politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The betting on when will Article 50 be triggered, if ever?

anotherDave said:

There's going to be a lot of pressure from the EU for clarity on what/when the UK is doing. I don't think they could string it out till 2018.

ReggieCide said:

anotherDave said:

There's going to be a lot of pressure from the EU for clarity on what/when the UK is doing. I don't think they could string it out till 2018.

As far as pressure for clarity is concerned, it's the markets that matter not the EU. Delaying is our boat and the EU is in it with us, virtually powerless. Might it help us squeeze the EU? It's a poker call.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

The triggering of article 50 will, at the very least, be a cabinet decision and in view of the differing opinions, I cannot see Andrea Leadsom, in the unlikely event of her becoming PM, being able to trigger it on election to the post. I cannot see it happening before January 2017 and probably later.

It will be interesting to see if the HOC demand a say and how they formulate that.

This is one of the reasons I think a Brexiteer as PM could well have a negative impact on the process and that Theresa May would have much more of a chance of carrying the Country with her.

As has been said before 'this is no time for a novice'

tyson said:

anotherDave said:

There's going to be a lot of pressure from the EU for clarity on what/when the UK is doing. I don't think they could string it out till 2018.

I can't see Article 50 happening ever, sadly for you. There cannot be a mighty coalition of the mainstream politicians, business, the intelligentsia, the media and culture, London, the Scots on one side pitched against the great unwashed and some ideological notrights that mostly seem to post here. Looks to me to be an unfair fight.

Ain't going to happen comrade.

HurstLlama said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

The triggering of article 50 will, at the very least, be a cabinet decision and in view of the differing opinions, I cannot see Andrea Leadsom, in the unlikely event of her becoming PM, being able to trigger it on election to the post. I cannot see it happening before January 2017 and probably later.

It will be interesting to see if the HOC demand a say and how they formulate that.

This is one of the reasons I think a Brexiteer as PM could well have a negative impact on the process and that Theresa May would have much more of a chance of carrying the Country with her.

As has been said before 'this is no time for a novice'

It's a tricky one, Big_G. Do the Conservatives go for a novice or someone who has proved to be useless at actually getting things done? Do they go for someone whose leadership skills are untested or someone whose leadership skills are known to be awful?

I don't have a vote, few people on here do, for all we bump our gums. The 150,000 or so remaining Conservative party members carry a grave responsibility. I hope they choose wisely.

tyson said:

nunu said:

How would people on here feel about corporation tax in Britain falling below Ireland's? Say if it was revenue neutral in the short term by closing loopholes but raised say an extra few billion in the short term. The chancellor is planning cutting below 15%.

I don't think courting the opinion of people posting on here is going to present you with a sensible answer.

tyson said:

anotherDave said:

There's going to be a lot of pressure from the EU for clarity on what/when the UK is doing. I don't think they could string it out till 2018.

I can't see Article 50 happening ever, sadly for you. There cannot be a mighty coalition of the mainstream politicians, business, the intelligentsia, the media and culture, London, the Scots on one side pitched against the great unwashed and some ideological notrights that mostly seem to post here. Looks to me to be an unfair fight.

Ain't going to happen comrade.

rcs1000 said:

John_M said:

ReggieCide said:

anotherDave said:

There's going to be a lot of pressure from the EU for clarity on what/when the UK is doing. I don't think they could string it out till 2018.

As far as pressure for clarity is concerned, it's the markets that matter not the EU. Delaying is our boat and the EU is in it with us, virtually powerless. Might it help us squeeze the EU? It's a poker call.

We're the ones that will be damaged by undue delay. We're dealing with intangibles; business & consumer confidence are incredibly important. We don't need investment delays or a consumer slump.

We need to help Germany to help us. They're on our side. Others less so.

That's right: if you're (say) Toyota and you're considering where in the EU to build a factory. Right now, the UK might be your preferred site. But, if we're going for CO, with WTO rules, then somewhere else gets the nod. Now, WTO rules aren't very likely... but would you make that call, and then get blindsided? No, delay would be your first instinct. And if we (the UK) don't make up our mind where we're going, you'll look for alternatives.

Luckyguy1983 said:

FPT

Lowlander said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

rcs1000 said:

malcolmg said:

rcs1000 said:

chestnut said:

Europe seems to be in perpetual economic limbo with the woes of the Eurozone. They have a £100bn surplus at stake in their dealings with the UK. The German car industry is playing with over 20% of it's exports.

Did you know that, even if the Eurozone exports to the UK fell to zero, it would still run a current account surplus.

They are still in bother and £100 Billion of Tat not going out would cause quite a few issues methinks. Given most of it will be from Germany and France.

Remind me, what does Scotland export that is not black and sticky?

Scotch whisky accounts for around a quarter of all British food exports.

No idea what the value of oil exports is these days but Scotch whisky exports are worth just under £4 billion a year. That is one very important industry.

And growing all the time. Production isn't labour intensive enough to support huge amounts of jobs though. There are plenty of ancillary jobs however.

Which are, sadly, mainly in London. I would not be surprised if more Income Tax is paid in Brent with regards to the Scots Whisky industry than is paid in the whole of Scotland. Of course all that Income Tax is classed by the Treasury as "London Region".

Scotch whisky industry.

And I strongly doubt it.

I would be rather sadder about the degree of foreign ownership - in your brain obviously UK is foreign, but we share a tax base. The majority of the industry is owned by the likes of LVMH, Pernod Ricard, Barcardi, Beam Suntory etc., with more going as we write. A sign of success, yes, but still profits not flowing back into Scotland.

Lowlander said:

HaroldO said:

Lowlander said:

HaroldO said:

Utter piffle. He never analyses costs (because they don't benefit his argument) and his figures are a nonsense because it is impossible to give a reasonable accurate figure for Scottish revenue post Independence based on the current fiscal framework (not least because we don't know what the negotiated settlement would be). All he does is give an indicative number for the current fiscal framework and gives no justification as to why it would exist post independence.

There is absolutely no account given for the complexity and no attempt to analyse the complexity of the true revenue figures on chokkablog. This is not surprising because the reality is that it would be extremely difficult and expensive to do so and lots of the adjustments made for the current fiscal framework would be different under Independence.

He analysed the whole of Gers, link here;

http://chokkablog.blogspot.co.uk/2016/03/the-price-of-independence.html

and at the end;
"None of this is to suggest that Scotland couldn’t be an independent country or that raw economics should be the only consideration. But if we’re to be honest about the economic implications, it now seems clear that independence will only happen within our lifetimes if the majority of Scots are willing to vote to become considerably worse off, quite possibly for generations to come."

And yes, he says that it cannot be used to predict and independent Scotland fully because it is an analysis of the past and not the future but it is the closest set of figures we have to understand the Scottish government finances.

He goes through the revenue figures extensively, what figures are he missing for example if you disagree? So far you have been excessively vague.

Perhaps you can point me to where he adjusts revenue for tax differentials caused by head office effects (such as Diageo being HQed in London). Just as a starter.

ThreeQuidder said:

tyson said:

Thank goodness we are not playing France.

You did well against Germany, except for the penalties.

Lowlander said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

FPT

Lowlander said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

rcs1000 said:

malcolmg said:

rcs1000 said:

chestnut said:

Europe seems to be in perpetual economic limbo with the woes of the Eurozone. They have a £100bn surplus at stake in their dealings with the UK. The German car industry is playing with over 20% of it's exports.

Did you know that, even if the Eurozone exports to the UK fell to zero, it would still run a current account surplus.

They are still in bother and £100 Billion of Tat not going out would cause quite a few issues methinks. Given most of it will be from Germany and France.

Remind me, what does Scotland export that is not black and sticky?

Scotch whisky accounts for around a quarter of all British food exports.

No idea what the value of oil exports is these days but Scotch whisky exports are worth just under £4 billion a year. That is one very important industry.

And growing all the time. Production isn't labour intensive enough to support huge amounts of jobs though. There are plenty of ancillary jobs however.

Which are, sadly, mainly in London. I would not be surprised if more Income Tax is paid in Brent with regards to the Scots Whisky industry than is paid in the whole of Scotland. Of course all that Income Tax is classed by the Treasury as "London Region".

Scotch whisky industry.

And I strongly doubt it.

I would be rather sadder about the degree of foreign ownership - in your brain obviously UK is foreign, but we share a tax base. The majority of the industry is owned by the likes of LVMH, Pernod Ricard, Barcardi, Beam Suntory etc., with more going as we write. A sign of success, yes, but still profits not flowing back into Scotland.

That happened on Westminster's watch. The ownership structure of the industry was created before the Scottish Government even existed.

I can think of no other country in the world (with the possible exception of the United States) where major strategic industries would have been allowed into foreign ownership.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

tyson said:

Thank goodness we are not playing France.

No - just leave to our heroes on Wednesday

Luckyguy1983 said:

Lowlander said:

That happened on Westminster's watch. The ownership structure of the industry was created before the Scottish Government even existed.

I can think of no other country in the world (with the possible exception of the United States) where major strategic industries would have been allowed into foreign ownership.

BenRiach/Glenglassaugh has just been sold to a US company - you were saying?

Big_G_NorthWales said:

The triggering of article 50 will, at the very least, be a cabinet decision and in view of the differing opinions, I cannot see Andrea Leadsom, in the unlikely event of her becoming PM, being able to trigger it on election to the post. I cannot see it happening before January 2017 and probably later.

It will be interesting to see if the HOC demand a say and how they formulate that.

This is one of the reasons I think a Brexiteer as PM could well have a negative impact on the process and that Theresa May would have much more of a chance of carrying the Country with her.

As has been said before 'this is no time for a novice'

tyson said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

tyson said:

Thank goodness we are not playing France.

No - just leave to our heroes on Wednesday

You are entitled to your positivity (comrade- he said timidly). The Belgium match ranks as one of the 3 best home country matches I have ever seen. 1996- England against Holland. 1978 Scotland vs Holland.

Your anthem touches the hairs on the back of my neck

Lowlander said:

That happened on Westminster's watch. The ownership structure of the industry was created before the Scottish Government even existed.

I can think of no other country in the world (with the possible exception of the United States) where major strategic industries would have been allowed into foreign ownership.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

tyson said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

tyson said:

Thank goodness we are not playing France.

No - just leave to our heroes on Wednesday

You are entitled to your positivity (comrade- he said timidly). The Belgium match ranks as one of the 3 best home country matches I have ever seen. 1996- England against Holland. 1978 Scotland vs Holland.

Your anthem touches the hairs on the back of my neck

Thanks Tyson. My late Father in Law from the Scotland always said it was the most stirring anthem. You should listen to my young grand children singing it in Welsh - it brings tears to the eyes. And yes I am sure you didn't really mean to address us as 'comrade'

SeanT said:

It will be Theresa May, and, when her ducks are in a row, judging by her remarks today, she will go for EEA plus *qualified* Free Movement, using the 3m EU citizens in the UK as pawns

Cruel realpolitik means she has a decent chance of victory.

I expect triggering in the first quarter of 2017. I also have no effing idea. But that's my guess.

rcs1000 said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

I have no more knowledge than anyone else but my guess would be October 1st - December 31st.

I think if EFTA/EEA is the destination, it can and should be done very quickly. It's much more of an issue with something more customised, because the government wouldn't want to pull the trigger until the outline of a deal is in place.

SeanT said:

williamglenn said:

If Leadsom becomes PM and immediately triggers Article 50 and rules out EFTA, will any of the Leavers on here regret their enthusiasm for Brexit?

I would. For sure. It would be insanity. Once A50 is triggered, we become beggars.

We can trigger it when we like (although the markets will pressure us). The obvious solution is to line up a deal beforehand (fuck Juncker, talk to Merkel, Hollande, directly), then trigger, and get EEA sewn up in months.

Minimum disruption to the City and the economy. Clear win. And we're out of the EU and can then, at our leisure, pursue our freedoms around the world.

We will take an economic hit, but it won't be massive, is my guess

Triggering A50 now, with no idea of where we're going, would be catastrophic.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

tyson said:

anotherDave said:

There's going to be a lot of pressure from the EU for clarity on what/when the UK is doing. I don't think they could string it out till 2018.

I can't see Article 50 happening ever, sadly for you. There cannot be a mighty coalition of the mainstream politicians, business, the intelligentsia, the media and culture, London, the Scots on one side pitched against the great unwashed and some ideological notrights that mostly seem to post here. Looks to me to be an unfair fight.

Ain't going to happen comrade.

I think you sum yourself up perfectly by your reference to 'comrade'. This is going to happen otherwise democracy is lost, and I voted remain

williamglenn said:

If Leadsom becomes PM and immediately triggers Article 50 and rules out EFTA, will any of the Leavers on here regret their enthusiasm for Brexit?

Jobabob said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

tyson said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

tyson said:

Thank goodness we are not playing France.

No - just leave to our heroes on Wednesday

You are entitled to your positivity (comrade- he said timidly). The Belgium match ranks as one of the 3 best home country matches I have ever seen. 1996- England against Holland. 1978 Scotland vs Holland.

Your anthem touches the hairs on the back of my neck

Thanks Tyson. My late Father in Law from the Scotland always said it was the most stirring anthem. You should listen to my young grand children singing it in Welsh - it brings tears to the eyes. And yes I am sure you didn't really mean to address us as 'comrade'

The best national anthem in the world? It's a straight fight between France and Wales.

Could well be the final too.

tyson said:

Thank goodness we are not playing France.

SeanT said:

williamglenn said:

If Leadsom becomes PM and immediately triggers Article 50 and rules out EFTA, will any of the Leavers on here regret their enthusiasm for Brexit?

I would. For sure. It would be insanity. Once A50 is triggered, we become beggars.

We can trigger it when we like (although the markets will pressure us). The obvious solution is to line up a deal beforehand (fuck Juncker, talk to Merkel, Hollande, directly), then trigger, and get EEA sewn up in months.

Minimum disruption to the City and the economy. Clear win. And we're out of the EU and can then, at our leisure, pursue our freedoms around the world.

We will take an economic hit, but it won't be massive, is my guess

Triggering A50 now, with no idea of where we're going, would be catastrophic.

rcs1000 said:

Lowlander said:

That happened on Westminster's watch. The ownership structure of the industry was created before the Scottish Government even existed.

I can think of no other country in the world (with the possible exception of the United States) where major strategic industries would have been allowed into foreign ownership.

Two points:

Firstly, the ultimate beneficial ownership will be incredibly geographically diverse. If you, as a Scot, wants to own a bit of the whisky industry, you'll find that all you have to do is buy a share of Diageo or LVMH. The real economic owners, then, of Scottish whisky are pensioners and savers around the world.

Secondly, this was an incredibly fragmented industry and none of the individual purchases meant very much. Are you really planning on stopping a 25m quid purchase of a distillery in Campbelltown? If so, look forward to no-one making an investments in Scotland. If the government is micromanaging the economy, no good will come of it.

rcs1000 said:

SeanT said:

It will be Theresa May, and, when her ducks are in a row, judging by her remarks today, she will go for EEA plus *qualified* Free Movement, using the 3m EU citizens in the UK as pawns

Cruel realpolitik means she has a decent chance of victory.

I expect triggering in the first quarter of 2017. I also have no effing idea. But that's my guess.

I fear that the EU-bods will play hardball: so, Prime Minister May, you plan to send German investment bankers back to Frankfurt so we can collect their tax, while you get the old and the infirm back in return?

Mortimer said:

Why on earth would Leadsom say something so silly? Was it to distract from today's pretty dire headlines for her?

rcs1000 said:

SeanT said:

if anyone is feeling a bit blue, I had my first sex since Brexit today, with my new experimental physicist GF, and it really helped. I recommend.

Sexit for Brexit?

I'll riskit for a Swisskit.

I'm also drunk.

Congratulations. I too like nothing more than post on Politicalbetting after sex. That probably explains why I post so often.

HaroldO said:

Lowlander said:

HaroldO said:

So you are saying that HQ affects only affect Scotland negatively? Because that would be massively simplistic.
Also are you saying that the HQ would then move? Because if Scotland was independent then Diageo would still be in London and have their corporation tax charged in the rUK.
Also, what do you mean by tax differentials? Income tax, corp tax (which I assumed above) or other taxes?

Don't get me wrong, I in know way am saying GERs is written in stone but it is the closest we have to an accurate picture.

In the UK, London has a disproportionate share of head offices and it effects every region (not just Scotland). Diageo is merely a very obvious example. Yes there are counter-examples such as SSE but I think it is hard to argue that overall, the tax differential is not in London's favour. As I said previously, I don't expect big effects, but some effect and negatively to Scotland.

Even if Diageo retained their HQ in London, a tax border between England and Scotland would require them to declare earnings in Scotland for which they would pay Corp Tax.

You are right that GERS is the best measure we have. But it is an incredibly poor model even for measuring the current fiscal framework. It is an exceptionally poor model for predicting the fiscal position of an Independent Scotland.

But that would be true in the future, the HQ's wouldn't move they would stay put.

Eh? So Scotland would charge corp tax on earnings rather than profit now? Erm, good luck with getting any international firms to produce in Scotland after that.

I think it is the model of best fit for now, but not a great predictor. But even if it is a certain % out it clearly shows an iScotland would be in a lot of trouble in the short to medium term.

MarqueeMark said:

Iceland need the Knights of the Vale to turn up second half....

TheScreamingEagles said:

Mortimer said:

Why on earth would Leadsom say something so silly? Was it to distract from today's pretty dire headlines for her?

Because she's overrated and not very good.

Just look at her record at Barclays and the loan she gave Barings.

No wonder Kippers, Arron Banks, and Leave.eu are backing her

PeterC said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

tyson said:

anotherDave said:

There's going to be a lot of pressure from the EU for clarity on what/when the UK is doing. I don't think they could string it out till 2018.

I can't see Article 50 happening ever, sadly for you. There cannot be a mighty coalition of the mainstream politicians, business, the intelligentsia, the media and culture, London, the Scots on one side pitched against the great unwashed and some ideological notrights that mostly seem to post here. Looks to me to be an unfair fight.

Ain't going to happen comrade.

I think you sum yourself up perfectly by your reference to 'comrade'. This is going to happen otherwise democracy is lost, and I voted remain

You are right - and sooner rather than later. To leave A50 up in the air indefinitely would shred anything left of goodwill towards us. The 27 are apoplectic as it is already.

matt said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Mortimer said:

Why on earth would Leadsom say something so silly? Was it to distract from today's pretty dire headlines for her?

Because she's overrated and not very good.

Just look at her record at Barclays and the loan she gave Barings.

No wonder Kippers, Arron Banks, and Leave.eu are backing her

I have no idea whether your being fair re Barings - did the loan dox mean that there was no choice or was it a positive decision? I assume that she left BZW shortly after. However, to be an Oxfordshire councillor at the same time as working in the City in an apparently senior role suggests a not very taxing City job. I honestly don't know how that was squared away.