How is brexit going to affect Ireland?

I want to preserve the Good Friday Agreement and the common travel area, and I want to find solutions with the Republic of Ireland and with the British authorities.

www.independent.ie/business/brexit/we-will-find-a-border-solution-insists-barnier-35904216.html

As a previous poster has pointed out if the status quo continues re: border, nothing to stop an EU citizen driving from Dublin up to Belfast. Does taking back control of borders only apply to England?

How will Brexit voters who wanted to control non Brits coming to UK feel about the common travel area remaining? The Irish in Britain haven't exactly been greeted with a warm welcome historically.

I've heard conflicting reports about Ireland losing jobs due to Brexit but also gaining - so could cancel itself out. No need to worry about infrastructure being stretched?

Ireland is not a commonwealth country, and hasn't been since 1949 so any UK commonwealth plans or discussions won't impact Ireland.

Dublin doesn't have the infrastructure (schools, housing, transport) to welcome huge numbers of well paid bankers, so it is unlikely that there can be a big move to Dublin. Regardless of how the corporation tax works out, international companies will need a EU base and Ireland's English speaking workforce, its strong US links and international outlook will mean it will remain attractive to those who need to be in Europe.

As Appalazian stated, the border/GFA and the impact of even a soft border on agriculture as well as the impact of a crashing sterling on businesses trading mainly with the UK are key. The drop in sterling is already a big issue for companies in Ireland.

The EU have already guaranteed Irish neutrality via treaties so that shouldn't be an issue. There are lots of issues with the CTA - it only refers to Irish and UK citizens being able to move freely so how do you control other Europeans who won't have permission to move? Stopping people who look a bit French at this vaguely soft border? It is going to take some imaginative work to solve this issue and there has been no effort by the tories. DD famously referred to this border as an internal one at the start of the discussions. I hope he's genned up on his knowledge of where the UK stops since then. I live by a EU/Schengen border and even with FOM, there are tailbacks at the borders at peak times to ensure that tarifs are paid and people aren't smuggling shopping/goods/people.

The only reason Irish issues are so high on the Brexit negotiating table is thanks to the Irish government's highly successful lobbying of EU partners and efforts at preparing for Brexit despite no help from the UK govt in providing details or ideas. The EU understands our issues a lot better than the UK does and our close ties and good diplomatic relations will hopefully help lessen the impact and at least force the Brexiteers to address the issues and detailed solutions.

Ireland is the country that is going to be most punished by Brexit, other than the UK of course. As a whole, it is a country that has benefited enormously from the EU since joining, both in terms of social and economic impacts and that is why Irish people are generally very pro Europe. T Even with the best will in the world, it is going to be a very difficult transition for Ireland but it is very clear that it is the EU where the future lies and that we can't rely on any favours from the UK.

Trade in agricultural products and foodstuffs is going to be the big issue. The EU has already said that 100% of agricultural trade will be subject to veterinary/ phytosanitary checks.

I would love to know how people think this is going to be achieved without "friction".

As far as Corporate Taxation goes, even if nothing much else has happened since some OECD multilateral agreement for transparency in 2014 (see link below), in my opinion the prospects for low tax countries like Ireland looks good from September this year – as the authorities crack down, large corporations have less options - so look to settle in countries so comfortable with a low tax economy, businesses can both settle in a country and plan 5 years plus into the future.

“Noose tightens around global tax evasion as OECD countries sign new agreement”

“The OECD just took a step closer to fighting tax evasion on a global scale, with 51 territories agreeing to create “information exchanges” that will help track culprits down.”

“The first signatories to the dull-sounding "multilateral competent authority agreement" – which include the UK and Ireland – will launch their information exchanges by September 2017. Others will follow in 2018.”

In the UK on the other hand, thanks to a resurgence of the 1970’s far left and the uncertainty of the next general election, the opposite is true, based on the Corbynisters chosen ‘Venezuelan model’ of a much larger state, paid for by ever increasing taxation on all businesses (until the inevitable closures or relocations happens) – via an El Presidente Corbyn and his anti capitalism and anti profit sidekick – who has also just shown that on Brexit, Labour would rather try and bring the government down, than get behind them to get a Brexit deal through parliament.

I reiterate, the UK will have to face a potential anti business Labour headwind, for the foreseeable future, and so in my mind making the Republic of Ireland a much better place for larger corporations to settle, bullying from Brussels and the Franco-German axis, or not.

Spinflight

While the EU are playing EU rules and being cocks in trying to slow Brexit down so they can use the uncertainty to poach UK businesses e.g. the City, who is to say WHAT preliminary negotiations can't be had with our old colonies and 52 countries forming what used to be called the British Commonwealth, and now just called the Commonwealth - with its head office representing around 2.3 billion citizens, in London??

Article 50 was never meant to be used, as a country could go there, but no country was ever meant to leave (like 'The Hotel California' really) - and so far, the consequential 'interpretation' of Article 50 departure like the ORDER of negotiations, has been firmly on EU terms, like demanding money and better EU citizen right here first, before negotiating anything else.

So with the EU playing hard ball, whats wrong with the UK having chats with our old colonial and Commonwealth friends, before an official Brexit - as they rush through new treaties e.g. Japan?

Also- re EU army: firstly, Ireland is neutral, secondly, I believe any such participation would require a referendum which wouldn't pass. So, not a real issue of concern.

I don't fully understand how some of the things listed in the OP are meant to link specifically to brexit, but I may be missing something. Moves in the EU on tax reform are slow, and priority is still being given to the OECD process. EC reforms are unlikely to be hastened by Brexit, and everything Ireland is facing there in terms of push back has been coming for a long time. While the UK was an ally to a certain extent (if you take the view that continuing to operate as an effective tax have while getting v little in return in terms of job is in Irelands best interests, as the Irish government seems to do) they are much less concerned about it than say the Netherlands or Luxembourg.

International organisations that have their EU HQs in Ireland (predominantly for tax purposes) are unlikely to move these.

What happens regarding their interaction with the UK is still up for grabs, but essentially that will probably be more an issue for importing, and none of these goods are imported from Ireland, nor do the related jobs sit in Ireland.

The big concerns are NorthernIreland, unpredictable effects of currency fluctuations and agricultural exports. There is a real chance of this reigniting conflict. The social costs of this would be huge, there would also be financial effects. Goods currently move freely across the border, which is invisible except for signs informing you speed limits are now in MPH. This includes goods at various stages of production, so there could be infrastructure problems I'd say processing plants had to be reproduced. A huge number of our agricultural exports go to the UK, if sterling drops in value still lower- which tbh seems very likely, even if only relatively short term - then this will have a huge effect on farmers.

Then there is the question of jobs moving from London. It's being seen as a positive, but the reality is Dublin is facing a housing crisis due to a shortage of construction post-crash: bankers coming over and driving up prices yet further could be damaging.

I don't think any of this is likely to radically change public opinion on ireland staying in the EU, but that will depend how it's handled. So far the view is that brexit is insane, and that the EU are much more concerned about the GFA than the tories. They have seemed much more adaptable about preserving the CTA, too. For movement of people, I don't see it being a problem- ireland already protects the borders at airports in a way the UK doesn't for people arriving from Ireland, e.g. Full passport control. The main issues are the DUP stating they won't except any difference in what happens in NI vs rUK, and what this will all mean for goods.

"That the EU would require treaty change to accommodate it, and that this would be a very slow process, is effectively their problem if they refuse reasonable negotiations." Absolutely Spin.

"Also plenty of reports of banks registering interest and acquiring office space in Dublin in order to remain in the eurozone. Nice little earner for Ireland."

Not quite Ghost, this also happened when the 12.5 % corporation tax was introduced. Despite 'spin' the majority of banks 'registering an interest' already have operations in Ireland. There is no such 'exodus' the europhiles wish to promote.

What it also hasnt done, is create jobs. As with the corporate tax influx, they are registered offices only, with minimal manpower, purely created to take advantage of the tax benefits.

"Good news, doesn't quite sit with taking back control of borders though.."

Yes it does. Ireland are already acting as 'migrant' control for the UK due to the CTA. The 'border' already exists at the geographic boundary of Ireland.

The EU don't have a problem with the CTA. It's the Tories playing with fire doing a deal with the DUP that threatens the GFA.

Pretty sure there will be no hard border. Also nice paradox that people born in the north can obtain Irish passports and thus be EU citizens.

Also plenty of reports of banks registering interest and acquiring office space in Dublin in order to remain in the eurozone. Nice little earner for Ireland.

The EU wants to preserve the GFA. That means soft border. UK gov is committed to common travel area. Good news, doesn't quite sit with taking back control of borders though..

Absolutely Spin. For all the pantomime acting out on our screens, the ducks are absolutely being lined up. One thing no one is in any doubt of, is the EUs ability or lack or ability, (all 27 members?) or the EUs potential lack of desire, to agree anything.

Springbreeze, the Apple issue, which sees both Apple and Ireland on the same side versus the EU, is Irelands desire to negotiate their own arrangements. Arrangements that have turned them around from financial disaster. Dare I say it, its both legal and financial sovereignty.

On the whole Brexit thing, I totally disagree with you. What youre suggesting, (and is yet another of the europhiles fearmongering campaign, a baseless fallacy) quite simply wont happen.

Both Northern Ireland and Ireland want an 'invisible' border. Its the EU who again would be the objectors in your hypothetical argument. That is in itself a politically grim situation. The EU would have to be the enforcers of this, despite the will of mainland UK, the UK government, the desire of the NI peoples and the desire of the government and peoples of the Irish Republic.
It is also absolutely do-able, as seen in Cyprus, so to 'discriminate' simply because they wish to act punitively, would be in breach of their own legislation. Yes Turkey is part of the customs union but there must be some form of 'customs union' between the UK and EU and Ill explain why.

As with Cyprus, there are key travel routes in and out, and controls both of 'people' and 'goods' would be managed at the arrival points. It wasnt hard to set up in Cyprus and its not hard to set up in Ireland/NI. There is already this arrangement with the ROI and the UK with regards the common travel area (CTA). Ireland currently act as UK migration control on their incoming routes, which then allows a broader application of the CTA to more travellers.
Customs already exist for goods and travellers from outside of the EU, and use of the CHIEF system they already have in place will easily support any level of tariff that may be applied.

To simplify, there are 3 immediate levels of 'tax' that apply to all goods. VAT, excise, and potential tariffs (BTI, Binding Tariff Information) Whilst everyone is tutting over the tariff issue, we already have controls over these 3 areas. All these processes support trade irrespective of in or out of the EU. The reason being, that its not enough to say currently 'all UK exports to EU member states are non-vatable', because theyre not. There are a multitude of circumstances that means goods can be currently sold into an EU member states business, and VAT must be applied. The core structure of these controls are Region of Origin and Destination. We already apply these processes as Origin/Destination procedures. An invisible border in Ireland will make no difference whatsoever to these processes.

The same rules of Origin and Destination applies to goods that are produced within the Republic and then sold over an 'invisible' border for use in NI, and would be an issue for customs enforcement, just as it is now.
Coming back to tariffs therefore, the issue is 'how much, if any'. (Not the actual ability to control goods)

How does that cost impact Ireland? It could be significant. Take Fuel. Ireland imports over 90% of its fuel/gas from the UK. Any additional tariff applied to that would be hugely significant.

Why will a customs union exist? Quite simply VAT. Theoretically, the UK could do away with VAT post Brexit. Its an EU Legislated tax. However, neither the UK nor the EU can afford to lose it. VAT accounts for over £150 billion of our total tax revenue. Thats a figure we could never recoup from any other area. The EU receive around 12% of its VAT revenue from the UK (That includes calculating the correction rebate we receive). Would the EU prefer to lose their UK VAT stream? Never never never, as theres no reason whatsoever to do away with it. Its free money now and itll be free money then.

What we are all witnessing is indeed classic EU pantomime and posturing from an organisation who knows appearances are everything.

Caroline, isn't the issue not so much the 12.5% tax rate but the fact that Apple did not pay anything close to 12.5%. Tax rates should not be individually negotiable by large companies.

But on the question, a hard Brexit would be disastrous for Ireland and N. Ireland in particular. Farmers in the border are regularly sell on the other side of the border, just like it's a single country. If the UK decides to leave the Customs Union, this would not be the same and the NI economy would really suffer.

There are no positives for Ireland for Brexit, but then there are no positives for the UK in Brexit either.

I think what is clear Spin, within the eurozone, is member states realise they have no alternative, at the moment. Merkel will be ok in the Autumn elections, but thats not because of popular support, but simply because there is absolutely no alternative to the Merkel plan and the ECB. None. Mainland eurozone states specifically, are utterly committed up to their ears legally and financially. It really is shit or bust.

However, what I do think is becoming a stronger and stronger possibility, is the influence of the IMF. IMO, the only way forward will be to have an international clearing union overseen and co-ordinated by the IMF. Whilst EU bureaucrats are running around (validly?) flexing their financial muscle on eurozone members, they ignore their dire position on the global stage.

Taking the two examples of the UK and Ireland.
For the UK outside the EU, an international clearing union opening up controlled and balanced financial international policies by utilising global reserves is a no brainer (and tbh I think is absolutely going to happen anyway as a post Brexit London finance powerhouse steps up).

For Ireland within the EU, it is exactly what they have attempted to position themselves for when they exited the bailout programme.

The fly in the ointment is the EU themselves.
Would they really block any attempt at an IMF International union by making it illegal for member states to benefit from it? Yes, understandable as they square up and posture against a post brexit UK, but utterly misunderstandable as they block Irelands efforts on a global stage.

If they therefore did, its absolutely game over for the EU and ECB.

What europhiles miss regards Irelands position, is that whilst the 'corporate tax' carrot did indeed bring a dramatic influx of investment that saw their GDP national debt ratio shrink dramatically, it didnt actually provide jobs. Jobs remained in London, but tax wrappers exist in Ireland. The employment possibilities in Ireland remains almost unchanged from their darkest hour in 2010. Finance, and how that finance is structured is absolutely the difference between Ireland today, and Ireland on the brink of collapse 7 years ago.

How fast could a dramatic u-turn on EU financial policy happen? Pretty quickly IMO and Ireland, Apple and the US have far greater impact on Brexit, than is currently acknowledged. The UK needs to continue doing what its doing, and thats help create a truly international 'alternative'.

"Inflation though is a good thing for indebted nations."

Its only a good thing for those indebted nations with their own currency, that could inflate away their debt burden. Inflation has a different effect on the eurozone.

What you also have to keep in mind, is that the ECB have now set themselves up in a supervisory role.

On the surface, all well and good. Surely supervision is essential considering the rather bad habits eurozone member states have been guilty of? However, theres a huge knock on effect of this. Firstly they charge for the priviledge of providing that supervision whilst demanding a level of bureucracy and regulation over and above what banks have to provide on a national level. Secondly, As Theasaurass points out, they are working on low interest rates. And thirdly, they are so far behind what US investment banks offer in terms of efficiency and well led strategy, they were struggling to compete before picking up the 'supervisory' role, theyre a world away now.

Oh, and they have massive conflicts of interests to deal with at the same time.

Bailout can be seen to work in the past, take Ireland and to a lesser degree Spain. However, if (as is suggested regards Spain) if a nations government hasnt been totally open about the level of debt accrued to facilitate the economic turn round (or if policies have only been shortsighted which is common in domestic politics), then no amount of supervision can miraculously fill a black hole.

Jose may feel a little more secure that his family savings are in a 'reputable' supervised local bank, but foreign investors have nothing whatsoever to attract them. Ireland on the other hand just serviced their huge debt via other sources and indeed rebuilt confidence from foreign investors by doing so.

This isnt just a centralised banking issue, its utterly hobbling the national banks of any eurozone member state. Yes inflation and interest rates are a hairs breadth away from bringing this whole house of cards down, but also, even with a fair wind and calm sea, they just cant compete.

The EU, in their ultimate desire for a federal europe, has done what the EU does best, they have crippled their own competetiveness in the banking industry. Short term self survivalism yes, but ultimately they are now totally on their own with no ability to compete globally.

Coming full circle, back to your Ireland question, I think we're understimating the Apple tax farce. Yes its partially on a back burner for now, but is heading to the european courts next year I think. Judgment aside, dictating to Ireland the tax rates they must charge and then enforcing it with such an eye wateringly high bill to Apple, has only achieved 1 thing. Future investment in Ireland certainly on their currently low offer of corporation tax, must be approached with caution. The EU may sting you anyway. Its not exactly a positive state of affairs for Ireland. I think Ireland will leave, absolutely certainty if they lose the Apple tax case. I think their very survival will depend on leaving.

So London, when do we offer 12.5% corporation tax without the shackles of the EU, and bearing in mind the shrinking of the EU banking sector, align ourselves better with US led investment banking?

Spinflight

The so called ‘Eurodollar’, as beyond the jurisdiction of the U.S. Federal Reserve, has been around for several decades, in fact it was the growth of that external $ market and the scattering of banks around Europe that needed to be in one place that could accommodate their physical growth – that chose London from the mid 1970’s, and the precursor to the investment banking etc activities in the City today – but I neither see where you are going with that line, or subscribe to a dollar, or any other crash, yet.

President Trump ‘the businessman’ if manages by lower domestic taxes, with fewer OECD inspired global tax havens for companies to hide money etc, to encourage U.S. corporations to bring their Eurodollars back home and invest in ‘America first’ factories, production and jobs, I can see a potential problems with FEWER dollars floating around the world (including being invested in Europe) – but before ANY crash, the PRICE of money RISING would have red flagged a more systemic problem.

In fact, as inflation rises here and in Europe, we have to remember our Base Rate is the lowest it has ever been since the late 17th century when the Bank of England was founded, and it wasn’t that long ago ‘normal’ yield curves meant governments had to pay ABOVE inflation (up to a 2% premium) to borrow money from bond investors – so those politicking about ‘real’ falls in earnings due to inflation, better watch what they wish for as the historic ‘remedy’ is to squeeze inflation out of the system via higher interest rates.

Regarding the Eurozone where QE money is STILL being pumped in, they have inflation issues as close to 2%, and where the European Central Bank effectively forms a guarantee, or member state protective umbrella ‘as a whole’ - which means those that member states who might be rated ‘junk’ and pay much larger borrowing premiums if on their own, do not so as Germany’s (and to some extent France’s) credit rating is in the ‘risk’ credit assessment, by ratings agencies.

My point is that with 2% Eurozone inflation, a threat of European Central Bank stopping QE soon, and the interest rate yield curves ‘normalising’, in 10-year government borrowing, Spain should be paying MORE now than 1.72%, Italy 2.33%, Portugal 3.10% and Greece with all its problems 5.28% - and so IMO any European interest rate versus ‘normalising’, combined with a credit market ‘event – could see those member countries new borrowing and debt service bills rocket up as markets more than ‘price in’ the new interest rate scenario, with a knock on effect to the likes of Germany and France, needing to guarantee a smaller Eurozone financial bailout (hopefully) than before.

AS you will be aware the main difference between the 1930’s Depression in some countries, and the 2008/9 great recession, was the quick action by central banks to flood the market short term (or so they thought) with as much banking liquidity as they needed to keep the bank lending taps open to businesses and citizens – but for countries that absorbed the cost of a banking crisis, and their central banks ‘creating’ money on their own balance sheet they never had pre 2008 by QE type operations – they have now used up their ammo.

(I think we have moved well off subject and probably need to get back )