Britain to promise 20 billion euros in Brexit bill: FT

[webfact]

Britain to promise 20 billion euros in Brexit bill: FT

 

LONDON - British Prime Minister Theresa May will promise to pay a Brexit divorce bill of at least 20 billion euros (18 billion pounds, $24 billion), according to officials cited by the Financial Times.

 

May's EU adviser Olly Robbins has informed his counterparts in various European capitals of the offer, the newspaper said in its online edition late Tuesday, citing unnamed officials briefed on the discussions.

 

The announcement will be formally made by May on Friday, when the prime minister delivers a highly-anticipated Brexit speech in the Italian city of Florence, the FT said.

 

Britain is yet to put forward a figure to meet its financial obligations to the European Union when it leaves the bloc, currently set for March 29, 2019.

 

The lack of agreement on a divorce settlement has proven a major stumbling block in the Brexit talks.

 

While Brussels has not made public its own figure, EU senior officials have told AFP the preliminary evaluation is between 60 to 100 billion euros.

 

Britain's net contribution in 2015, the last year for which figures were available, was 10.75 billion euros, according to European Commission and European Parliament documents.

 

The 20 billion euros figure therefore points to payments to meet the UK committment to the EU's seven-year budget, which runs to 2020, and could be paid during a transitioned departure from the bloc.

 

"Transition payments do not cancel the bill," a senior EU diplomat told the Financial Times.

 

May's office did not immediately comment on the newspaper report and the government's position has previously been that it is up to the EU to come up with a figure, which London will then challenge.

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/breakingnews/30327184

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2017-09-20

[terryw]

Once again it looks like the UK will be making a reasonable offer to the EU. The problem is, how do you deal with an organisation that refuses to itemize its Bill and behaves like a spoilt child when the legality of these outstanding payments is challenged by the UK.

[BuaBS]

Relax ! It's only printed money , worth nothing.

[dunroaming]

58 minutes ago, terryw said:

Once again it looks like the UK will be making a reasonable offer to the EU. The problem is, how do you deal with an organisation that refuses to itemize its Bill and behaves like a spoilt child when the legality of these outstanding payments is challenged by the UK.

Not sure about once again.  This is the first figure from the UK and the EU have been pushing for it for some time.  Still it will be a disappointment to the Brexiteers on TV who say that the UK owe the EU nothing.  Slowly the reality will sink in I guess.

[dick dasterdly]

8 hours ago, webfact said:

While Brussels has not made public its own figure, EU senior officials have told AFP the preliminary evaluation is between 60 to 100 billion euros.

 

Britain's net contribution in 2015, the last year for which figures were available, was 10.75 billion euros, according to European Commission and European Parliament documents.

Not sure why (in the absence of agreed favourable trading terms) the UK would consider paying more than one year's  net annual payment - bearing in mind the EU's seven year budget ends one year after the UK's leaves in 2019?  Edit - and this isn't taking into consideration the UK's share of EU assets!

 

Even so, its good to see that the amount is gradually reducing from the EU's initial figure of 100 bn....

Edited September 20, 2017 by dick dasterdly

[British Bulldog]

Quite ironic that one of the many reasons the UK wants to get out is becuase of these massive bills !

[dunroaming]

2 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

Not sure why (in the absence of agreed favourable trading terms) the UK would consider paying more than one year's  net annual payment - bearing in mind the EU's seven year budget ends one year after the UK's leaves in 2019?

 

Even so, its good to see that the amount is gradually reducing from the EU's initial figure of 100 bn....

Two things to remember here.  First is that the EU didn't ask for a specific amount.  They just asked the UK to come up with an offer.  Secondly this will not mean that it will be the last payment by the UK.  Davis has admitted that we will still have to pay into the EU after Brexit.

[rockingrobin]

13 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

Not sure why (in the absence of agreed favourable trading terms) the UK would consider paying more than one year's  net annual payment - bearing in mind the EU's seven year budget ends one year after the UK's leaves in 2019?  Edit - and this isn't taking into consideration the UK's share of EU assets!

 

Even so, its good to see that the amount is gradually reducing from the EU's initial figure of 100 bn....

Its the forerunner to the transitional period. What the UK has now to do is decide where it is transiting to

[dick dasterdly]

7 minutes ago, dunroaming said:

Two things to remember here.  First is that the EU didn't ask for a specific amount.  They just asked the UK to come up with an offer.  Secondly this will not mean that it will be the last payment by the UK.  Davis has admitted that we will still have to pay into the EU after Brexit.

Have to agree, a few EU 'important people' came up with 100 bn, which was gradually reduced to 60 bn.

 

Not that it matters, its down to the claimant to PROVE their claim - not insist that the entity from which they are claiming 'makes an offer'....

[bartender100]

The EU will put it to good use, give it to Greece so they can keep retiring at 60yo or build some more new roads in Spain

[rockingrobin]

30 minutes ago, dunroaming said:

Two things to remember here.  First is that the EU didn't ask for a specific amount.  They just asked the UK to come up with an offer.  Secondly this will not mean that it will be the last payment by the UK.  Davis has admitted that we will still have to pay into the EU after Brexit.

 

12 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

Have to agree, a few EU 'important people' came up with 100 bn, which was gradually reduced to 60 bn.

 

Not that it matters, its down to the claimant to PROVE their claim - not insist that the entity from which they are claiming 'makes an offer'....

The government has already stated it wishes to remain party to some EU projects post Brexit

[Retiredandhappyhere]

Surely, if the EU feels that the UK owes it some money, it is up to the EU to send the UK a detailed bill?   

 

Perhaps the EU does not want the UK to have the opportunity to challenge their calculations, particularly as the EU's annual accounts are so suspect that the auditors have refused to certify them for many years. 

[dunroaming]

36 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

Not that it matters, its down to the claimant to PROVE their claim - not insist that the entity from which they are claiming 'makes an offer'....

Yes and you have to start somewhere.  Britain will offer the 20 billion and the EU will respond to that.  After all both sides are calling themselves the "negotiators".  It my business almost every transaction is subject to negotiation and my god it can be tedious to say the least!  I am just pleased that at least the UK are making some sort of progress!

[dunroaming]

25 minutes ago, Retiredandhappyhere said:

Surely, if the EU feels that the UK owes it some money, it is up to the EU to send the UK a detailed bill?   

 

Perhaps the EU does not want the UK to have the opportunity to challenge their calculations, particularly as the EU's annual accounts are so suspect that the auditors have refused to certify them for many years. 

It's called negotiation and at last the UK have stopped sitting on the fence and are coming up with a figure.

[Khun Han]

1 hour ago, dunroaming said:

It's called negotiation and at last the UK have stopped sitting on the fence and are coming up with a figure.

 

But no criticism of the EU, who should be the party coming up with a figure. It's always the UK's fault in remainers' eyes. 

[dunroaming]

1 minute ago, Khun Han said:

 

But no criticism of the EU, who should be the party coming up with a figure. It's always the UK's fault in remainers' eyes. 

I am highly critical of the EU.  They are determined to make it hard for Britain to leave the EU as their fear is that others will follow.  But I understand their position as much as I don't like it.

 

The British voters (just over half of them anyway) decided that they wanted to leave the EU for various reasons.  The waters were mudded when it was discovered that the promises the Brexit side made could not in practice be delivered.  Then May promised that certain parts of Brexit were the goal and if that failed then Britain would walk away without a deal at all.  Then the economists and the businesses said that to do that would be economic suicide.  The more the team of "negotiators" looked at the practical steps it would take to achieve a Brexit that worked, the more they realised just how hard it was going to be to achieve it.

 

All of this is then seen as a sign of chaos by the EU side and they are going to screw down as hard as they can.  The disastrous election called by May just re-iterated the mess that the UK is in over this divorce.  She is now much weakened and the hawks are circling.

 

None of this should come as a surprise.  By taking the "them or us" approach is a dangerous game given the strutting egos on both sides.  It's a stand-off with the EU having a pair of cocked pistols and the UK with a water pistol.  I have everything crossed for some sort of successful conclusion but I can't see any sight of it yet.  Can you? 

[Khun Han]

10 minutes ago, dunroaming said:

I am highly critical of the EU.  They are determined to make it hard for Britain to leave the EU as their fear is that others will follow.  But I understand their position as much as I don't like it.

 

The British voters (just over half of them anyway) decided that they wanted to leave the EU for various reasons.  The waters were mudded when it was discovered that the promises the Brexit side made could not in practice be delivered.  Then May promised that certain parts of Brexit were the goal and if that failed then Britain would walk away without a deal at all.  Then the economists and the businesses said that to do that would be economic suicide.  The more the team of "negotiators" looked at the practical steps it would take to achieve a Brexit that worked, the more they realised just how hard it was going to be to achieve it.

 

All of this is then seen as a sign of chaos by the EU side and they are going to screw down as hard as they can.  The disastrous election called by May just re-iterated the mess that the UK is in over this divorce.  She is now much weakened and the hawks are circling.

 

None of this should come as a surprise.  By taking the "them or us" approach is a dangerous game given the strutting egos on both sides.  It's a stand-off with the EU having a pair of cocked pistols and the UK with a water pistol.  I have everything crossed for some sort of successful conclusion but I can't see any sight of it yet.  Can you? 

 

Yes, I can. Your analogy of pistols is preposterous. Remainers go on and on about how the EU holds all the cards, and twist the trade figures to make the UK's side look insignificant, when it isn't (not to mention the fact that we can simply buy most of the stuff we buy from the EU elsewhere and cheaper once we're free of them). And there's the security aspect, which can't be underestimated (though remainers will do their best to do so): without the UK's input, the rest of the EU is woefully defended and it's intelligence networks aren't even in the same galaxy.

 

What amazes me is just how hard remainers push their absurd claims that the UK doesn't have a leg to stand on and is falling apart at the seams. Though in dunroaming's case, he has been honest enough to admit to having a large vested interest.

[CG1 Blue]

3 hours ago, dunroaming said:

Two things to remember here.  First is that the EU didn't ask for a specific amount. 

And we all know why that is.  The EU's (unaudited) accounts are in such a mess they wouldn't have a clue what to charge the UK or how to quantify it.

What the EU are looking for here is a bribe or ransom from the UK.  They just haven't decided what amount to put on the ransom note yet.

Edited September 20, 2017 by CG1 Blue

[dunroaming]

49 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

Though in dunroaming's case, he has been honest enough to admit to having a large vested interest.

You leave my large vested interest out of it  

 

Let's just see how it all pans out.  Time for a bottle of Spanish rioja, some French pate and a Danish pastry to follow while I catch up on that good Belgium thriller I downloaded earlier