Import charges

A section dedicated to non Mini related conversations that some members may find disturbing, worrying or offensive. If you are likely to be troubled by non Classic car related content, I would suggest you avoid!
66Traveller
Posts: 861
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2012 5:47 pm
Location: Belgium

Re: Import charges

Post by 66Traveller »

No.

There was a trade deal on trade in goods. But that doesn’t negate the WTO requirement for customs checks. And WTO Rules Of Origin rules also apply - so the majority of a product has to originate in the U.K. to qualify - hence something manufactured in China but supplied to a customer in the EU doesn’t meet the ROI requirements, isn’t therefore tariff free, so duty is payable. Those are the rules of international trade as set out by the WTO.
User avatar
Exminiman
Posts: 1145
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2017 8:59 am
Location: Berkshire UK

Re: Import charges

Post by Exminiman »

Spider wrote: Mon Mar 01, 2021 7:06 pm (scratches head) Wasn't there a Co-operative Trade Deal done between the UK and EU at the last minute that allowed for the pre-Brexit Trading terms to continue ?
Think that was the idea, but “clever” clauses like stopping products being moved into an EEC country from UK, if product was not wholly or significantly made in UK have caused “Friction” to to the process, which of course means time and money.....
Imagine if you were a Supermarket, or Manufacturer, whith shops or factories in Europe..... :?
66Traveller
Posts: 861
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2012 5:47 pm
Location: Belgium

Re: Import charges

Post by 66Traveller »

Those "clever clauses" are the WTO rules unfortunately that govern world trade...
66Traveller
Posts: 861
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2012 5:47 pm
Location: Belgium

Re: Import charges

Post by 66Traveller »

GeorgeA wrote: Mon Mar 01, 2021 1:02 pm
66Traveller wrote: Mon Mar 01, 2021 11:10 am The European Convention on Human Rights is not an EU piece of legislation: it stems from the Council of Europe and it still applied to the UK because the UK is still a member of the Council of Europe and a party to the Convention.
As I missed it I'll reply to it

EU human rights law states that you cannot support somebody to a country where the jail conditions are worse than the country you are deporting them from. That is why we built and for the upkeep of jails in Jamaica and Africa

We could not deport criminals if they had served more than 10 years under the EU law. They were entitled to settle in this country because of the amount of time they had spent.

We also could not support criminals and people from Europe with severe criminal records due to the freedom of movement. As it broke EU law and broke their human rights.

Now we are no longer subject to EU freedom of movement law. We can deport people without breaking EU and human rights laws because we are not breaking freedom of movement. For now someone can spend 10 years in jail in this country and then get deported. Without breaking their human rights.

now we are out of the freedom of movement We can deny entry just like Australia to people with criminal records from Europe. Something we could not do while in the freedom of movement.

Now thanks to Brexit scumbags like this that killed Alice Gross Will not be out into the country under freedom of movement.
Or if they do come in we can deport them.

"Why was Latvian killer Arnis Zalkalns allowed in UK to murder Alice Gross?" https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... e-say.html
Now where to start on all of this which mixes EU Asylum and migration rules (which the UK had a permanent opt out from) with the UK's obligations as a state party to the 1951 UN Convention on the Status of Refugees and the UK's obligations as a signatory of the Council of Europe's European Convention on Human Rights. The last two - the 51 UN Convention and the ECHR are nothing to do with the EU and still apply to the Uk since we are still signatories to both. EU law in this area never applied to the Uk because of the opt out.

EU Freedom of Movement is a separate issue but never prevented the return of EU nationals convicted and jailed in the UK to their home countries . Meanwhile the European Arrest Warrant meant that the UK authorities could have someone who had committed a criminal (or terrorist) offence in the UK arrested in any of the other EU Member States and returned to the UK for trial. At the same time UK law enforcement had real time access to EU law enforcement, immigration and criminal record data bases.

Equally the UK always had control over its borders - it was never part of the Schengen area - so always exercised controls at both entry and exit points to the UK.

The deal signed in December doesn't make any difference to EU nationals being allowed to enter the UK and to stay for up to six months - it only affects the right to live permanently and to work in the UK.

I think its important to try to untangle all of this - it is very complicated and the press likes to conflate what are actually unrelated issues.
66Traveller
Posts: 861
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2012 5:47 pm
Location: Belgium

Re: Import charges

Post by 66Traveller »

GeorgeA wrote: Mon Mar 01, 2021 2:20 pm @66Traveller at the end of the day we can debate for week's and it's not going to change anything. I'd soon come on here to read about talk about things mini-related topics

You will always believe that it's amazing and refuse to look at its flaws and just believe what ever EU commission tells you to.

For me Brexit is not perfect It was never going to be just like the EU has its pro's and con and I was happy in it. I have friends all over the EU who I talk to regularly.
It's lack of change and it's unwilling to address issues while some countries blatantly break the rules and get away with it.
French police helping people across the Chanel. (Preported by vote remain news outlets before Brexit was even a thing.)

Yet countries like the UK who follow the rules pay a lot more in than we get out of it get stopped from proving state aid. British steel being a prime recent example something that the French happily ignore.
Prime example French government takes a 13% stake in PSA, in a financial rescue operation in 2014.

On the day David Cameron tried to set the ball rolling of reform to avoid Brexit. He was laughed in the face and sent packing. So we had a vote we left.

The fact that they laughed him out of the building and were not prepared to change anything was a deal-breaker plain and simple. If the unelected idiots had been prepared to talk about reformm we would never had Brexit.
George,

I couldn't agree more - we could talk about all of this until the cows come home and we have to respect each other's viewpoints. We are where we are on it and the arrow of time moves in only one direction.

But you are wrong on the UK steel industry - most recently Port Talbot. Nothing in EU State Aid rules (which the British largely wrote anyway) prevented the British Government stepping in in the face of unfair (non EU) state subsidised competition. It was the British government that chose not to. Like you I think that having a manufacturing base is of strategic importance.

As for the uneven application of EU rules, its worth remembering that few "EU rules" are directly applicable in national law (Regulations) - the vast majority - Directives -required secondary legislation which meant that successive UK governments set out to make that as comprehensive as possible (so called "gold plating"). That might be because our "common law" legal system (based on the presumption that things are allowed unless constrained or prohibited by legislation) was different to the continental model (based on the assumption that something is allowed only if it is provided for in legislation). But again we could debate this forever.

I'm glad you have lots of friends in the rest of Europe. The EU is a legal order - a set of rules of a club. But people and values are what make Europe as a continent what it is - not rules.
User avatar
Spider
Posts: 4014
Joined: Mon May 07, 2012 6:10 am
Location: Big Red, Australia

Re: Import charges

Post by Spider »

Ah, OK, cheers Exminiman and 66Traveler - it's a bit hard to follow and it must drive you guys bonkers.
hicklingmick
Posts: 49
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 5:24 pm
Location: Rural norfolk Uk

Re: Import charges

Post by hicklingmick »

66 Traveller.. You said this .

Equally the UK always had control over its borders - it was never part of the Schengen area - so always exercised controls at both entry and exit points to the UK.

Actually we couldnt stop EU nationals except criminals but any normal EU citizen was allowed entry.The following was Pre Brexit.

""Because of the UK’s opt-out from the main part of Schengen, it can still check people coming from the rest of the EU to see if they are entitled to enter the UK or not. Due to EU rules on free movement of people, the UK must admit EU citizens and their family members, unless there is some indication (perhaps in the Schengen Information System) that they are wanted persons or that they are using stolen passports. However, the entry of anyone else into the UK is controlled by UK law. In other words, the UK still controls its borders as regards most non-EU citizens.""


If the common market had stayed as intended all those years ago just as a trading concern then Brexit wouldnt have happened but the EU commission has got too big for its boots and always seems to be run by somebody who had to leave a position elsewhere because not good enough.

The UK is only the first to leave the EU many more will follow suit.

Some of the directives they bring out are plain crazy such as the Tobacco directive.

They are trying to cut tobacco use but because of the farm subsidies they subsidise farmers to grow tobacco, in fact farmers get paid a lot more to grow tobacco than grow grain

Ecig liquid containing nicotine can only be sold in 10ml bottles therefore causing more plastic waste.
Post Reply