for trading from European Union.
eep on developing daily basis headlines almost around five months even after the final voting had been completed. The line which will provide hope to those people who are pursuing soft BREXIT, for them the European Union included get out clauses. The Union will be further prepared for reconsidering their offers if the positions of the United Kingdom are found to be involved. The main recommendation that should be given for the BREXIT is to get secure commercial support from the European Union to help out the fund of Ireland’s reply over the measures to BREXIT. More than all other countries of Europe, Ireland is the only country that will face major challenge. As a developed resolution it has been found that, the European parliament recognized a completely unique as well as special circumstance which is confronting the Ireland’s Iceland in the BREXIT face. It can be said that, the only place in Europe is Ireland which shares a wide range of land to United Kingdom. Along with the land bridge route and a quite large portion of the Irish goods exports to the economies of European Union is transported. A hard BREXIT is able to include a much lower tariff because extreme restriction can eventually increase the overall cost on which the current atmosphere. The supply chain hub of the European Union especially in Ireland is required to be developed accordingly to make sure a secure and clean pathway for the members belong to European Union. As United Kingdom is a very much significant part of distribution and transportation thus the hard BREXIT will be able to increase the cost but at the same time can reduce the system efficiency.
In order to prevent the rate of massive loss that is continuously occurring in the country, immediate comprehensive actions are required to be considered in United Kingdom. The Government of Irish should campaign about the security policies in United Kingdom to reduce the pressure and challenges that the industries are continuously facing. The campaign will also help to develop positive economical support and vital protection abilities accordingly. Required changes in the outline plans should brought for gaining economic growth. In addition to this, other recommendation that should be considered is to maintain 9% of vat rate for the European Hospitality industry. In order to avoid the competitiveness loss as a reply to the decline in the values of sterling reasons, retaining the vat percentage is required. Direct job should be offered to the applicants to gain effective commercial success and profit as well. Besides this another recommendations for the BREXIT is to create regional BREXIT hubs mainly for the rural tourism and hospitality departments. A national board of BREXIT should be created to develop planning and initiative towards cost reduction in businesses.
Anderson, M., Mitchell, I. and Crawfurd, L., 2017, June. Beyond Brexit: How the UK Can Lead the World in Trade for Development. In MAKING UK TRADE WORK FOR DEVELOPMENT POST-BREXIT WORKSHOP REPORT (p. 39).
Andersson, S. and Nilsson, F., 2016. What can fixit after Brexit? An empirical study of the economic effect on UK trade, following an exit from the European Union.
Armstrong, A. and Portes, J., 2016. Commentary: the economic consequences of leaving the EU. National Institute Economic Review, 236(1), pp.2-6.
Arnorsson, A. and Zoega, G., 2016. On the causes of Brexit.
Baker, A.H., Ali, R.R. and Thrasher, A.J., 2016. Impact of BREXIT on UK gene and cell therapy: the need for continued pan-European collaboration.
Baker, J., Carreras, O., Kirby, S., Meaning, J. and Piggott, R., 2016. Modelling events: the short-term economic impact of leaving the EU. Economic Modelling, 58, pp.339-350.
Bell, B. and Machin, S., 2013. Brexit and wage inequality. Brexit Beckons: Thinking ahead by leading economists, p.111.
Booth, S., Howarth, C., Ruparel, R. and Swidlicki, P., 2015. What If…?: The Consequences, Challenges & Opportunities Facing Britain Outside EU. Open Europe.
Bouoiyour, J. and Selmi, R., 2016. a. Are UK industries resilient in dealing with uncertainty? The case of Brexit. Working paper, CATT, University of Pau.
Bourne, R., 2016. Why did the British Brexit? and What are the Implications for Classical Liberals?. Economic Affairs, 36(3), pp.356-363.
Bruno, R., Campos, N., Estrin, S. and Tian, M., 2016. Technical Appendix to ‘The impact of Brexit on foreign investment in the UK’Gravitating towards Europe: an econometric analysis of the FDI effects of EU membership.
Bruno, R.L., Campos, N., Estrin, S. and Tian, M., 2016. Foreign direct investment and the relationship between the United Kingdom and the European Union.
Burke, E., 2016. Who will speak for Northern Ireland? The looming danger of an Ulster Brexit. The RUSI Journal, 161(2), pp.4-12.
Busch, B. and Matthes, J., 2016. Brexit: the economic impact–A Survey. In CESifo Forum (Vol. 17, No. 2, pp. 37-44). Ifo Institute-Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich.
Busch, B. and Matthes, J., 2016. Brexit-the economic impact: A meta-analysis (No. 10/2016). IW-Report.
Calhoun, C., 2016. Brexit is a mutiny against the cosmopolitan elite. New Perspectives Quarterly, 33(3), pp.50-58.
Campos, N.F., 2016. 3 Lousy experts: Looking back at the ex ante estimates of the costs of Brexit. Brexit Beckons: Thinking ahead by leading economists, p.35.
Carrera, S., Guild, E. and Luk, N.C., 2016. What Does Brexit Mean for the EU’s Area of Freedom, Security and Justice?.
Chadha, J.S., 2016. Assessing the economic risks from Brexit. Gresham College Lecture, 2.
Chang, W.W., 2017. Brexit and Its Economic Consequences.
Coulter, S. and Hancké, B., 2016. A bonfire of the regulations, or business as usual? The UK labour market and the political economy of Brexit. The Political Quarterly, 87(2), pp.148-156.
Coyle, D., 2016. Brexit and globalisation. Brexit Beckons: Thinking ahead by leading economists, p.23.
Crafts, N., 2016. The Growth Effects of EU Membership for the UK: a Review of the Evidence. Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE), Global Perspectives Series: Paper, 7.
Cumming, D.J. and Zahra, S.A., 2016. International Business and Entrepreneurship Implications of Brexit. British Journal of Management, 27(4), pp.687-692.
Currie, S., 2016. Reflecting on Brexit: migration myths and what comes next for EU migrants in the UK?. Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, 38(3), pp.337-342.
Davies, R.B. and Studnicka, Z., 2017. The Heterogeneous Impact of Brexit: Early Indications from the FTSE.
Dhingra, S. and Sampson, T., 2016. Life after BREXIT: What are the UK’s options outside the European Union?.
Dhingra, S. and Sampson, T., 2016. UK–EU Relations after Brexit: What is Best for the UK Economy. Brexit Beckons: Thinking ahead by leading economists.
Dhingra, S., Huang, H., Ottaviano, G., Paulo Pessoa, J., Sampson, T. and Van Reenen, J., 2017. The costs and benefits of leaving the EU: trade effects. Economic Policy, 32(92), pp.651-705.
Dhingra, S., Ottaviano, G. and Sampson, T., 2017. A hitch-hiker’s guide to post-Brexit trade negotiations: options and principles. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 33(suppl_1), pp.S22-S30.
Dhingra, S., Ottaviano, G., Sampson, T. and Van Reenen, J., 2016. The impact of Brexit on foreign investment in the UK. BREXIT 2016, p.24.
Dhingra, S., Ottaviano, G., Sampson, T. and Van Reenen, J., 2016. Brexit: the impact on UK trade and living standards (No. 469). Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
Dhingra, S., Ottaviano, G., Sampson, T. and Van Reenen, J., 2016. The UK Treasury analysis of’The long-term economic impact of EU membership and the alternatives’: CEP Commentary. BREXIT 2016, p.69.
Dhingra, S., Ottaviano, G.I., Sampson, T. and Reenen, J.V., 2016. The consequences of Brexit for UK trade and living standards.
Dhingra, S., Ottaviano, G.I., Sampson, T. and Reenen, J.V., 2016. Less trade and lower living standards in the UK: the price of Brexit. LSE Business Review.
Dhingra, S., Van Reenen, J., Sampson, T. and Ottaviano, G.I., 2016. The cost of Brexit to trade? At least£ 850 per household, per year. LSE Brexit.
Doherty, M., 2016. Through the looking glass: Brexit, free movement and the future. King’s Law Journal, 27(3), pp.375-386.
Douch, M., Edwards, T.H. and Milne, A., 2017. A briefing on the UK’s choice of trade arrangements outside of the EU.
Duru, D.N., Hanquinet, L. and Cesur, N.S., 2017. Perceptions of diversity and attitudes of tolerance in the ‘fragmented’UK. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 43(4), pp.674-692.
Ebell, M. and Warren, J., 2016. The long-term economic impact of leaving the EU. National Institute Economic Review, 236(1), pp.121-138.
El-Shimy, N., 2017. The Impact of British Exit (Brexit) from the European Union on Egyptian-British Relations. Review of Economics and Political Science, 2(1), pp.72-101.
Emmerson, C., Johnson, P. and Mitchell, I., 2016. The EU single market: the value of membership versus access to the UK. Institute for Fiscal Studies.
Emmerson, C., Johnson, P., Mitchell, I. and Phillips, D., 2016. Brexit and the UK’s public finances. Institute for Fiscal Studies Report, 116.
Evlogias, E., 2017. An exploration into voting behaviour: A thematic analysis on what drove voting on the Brexit Referendum on a University sample.
Franks, J., 2016. Some implications of Brexit for UK agricultural environmental policy.
Grant, W., Cardwell, M., Greer, A., Rogers, C., Smith, F., Swinbank, A., Bromet, C., Cowling, B., Findlay, R. and Jones, H., 2016. The implications of brexit for UK agriculture.
Gudgin, G., Coutts, K., Gibson, N. and Buchanan, J., 2016. The macro-economic impact of Brexit: using the CBR macro-economic model of the UK economy (UKMOD). Centre for Business Research Working Paper, (483).
Harvey, D. and Hubbard, C., 2016. Why Brexit. Centre for Rural Economy Discussion Paper Series, (35).
Hatzigeorgiou, A. and Lodefalk, M., 2016. The Brexit Trade Disruption Revisited. The Estey Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, 17(1), pp.41-58.
Hunt, A. and Wheeler, B., 2016. Brexit: All you need to know about the UK leaving the EU. BBC News, 24.
Jafari, Y. and Britz, W., 2017. Brexit–an economy-wide Impact Assessment looking into trade, immigration, and Foreign Direct Investment. In 20th Annual Conference on Global Economic Analysis, June (pp. 7-9).
Jayakumar, V., 2017. UK Current Account Sustainability in the Post-Brexit Era: Insights from an Intertemporal Current Account Framework. Theoretical Economics Letters, 7(02), p.223.
Kee, H.L. and Nicita, A., 2017. Short-term impact of Brexit on the United Kingdom’s export of goods.
Keen, S., 2017. Trade and the gains from diversity: Why economists failed to predict the consequences of Brexit. Globalizations, 14(6), pp.803-809.
Kierzenkowski, R., Pain, N., Rusticelli, E. and Zwart, S., 2016. The Economic Consequences of Brexit.
Kirby, S., Carreras, O., Meaning, J., Piggott, R. and Warren, J., 2016. Prospects for the UK Economy. National Institute Economic Review.
Knight, D.M., 2017. Anxiety and cosmopolitan futures: Brexit and Scotland. American Ethnologist, 44(2), pp.237-242.
Lea, R., 2016. Post-Brexit trading options for the UK. Arbuthnot Banking Group, 4.
Lea, R., 2016. The economy two months post-Brexit vote: cautiously encouraging. Arbuthnot Banking Group, 30.
Lea, R., 2017. UK growth was modest in 2017Q2 but business surveys and a robust labour market point to firmer growth ahead. Arbuthnot Banking Group, 31, pp.2007-08.
McKenna, H., 2016. Five big issues for health and social care after the Brexit vote.
McMahon, M., 2016. The implications of Brexit for the city. Brexit beckons: Thinking ahead by leading economists, CEPR Press, London, pp.95-101.
Mendez-Parra, M., Papadavid, P. and te Velde, D.W., 2016. BREXIT and development. Retrieved from, 10381(10570), p.15534.
Menon, A. and Salter, J.P., 2016. Brexit: initial reflections. International Affairs, 92(6), pp.1297-1318.
Mulabdic, A., Osnago, A. and Ruta, M., 2017. Deep integration and UK-EU trade relations.
Oehler, A., Horn, M. and Wendt, S., 2017. Brexit: Short-term stock price effects and the impact of firm-level internationalization. Finance Research Letters.
Oliver, T., 2014. A ‘Brexit’would have important implications at the European and international levels. British Politics and Policy at LSE.
Oliver, T., 2016. Brexit: What happens next. LSE IDEAS Strategic Update, 16.
Oliver, T., 2016. The world after Brexit: From British referendum to global adventure. International Politics, 53(6), pp.689-707.
Onaran, O. and Guschanski, A., 2016. Rising inequality in the UK and the political economy of Brexit: lessons for policy.
Ottaviano, G.I., Pessoa, J.P., Sampson, T. and Van Reenen, J., 2014. The costs and benefits of leaving the EU.
Passlack, M., 2016. Brexit. Macroeconomic Consequences.
Portes, J., 2016. Immigration after Brexit. National Institute Economic Review, 238(1), pp.R13-R21.
Roy, A. and Mathur, S.K., 2016. Brexit and India–EU Free Trade Agreement. Journal of Economic Integration, pp.740-773.
Ryan, J., 2016. UK referendum and potential Brexit?. ifo Schnelldienst, 69(10), pp.10-12.
Sampson, T., 2017. Brexit: The economics of international disintegration.
Sampson, T., Dhingra, S., Ottaviano, G. and Van Reenen, J., 2016. Economists for Brexit: A Critique. BREXIT 2016, p.81.
Sampson, T., Dhingra, S., Ottaviano, G.I. and Reenen, J.V., 2016. How do ‘Economists for Brexit’manage to defy the laws of gravity?. LSE Business Review.
Sellers, P.J. and Sellers, P.J., 2017. The UK living wage: A trade union perspective. Employee Relations, 39(6), pp.790-799.
Simionescu, M., Bilan, Y., Smrcka, L. and Vincúrová, Z., 2017. The effects of european economic integration and the impact of Brexit on the UK immigrants from the CEE countries. E+ M Ekonomie a Management, 20(1), p.29.
Somai, M. and Biedermann, Z., 2016. Brexit: Reasons and challenges. Acta Oeconomica, 66(s1), pp.137-156.
Springford, J. and Whyte, P., 2014. The consequences of Brexit for the City of London. London: Centre for European Reform.
Springford, J., 2013. Brexit and EU regulation: A bonfire of the vanities?. Group.
Stalford, H., 2016. The UK referendum on membership of the EU: Whither social welfare and family law?.
Steinberg, J., 2017. Brexit and the Macroeconomic Impact of Trade Policy Uncertainty. Working Paper, University of Toronto.
Sumption, M., 2017. Labour immigration after Brexit: questions and trade-offs in designing a work permit system for EU citizens. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 33(suppl_1), pp.S45-S53.
Swinbank, A., 2016. Brexit or Bremain? Supply value chain
Options for UK Agricultural Policy and the CAP. EuroChoices, 15(2), pp.5-10.
Tans, S.J., 2017. Service Provision and Migration: EU and WTO service trade liberalization and their impact on Dutch and UK Immigration Rules. Brill.
Van Reenen, J., 2016. Brexit’s Long-Run Effects on the UK Economy. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 2016(2), pp.367-383.
Vergano, P.R. and Dolle, T., 2016. The Trade Law Consequences of “Brexit”. European Journal of Risk Regulation, 7(4), pp.795-800.
Wadsworth, J., Dhingra, S., Ottaviano, G. and Van Reenen, J., 2016. Brexit and the Impact of Immigration on the UK. Centre for Economic Performance. LSE, pp.34-53.
Weale, A., 2017. The Democratic Duty to Oppose Brexit. The Political Quarterly, 88(2), pp.170-181.
Wenger, R.J., 2017. Should I stay or should I go: the effects of Brexit on family leave laws in the United Kingdom. Duq. Bus. LJ, 19, p.119.
Wielechowski, M. and Czech, K., 2016. Brexit Related Uncertainty for United Kingdom Economy. Acta Scientiarum Polonorum. Oeconomia, (4), pp.171-181.
Wilcock, J. and Miller, A., 2016. The truth and consequences of Brexit: could a catastrophe for academia be an opportunity for publishers?. Insights, 29(3), p.216.
Zhang, A. and An, R., 2016. THE IMPACT OF BREXIT ON MOTOR INDUSTRY IN UK.
Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.
You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.
Read moreEach paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.
Read moreThanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.
Read moreYour email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.
Read moreBy sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.
Read more