Post-Brexit - buying bike parts abroad . . (incl. Rose/DutchBikeParts)

General cycling advice ( NOT technical ! )
SA_SA_SA
Posts: 2358
Joined: 31 Oct 2009, 1:46pm

Re: Post-Brexit - buying bike parts abroad . . (incl. Rose/DutchBikeParts)

Post by SA_SA_SA »

Jdsk wrote:
SA_SA_SA wrote:
Jdsk wrote:The EU rules are well known. The UK was involved in developing nearly all of them as a Member State. We chose to become a third country. We agreķed a treaty a few months ago. We passed it into domestic law. One party's view of what's "necessary" has no legal weight, and would immediately be thrown out as a complaint with our signature highlighted. If we don't want to trade in line with the treaty provisions we shouldn't have agreed them... that's what sovereignty means.

But if the Eu is imposing more checks gb to eu direction than the deal requires or are using non tariff rules as trade barriers ( eg sps rules that exceed what is scientifically neccessary )why shouldn t an independant tribural find against them?

What you or anyone else thinks is "unnecessary" or not "scientifically necessary" is irrelevant...

It is relevant if either the trade treaty itself or the wto rules require such.
Last edited by SA_SA_SA on 12 Mar 2021, 9:24pm, edited 1 time in total.
------------You may not use this post in Cycle or other magazine ------ 8)
SA_SA_SA
Posts: 2358
Joined: 31 Oct 2009, 1:46pm

Re: Post-Brexit - buying bike parts abroad . . (incl. Rose/DutchBikeParts)

Post by SA_SA_SA »

Jdsk wrote:Now... back to bike parts from Member States of the EU to the UK....
The UK has put off implementation of border controls until January 2022. Does that encourage you to find ways to restart supplies... you've got a prolonged grace period in which to sort this out? Or do you choose to wait a bit and see what happens... they might change the rules before then?

Jonathan

Yes back on thread :)
As i said upthread, surely what bike 24 and rose etc are waiting for is when they update their systems for the new intra eu vat rules, as surely that is cheapest and simplest for them. I dont understand why they don t have a 135 minimum order in meantime?
------------You may not use this post in Cycle or other magazine ------ 8)
Jdsk
Posts: 24478
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Post-Brexit - buying bike parts abroad . . (incl. Rose/DutchBikeParts)

Post by Jdsk »

SA_SA_SA wrote:
Jdsk wrote:
SA_SA_SA wrote:But if the Eu is imposing more checks gb to eu direction than the deal requires or are using non tariff rules as trade barriers ( eg sps rules that exceed what is scientifically neccessary )why shouldn t an independant tribural find against them?

What you or anyone else thinks is "unnecessary" or not "scientifically necessary" is irrelevant.../quote]
It is relevant if either the trade treaty itself or the wto rules require such.

That's a quote of me, but the layout is duff.

Yes, if it breaches the treaty provisions on that then it breaches the treaty. Is the UK Government alleging that there is such a breach?

I've already observed that the Minister knew about the implications of the SPS for shellfish before the agreement, and then made misleadings statements about that.

Jonathan
Jdsk
Posts: 24478
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Post-Brexit - buying bike parts abroad . . (incl. Rose/DutchBikeParts)

Post by Jdsk »

SA_SA_SA wrote:As i said upthread, surely what bike 24 and rose etc are waiting for is when they update their systems for the new intra eu vat rules, as surely that is cheapest and simplest for them. I dont understand why they don t have a 135 minimum order in meantime?

How do you know that their position only depends on the VAT rules. Have they said that?

Jonathan
roubaixtuesday
Posts: 5801
Joined: 18 Aug 2015, 7:05pm

Re: Post-Brexit - buying bike parts abroad . . (incl. Rose/DutchBikeParts)

Post by roubaixtuesday »

SA_SA_SA wrote:

No, just that sps checks are required to be the minimum scientifically required otherwise they are being mis used as a trade barrier.


Citation required.

We've got exactly what we asked for: third country status, no common regs.

The consequences of that are exactly what we were told they would be.
Psamathe
Posts: 17616
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: Post-Brexit - buying bike parts abroad . . (incl. Rose/DutchBikeParts)

Post by Psamathe »

SA_SA_SA wrote:
Psamathe wrote:
SA_SA_SA wrote:https://m.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/northern-ireland-protocol-checks-equate-to-20-of-total-undertaken-by-eu-40158174.html

My understanding is that there are two completely separate issues going on. GB has decided to delay import checks (which it can do as a sovereign nation) - because it is "not ready" (customs posts not built). So goods EU into GB wont be properly checked.

Completely separate are the GB/NI checks which were negotiated and UK Government agreed. So it either signed an international treaty without understanding what they were signing (and had negotiated) or they signed in bad faith. Either possibility shows the world the nature of our Government (in an unbelievably bad light). GB/NI is a very special case to address the issues created by NI not being an EU member state but having an open border with an EU member state. So to facilitate such a difficult border special case procedures have been put in place between Gb and NI as negotiated by Johnson/Westminster and as signed and ratified by Johnson/Westminster. So it can't really be compared to borders between EU countries nor with borders between EU and non member states. If Johnson does not like the deal he should not have negotiated nor signed it.

IAn

But the protocol isn't fixed, eg article 16, thats why it has a joint committee, so it was reasonable for the UK government to take the EUs claim to view N Ireland as special, at face value, and assume they(the eu) would, like them, thus interpret the protocol in a reasonable manner, to minimise checks, and respond to problems.

It is the Eu commission that has been acting in bad faith to Northern Ireland. If it was interested in N Irelands well being the eu commissions response to Britain acting to safeguard an internal part of itself wouldnt be legal action, and that after it itself instigated article 16 to block vaccines...

The threats of dissident republicans have been allowed to have a massive effect on Eu uk negotiations to the UKs (and Northern Irelands) disadvantage...how will that discourage them....

We have always known the EU would protect the single market. That's why there were negotiations and an international treaty signed. Dissuasions were ongoing when the UK Government unilaterally decided to announce they were breaking the agreement.

As I see it a large part of the numbers of checks relate to the nature og GB/NI logistics - single lorry with lots of different products/suppliers meaning lots of checks and lots of paperwork. Had the UK Government listened to UK hauliers or had the UK Government understood business practice then they could have negotiated a better deal. But they didn't and now are just spending their time insulting the EU. UK/Westminster negotiated and agreed the deal so it's pretty pathetic when they complain now all caused by their own shortcomings and incompetence.

But confusion also comes because this thread is about being in GB and buying products in from the EU - where the UK Gov. has also made a complete pig's ear of a mess and has had to massively extend "no checks" which will put UK business and a bad disadvantage (relative to EU business) - and that's all a UK Gov. failing to prepare for UK being a 3rd country (nothing to do with deals negotiated/signed).

Ian
SA_SA_SA
Posts: 2358
Joined: 31 Oct 2009, 1:46pm

Re: Post-Brexit - buying bike parts abroad . . (incl. Rose/DutchBikeParts)

Post by SA_SA_SA »

SA_SA_SA wrote:
Jdsk wrote:
SA_SA_SA wrote:As i said upthread, surely what bike 24 and rose etc are waiting for is when they update their systems for the new intra eu vat rules, as surely that is cheapest and simplest for them. I dont understand why they don t have a 135 minimum order in meantime?

How do you know that their position only depends on the VAT rules. Have they said that?

Jonathan

The big eu online retailers are going to have to change systems for that incoming intra eu change of vat rules anyway , which the eu to uk vat rules for are based on, so why wouldnt they do both related updates at same time?
------------You may not use this post in Cycle or other magazine ------ 8)
Jdsk
Posts: 24478
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Post-Brexit - buying bike parts abroad . . (incl. Rose/DutchBikeParts)

Post by Jdsk »

SA_SA_SA wrote:
Jdsk wrote:
SA_SA_SA wrote:As i said upthread, surely what bike 24 and rose etc are waiting for is when they update their systems for the new intra eu vat rules, as surely that is cheapest and simplest for them. I dont understand why they don t have a 135 minimum order in meantime?

How do you know that their position only depends on the VAT rules. Have they said that?

They are going to have to change systems for that imcoming intra eu change of vat rules , which the eu to uk vat rules for are based on, so why wouldnt they do both at same time?

What's the date for that VAT change please? Is it affected by the changed date for checks?

Thanks

Shirley
PH
Posts: 13099
Joined: 21 Jan 2007, 12:31am
Location: Derby
Contact:

Re: Post-Brexit - buying bike parts abroad . . (incl. Rose/DutchBikeParts)

Post by PH »

Jdsk wrote:What's the date for that VAT change please? Is it affected by the changed date for checks?

1st July - It has no relevance or impact on the extension of the relaxed checking period and none on individuals buying bike parts.
There is a theory that retailers have waited to implement the UK changes at the same time as the EU VAT ones, I've seen nothing that establishes this and friends who work on POS software tell me the systems will be different.
The delay in the checking of imports is exactly what it says. It hasn't changed any rules or regulations or costs, it just removes some of the delays caused by the process. An importer will still be liable if they haven't complied with those regulations.
Last edited by PH on 13 Mar 2021, 12:24pm, edited 1 time in total.
Jdsk
Posts: 24478
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Post-Brexit - buying bike parts abroad . . (incl. Rose/DutchBikeParts)

Post by Jdsk »

Thanks

Jonathan
Psamathe
Posts: 17616
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: Post-Brexit - buying bike parts abroad . . (incl. Rose/DutchBikeParts)

Post by Psamathe »

An interesting table of U-turns re UK-EU trade. The table lower down the page indicates what decisions were UK, which EU and which joing (colour bar on left. And the majority were UK alone decisions. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/mar/13/eight-major-government-u-turns-on-post-brexit-controls

Ian
SA_SA_SA
Posts: 2358
Joined: 31 Oct 2009, 1:46pm

Re: Post-Brexit - buying bike parts abroad . . (incl. Rose/DutchBikeParts)

Post by SA_SA_SA »

I wouldnt rely on the guardian for a balanced view of Northern Ireland.

EDIT: to avoid further thread drift I will respond to following post from psamathe here
psamathe wrote:Are you saying any of their data on who made decisions is wrong...

No
or just trying to cast vague unsupported aspersions?
If some of the linked to content above is wrong then please do say what and give sources for your correct data. I suspect the Guardian would like to be told as well....

Is calling the guardian a left wing paper an aspersion? Surely they already know that. Similarly for as long as I remember they always tended to be biased to the nationalist / republican side and presumably they know and admit that too.

I wasnt commenting on the data.

Actually , this post is off thread and I was about to delete it but you responded too quick :) :oops:
Last edited by SA_SA_SA on 13 Mar 2021, 3:19pm, edited 1 time in total.
------------You may not use this post in Cycle or other magazine ------ 8)
Psamathe
Posts: 17616
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: Post-Brexit - buying bike parts abroad . . (incl. Rose/DutchBikeParts)

Post by Psamathe »

SA_SA_SA wrote:I wouldnt rely on the guardian for a balanced view of Northern Ireland.

Are you saying any of their data on who made decisions is wrong or just trying to cast vague unsupported aspersions?

If some of the linked to content above is wrong then please do say what and give sources for your correct data. I suspect the Guardian would like to be told as well.

Ian
SA_SA_SA
Posts: 2358
Joined: 31 Oct 2009, 1:46pm

Re: Post-Brexit - buying bike parts abroad . . (incl. Rose/DutchBikeParts)

Post by SA_SA_SA »

Psamathe wrote:
SA_SA_SA wrote:
Psamathe wrote:My understanding is that there are two completely separate issues going on. GB has decided to delay import checks (which it can do as a sovereign nation) - because it is "not ready" (customs posts not built). So goods EU into GB wont be properly checked.

Completely separate are the GB/NI checks which were negotiated and UK Government agreed. So it either signed an international treaty without understanding what they were signing (and had negotiated) or they signed in bad faith. Either possibility shows the world the nature of our Government (in an unbelievably bad light). GB/NI is a very special case to address the issues created by NI not being an EU member state but having an open border with an EU member state. So to facilitate such a difficult border special case procedures have been put in place between Gb and NI as negotiated by Johnson/Westminster and as signed and ratified by Johnson/Westminster. So it can't really be compared to borders between EU countries nor with borders between EU and non member states. If Johnson does not like the deal he should not have negotiated nor signed it.

IAn

But the protocol isn't fixed, eg article 16, thats why it has a joint committee, so it was reasonable for the UK government to take the EUs claim to view N Ireland as special, at face value, and assume they(the eu) would, like them, thus interpret the protocol in a reasonable manner, to minimise checks, and respond to problems.

It is the Eu commission that has been acting in bad faith to Northern Ireland. If it was interested in N Irelands well being the eu commissions response to Britain acting to safeguard an internal part of itself wouldnt be legal action, and that after it itself instigated article 16 to block vaccines....

1 We have always known the EU would protect the single market. That's why there were negotiations and an international treaty signed. Dissuasions were ongoing when the UK Government unilaterally decided to announce they were breaking the agreement.

As I see it a large part of the numbers of checks relate to the nature og GB/NI logistics - single lorry with lots of different products/suppliers meaning lots of checks and lots of paperwork. Had the UK Government listened to UK hauliers or had the UK Government understood business practice then they could have negotiated a better deal. But they didn't and now are just spending their time insulting the EU. UK/Westminster negotiated and agreed the deal so it's pretty pathetic when they complain now all caused by their own shortcomings and incompetence.

2 But confusion also comes because this thread is about being in GB and buying products in from the EU - where the UK Gov. has also made a complete pig's ear of a mess and has had to massively extend "no checks" which will put UK business and a bad disadvantage (relative to EU business) - and that's all a UK Gov. failing to prepare for UK being a 3rd country (nothing to do with deals negotiated/signed).

Ian

1 I dont accept that they need so many checks to 'protect' the single market. The point of the ni protocol is to reduce the checks to minimum:

Logically one should therefore minimise checks, monitoring for problems, and deal with them as found hence committee, not presuppose problems and do lots of unnecessary checks. And try to avoid requiring actual paperwork in 2021.

yes the uk could have done without mrs mays non negotiation but the northern ireland protocol is still better than mrs mays one despite the actions of remaining-remainers in. And similarly imo lord frost managed more than could be expected given the antics of rebelling-remainer mps ...

The eu commission deserve criticism over Northern Ireland.

I do not think the Uk are breaking the protocol yet, even if you dissagree wuth lords frosts view, if necessary by april they can use article 16 under its rules, if the Eu commission are going to be awkward about it.
But again that itself undermines their claim to be interested in Northern Ireland above other concerns.

I am glad the Uk acted for the interests of Northern Ireland.

2 it is mid pandemic,


I apologise for going off topic a bit ....anyway it seems
that this thread Op answer amounts to wait and see.
Last edited by SA_SA_SA on 15 Mar 2021, 9:20pm, edited 2 times in total.
------------You may not use this post in Cycle or other magazine ------ 8)
Jdsk
Posts: 24478
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Post-Brexit - buying bike parts abroad . . (incl. Rose/DutchBikeParts)

Post by Jdsk »

This thread is about importing bike parts into the UK, and especially from suppliers in EU Member States.

Trade between the GB and NI is important, but is it relevant here?

Jonathan
Post Reply