In message , at 14:04:17 on Sun, 5 Feb 2017,
tim... remarked:

"country of origin" rules for "supply chain" industries (Automotive
being the most important example)

My understanding is that's a Single Market thing, not CU.

Then your understanding is wrong

I don't think so. The kind of rules you refer to are presumably "if it
meets EU standards in one country, it will in another".

Post-your=Brexit there's nothing to ensure that while the customs people
will let the stuff in, without a tariff, that the customer will
automatically discover it meets the standards.
--
Roland Perry

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 14:04:17 on Sun, 5 Feb 2017,
tim... remarked:

"country of origin" rules for "supply chain" industries (Automotive
being the most important example)

My understanding is that's a Single Market thing, not CU.

Then your understanding is wrong

I don't think so. The kind of rules you refer to are presumably "if it
meets EU standards in one country, it will in another".

OK

these rules aren't about functionality

they are about the difficult of classifying the origin of a car built in the
UK from components sourced partly in the UK, party from rEU and partly from
ROW.

E.g. (from inside the CU, outside the EU) if, you apply the (EU) external
tariff on the ROW components when you build the car, you don't have to
charge it again on the percentage of the total value of the car that
component represnets, when you export the car to rEU (or something like
that).

keeping a track of the country of origin, and the import duty paid for each
of the thousands of parts in the car is what the Automotive industry wants
to avoid, and what they claim will cost them 1500 per car to do (that
figure's got to be a bull**** high figure, but that it might cost 100s is
clear).

Post-your=Brexit there's nothing to ensure that while the customs people
will let the stuff in, without a tariff, that the customer will
automatically discover it meets the standards.

That part is clearly within the SM

But for Automotive that's what type approval is all about

tim

In message , at 16:07:07 on Sun, 5 Feb 2017,
tim... remarked:

Post-your=Brexit there's nothing to ensure that while the customs
people will let the stuff in, without a tariff, that the customer
will automatically discover it meets the standards.

That part is clearly within the SM

Hurrah!
--
Roland Perry

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 16:07:07 on Sun, 5 Feb 2017,
tim... remarked:

Post-your=Brexit there's nothing to ensure that while the customs people
will let the stuff in, without a tariff, that the customer will
automatically discover it meets the standards.

That part is clearly within the SM

Hurrah!

but that is their problem

it isn't a reason why we should be part of, and achieve benefits from, the
CU

tim


--
Roland Perry

In message , at 17:09:05 on Sun, 5 Feb 2017,
tim... remarked:
Post-your=Brexit there's nothing to ensure that while the customs
people will let the stuff in, without a tariff, that the customer
will automatically discover it meets the standards.

That part is clearly within the SM

Hurrah!

but that is their problem

it isn't a reason why we should be part of, and achieve benefits from,
the CU

Are you now agreeing that the third of the following you listed earlier
is SM not CU:

tariff free trade

ease of customs documentation at borders

"country of origin" rules for "supply chain" industries (Automotive
being the most important example)
--
Roland Perry

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 17:09:05 on Sun, 5 Feb 2017,
tim... remarked:
Post-your=Brexit there's nothing to ensure that while the customs
people will let the stuff in, without a tariff, that the customer
will automatically discover it meets the standards.

That part is clearly within the SM

Hurrah!

but that is their problem

it isn't a reason why we should be part of, and achieve benefits from, the
CU

Are you now agreeing that the third of the following you listed earlier is
SM not CU:

No

because you are confusing

proof that you have met the SM rules

with having to account for the duty on the components/completed article

AIUI the former is never done at borders and therefore does not impact on
the day to day costs of shipping goods. Of course it impacts on the initial
design costs and possibly requires certification (though mostly products are
self certified on pain of fines for getting it wrong). As a simple example
the EU mandates lead-free solder (a discussion I recall has been had
before). How the heck do you think that conformance with this requirement
can ever be performed at a border point?

But the latter is done at borders and therefore does affect your costs for
every single consignment.

It is the imposition of these ongoing day-to-day extra costs that most of
the complaints about the effect on Trade of leaving the EU are all about.

But the people who are making that (I accept, perfectly valid) point are
attributing it to our leaving the SM, when the reality is that they will
come from us leaving the CU.

tim

In message , at 11:41:56 on Mon, 6 Feb 2017,
tim... remarked:

Post-your=Brexit there's nothing to ensure that while the customs
people will let the stuff in, without a tariff, that the customer
will automatically discover it meets the standards.

That part is clearly within the SM

Hurrah!

but that is their problem

it isn't a reason why we should be part of, and achieve benefits
from, the CU

Are you now agreeing that the third of the following you listed
earlier is SM not CU:

No

because you are confusing

proof that you have met the SM rules

with having to account for the duty on the components/completed article

No I'm not. The distinction is clear.

AIUI the former is never done at borders and therefore does not impact
on the day to day costs of shipping goods.

Maybe not at internal borders, but if we take the apocryphal example of
straight bananas, they have to be checked when first imported into the
CU, but if that specification was in fact in force[1] then after we
leave the SM the UK could import mis-shapen bananas and then what's to
stop us shipping them to the Continent under CU?

[1] Other parts of the Directive still are, such as freedom from pests
and pesticides.

Of course it impacts on the initial design costs and possibly requires
certification (though mostly products are self certified on pain of
fines for getting it wrong).

Not all products with specifications are manufactured goods (see above).

But the people who are making that (I accept, perfectly valid) point
are attributing it to our leaving the SM, when the reality is that they
will come from us leaving the CU.

You are making the assumption that everything we export to the
rest-of-EU in future will continue to meet the standards, and thus not
require inspection a the border. But having left the SM, the specs will
drift apart. One of the most significant being discussed on other lists
I subscribe to is the much stricter Data Protection rules due to come in
between now and Brexit, while the UK government is busy passing laws
which water down the existing rules.

One of the things we export (under that SM umbrella) is data hosting and
processing facilities.
--
Roland Perry

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 11:41:56 on Mon, 6 Feb 2017,
tim... remarked:

Post-your=Brexit there's nothing to ensure that while the customs
people will let the stuff in, without a tariff, that the customer
will automatically discover it meets the standards.

That part is clearly within the SM

Hurrah!

but that is their problem

it isn't a reason why we should be part of, and achieve benefits
from, the CU

Are you now agreeing that the third of the following you listed
earlier is SM not CU:

No

because you are confusing

proof that you have met the SM rules

with having to account for the duty on the components/completed article

No I'm not. The distinction is clear.

AIUI the former is never done at borders and therefore does not impact
on the day to day costs of shipping goods.

Maybe not at internal borders, but if we take the apocryphal example of
straight bananas, they have to be checked when first imported into the
CU,

Do they

Do you have evidence of this?

but if that specification was in fact in force[1] then after we
leave the SM the UK could import mis-shapen bananas and then what's to
stop us shipping them to the Continent under CU?

the threat of a fine when caught

[1] Other parts of the Directive still are, such as freedom from pests
and pesticides.

That has to be done for immediate health and safety reason

it is not comparable with checking that goods meet some administrative
standard.

No-one will die if a straight banana sneaks through. Someone might if the
consignment contains a deadly spider.

Of course it impacts on the initial design costs and possibly requires
certification (though mostly products are self certified on pain of
fines for getting it wrong).

Not all products with specifications are manufactured goods (see above).

But the people who are making that (I accept, perfectly valid) point
are attributing it to our leaving the SM, when the reality is that they
will come from us leaving the CU.

You are making the assumption that everything we export to the
rest-of-EU in future will continue to meet the standards, and thus not
require inspection a the border.

no, I am not

I am claiming that there is no inspection for compliance at the border

and that enforcement is done at point of sale, on punishment of fines
(obviously plus loss of infringing goods) for non compliance

This is pretty standard practice with standards compliance.

How often do you see recalls of toys which don't meet the safety specs for 5
years olds.

If this border check is in place why wasn't the non compliance picked up
there?

But having left the SM, the specs will
drift apart.

for things that we export we will have to met those specs

but for things that we sell locally we wont (obviously assuming that there's
a financial advantage for having different product lines)

But this is no different from now where companies who export to the US/ROW
might have to follow different specs than for exports to the EU. Why do all
Remainers think that this is fundamentally difficult? (Obviously it is in a
small subset of cases, but that will be reflected in the price of the item)

One of the most significant being discussed on other lists
I subscribe to is the much stricter Data Protection rules due to come in
between now and Brexit, while the UK government is busy passing laws
which water down the existing rules.

Well I'll just have to leave the people who are experts in this to, sort it
out - above my pay grade

One of the things we export (under that SM umbrella) is data hosting and
processing facilities.

I did say that I was only referring to goods and that services might be a
problem

tim

In message , at 18:57:55 on Tue, 7 Feb 2017,
tim... remarked:


"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 11:41:56 on Mon, 6 Feb 2017,
tim... remarked:

Post-your=Brexit there's nothing to ensure that while the customs
people will let the stuff in, without a tariff, that the customer
will automatically discover it meets the standards.

That part is clearly within the SM

Hurrah!

but that is their problem

it isn't a reason why we should be part of, and achieve benefits
from, the CU

Are you now agreeing that the third of the following you listed
earlier is SM not CU:

No

because you are confusing

proof that you have met the SM rules

with having to account for the duty on the components/completed article

No I'm not. The distinction is clear.

AIUI the former is never done at borders and therefore does not impact
on the day to day costs of shipping goods.

Maybe not at internal borders, but if we take the apocryphal example of
straight bananas, they have to be checked when first imported into the
CU,

Do they

Do you have evidence of this?

If the importer doesn't, he could be fined.

but if that specification was in fact in force[1] then after we
leave the SM the UK could import mis-shapen bananas and then what's to
stop us shipping them to the Continent under CU?

the threat of a fine when caught

Only the second importer, because he's still in the SM and has to obey
the rules.

[1] Other parts of the Directive still are, such as freedom from pests
and pesticides.

That has to be done for immediate health and safety reason

it is not comparable with checking that goods meet some administrative
standard.

Who is checking, and when?

No-one will die if a straight banana sneaks through. Someone might if
the consignment contains a deadly spider.

Who is checking, and when?

Of course it impacts on the initial design costs and possibly requires
certification (though mostly products are self certified on pain of
fines for getting it wrong).

Not all products with specifications are manufactured goods (see above).

But the people who are making that (I accept, perfectly valid) point
are attributing it to our leaving the SM, when the reality is that they
will come from us leaving the CU.

You are making the assumption that everything we export to the
rest-of-EU in future will continue to meet the standards, and thus not
require inspection a the border.

no, I am not

I am claiming that there is no inspection for compliance at the border

And I'm saying that means there's a risk of exporting something that the
buyer will have to reject, because it doesn't meet the standards.

Well I'll just have to leave the people who are experts in this to,
sort it out - above my pay grade

As a Brexiteer, haven't you had enough of experts?

One of the things we export (under that SM umbrella) is data hosting and
processing facilities.

I did say that I was only referring to goods

Which is very unusual. Most Brexiteers are wrongly under the impression
that 'goods and services' are all covered the same under the SM.

and that services might be a problem

Oh, you can be sure they will be.
--
Roland Perry