UK not legally bound to pay into EU budget if no Brexit deal - British lawmakers

By Kylie MacLellan

 

Britain's Prime Minister, Theresa May in Glasgow, Scotland March 3, 2017. REUTERS/Russell Cheyne

 

LONDON (Reuters) - If Britain leaves the European Union without agreeing an exit deal it will not be legally obliged to contribute to the bloc's budget post-Brexit, a committee of members of Britain's upper house of parliament said on Saturday.

Money is likely to be one of the most contentious elements of the upcoming divorce talks. Other EU nations want Britain to pay its share of budget commitments -- estimated informally by EU officials at roughly 60 billion euros.

British Prime Minister Theresa May has said only that the government would consider paying into the EU to participate in "some specific European programmes".

Under Article 50 of the EU's Lisbon Treaty, Britain has two years to agree a deal with the EU after which time it will leave without one unless all member states agree to extend negotiations.

"If agreement is not reached, all EU law - including provisions concerning ongoing financial contributions and machinery for adjudication - will cease to apply and the UK would be subject to no enforceable obligation to make any financial contribution at all," the House of Lords EU Financial Affairs committee said in a report.

The report also concludes that, in return, Britain will not be in a position legally to claim a share of the EU's assets on exit unless they are included in a withdrawal agreement.

Negotiating what Britain owes is one of the EU's priorities for this year, with EU officials saying the bloc wants to agree with Britain a formula for calculating the amount rather than defining a concrete sum in advance.

Britain will have to weigh up the financial and political costs of making payments to the EU in return for agreement on things such as EU market access, the committee said.

"If the government wishes to include future market access on favourable terms as part of the discussions on the withdrawal agreement, it is likely to prove impossible to do so without also reaching agreement on the issue of the budget," it said.

"The political and economic consequences of the UK leaving the EU without responding to claims under the EU budget are likely to be profound."

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-03-04

 

 

So let's you give me your best two marbles and you can have my cold leftover pie. And I'll throw in the matie sauce too.

30 minutes ago, mfd101 said:

So let's you give me your best two marbles and you can have my cold leftover pie. And I'll throw in the matie sauce too.

What.  

Good. Lets hope we stick to it. Ripped off uk for too long

3 hours ago, rooster59 said:

If Britain leaves the European Union without agreeing an exit deal it will not be legally obliged to contribute to the bloc's budget post-Brexit

Not really a good start for negotiations for the UK.

If May is truly unconcerned about getting an exit deal with the EU, then announce that the day after Article 50 is invoked, just exit without further discussions with the EU.

38 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

Not really a good start for negotiations for the UK.

If May is truly unconcerned about getting an exit deal with the EU, then announce that the day after Article 50 is invoked, just exit without further discussions with the EU.

 

Unfortunately the clown the EU selected as chief negotiator and Juncker have both banded this 60 billion Euro figure around, and the former stated there can be no negotiations until Britain has paid it. Ploncker.

 

The EU aren't renowned for their honesty, transparency, ethics or fair play. 

 

So why the fcku should Britain role over and die for them?

 

This could end very badly, if push comes to shove. Let's hope common sense prevails although the EU bureaucrats are not known for that quality.

The UK owe them naff all the cheeky beggars. Can't wait to be free of them.

It's just posturing, as usual. The 60 billion is the current football to kick around, no point in getting your knickers in a twist about it.

With corruption in the E.U. costing 12o bn Euros annually. How about sorting that out first?

Are these actual liabilities or not?

 

It may well be that they are not enforceable but does that mean that liabilities do not exist?

 

Are we saying we will just leave without paying our bill?

 

Maybe someone with more in depth knowledge could enlighten us?

 

I mean, if I have a decent lunch, I don't threaten not to pay because the Thais are smaller than me. Nor do I say, OK I'll pay but I want to take a couple of bottles of port as an offset....

"Britain has two years to agree a deal with the EU"

2 more hours is too long 

 

& today the French grab a quick bargain while the £ is down the toilet 

Vauxhall sold to the French likely today 

If we don't pay what can they do send the bailiffs to knock on parliaments door.

If the EU are demanding that the UK pay 60 billion Euros in exiting the EU, and the UK has no LEGAL liability to pay it, surely this gives the UK a big bargaining chip in the negotiations?  We will soon see an unravelling of the EU's big stick attitude if Theresa May sticks to her guns.

The EU does not care if Britain stays or leaves, it just wants the money.

Greedy , greedy

Geezer

25 minutes ago, maxtwo said:

If we don't pay what can they do send the bailiffs to knock on parliaments door.

And that is the point

 

Are you suggesting that because we can not be forced we should not pay?

 

Are you British?

28 minutes ago, maxtwo said:

If we don't pay what can they do send the bailiffs to knock on parliaments door.

Not an expert on EU trade matters but maybe a tariff on UK imports, limit access to EU single market, banking penalties, etc. - economic sanctions that would help EU recoup the alleged liability?

50 minutes ago, Retiredandhappyhere said:

If the EU are demanding that the UK pay 60 billion Euros in exiting the EU, and the UK has no LEGAL liability to pay it, surely this gives the UK a big bargaining chip in the negotiations?  We will soon see an unravelling of the EU's big stick attitude if Theresa May sticks to her guns.

What I mean by posturing is:

 

The EU says that if we do not pay then they will not give us any good deals.

May says that if the EU do not give us any good deals we may not pay.

 

We are the opening gambit stage

And again, we only see the EU side. They base these figures on committed projects and future pensions.

 

Fine, we take care of the free loading MEPs from the UK and ask for our share of profits from these "projects"

 

This is pure "setting the opening position" from the EU and our stupid press and some members of the public take it as gospel.

 

TM should now say the the EU owes us umpteen billion Euros for all the the money we have put into European projects and will not see any return from.

 

Trouble is, that if we have civil servants and politicians negotiating, we are royally stuffed as they are useless. We need some hard headed Captains of Industry and experienced contract managers who are pro UK to negotiate on our behalf.

 

I would offer my own services but the problem is "I don't give a sh*t". It will be a fudged outcome.

1 hour ago, clockman said:

With corruption in the E.U. costing 12o bn Euros annually. How about sorting that out first?

You do realise that is the total estimated cost of corruption across all EU countries. It is not corruption in the EU per se. It is the cost of bribery which is still endemic in certain countries but very low in others.

8 minutes ago, Grouse said:

You do realise that is the total estimated cost of corruption across all EU countries. It is not corruption in the EU per se. It is the cost of bribery which is still endemic in certain countries but very low in others.

I agree. (I must see a doctor, that's twice I have agreed with you).

 

Some countries (of which we unfortunately are one) are reasonably honest. In others (no names no pack drills) corruption is a way of life.

 

I am a pragmatist. If you know the system, you use the system. And this is what many are doing albeit slightly illegally.

 

To me, the biggest waste of money and corruption is in the EU Parliament and the EU commission. To a person, it is a gravy train. All of them pigs with their snouts firmly stuck in the trough.  Can anyone honestly say they agree with this. It's the largest Quango ever invented.

 

7 minutes ago, Flustered said:

I agree. (I must see a doctor, that's twice I have agreed with you).

 

Some countries (of which we unfortunately are one) are reasonably honest. In others (no names no pack drills) corruption is a way of life.

 

I am a pragmatist. If you know the system, you use the system. And this is what many are doing albeit slightly illegally.

 

To me, the biggest waste of money and corruption is in the EU Parliament and the EU commission. To a person, it is a gravy train. All of them pigs with their snouts firmly stuck in the trough.  Can anyone honestly say they agree with this. It's the largest Quango ever invented.

 

Clearly there is huge wastage, accounting still isn't good enough and the Brussels / Strasbourg farce is ridiculous. I don't mind much about the salaries and expenses; high but not off the wall. I actually like a federal / cantonal structure with as much as possible devolved down to individual states. A bit like a larger version of the USA. I don't see why individual states can not keep their identities. Denmark looks, feels, sounds, tastes and smells very different from Spain!

Do these highly opinionated and provocative pro Brexit posts represent the majority of Brits on this forum? I feel that many here who opposed Brexit might be upset by them. Perhaps it's the same north and south divide in the UK that is apparent here amongst the Brits here. The more affluent and educated South versus the poorer and less educated North!

 

17 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Clearly there is huge wastage, accounting still isn't good enough and the Brussels / Strasbourg farce is ridiculous. I don't mind much about the salaries and expenses; high but not off the wall. I actually like a federal / cantonal structure with as much as possible devolved down to individual states. A bit like a larger version of the USA. I don't see why individual states can not keep their identities. Denmark looks, feels, sounds, tastes and smells very different from Spain!

And Britain's most prestigious company, Rolls-Royce is mired in corruption!

12 minutes ago, gamini said:

Do these highly opinionated and provocative pro Brexit posts represent the majority of Brits on this forum? I feel that many here who opposed Brexit might be upset by them. Perhaps it's the same north and south divide in the UK that is apparent here amongst the Brits here. The more affluent and educated South versus the poorer and less educated North!

 

Why should you even worry? It's a forum and everyone is entitled to their opinion regardless of which side they are on.

 

 

7 minutes ago, gamini said:

And Britain's most prestigious company, Rolls-Royce is mired in corruption!

This is a real moral conundrum

 

I'm not the archangel Gabriel by any stretch but I do try to do what's right.

 

I was employed by a German / Japanese electronics manufacturer with module assembly plants here in Thailand. We would have small teams of engineers from the usual blue chip global consumer electronics manufacturers come to Bangkok to "qualify processes". In addition to being the engineer responsible, I was also the "tour manager" responsible for wining and dining ETC. Now, companies like big blue do not permit gifts; what to do? So I would go to Nana and Cowboy and make arrangements with Mama San. Anyway, the engineers would have a fantastic time! "Didn't cost me anything! She loves me" blah, blah, grin, wink

 

I used to get receipts from a friendly travel agent for tours to the river Kwai and got re-imbursed like that!

 

Corrupt? Sure! Bad? I kept plants with 100s of people working and kept shareholders happy!

 

Where should one draw the line?

The UK is also owed 1/27th of the assets.  The buildings alone must be worth a fortune.

I read this article 50 once (it's just a short piece of text) and it said something along the lines of this : if all member states agree then the negotiation period can be extended by an additional year, potentially indefinitely. It was very non specific, they thought nobody would ever want to leave.

 

The UK would of course still be one of the member states at this point in time and might not agree to a year long extension which would bring things to an end very quickly in 2 years time. May is in absolute control of this.

Yes Grouse Iam British and a fairly large employer.And close to Sheffield.And I would not pay them another penny.And yes it has cost me a lot of money already,but worth every penny.And all my friends are on the leave side.As for the lords sticking up for the foreigners typically of are establishment.Get are people sorted and reciprocate.

28 minutes ago, ukrules said:

I read this article 50 once (it's just a short piece of text) and it said something along the lines of this : if all member states agree then the negotiation period can be extended by an additional year, potentially indefinitely. It was very non specific, they thought nobody would ever want to leave.

 

The UK would of course still be one of the member states at this point in time and might not agree to a year long extension which would bring things to an end very quickly in 2 years time. May is in absolute control of this.

GOOD!