Quote (Ghot @ Jun 10 2019 03:41pm)
I understand the "agreement" that the UK made while IN the EU. But that agreement went both ways.
When you leave the EU, I would think you would leave those agreements as well.
The fact that by the EU's calculations, the UK, one country, comes up OWING money to the EU, 27 countries, seems a bit weird.
The "value" of the agreement that the EU and the UK already got... would seem to me to be balanced in both directions already. I mean that's the way financial agreements work. Equal value for both or all parties.
It's NOT like a car payment agreement. The UK wasn't agreeing to purchase part of the EU, and because they wish to brexit, must pay the remainder.
It's more like a drug dealer agreement. Drug guy A says, "yeah, I'll be willing to take 50 pounds off your hands each year, for 10 years. Drug guy B says... "cool".
If either one backs out of the agreement, nothing is... "owed". The agreement just ceases to exist, when either party leaves.
The EU has budgets spanning seven years, to allow for long-time investment in infrastructure or other large-scale projects. The latest budget ranges from 2014 to 2020. So the UK needs to contribute to the budget for seven quarters, until december 2020.
Quote
Budget setting procedure
The EU budget is proposed annually by the European Commission. The proposed annual budget is then reviewed and negotiated by the Council of the European Union (which represents Member States' governments) and the European Parliament (which represents EU citizens). In order for the budget to be adopted, consensus of the majority of Member States is required and final endorsement by the European Parliament.[5]
The annual budget must remain within ceilings determined in advance by the Multiannual Financial Framework, laid down for a (five to) seven-year period. The Multiannual Financial Framework is a long-term spending plan, allowing the EU to plan and invest in long-term projects. It is proposed by the European Commission, and adopted by the Council (requiring the unanimous approval of every Member State) with the assent of the European Parliament.
The budget for a year is determined in advance, but final calculations of payments required from each Member State are not completed until after the budget year is over, and information about the final revenue and expenditure is available, and correction mechanisms have been applied.
Any long-term projects that Britain has agreed to fund outside of the budget will also need to be paid off. This is all set in the agreement that May made with the EU.
Now for the other question, can the UK cut and run? Yeah, of course. Is it smart to do so? Nope. For one the UK would be seen as a welching bunch by the rest of the world. Other reasons not to do it would be that any other negotiating between the EU and UK would become far more difficult. Note that the UK is more dependent on the EU than the other way around.
Quote
Are there any other downsides to not paying?
Beyond the strict legal issues, Professor Reid makes a further point about the problems of not paying the bill: “if we did not pay our debts, as it were, following a no-deal Brexit, there would be political consequences when we seek to negotiate trade agreements with new partners.”
She told us: “in my view we would be both legally and morally at fault were we to do so, which would have repercussions in our future dealings with potential partner states.”
So assuming we want a free trade deal – or indeed, any preferential agreement with the EU or other partners – after Brexit, it’s hard to see how we could get away with not paying the divorce bill.
What does the government say?
It’s worth remembering that the only people – thus far – who have suggested we could get out of paying the divorce bill are no longer in government.
In November, the government published a document alongside the withdrawal agreement asserting that Mrs May’s deal “provides for […] arrangements on the financial settlement that represent a fair settlement of the UK’s rights and obligations as a departing Member State, in accordance with its legal commitments and in the spirit of the UK’s continuing partnership with the EU”.
In essence: the government agrees with Professors Begg and Reid that paying the £39 billion is part of its legal obligation to the EU.
But isn’t this just a concession by Mrs May to smooth things along with Brussels? Professor Begg says not: “It’s wrong to describe it as a political obligation – it’s a legal liability. It’s not something to sweeten the deal – it’s part of the withdrawal.”