Correct poopscoop. any deal on financial services has been pretty much ruled out. LOndon cannot get better terms than new york or geneva have

Not so TJ. Barnier has already said otherwise, see my earlier post on recognising uk regulations as equivalent to eu. No deal on financial services (financial and otherwise) means no deal at all means no money post March 2019. We won’t have full “passporting” and in fact nor should we, its not desirable imho. Not worth the trade offs.

EU want a deal on agriculture and UK want one on services. That will be the trade off / agreement. See TM’s trade deal priorities for the UK, services and manufacturing. EU’s priority is agriculture first and manufacturing second.

New York has no deal at all with EU on financial services. Switzerland has a bespoke one. Switzerland is a net exporter to the EU, UK a net importer. It makes sense for the EU to agree a “better deal” with UK on services than it does with Switzerland in order to get tariff free access to our market fpr other goods.

Brexit caused 37 percent fall in new London financial jobs in December – report – Reuters
https://apple.news/AQJCVJStaSli6oB9byCJxqA

New York has no deal at all with EU on financial services. 

Fair point, but New York isn’t the financial capital of Europe either

Poops. Very good question which unfortunately has been hijacked above by nonsense and Ill-informed comment.

It’s both very complicated and simple at the same time. Official documentation runs to many hundreds of pages and our own internal one does too. The reason it is complicated is that different activities are covered by different passports which in turn have different treatments under equivalence (which is itself complicated). To keep things very simple, the most positive outcome is a deal that includes passporting. If that doesn’t happen we will move to equivalence (several different forms and process itself is complec but let’s keep it simple). This may require the relocation of some activities to Europe and again may require banks to have different legal structures (this is where it gets complicated). So skip the detail, Uk banks have subsidiaries in EU already – all in different centres despite the BS about Paris ^ – that already gives them passporting rights. So there is a lot of noise on the issue but as normal banks have already positioned themselves for all outcomes. Ultimately it’s a red herring. The CEO of Barc said as much last year.

All that remains is the ultimate detail which will determine which activities will need to be physically located. Bank estimates have gone from the 000s to the 00s ie approx 5% of people currently located in London max.

Bottom line – yes it’s a PITA but it is manageable and indeed has already been managed. In the meantime, the EU will creates lots of noise around “equivalence” as part of their negotiating tactic. This can be ignored unless you want to get lost in the kind of ill-Informed twiddle and mis-edukated comments that are being used to stifle understanding and overturn the democratic process.

If you want to get into the detail I would refer you to the EUs own study on the impact which is very thorough but stops before what banks are currently doing. It’s a long read though.

We won’t have full “passporting” and in fact nor should we, its not desirable imho. Not worth the trade offs.

I disagree with J’s conclusion here. We “may” continue with full passporting and this would clearly be the preferred option and the most desirable for both sides. Narrow self interest may get in the way in the meantime.

We shall see. As with the thread the surrounding noise while be entertaining if not informative .

If that doesn’t happen we will move to equivalence (several different forms and process itself is complec but let’s keep it simple).

Can I ask how you know this?

I’m 100% involved. I have to know.

Anyone that’s read an FT summary on the matter should/would know this Twodogs.

Interesting

Doesn’t really explain how you know we WILL move to equivalence?

Doesn’t really explain how you know we WILL move to equivalence?

It will be some grown ups behind the scenes stuff that you wouldn’t understand.

2D that’s a good question

The details are very complex so I simplify deliberately. (and didn’t correct Jambas above. )

Your point is very valid for the simple reason that equivalence is determined by the EU not by us. Hence it is up to their diacretion and why Barnier is starting all the noise in prep for the detailed negotiation

So the “will” comes from understanding the perspectives of both sides and what is in their interests. I am not alone here are the EU says exactly the same thing. Yes, I am more definitive because that is my judgement from being in the eye of the storm as it were. Good question though !!!

You really don’t need to simplify it for me, given my job

“Will” is not correct..it’s an aspiration.

Not so TJ. Barnier has already said otherwise, see my earlier post on recognising uk regulations as equivalent to eu. No deal on financial services (financial and otherwise) means no deal at all means no money post March 2019. We won’t have full “passporting” and in fact nor should we, its not desirable imho. Not worth the trade offs.

#Simply untrue

Which bit isn’t true, TJ?

It’s also the desired outcome of the EU and a position that banks are already prepared for.

So aspiration or not it doesn’t matter. It’s noise

Two dogs

Barnier has not said otherwise

NO deal on financial services does not mean no deal at all

Both those assertions from Jamba are incorrect.

also no deal does not involve no money after 2019. We have already agreed to pay infor longer thanthat

My point is that you criticize others for conflating facts and speculation, yet you’re doing exactly that. You cannot know that there will be equivalence….trust me, I know.

Ok, thanks TJ

Trust me – it will happen, indeed may be better

The Eu thinks the same too. If you think we will have not passporting and no equivalence then it really is tin hat tin

Plus as a precursor Barnier lready confirmef equivalence in some areas – no, really ??? – so the idea that there will no equivalent is fanciful in the extreme

Any financial institution that assumes there will be passport and doesn’t also prepare for other, worse scenarios, is foolish, putting it mildly.

And with that, I’m off..thanks THM, you’ve confirmed what I thought (and I don’t mean about passporting) – be careful what you say as there are people out there who almost certainly know more than you

I know **** all and I reckon we are at the same level.
Edit 🙂
This is the point where someone will feel compelled to contradict me whicheck will mean I know more than them.

2d

I have said that and haven’t prepared for that either. We are ready for worst case scenario

I had assumed that your job also required to read what is posted accurately – with that I’m off too!

Happy and prepared

How much is my chocolate going to cost?
Regardless of crop output projections.
I too want to be prepared.

How much is my chocolate going to cost?

No-one knows. This pile of uncertainty and problems caused by people who had no idea of the implications of their vote. Isn’t democracy great?

Can anyone post a link to the assessment reports published by Mayor of Londons Office/Camecon?

They’re being discussed in the news but I can’t find the reports.

This one?

https://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/preparing_for_brexit_report_jan_2018.pdf

Thanks for that.

Can someone just remind me of the upside of Brexit? Hell, can anyone even tell me the base case for it?

I’m still as angry about it today as I was on the morning of the result.

Everyone can read the report and decide how convincing the predcitions are. When they talk in generalities I agree with most of their comment but the precision of their numbers misleads as to their accuracy.

Economic forecasts are like the British weather forecast, just replace a timescale of days with years. Tomorrow’s forecast won’t be far wrong but in ten days it might be snowing (in June) when the forecast said sunshine. There are a huge number of variables, too many to make more than guestimates long term. When you see 166.9 for 2030 read 170 +or- 50.

Farage just said he would back a second ‘in/out’ referendum.

Blimey.

video here: https://twitter.com/ReasonCoffeeShp/status/951389479650185216

really!?

i’ll take your word for it. i don’t want to look at that shit’s face any more than i have to.

He clearly thinks he could win.

Bit like May with a snap general election it may not be as clear cut as he thinks…

He think he is right to think that Leave would more than likely win a second referendum, and right to recognise that it will be necessary to hold it. Obviously, I’ll be voting to remain. I think I’m still allowed to do that, without being called undemocratic.

I was just reading Farage’s Telegraph piece…

I also asked whether he thinks uncontrolled mass immigration from the EU had been the single biggest issue in the mind of Brexit voters. His look of total incomprehension confirmed his reluctantance to accept the unvarnished truth about the consequences of letting 10 poor, former communist countries join the EU.

It’s not about immigration… it’s all about immigration…

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/01/08/michel-barnier-happy-play-time-see-britain-sweat/

Meanwhile German GDP growth sets records according to Tagesschau 24.

He I think he is right to think…

Messy idiot.… although it almost made as much sense with the typo.

hopefully his hubris will be his downfall.