I found this letter to the FT about Britain's possible trade deal with the US:
Sir, US commerce secretary Wilbur Ross has pointed to some highly political choices to be made by this country (“US warns UK to avoid trade ‘hindrances’ in Brussels divorce deal”, November 7). He has also made clear that after Brexit the UK will not, after all, be able to have its cake and eat it.
If Britain wants a closer economic relationship with the US it should, apparently, be ready to make changes: to abandon some of its current food and environmental protection standards, to remove public authorities’ responsibility for type approval of motor vehicles, to rein in ambitions to regulate the “digital space”, and to provide opportunities for US influence on its standards-setting and regulation.
Some of these suggestions are directly contrary to British economic interests. Why would the British government abandon the EU type approval system for motor vehicles, essential for access to the dominant export market for British producers? Other suggestions reflect ignorance of, or disregard for, the political choices that lie behind current EU food regulations or, in the case of regulating the digital space, the active public debate in Europe about the need to reinforce the responsibility of internet service providers for content on their websites.
Mr Ross did not say what the US side might offer in return: no mention of encouraging foreign participation in US financial services or civil aviation markets, or relaxing Buy America provisions in US public procurement. His silence suggests that the current US administration has a rather one-sided view of economic partnership.