Customs Union? Single Market? The UK And Europe Can Do Better

As the 10th anniversary of Brexit approaches this summer, recent polls suggest nearly 6 in 10 Britons want to rejoin the European Union. Prime Minister Keir Starmer has begun speaking vaguely about a "closer alignment" between the UK and the European single market. Both he and the EU can and should think more boldly.

Starmer's recent comments were spurred by chatter from his own Labour Party about rejoining the EU's customs union. That would eliminate costly "rules of origin" declarations and make tariff-free trade unconditional. But most post-Brexit trade costs stem from nontariff barriers — regulatory inspections, declarations, safety checks, excise duties and the like. As long as the UK remains outside the EU's single market, those stay. Britain would also have to modify a range of recent trade deals, including with the successor to the Trans-Pacific Partnership.

Few Britons want another constitutional brawl over sovereignty and immigration, and Labour has ruled out reversing Brexit or rejoining the single market. But settling for such half measures isn't the answer. What's needed is a broader trade agreement that encourages tighter UK-EU integration without requiring Britain to accept the free movement of people, which remains politically toxic.

The EU has recognized the need for flexibility in the past. Switzerland credits its own bespoke arrangement — over 100 bilateral accords including tariff-free trade, cooperation in electricity markets and Swiss participation in EU research programs — with boosting economic growth and competitiveness. While Switzerland doesn't get to vote on the EU laws it must comply with, it sets its own rules in areas such as monetary policy and trade policy that fall outside its EU partnership.

Getting there won't be easy. EU leaders would much prefer an off-the-shelf plan, and they don't want to seem to reward Britain for leaving the single market. Parochial interests are still influential: France recently blocked a British bid to join a Europe-wide defense financing program in order to protect domestic suppliers. Meanwhile, a loud pro-Brexit minority is already howling at the idea of accepting any EU regulatory constraints.

But such intransigence harms both sides. A recent National Bureau of Economic Research study estimated that, by 2025, Brexit had shrunk British GDP per capita by 6% to 8% while reducing investment by 12% to 18%; the country badly needs stronger growth and better access to the European market. Europe, meanwhile, faces an unreliable, if not actively bullying, ally in the US, a growing Russian threat, a weak defense industrial base and the rise of far-right parties. It can hardly afford to shun the region's second-largest economy, a military power that's already deeply embedded in European supply chains.

Rather than quibble further, both sides should acknowledge they need each other. The first step is to quickly finalize last year's "reset" deals, aimed at easing health checks on food, animals and plants, improving cooperation on defense, and providing greater mobility for young people.

Next, they should open talks on additional ways to ease border frictions, lowering compliance costs, and improving competitiveness for both British and European firms. The EU could accept shared product-safety testing, agree that architects, doctors and other professionals can have their qualifications recognized across Europe, and allow single sets of safety data or approvals for chemicals, cars and medicines; Britain would keep its rules closely aligned. UK defense companies should play a larger role in the continent's defense buildup.

If nothing else has over the last decade, the upheaval of the past year should make clear to European and British leaders that their nations' prosperity and security cannot be unlinked. Their task is to champion that future, not apologize for it.

Source: Bloomberg Europe