4 ms·

If British citizens find fault with their government’s tax system — in this case, with how onerous it is for foreign businesses to setup UK VAT accounts — then

If British citizens find fault with their government’s tax system — in this case, with how onerous it is for foreign businesses to setup UK VAT accounts — then they can exert political pressure for change on their MP, travel to their capital to make representation / protest, or even, with politics at its most red in tooth and claw, vote for a completely new government. The linked Twitter thread points to how much better run the EU system is. Were remainers ceding tax authority to the EU because the EU is more competent? Sometimes the pro-EU movement’s most promising (if passive) argument is that the EU runs things much better than the UK, so let’s just give all the power to Brussels instead.

p_l 6y ago
The problem with VAT is that a lot of UK companies somehow forgot brexit happened, and that means different VAT handling. Well, among other problems, too.
- p_l 6y ago
  Ok, reading the new regs I am like "wow wtf"
- Dobbs 6y ago
  No one knew what the new rules would be until the 24th of December. Yes companies probably should have prepared a suite of options they could switch to. But there was always the chance, and probably the reality that whatever they prepared would be wrong.
  - p_l 6y ago
    The case I've heard regarding british exports to EU involved something that could be relatively easy to get, as it was known that UK would be out of common VAT and customs union at the time, and is mostly related to personnel mistakenly continuing to issue invoices "business as usual". Now, the import VAT situation is totally bonkers, and I'm really dismayed about how it's apparently going to hit us in EU too in June (media didn't give a peep about that one)
yokaze 6y ago
>Sometimes the pro-EU movement’s most promising (if passive) argument was that the EU runs things much better than the UK, so let’s just give all the power to Brussels instead. I think, no one argues that the EU runs things better in principle. The argument is that having to deal with a single set of rules is superior to having to so with multiple different ones (which to some degree is the current status within the EU too). How those rules are executed is orthogonal to it, and I would say that most proponents of the EU will agree, that there is room for improvement, as you surely will with how things are run in the UK. The power is not simply given to Brussels, your government has in most cases a veto. And depending on how your parliament has set up the checks and balances with your government, the agreements are subject to your parliaments approval. In other cases it has go through EU parliament, and you can lobby your MEP. So, in essence, it is not some anonymous thing in Brussel doing things, it is your government and your MEP to whom you can direct your complaints. In most cases though likely the very same government you still have to content with.
- p_l 6y ago
  Also, the "unelected bureacrats", with exception of EU civil service, are the Council of the European Union (EDIT: thank klelatti for correction) - which is formed of Ministers and Heads of State of all members.
  - pjc50 6y ago
    The UK has zero business complaining about unelected rule-makers while the House of Lords still exists.
    - ClumsyPilot 6y ago
      Funny enough, I found most things coming out of the HOL more sensible than the commons!
      - pjc50 6y ago
        Sadly this is true.
bArray 6y ago
You're going to be down voted here on HN, sorry in advance. Wrongly or rightly (we'll see), Brexit was about control. The UK having such control allows them to more easily adapt to their unique local situation, and by extension to external agents. > The linked Twitter thread points to how much better run > the EU system is. A few days in and people are already claiming it was a mistake (big surprise) - really not long enough to see the results of anything. My guess is that we'll have a good idea in the next 6 months, once the paperwork is really rolled out and businesses have a better idea of what to expect, the markets should be settled. > Were remainders ceding tax authority to the EU because > they were more competent? This is what I find crazy. In fact, it is well documented that most Countries are well under their projected targets [1]. Germany seems to be the only real winner. [1] https://www.cep.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/cep.eu/Studien/20_Jahre_Euro_-_Gewinner_und_Verlierer/cepStudy_20_years_Euro_-_Winners_and_Losers.pdf https://www.cep.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/cep.eu/Studien/20_J...
- klelatti 6y ago
  That link's about the Euro which is a separate (but related) debate from the wider EU point. The impact of the Euro on different member states is well understood and predicted.
  - bArray 6y ago
    > That link's about the Euro which is a separate (but > related) debate from the wider EU point. Good point, but almost every (or now every?) Country in the EU uses the Euro? I don't know how you could separate the effect of the currency and Union itself?
    - klelatti 6y ago
      Denmark has a permanent opt-out and Sweden, Poland etc haven't adopted yet and no timetable. I'm not an economist but I think at the highest level the impact of the Euro (devaluing their currency helps big exporters like Germany) are reasonably well understood and predicted. The impact of being in the EU (ex Euro) is a bit more difficult to quantify (see UK referendum) apart from the net payments (Germany pays in, UK paid in, Poland, Czech Rep etc receives). I don't think these payments are linked in any way to the Euro.
klelatti 6y ago
I think that you can consider the Remain / Leave argument in the abstract as being a debate between: 1. Ability to change rules more rapidly and in a way that better suits local conditions. 2. Greater interntational cooperation and coordination. The problem is that although 1. sounds like an unadulterated benefit it isn't always. It's more likely to result in rules that swing rapidly between approaches (as government changes especially in a system like the UK's) and also probably more susceptible to regulatory capture. So it's not really abour 'running better' - it's about stability at the expense of a degree of responsiveness.

p_l 6y ago

The problem with VAT is that a lot of UK companies somehow forgot brexit happened, and that means different VAT handling. Well, among other problems, too.

p_l 6y ago
Ok, reading the new regs I am like "wow wtf"
Dobbs 6y ago
No one knew what the new rules would be until the 24th of December. Yes companies probably should have prepared a suite of options they could switch to. But there was always the chance, and probably the reality that whatever they prepared would be wrong.
- p_l 6y ago
  The case I've heard regarding british exports to EU involved something that could be relatively easy to get, as it was known that UK would be out of common VAT and customs union at the time, and is mostly related to personnel mistakenly continuing to issue invoices "business as usual". Now, the import VAT situation is totally bonkers, and I'm really dismayed about how it's apparently going to hit us in EU too in June (media didn't give a peep about that one)

yokaze 6y ago

>Sometimes the pro-EU movement’s most promising (if passive) argument was that the EU runs things much better than the UK, so let’s just give all the power to Brussels instead. I think, no one argues that the EU runs things better in principle. The argument is that having to deal with a single set of rules is superior to having to so with multiple different ones (which to some degree is the current status within the EU too). How those rules are executed is orthogonal to it, and I would say that most proponents of the EU will agree, that there is room for improvement, as you surely will with how things are run in the UK. The power is not simply given to Brussels, your government has in most cases a veto. And depending on how your parliament has set up the checks and balances with your government, the agreements are subject to your parliaments approval. In other cases it has go through EU parliament, and you can lobby your MEP. So, in essence, it is not some anonymous thing in Brussel doing things, it is your government and your MEP to whom you can direct your complaints. In most cases though likely the very same government you still have to content with.

p_l 6y ago
Also, the "unelected bureacrats", with exception of EU civil service, are the Council of the European Union (EDIT: thank klelatti for correction) - which is formed of Ministers and Heads of State of all members.
- pjc50 6y ago
  The UK has zero business complaining about unelected rule-makers while the House of Lords still exists.
  - ClumsyPilot 6y ago
    Funny enough, I found most things coming out of the HOL more sensible than the commons!
    - pjc50 6y ago
      Sadly this is true.

bArray 6y ago

You're going to be down voted here on HN, sorry in advance. Wrongly or rightly (we'll see), Brexit was about control. The UK having such control allows them to more easily adapt to their unique local situation, and by extension to external agents. > The linked Twitter thread points to how much better run > the EU system is. A few days in and people are already claiming it was a mistake (big surprise) - really not long enough to see the results of anything. My guess is that we'll have a good idea in the next 6 months, once the paperwork is really rolled out and businesses have a better idea of what to expect, the markets should be settled. > Were remainders ceding tax authority to the EU because > they were more competent? This is what I find crazy. In fact, it is well documented that most Countries are well under their projected targets [1]. Germany seems to be the only real winner. [1] https://www.cep.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/cep.eu/Studien/20_Jahre_Euro_-_Gewinner_und_Verlierer/cepStudy_20_years_Euro_-_Winners_and_Losers.pdf https://www.cep.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/cep.eu/Studien/20_J...

klelatti 6y ago
That link's about the Euro which is a separate (but related) debate from the wider EU point. The impact of the Euro on different member states is well understood and predicted.
- bArray 6y ago
  > That link's about the Euro which is a separate (but > related) debate from the wider EU point. Good point, but almost every (or now every?) Country in the EU uses the Euro? I don't know how you could separate the effect of the currency and Union itself?
  - klelatti 6y ago
    Denmark has a permanent opt-out and Sweden, Poland etc haven't adopted yet and no timetable. I'm not an economist but I think at the highest level the impact of the Euro (devaluing their currency helps big exporters like Germany) are reasonably well understood and predicted. The impact of being in the EU (ex Euro) is a bit more difficult to quantify (see UK referendum) apart from the net payments (Germany pays in, UK paid in, Poland, Czech Rep etc receives). I don't think these payments are linked in any way to the Euro.

klelatti 6y ago

I think that you can consider the Remain / Leave argument in the abstract as being a debate between: 1. Ability to change rules more rapidly and in a way that better suits local conditions. 2. Greater interntational cooperation and coordination. The problem is that although 1. sounds like an unadulterated benefit it isn't always. It's more likely to result in rules that swing rapidly between approaches (as government changes especially in a system like the UK's) and also probably more susceptible to regulatory capture. So it's not really abour 'running better' - it's about stability at the expense of a degree of responsiveness.