How Much Does The European Union Cost Britain?

Foreword by Professor Tim Congdon CBE

1. A Message from the Author

2. Summary of the Main Costs

3. Direct Costs 3.1 The Lisbon Treaty & the EU Budget 3.2 Suggested Reforms to the Budget 3.3 The UK Rebate & the Proposed Reduction 3.4 The UKs Direct Contributions to the 2007-2013 Budget 3.5 Putting the UK Contribution in Perspective 3.6 Who Paid Most? Who Benefited Most? The Budget 2000-2006 3.7 Who Pays Most? Who Benefits Most? The Budget 2007-2009 3.8 The UKs Direct Contributions to the Budget 1973-2009 3.9 Hidden Costs

4. Indirect Costs 4.1 The Common Agricultural Policy 4.2 The Common Fisheries Policy 4.3 Over-Regulation

5. Summary of the Annual Direct and Indirect Costs, Gross and Net 2010

6. UK Balance of Payments with EU and the World 1973-2009

7. Can Britain Afford the European Union? 7.1 Trade and Jobs 7.2 The EU, London and the UK Financial Sector 7.3 Shoring up the Euro 7.4 The example of Norway and Switzerland

8. Challenge to Government

9. References

10. Acknowledgements

11. Appendix Top 99 EU Directives

Contents

How much does membership of the European Union cost Britain?

GiventheattackonourwayoflifethattheEUnowrepresents,andgiventheobviousgravityofthethreattoourinstitutions,acarefulcost-benefitanalysishasbecomeessential.InhisstudyofHow Much Does the European Union Cost Britain?GerardBatten,theUKIndependencePartysMEPforLondon,setsoutsomekeyfacts.Asheexplains,thecostsarebothdirectandindirect.

Thedirectcostsareheavilyagainstourcountryandhavebeensofromthestart.AsBattenshows,theUKhasbeenanetcontributortotheEUBudgetin37ofthe38years(1973to2010inclusive)thatithasparticipatedintheso-calledEuropeanconstruction.Hearrivesatafigureofalmost80billionofnetcontributionssince1973,butthisisaddingupthenumbersinthevaluesoftheirday.Ifthenumbersweretranslatedintothemoneyof2011,thetotalwouldundoubtedlybeover200billion,equivalenttoaboutaquarterofournationaldebt.

SinceourmembershipoftheEUisbecomingincreasinglyunpopularandwefaceacrisisinourpublicfinances,ourpoliticiansoughtlogicallytocutbackourpaymentstootherEuropeancountries.Onthecontrary,becauseofconcessionsfoolishlymadebyPrimeMinisterTonyBlairin2005,ournetcontributionisabouttoincreasesharplytobetween8billionand9billionayear.

Butthedirectcostsareonlypartofthestory.Indeed,intermsoftheiradverseimpactonourstandardofliving,theindirectcostsarealmostcertainlymuchlarger.Wehavecompliancecostsinimplementingthethousandsofrulesandregulations,manyofthemdownrightsilly,forceduponusbytheEuropeanCommission.WearealsopoorerbecauseresourcesaremisallocatedorwastedasaresultoftheCommonAgriculturalPolicyandtheCommonFisheriesPolicy.

Finally,wearenowincurringarangeofcontingentliabilitiesbyjoininginfinancialrescuepackagesfortheweakermembersoftheEurozone,suchasIrelandandGreece.Weareincurringtheseliabilities,althoughwehavehadthegoodsensenottobelongtotheEurozoneandhavekeptourowncurrency.

ThereisnodoubtthatBritainispoorer,muchpoorer,becauseitbelongstotheEU.Wewouldbebetteroffout,asonceagainafullyindependentandsovereignnation.BattenemphasisesthattwoEuropeannationsoutsidetheEUNorwayandSwitzerlandarenowricherthantheirneighbours.

Foreward by Professor Tim Congdon CBE

How much does membership of the European Union cost Britain? 3

Hecitesthefascinatingoutcomeofa2006cost-benefitanalysisinSwitzerland,whichshowedthatfullEUmembershipwouldhavesixtimesthecostofitsexistingtradingarrangementwiththeEU.NowonderaclearmajorityoftheSwisspeopleareagainstjoiningtheEU.

EveryonewithourcountrysinterestsatheartmustendorseBattensrecommendationthattheGovernmentcommissionanindependentcost-benefitanalysisofourEUmembership.Thepresentsituationinwhichwegivemoneytoforeignerstomisgovernusisintolerable.IcommendBattensanalysis:itisofthefirstimportanceanddeservesthewidestpossibleattention.

Professor Tim Congdon CBE26thMarch,2011

4 How much does membership of the European Union cost Britain?

Dear Reader,

Thisisthefourtheditionofthisstudysince2006.Thelasteditionwaspublishedin2008.Sincethenthesituationhasgrownmuchworse.TheLisbonTreatyhasbeenratified,theWestminsterpoliticalpartieshavingrattedontheirmanifestopromisesandcastironguaranteestoholdareferendum.MoreandmorepowerhasbeentransferredtotheEUandthecashcontributionsandindirectcostshaveriseninexorably.

ItisnotpossibleformetoproduceadefinitivecostofEUmembershipandIdonotmaintainthatmyfindingsaredefinitive,butIbelievethattheyarethebestestimateatthistimebasedontheavailableinformation.

Mymethodologyissimple:toidentifythedirectandknownindirectcostsofEUmembershipandcombinethemtoarriveatatotalcost.Onethingwecanbereasonablysureofisthatthereareyetmorehiddencoststhatwearenotawareofandthattherealcostsareactuallymuchhigherthanmydeliberatelyconservativeestimates,butIwouldrathererronthesideofcautionthanbeaccusedofexaggeration.Ihaveonlyusedthosefiguresandestimateswhichareclearlyidentifiableandcomefromrespectedsources.

Acouplemorecommentsonmymethodology:inestimatingthecostsoftheCommonAgriculturalPolicy,theCommonFisheriesPolicyandEUOverRegulationfor2010IhaveusedtheGDPfigurefor2009asthiswasthelatestoneavailable;whenreferringtoGrosscoststhisisbeforetheUKRebateandourownmoneyspentintheUKbytheEU,andwhereIuseNetthisisaftertheUKrebateandourownmoneyspentintheUKbytheEU.

My position is very clear: if my findings are inaccurate then let the Government commission an independent cost-benefit analysis and prove me wrong. If Britain benefits from EU membership then let those that advocate it prove it.

In my view membership of the EU is an economic and democratic disaster and that the only solution for Britain is unconditional withdrawal.

Yourssincerely,

Gerard Batten MEPLondon

1. A message from the Author


Thebulletpointsbelowhighlightthemainfindingsthathaveemergedfromthisstudy.TheypaintapictureofeverincreasingcostsofEUmembershipandaneverincreasingtradedeficitwithEUcountries.

BritainscontributionstotheEUBudgetarerisingby33% Gross,and anastonishing97% Net,forthebudgetperiod2007-2013comparedto 2000-2006.

ForthecurrentBudgetperiod(2007-2013)Britainwillhavemade estimatedtotalcontributionsof105.726 billion Grossor42.026 billion Net (excludingtheUKrebateandEUspendingintheUK).

BritainsannualcontributiontotheEUBudgetfor2010isestimatedat 15.247 billion Grossor6.883 billion Net.

From1973to2010Britainwillhavemadetotalaccumulatedcontributions totheEUBudgetof257.648 billion Gross or 77.851 billion Net.

TheCommonAgriculturalPolicycostsBritainanestimated16.7 billion perannum.

TheCommonFisheriesPolicycostsBritainanestimatedminimum of4.7 billionperannum.

EUover-regulationonbusinesscostsBritainanestimated48.7 billion perannum.

From1973(theyearBritainjoinedtheEU)to2009theUKhasan accumulatedtradedeficitwithEUmemberstatesofover438 billion. TheestimatedamountlostinfraudfromtheEUbudgeteachyear (6.3 billion)isabout92%oftheUKscurrentNetcontribution (6.8 billion).

For2010theestimateofthecombinedannualdirectandindirectcosts ofEUmembershipwillamountto85.3 billion Gross or 77 billion Net.

2. Summary of the Main Costs


Thisequatesto: Gross Net 7.1 billion permonth 6.4 billion permonth 1.6 billion perweek 1.5 billion perweek 233.7 million perday 211 million perday 9.7 million perhour 8.8 million perhour 162,291 perminute 146,499 perminute

Thisistheequivalentforeveryman,womanandchildinBritainof1,380 Gross or1,246 Netperannum:orlookedatanotherway,theequivalentforeveryBritishtax-payerof2,788 Gross or 2,516 Netperannum.

Inthistimeofeconomiccrisis,Governmentcut-backsinpublicspending,financialausterity,fearofjoblossesandfinancialhardshipformany,itisabsolutemadnesstobewastingbillionsofpoundseveryyearontheideologicalprojectofcreatingaUnitedStatesofEuropethatnoonewantsexceptanout-of-touchpoliticalelite.We might as well burn the money on a bonfire!


3.1 The Lisbon Treaty & The Union BudgetTheLisbonTreatyintroducesasinglelegalpersonalityfortheEuropeanUnionthatenablestheEUtoconcludeinternationalagreementsandjoininternationalorganisationsinitsownright.TheEUisthereforenowabletospeakandtakeactionasasinglelegalentity.1AsaresultofthischangeinthelegalstatusoftheEUitisthereforenowcalledtheEUBudgetasopposedtotheECBudgetasitwaspriortotheLisbonTreaty.ForsimplificationthisbookletreferstotheEUBudgetthroughout.

Deciding the Budget 2TheEuropeanCommission,ParliamentandCounciloftheEU(GovernmentMinisters)adoptaregulationforthemultiannualfinancialframework(MFF).3TheMFFdeterminestheamountsoftheannualceilingsoncommitmentappropriationsbycategoryofexpenditureandoftheannualceilingonpaymentappropriations.4

Theannualbudgetaryprocedurelastsfromthe1st September to the 31st Decembereachyear.AllEUinstitutionsandbodiesarerequiredtodrawuptheirestimateforthedraftbudgetaccordingtotheirowninternalproceduresbeforethe1st July.

TheCommissionusestheseestimatesandestablishestheannualdraftbudgetwhichisthensubmittedtotheCounciloftheEUandtheEuropeanParliamentby1st September.

TheCouncilthenadoptsitspositiononthedraftbudget,includinganyamendments,andpassesittotheEuropeanParliamentbefore1st October.TheCouncilinformstheParliamentofthereasonsbehinditsposition.

TheEuropeanParliamentthenhas42daystoeitheradoptthebudgetatfirstreadingorsubmititsamendmentsbacktotheCouncil.TheCouncilmayaccepttheamendmentswithinatimelimitof10daysandadoptthedraftbudget.

IftheCouncildoesnotaccepttheParliamentsamendments,aConciliationCommitteeisorganised,composedofmembersoftheCouncilortheirrepresentativesandanequalnumberofmembersrepresentingtheEuropeanParliament.TheConciliationCommitteeisassignedtocomeupwithajointtextwithin21days.Iftheconciliatoryprocedurefails,theCommissionhastocomeupwithanewdraftbudget.

OnceajointtextisagreeduponbytheConciliationCommittee,inearlyNovember,theCouncilandtheParliamenthave14daystoapproveorrejectit.TheParliamentmayadoptthebudgeteveniftheCouncilrejects

3. Direct Costs


thejointtext.IncasetheCouncilandtheParliamentbothrejectthejointdraftorfailtodecide,thebudgetisrejectedandtheCommissionhastosubmitanewdraftbudget.

If,atthebeginningofafinancialyear,thebudgethasnotyetbeendefinitivelyadopted,asumequivalenttonotmorethan1/12ofthebudgetappropriationsfortheprecedingfinancialyearmaybespenteachmonth.

Intheeventofexceptionalorunforeseencircumstances,theCommissionmayproposeduringtheyearthatthebudgetasadoptedbeamended;itdoesthisbysubmittingdraftamendingbudgets.Amendingbudgetsarealsousedtoenterthebalancefromthepreviousyearinthebudgetforthecurrentyear.

On15thDecember2010theEuropeanParliamentvotedtoaccepttheEUBudgetfor2011(UKIPMEPsvotedagainst),thefirstEUBudgetundertheLisbonTreatyprocedures.The2011Budgetgivesanincreaseof2.9% onthe2010budgetequallingtotalpaymentsof126.5 billion.

TheEuropeanCommissionandtheParliamentwanteda6%risebuttheCouncilarguedfor2.9%andgotitsway.PrimeMinisterDavidCameronhaileditasahuge achievementthatBritain,FranceandGermanyhadinsistedthattheEUsbudgetfortheperiod2014-2020shouldnotrisemorethantherateofinflation.SomemightwonderwhyinthemidstofaneconomiccrisiswhentheBritishGovernmentisbeingforcedtocutpublicexpenditureondefenceandvitalpublicservices,thatthereshouldbeanyriseatall.AsUKIPMEPMartaAndreasonputit,He is trying to make a success story out of this, but frankly he should have been asking for a reduction in the EU budget.

What is the money spent on?TheEUBudgetfor2011is126.5 billion.TheEuropeanCourtofAuditorsestimatethatbetween2.5%and5%ofthebudgetissubjecttofraud.TalesofEUfraudarelegendaryandtoobigasubjectforinclusionhere.Butifweusethehigherfigureof5%thisequatesto6.325 billionin2011andisequivalenttoabout92%oftheUKsentirenetcontribution. It is fair to say then that most of the UKs net contribution to the EU budget is probably being stolen by fraudsters.

ThepiechartoverleafshowswheretheEUbudgetisspent,andinwhatpercentage.


EU Budget Spending Breakdown

How does the UK and other Member States pay into the EU Budget?ThebasicrulesonthesystemofownresourcesarelaiddowninaCouncilDecision(currently2007/436/EC, Euratom),adoptedbyunanimityintheCouncilandratifiedbyallMemberStates.

MemberStatesgrosscontributionstotheEUBudgetaremadeupofthreeelements:

TraditionalOwnResources(TOR); ValueAddedTax(VAT); AproportionofGrossNationalIncome(GNI)

Thesedifferentrevenuesourcesareusedinasequentialway:firstTOR,secondlyVAT,andthirdlyGNI.TheresidualGNIcontributionoffsetsthedifferencebetweenthetotalexpenditureandtheotherrevenue.Inpracticetheseelementswillvaryyeartoyearinthepercentagetheycontributebuttheymustalwaysadduptotheagreedbudget.

ThetotalamountofownresourcesforthewholeEUBudgetcannotexceed1.23%ofthegrossnationalincome(GNI)oftheEU5.


AidtoEUMemberStates45.5%

AgricultureandtheEnvironment41.3%

CitizenshipandJustice1.3%

ForeignPolicyandAid6.2%

Administration5.7%

45.5%

41.3%

6.2%

5.7%1.3%

Traditional Own Resources (TOR)TheseconsistofcustomsdutiesandsugarleviesandarecollectedbyMemberStatesonbehalfoftheEU.TheyareviewedbytheEUasthepropertyoftheEU.MemberStatesareallowedtokeep25%ascompensationfortheircollectioncosts.

In2010,TORaccountsforapproximately12%oftotalEUrevenue.PaymentsaremadeintoEUNo1AccountwhichistheCommissionsaccountintheUK.Thebankdoesnotpayinterestonthisaccount.PaymentmustbemadebytheMemberStateonthefirstworkingdayafterthe19thofeachmonthandoccurtwomonthsinarrears.PaymentsarebasedontheMemberStatesactualcollectionofthedutiesandleviesconcerned.

VAT and Gross National Income (GNI) Based Resources:TheadoptedEUBudget,oranysubsequentamendingbudget,indicatesthetotalVATandGNIbasedcontributions(andtheUKRebate)foreachyear.

TheownresourcebasedonVATisleviedonMemberStatesVATbases,whichareharmonisedforthispurposeinaccordancewithCommunityrules.Thesamepercentage(0.30%)isleviedontheharmonisedbaseofeachMemberState;however,thisrateisreducedfor4MemberStatesfortheperiod2007-2013(Austria0.225%,Germany0.15%,theNetherlandsandSweden0.10%).

TheVATbasetotakeintoaccountiscappedat50%ofeachMemberStatesGNI.ThisruleisintendedtoavoidthelessprosperousMemberStatespayingoutofproportiontotheircapacity,sinceconsumptionandhenceVATtendtoaccountforahigherpercentageofacountrysnationalincomeatrelativelylowerlevelsofprosperity.

TheEuropeanCommissionsendsamonthlyletter-of-calltoeachMemberStaterequestingthecorrespondingfunds.Thetransfersaremadeonthefirstworkingdayofeachmonth.VATandGNIcontributionsaremadedirectlyfromHMGsConsolidatedFund6intotheEUCommissionsbankaccountintheUK(ECBankAccountNo1).

Paymentsaremadein12ths,oraproportionthereof.RegulationsallowtheCommissiontocallupadditionalVATandGNIbasedcontributions,uptotwoadditional12thsofeach,sothatinthefirstquarterupto5/12thsofeachelementmaybepaid.Thesepaymentsaremadeinaccordancewiths2(3)oftheECA (European Communities Act) 1972whichstatestheUKsobligationstowardsfinancingtheEUBudget.

TheVAT-basedresourceaccountsforaround11%oftotalEUrevenue.


TORandVATcontributionsmakeasmallandshrinkingshareoftheEUBudget.TheremainderofthecontributionsismadeoftransfersfromMemberStatesnationalbudgets.

HowmuchaMemberStateisexpectedtopaydependsuponthesizeofitseconomy.ThesamepercentagerateisleviedoneachMemberStatesGNI.Forthefinancialperiod2007-2013SwedenandtheNetherlandsaregrantedgrossreductionsintheirannualGNIpayments,similartotheBritishrebate.Thereductionsare605millionfortheNetherlandsand150millionforSwedenin2004prices.TheseamountsarefinancedbyallMemberStatesincludingthosetwobenefitingfromthem.

TheGNI-basedresourceaccountsforaround76%oftotalEUrevenue.

3.2 Suggested Reforms to the BudgetTheEuropeanCommissionisproposingsignificantchangestohowtheEUsBudgetisfinanced.TheCommissionismakingsuchproposalsbecauseofthebitter debates about net contributors and the complex concepts of rebates with the consequences of favouring instruments with geographically pre-allocated financial envelopes rather than those with the greatest EU added value. 7TheCommissionthereforestatesthatitisputtingforwardtheoptionofreducingMemberStatescontributionsbyabolishingtheVAT-basedownresourceandprogressivelyintroducingoneorseveralnewownresourcesasareplacement.8

TheCommissionpublishedinOctober2010anon-exhaustivelistofpotentialoptionsforownresourcestobediscussedduringtheEUBudgetReview.

Thislistincludes: Afinancialactivitiestax; Afinancialtransactiontax; EUrevenuesfromauctioningundertheEmissionsTradingSystem; AnEUchargerelatedtoairtransport; AnEUvalueaddedtax; AnEUenergytax;and AnEUcorporateincometax.

ItisemphasisedbytheEuropeanCommissionthatanyfutureblendofownresourceswouldbeareplacementnotanadditiontothefinancingofthebudget.

PointedlyfortheUKsrebatetheCommissionstatesinregardtocorrectionmechanisms(i.e.theUKRebate);it is ultimately the composition of the expenditure and the reforms of the own resources system that will


determine whether correction mechanisms are justified in the future.9

ThisisaclearsignalthattheCommissionintendstoabolishtheUKrebate.

ThePresident of the European Commission, Manuel BarossohasvoicedtheideaofaEuropeantaxofsomekind,asdescribedabove,andtheissuingofEuro-bonds.FromtheEUspointofviewthecurrentfinancingsystemhastwomajordrawbacks:firstlythatmemberstatesoftenresistfurtherpayments(atleastthosewhoarenetcontributors)anddonottakeintoaccounttheaddedvalueofexpendituresintheEUasawhole;andsecondlythattheEUhasevolvedfromamereunionofstatesandcitizensandadirectbondbetweencitizensandtheUnionisrequired.IntheEUsviewanEUTaxwouldsolvebothproblems.10

TheintroductionofaEuro-taxwouldbringtoaheadthefundamentalcontradictionattheheartoftheEuropeanUnion:thatcontradictionisbetweenthosegovernmentsandpoliticiansthatcontinuetopretendthattheEUisnotaboutthecreationofaunifiedpoliticalstate,andthepeoplesofEUmemberstatesthatknowfullwellthatitispreciselyaboutthecreationofaUnitedStatesofEurope.Thiscontradictionmusteventuallybefacedandresolvedonewayortheother.

3.3 The UK Rebate & the Proposed ReductionTheUKRebateisaspecificmechanismforcorrectingthebudgetaryimbalanceoftheUnitedKingdom.Thismechanismisalsopartoftheownresourcessystem.

ThefamousBritishrebatewasestablishedbytheEuropeanCouncilatFontainebleauin1984asaresultofMrsThatchersinsistencethattheproportionoftheUKcontributionswasunfair.Thespecialsituationwascharacterisedbytwofactors:

AsmallagriculturalsectorresultinginverylowCommunityagricultural spendingintheUK. Alargecontributiontothefinancingofthebudgetbecauseofthelarge proportionofthecountrysGNP(GrossNationalProduct)accountedfor bytheVATbase.

TheUKcorrectionmechanismwasintroducedin1985andalthoughthismechanismhasbeenmodifiedonseveraloccasionsduetothechangesinthesystemofEUbudgetfinancing,thebasicprinciplesremainedthesame.

TheRebatetakestheformofareductioninthecontributionbytheUKtothefinancingoftheEU.TherebateisdeductedfromtheUKscontributionsandnotphysicallypaidtoBrusselsandlaterrefunded;howeverthisoccurswith


ayearoverlap,i.e.therebateisdeductedfromtheUKspaymentsayearinarrears;11e.g.therebatein2002relatestotheUKreceiptsandpaymentsfor2001.

JustbeforeChristmas2005,attheendoftheBritishPresidencyoftheEuropeanCouncil,thePrimeMinister,TonyBlairagreedanewEUbudgetfor2007-2013.AlthoughhewasundernoobligationtodosohesurrenderedalargeportionoftheBritishrebate.HemadetheconcessionsdespitefailingtogetanyagreementfromFranceoncuttingagriculturalsubsidies,proposinginsteadonlyanon-bindingreviewofEUspendingin2008.12CommonAgriculturalPolicyspendingistoremainataround43%ofthetotalbudgetuntil2013.ThemainbeneficiaryisFrance.

WhenaddressingameetingoftheEuropeanParliamenton20thDecember2005,atwhichtheauthorwaspresent,MrBlairjustifiedhissurrenderoftheUKRebateonthegroundsthatthenewEUbudgetwould,transfer wealth from rich countries to poor countries,andthatwewere,investing in Eastern Europe.HedidnotmentionifhethoughttheBritishpeopleknewthattheywerevotingtotransfertheirwealthorinvestinEasternEuropewhentheyvotedLabourintheGeneralElectionof2005.

BlairgaveupaconsiderablepercentageoftheUKrebateandthecosttotaxpayersiscappedat10.5 billion,at2004prices.Thisequatesto7.7 billion.13ThiswasconfirmedbytheChiefSecretaryoftheTreasury,AndyBurnhamMPon15thJanuary2008,The cost of disapplying the rebate to non-agricultural spending in the accession countries...is capped at 10.5 billion...that is the consequence of enlargement.Afteraphasinginperiodduring2009-2011theUKwillparticipatefully14inthefinancingofthecostofEUenlargement.

The2005CouncildecisionmeansthattheUKscontributionstothenewmemberstatesarenotincludedinthecalculationoftheUKRebate;exceptforCAP,marketrelatedexpenditure,andthatpartoftheruraldevelopmentexpenditureoriginatingfromtheEuropeanAgriculturalGuidanceandGuaranteeFund(EAGF,GuaranteeSection).

This means that whilst UK contributions are increasing the rebate is decreasing, because any expenditure in new member states (of which there are now twelve) is not included in the calculations of the British rebate.

What this also means is that, in the event of further EU enlargement before 2013 (not including Bulgaria and Romania), by means of a complex formula the ceiling on the UKs increased contributions of


10.5 billion will be raised: this means that more EU enlargement means even less rebate for the UK taxpayer. The rebate will continue to reduce over time.

TherearethreecandidatecountriesthatarecurrentlyinaccessionnegotiationstobecomemembersoftheEU.These are Croatia, Turkey and Iceland.In2009theCommissionrecommendedtoopenaccessionnegotiationwiththeFormerYugoslav Republic of MacedoniabuttheCouncilhasnotyettakenadecisiononthisrecommendation.

ThreefurthercountrieshaveappliedforEUmembership.TheseareMontenegro, Albania and Serbia.Finally,bothBosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) and Kosovoarepotentialcandidates.

ThecurrenttargettimetableforEUenlargementforcountrieswithcandidatestatusis:

Croatia2012 Iceland2012 FormerYugoslavianRepublicofMacedonia2013+ Turkey(nodatedecided)15

AlsowaitinginthewingsforpotentialcandidatestatusareUkraine,BelarusandMoldova.As these countries join the UK rebate will reduce accordingly.

Proposed reduction of the UK rebate16InSeptember2010theEUsBudgetCommissioner,JanuszLewandowski,statedthattherewasnolongeranyjustificationfortheUKsrebate.MrLewandowskideclaredthatUKincomeperheadhadgrownmarkedlysince1984whenthethenprimeminister,MargaretThatcher,negotiatedtherebate.TheBudgetCommissioneralsocitedareductionintheproportionofthebudgetspentontheCommonAgriculturalPolicy(CAP)whichin1984accountedfor71%oftheEUbudget,comparedtoapproximately42%in2010.

Itisthereforeevidentwhenthenegotiationscommenceregardingthenextbudgetperiodof2014-2020 theUKrebatewillbeakeytopic.

TheUKjustifiestherebateonthebasisthatwithoutittheUKsnetcontributionasapercentageofnationalincomewouldbetwice as big as Frances and 1.5 times bigger than Germanys.ThisisattributedtoexpendituredistortionscausedbypoliciessuchastheCAP.TheUKRebateamountstoroughly66%ofthedifferencebetweenwhattheUKpaysinto


thebudgetandwhatitgetsbackfromtheEU.Four other net contributors also get rebates: Germany, Netherlands, Austria and Sweden.

Thecostofthisdecisionisstark.In2009Rebatereduction(agreedbyTonyBlair)costtheUK286 million,in2010thecostwas1.2 billion,andin2011itwillriseto1.98 billion.ThetotalcostthereforetotheUKfortheperiod172009-2011willbe3.466 billion.Andthefuturecostwillbe2 billion per annumoverthebudgetperiodtakingusclosetothe7.7 billionrebatesurrenderedbyTonyBlair,forthecurrentbudgetperiod.

3.4 The UKs Direct Contributions to the 2007-2013 BudgetInthelasteditionofthisbookletin2008weusedthefiguresgivenbyHMGovernmenttoLordLawsonofBlaby,inFebruary2006,inreplytoaquestionintheHouseofLordsaspublishedinHansard,toshowthegrossandnetcontributionstotheEUbudgetperiod2007to2013.ThefiguresinTable1belowarenowbasedonactualGovernmentfiguresfor2007-2009andGovernmentestimatesfor2010-2013.

TheEUpublishesitsactualbudgetfiguresonacalendaryearbasisbuttheUKGovernmentusesafinancialyearbasis(ApriltoMarch).ThismeansthatintheinterestsofuniformityandcoherencewehavehadtorecalculatetheGovernmentsfiguresonacalendaryearbasis.

Table 1.

The UKs Estimated Direct Contributions to the 2007-2013 EU Budget.Figuresshowninbillions UK EUCalendar Gross Spending UK Net Year Contributions in UK Rebate Contributions

2007Actuals 13.060 5.325 3.523 4.2132008Actuals 13.334 5.736 4.862 2.7362009Actuals 14.779 5.467 5.392 3.9202010Estimates 15.247 4.935 3.429 6.8832011Estimates 15.717 4.832 2.786 8.0992012Estimates 16.204 4.966 3.371 7.8672013Estimates 17.385 5.169 3.907 8.309

Estimated Total 105.726 36.430 27.270 42.026

Note:Figures2007to2009takenfromPinkBook,figures2010to2013takenfromHMTreasury.Figuresroundedupordownasappropriate.


Theseestimatedfiguresshowastarkriseoverthecontributionsmadeduring2000-2006budgetperiod.ThisisbecausethethenPrimeMinister,TonyBlair,surrenderedpartoftheUKRebatein2005,andthecurrentPrimeMinister,DavidCameron,agreedanincreasetotheUKcontributiontotheEUbudgetin2010.

ThefiguresforBritainscontributiontotheEUbudgetfor2000-2006were:Gross 79.486 billion and Net 21.303 billion.BasedontheGovernmentsfiguresfor2007-2013,incomparisonto2000-2006wewillseepercentagerisesasfollows:

Gross = 33% (Gross=totalcontributiontoEUBudget). Net = 97.27% (Net=TotalcontributionminustheUKRebate).

A97%riseinthenetcontributionsistrulyastonishinginthecurrenteconomicclimate.TheCoalitionGovernmentinheritedamassivenationaldebtandweareborrowingmoremoneywecantaffordinordertopayittotheEU.

AbriefwordofexplanationregardingtheEUSpendingintheUK:thisisourownmoneyspentinourowncountrybytheEU(andusuallyusedtopublicisetheEUsbenevolenceatthesametime)andthereforeIhaveleftthisintheGrosscostsestimates.

ThesespectacularrisescanbeattributedtotheEUsneverendingambitiontoincreaseitsbudgetandthenegotiatingtriumphsoftheLabourandCoalitiongovernmentsinsurrenderingtheUKrebateandagreeingtobudgetincreases.


3.5 Putting the UK Contribution in PerspectiveFiguresinbillionsofpoundsaredifficulttorelatetoeverydaylife.InordertoillustratewhatourcontributionsmeanintermsofrealandunderstandableamountsofmoneyTable2belowshowstheannualgrossandnetfiguresbrokendownintoamountsperyear,month,week,day,hourandminuteforthewholebudgetperiod2007-2013

Table 2.

Note:Figureshavebeenroundedupordownasappropriate.

Thesefiguresshowthatin2010wewerecontributinganestimated41.8 million per day Gross,andanestimated18.9 million per day Net.Bytheendofthecurrentbudgetperiod(2013)theUKwillbepayinganestimated47.6 billion Gross,or22.8 billion Net,perday.Thesepaymentswillcontinuetoriseinexorablyinthefuture.

Annual Month Week Day Hour MinuteActual 2007 Gross 13bn 1.1bn 251.2m 35.8m 1.5m 24,848Net 4.2bn 351m 81m 11.5m 480,936 8,016

Actual 2008 Gross 13.3bn 1.11bn 256.4m 36.5m 1.5m 25,369Net 2.7bn 228m 52.6m 7.5m 312,329 5,205

Actual 2009 Gross 14.8bn 1.232bn 284.2m 40.5m 1.7m 28,118Net 3.9bn 326.7m 75.4m 10.7m 447,863 7,458

Estimated 2010 Gross 15.2 bn 1.3 bn 293.2 m 41.8 m 1.7 m 29,009Net 6.9 bn 573.5 m 132.4 m 18.9 m 785,674 13,095

Estimated 2011 Gross 15.7bn 1.3bn 302.2m 43.1m 1.8m 29,902Net 8.1bn 674.9m 155.7m 22.2m 924,515 15,409

Estimated 2012 Gross 16.2bn 1.4bn 311.6m 44.4m 1.8m 30,829Net 7.9bn 655.6m 151.3m 21.6m 898,031 14,967

Estimated 2013 Gross 17.4bn 1.4bn 334.9m 47.6m 2m 33,076Net 8.3bn 692.4m 159.8m 22.8m 948,545 15,809


3.6 Who Paid Most? Who Benefited Most? The Budget 2000-2006 Table3belowshowsthegrosscontributionspermemberstate,EUexpenditureineachmemberstate,andthenetcontributionspermemberstateforthebudgetperiod2000-2006.AscanclearlybeseenGermanyisthebiggestnetcontributor,withBritaininsecondplaceevenaftertherebate.

Table 3. Who pays most: Budget 2000-2006

2000-2006 2000-2006 2000-2006 Total Gross Total EU Expenditure Total Net Contributions in Member State Contributions

Germany 139.15 Spain 99.51 Germany 60.09France 107.79 France 89.63 UK(afterrebate) 27.80Italy 86.49 Germany 79.07 Netherlands 23.85UK(afterrebate) 77.95* Italy 70.22 France 18.16Spain 54.68 UK 50.15 Italy 16.27Netherlands 37.75 Greece 39.03 Sweden 8.03Belgium 25.45 Belgium 33.41 Austria 3.16Sweden 17.59 Portugal 26.70 Denmark 2.45Austria 14.33 Ireland 17.99 Finland 0.48Denmark 13.05 Netherlands 13.89 Cyprus - 0.25Greece 10.93 Poland 13.85 Malta - 0.27Finland 9.45 Austria 11.17 Slovenia - 0.55Portugal 9.24 Denmark 10.60 Estonia - 0.66Ireland 8.61 Sweden 9.56 Latvia - 0.94Poland 6.08 Finland 8.97 Slovakia - 1.07Czech Rep 2.59 Luxembourg 7.23 Czech Rep - 1.31Hungary 2.15 Hungary 4.59 Bulgaria - 1.51Luxembourg 1.51 Czech Rep 3.90 Lithuania - 1.92Slovakia 0.98 Romania 2.85 Hungary - 2.44Slovenia 0.72 Lithuania 2.48 Romania - 2.85Lithuania 0.56 Slovakia 2.05 Luxembourg - 5.72Cyprus 0.40 Bulgaria 1.51 Poland - 7.76Latvia 0.35 Latvia 1.30 Belgium - 7.95Estonia 0.29 Slovenia 1.27 Ireland - 9.38Malta 0.13 Estonia 0.95 Portugal - 17.46Bulgaria 0.00 Cyprus 0.65 Greece - 28.09Romania 0.00 Malta 0.40 Spain - 44.84 Totals 628.23 602.91 25.32

*Note:ThefiguresareshownineurosinbillionsandaretakenfromtheEuropeanUnionofficialbudgetbreakdown.TherearedisparitiesbetweentheCommissionsfiguresandtheUKOfficeofNationalStatisticsfiguresbecausetheCommissionsfiguresfortheUKgrosscontributiontothebudgetareaftertheUKRebatehasbeenappliedandtheONSfiguresforthegrosscontributionarebeforetheUKRebateisapplied;disparitiesmayalsobebecauseofvariationsinthedateandapplicationoftheprevailingexchangerate.


Table 4. Net Beneficiaries to the EU Budget 2000-2006

ThistableisanotherwayoflookingatthelastcolumnofTable3.ItshowswhoreceivedthemostfromtheEUbudget.

2000-2006: Net Beneficiaries BillionsSpain 44.84Greece 28.09Portugal 17.46Ireland 9.38Belgium 7.95Poland 7.76Luxembourg 5.72Romania 2.85Hungary 2.44Lithuania 1.92Bulgaria 1.51Czech Rep 1.31Slovakia 1.07Latvia 0.94Estonia 0.66Slovenia 0.55Malta 0.27Cyprus -0.25Finland -0.48Denmark -2.45Austria -3.16Sweden -8.03Italy -16.27France -18.16Netherlands -23.85UK(afterrebate) -27.80Germany -60.09

Note:FiguresshowninbillionsThistableshowsthelastcolumnofTable3andhighlightsthenetbeneficiariesoftheEUbudget(aftertheUKrebateandspendinginMemberStates).ThismayperhapsdemonstratewhysomecountriesaremoreenthusiasticaboutEUmembershipthanotherswhobearthefinancialburden.


3.7 Who Pays Most? Who Benefits Most? The Budget 2007-2009TheEuropeanCommissionhasnotpublishedfiguresforthebudgetperiod2007-2013buttheyhavepublishedactualfiguresfortheyears2007-2009.Table5belowshowsthesefiguresandwhopaysthemostandwhobenefitsthemost.GermanyisthebiggestcontributorandPolandisthebiggestbeneficiary.Britainhasmoveddowntofourthbiggestcontributorandthishasbeenduetothefallofthepoundagainsttheeurooverthisperiod.

Table 5. 2007-2009 Member State Net Actual Contributions to the EU Budget

2007-2009: Net Contributions BillionsGermany 29.045France 13.856Italy 13.593UK(afterrebate) 12.685Netherlands 10.276Sweden 3.419Denmark 2.677Austria 1.536Finland 1.201Cyprus 0.120Malta -0.067Slovenia -0.267Ireland -0.900Estonia -0.965Latvia -1.366Bulgaria -1.498Slovakia -1.691Lithuania -3.046CzechRep -3.174Luxembourg -3.302Romania -3.571Belgium -3.751Hungary -5.273Spain -5.530Portugal -7.182Greece -14.605Poland -15.264 Thetablecanalsobelookedatinreverse,whichbottomupshowswhogainedthemostfromtheEUbudget.


3.8 The UKs Direct Contributions to the Budget 1973-2010Thetablebelowshowsgrosscontributions,minuspublicsectorreceipts(theUKsownmoneyspentbytheEUintheUK),andnegotiatedabatements(theUKrebate)toarriveatthenetcontributionstotheEUBudgetsinceBritainjoinedin1973upto2010.

Table 6. Figures shown in millions, totals in billions. NegotiatedCalendar Gross Public Abatements NetYear Contributions Sector Receipts & Refunds Contribution1973 181 79 0 1021974 179 150 0 291975 341 398 0-571976 463 296 0 1671977 737 368 0 3691978 1,348 526 0 8221979 1,606 659 0 9471980 1,767 963 98 7061981 2,174 1,084 693 3971982 2,862 1,240 1,019 6031983 2,976 1,521 807 6481984 3,201 2,017 528 6561985 3,925 1,853 227 1,8451986 4,493 2,216 1,701 5761987 5,202 2,345 1,153 1,7041988 5,120 2,182 1,595 1,3431989 5,587 2,116 1,156 2,3151990 6,355 2,183 1,697 2,4751991 5,807 2,765 2,497 5451992 6,738 2,827 1,881 2,0301993 7,985 3,291 2,539 2,1551994 7,189 3,253 1,726 2,2101995 8,889 3,665 1,207 4,0171996 9,109 5,092 2,412 1,6051997 8,268 4,976 1,733 1,5591998 10,265 4,394 1,377 4,4941999 10,524 3,760 3,171 3,5932000 10,719 4,518 2,084 4,1172001 9,557 4,131 4,560 8662002 10,097 3,589 3,099 3,4092003 11,485 4,241 3,560 3,6842004 11,505 5,416 3,592 2,4972005 13,098 6,368 3,655 3,0752006 13,025 5,799 3,570 3,6562007 13,060 5,324 3,523 4,2132008 13,334 5,736 4,862 2,7362009 14,779 5,467 5,392 3,9202010(estimate) 13,698 3,287 2,587 7,823

Totals in billions 257.648 110.095 69.701 77.851Note:Figurestakenfrom1973to1996historicalsourcesandsince1997to2010theGovernmentPinkBookandthesemaybesubjecttoretrospectiverevision.


Curiously the only year that Britain received more from the EU budget than it paid in (1975) was the one and only year that Britain held a referendum on EU membership, whether this was a coincidence or deliberate we cannot determine.

BearinmindthatthepublicsectorreceiptsisourownmoneypaidtotheEUbudgetwhichisthenspentintheUK.ThisispresentedasEUmoneyandusedbytheEUforpropagandapurposestopromoteitself.

3.9 Hidden Costs Thelasteditionofthisbookletin2008containedasectiononHiddenCosts.ItisknownthatamountsofmoniesadditionaltothebudgetcontributionsarepaidtotheEUtofundEUandEUrelatedprojects,e.g.theGalileoSatelliteSystemetc.AnestimatefortheseamountswasarrivedatusingthediscrepanciesbetweenthepublishedUKGovernmentcurrentaccountbalancewiththeEUinstitutionsandtheofficialtransactionswithEUinstitutions.

In2008weestimatedthediscrepancyas3 billion per annum.Thecurrentdiscrepanciesareestimatedatanaverageof3.258 billion per annum(2010).HoweverextractingdefinitiveinformationfromtheGovernmenttoidentitythesefundshasprovedimpossibleevenforsittingMPs,suchasAustinMitchellwhoaskedspecificquestionsonthisissue.

WhilewebelievethatadditionalsumsofmoneyarebeingpaidtotheEUintheregionofover3billionperannumwecannotdefinitivelyidentifytheexactamountsandpurposes;thereforeforthiseditionwehavedecidedtoleavethisestimatedexpenditureoutofourfinalcalculations.Thisisasubjectthatneedstobereturnedtointhefuture.ItwillproveextremelydifficulttoidentifyeveryEUprojectthatwehelptofundoutsideofthebudgetcontributionsandtheamounts,butwecanbesureitisverysignificantamountsofmoney.


4.1 The Common Agricultural Policy TheCommonAgriculturalPolicyhasbeenoneofthemostcontroversialandexpensiveofallEUpoliciessincetheEUscreation.Inefficientcontinentalfarmershavebeensubsidisedbythetaxpayerandtheconsumer.ThecostoftheCAPasaproportionoftheEUbudgetwasabout70%ofthetotalEUbudgetduringthe1980sbuthasnowfallentoaround41%;neverthelessitisthesecondbiggestitemofEUspending.

WhilewehavemovedawayfromtheworstdaysofwinelakesandbuttermountainstheCAPstillimposesunnecessarycostsontheconsumerbecauseofartificiallyhighfoodcosts:cheaperfoodcouldbeboughtontheworldmarket.TobefairthissituationisnotasbadasitwasbutcompletereformoftheCAPassoughtandpromisedbymanypoliticianshasprovedelusive.

Estimatesvarywidelyastotheactualcostontheconsumer,buttheeconomistIanMilne18usingdatafromOECD(OrganisationofEconomicCo-operationandDevelopment)estimatedthattheCAPcostBritainanythingbetween1.2% and1.7%ofGrossDomesticProductperannum.Intheabsenceofamorerecentorauthoritativemethodologywehaveusedthesameformula.Usingthelowestfigureof1.2%ofGDPthismeansthattheCAPiscostingBritishconsumersatleast16.712 billion(seeTable7below)asper2009thelastyearforwhichGDPfiguresareavailable.

Table 7. UK GDP and estimated cost of CAP

UK GDP shown in trillionsCost of CAP shown in billions

Year UK GDP CAP at 1.2% CAP at 1.5% CAP at 1.7% of GDP of GDP of GDP2008 1.445 17.347 21.684 24.5752009 1.392 16.712 20.891 23.76

Note:UKGDPtakenfromTheBlueBook2010,OfficeofNationalStatistics

ThecostoftheCommonAgriculturalPolicyontheUKeconomycanthereforebeestimatedatabout16.7 billionperannum.

4. Indirect Costs


4.2 The Common Fisheries PolicyTheCommonFisheriesPolicy(CFP)didnotexistuntilBritainsoughttojointheEuropeanEconomicCommunityin1972.BritainsnegotiatingpositionwasweakandasaresultacynicalpriceforjoiningwasextractedintheformofgivingalltheotherEECcountriesaccesstoBritainsrichfishstocksinourterritorialwaters;19andaswenowknowtheConservativeGovernmentliedtotheHouseofCommonsaboutwhatthiswouldmeanforthefishingindustry.

TheCFPhascrippledBritainsfishingindustryandresultedinthousandsofjobsbeingdestroyed.In1970therewere21,443fishermenintheUK.20By2009thatfigurehaddroppedto12,212;21adecreaseof43.05%.Arecentreportestimatesthatintotalover97,000jobshavebeenlost:9,000 in fishingand88,000 in dependent industriesonshore.22

TheobscenityofthequotasystemmeansthatthousandsoftonsoffisharethrownbackdeadintotheseabecausewhileitisunavoidabletocatchthemtheyarenotallowedtobelandedandsoldunderEURegulations.DespitedecadesofindustrycampaignersandpoliticiansdemandingreformithastakentheeffortsofaTVcelebritychef,HughFearnley-Whittingstall,andhispetitionofmorethansixhundredandfiftythousandnamestoelicitanylikelihoodofchangeinthepolicybytheCommission;howevertheywillnotimplementthisbefore2012andthismoveisstronglyopposedbySpainwhichhasplunderedBritishwatersfordecades.

TheMarineandFishingAuthorityconfirmedtotheauthorin2007thattheyhadnotcarriedoutanystudiesoftheCFPontheUKeconomy;andtheystatedthatwe cannot identify UK waters: they are now identified as being part of EC waters.HMGovernmentdoesnotseemtohavethefoggiestnotionofwhattheCFPcostsBritainanddonotevenbothertoidentifyUKwatersinrelationtothestatisticstheydokeep:andwhyshouldtheywhentodosowouldonlyshowuptheinsanityoftheCFP.

ArrivingatafigureforthecostoftheCFPisthereforeextremelydifficult.However,thelatestfiguresavailablefor2009allowanestimatetobearrivedat.AccordingtotheMarineManagementOrganisationin2009UKvessels,includingtheChannelIslandsandtheIsleofManvessels,landedintheUKandabroad580,600 tonnesofseafish(includingshellfish)withavalueof674.3 million.23

ThelatestfiguresforthetotalcatchfortheEUareonlyavailablefor2007whentheUKspercentageofthattotalcatchwas12%.Usingthispercentagefor2009thetotalcatchfortheEUwouldbeapproximately4.838 tonnesatavalueof5.619 billion.


About70%ofthetotalEUcatchcomesfromwhatwereformerlyUKterritorialwatersbeforethecreationoftheCFP.Therefore,thetotalvalueoftheEUcatchof5.619 billion,minus30%equals3.933 billion.IfwethensubtracttheactualvalueoftheUKcatchof674.3 millionweareleftwithafigureof3.259 billion.

Intheabsenceofanyofficialfigures,thecosttoBritainoftheCFPpurelyinlostcatchaloneisatleast3.259 billionperannum.

TheUKcouldbeself-sufficientinnon-exoticfishstocksbutisforcedtoimportfishtosatisfydemand,whichhasbeensteadilyrisingovertheyears.Toaddinjurytoinsultweareforcedtoimportfishcaughtinwhatwereourownterritorialwaters.TheTaxPayersAlliancereportThe Price of Fishputsthetotalcost,includinglostcatchandadditionalfoodcosts,atanestimated4.7 billionperannum.24

ThereforewecanestimatetheminimumtotalcostoftheCFPtoBritainataminimumof4.7 billionperannum.

Thesefiguresstilltakenoaccountofotherfactorssuchasthecostoftheadministrativeburden,on-goingdecommissioningschemes,unemploymentandsocialsecuritypaymentsandmuchmore,whichiftheywereknownwouldpushthecosthigherstill.

4.3 Over-RegulationAccordingtoastudyundertakenfortheGermanParliamentbyformerPresidentRomanHertzogin2006anestimated84%ofGermanysnewlawscomefromtheEuropeanUnion.25ItisreasonabletosupposethatasimilarfigureappliestotheUKintheabsenceofanystudiesprovingthecontrary.

TheEUnowregulatesbusinessofallkindsacrosseveryindustry.MostrecentlytheEuropeanParliamentvotedtoimplementsixnewdirectivesthatwillregulatetheUKfinancialservicessector.Thisregulationisoftenincompetentlydraftedandcarrieswithitcostsofover-regulationthatunderminescompetitiveness,increasescoststoconsumers,orsimplydestroysjobs.

ArrivingatadefinitivefigureforthecostofEUover-regulationonbusinessisextremelydifficult.ButanumberofpeoplehavetriedtoestimateitscostasapercentageofGDP(GrossDomesticProduct).InOctober2006,GuntherVerhuegen,EuropeanCommissionerforindustryandenterpriseestimatedthattheannualcostofEUregulationacrosstheEUwas5.5%ofGDP.In2004,PeterMandelsontoldtheConfederationofBritishIndustrythatthecostofregulationamountedto4%ofEuropesGDP.In2004theDutchVicePrimeMinsterandFinanceMinister,GerritZalmstatedthatthe


administrativeburdenonbusinessintheNetherlandswasestimatedat4%ofGDP.In2007CommissionerVerhuegenstatedthattheaveragefigureformemberstateswas3.5%ofGDP.

Inthe2008editionofthisbookletweassumedaconservativefigureof2%ofGDPwhichgaveacostof28billionperannum.ThisfigurehasbeenmorethanvindicatedbythepublicationofthecostoftheTop99EUDirectivesbytheOpenEuropeThinkTank(see Appendix).Thisputthecost(usingtheGovernmentsownfigures)atover20 billionperannum.Bearinmindthatthesefiguresarejustforthetop99directivesandthereareliterallythousandsthatimpactonbusiness.

WewillthereforeusetheCommissionsestimatedcosttotheUKeconomyastheaveragecosttoMemberStatesof3.5%ofGDP.

Table 8. UK GDP shown in Trillions

Cost of EU Regulations shown in Billions

Year UK GDP EU Regulation at 3.5% of GDP2008 1.446 50.62009 1.393 48.7

Note:ThelatestUKGDPfiguresavailablearefor2009,takenfromTheBlueBook,OfficeofNationalStatistics.

ThereforeweestimatetheannualcostofEUregulationontheUKascurrentlyabout48.7 billionperannum.

Noonewouldseriouslysuggestthatindustryandbusinessshouldnotberegulated,butEUregulationappliesto100%ofbusinesswhereasonlyabout10%ofbusinessesexporttoEurope.TheybearanunnecessaryburdenthatcertainlywouldbesignificantlylighterifthelawsweremadeinBritainandnottheEU.


Tables9&10belowshowthecombinedestimateddirectandindirectcosts,GrossandNetfor2010.

Table 9. Estimated Gross Direct Budget Contributions and Indirect Costs for 2010 2010Gross Contributions to EU Budget 15.2bnCommon Agricultural Policy 16.7bnCommon Fisheries Policy 4.7bnEU Regulation 48.7bnTotal 85.3 bnNote:figuresroundedupordownasappropriate

Table 10. Estimated Net Direct Budget Contributions and Indirect Costs for 2010

2010Net Contributions to EU Budget 6.9bnCommon Agricultural Policy 16.7bnCommon Fisheries Policy 4.7bnEU Regulation 48.7bn

Total 77.0 bnNote:figuresroundedupordownasappropriate

Table 11. Breakdown of Gross Contributions to the EU Budget and Indirect Costs for 2010 Annual Month Week Day Hour Minute85.3bn 7.1bn 1.6bn 233.7m 9.7m 162,291Note:figuresroundedupordownasappropriate

Table 12. Breakdown of Net Contributions to the EU Budget and Indirect Costs of 2010

Annual Month Week Day Hour Minute77bn 6.4bn 1.5bn 211m 8.8m 146,499Note:Figuresroundedupordownasappropriate

Table 13. Breakdown Gross & Net, Per Person, Per Taxpayer

Per Man, Woman Per Tax Payer & Child in the UK in the UKGross Costs 2010 1,380 2,788Net Costs 2010 1,246 2,516Note:UKPopulationin2010=61.8million.UKTaxpayersin2010=30.6millionFiguresfromtheOfficeofNationalStatistics.Figuresroundedupordownasappropriate

5. Summary of the Annual Direct and Indirect Costs, Gross & Net for 2010

2010 Gross

2010 Net


WearetoldbythoseinfavourofEUmembershipthatitisessentialfortrade.ThereforeitwouldbeperfectlyreasonabletoexpectthatweshouldseeasteadyriseinthebalanceoftradebetweentheUKandEUMemberStates.ButifwelookatthebalanceoftradefiguresfortheperiodofUKmembershipoftheEUweseequiteadifferentpicture.Whatweseeisagrowingtradeimbalanceandsteadilyincreasingtradedeficit.DevicessuchastheCommonExternalTariff(taxesonimport)andtheCommonAgriculturalPolicy(subsidisingcontinentalfarmersattheexpenseoftheconsumer),andoverregulationonbusiness,havedistortedBritainstradepatternspreventingusbuyingmorebeneficiallyontheworldmarket.

ItisimportanttounderstandthattheEUisnotaFreeTradeArea,itisaCustomsUnion.Afreetradeareaismeanttofacilitategreateaseoftradingbetweennations.Acustomsunionsprimarypurposeistoimposecostsonimportsfromoutside.TheEUcustomsunionisarelicfromthe1950sandisinfacttheonlysurvivingcustomsunionintheworld,allothershavingbeenabandonedinfavouroffreetradearrangements.

SeeTable 14, UK Balance of Trade with EU Countries and the World, 1973-2009,overleafonpage30.

6. UK Balance of Payments with EU and the World 1973-2009



Table 14. UK Balance of Trade with EU Countries and the World, 1973-2009

Calendar Year Balance with EU Balance with non Balance with Countries in EU Countries in the World in Trade & Services Trade & Services Trade & Services

1973 -1,674 678 -9961974 -2,592 -590 -3,1821975 -2,831 1,308 -1,5231976 -2,536 1,764 -7721977 -2,215 2,268 531978 -2,920 4,043 1,1231979 -2,995 2,542 -4531980 815 2,028 2,8431981 1,694 5,054 6,7481982 813 3,836 4,6491983 41 3,488 3,5291984 -1,029 2,511 1,4821985 -1,496 3,734 2,2381986 -8,832 7,968 -8641987 -12,889 8,086 -4,8031988 -18,175 1,700 -16,4751989 -20,811 -1,587 -22,3981990 -18,393 -353 -18,7461991 -5,793 -2,161 -7,9541992 -11,823 1,690 -10,1331993 -13,207 2,451 -10,7561994 -12,523 10,104 -2,4191995 -12,500 9,608 -2,8921996 -5,485 1,296 -4,1891997 -4,845 5,349 5041998 -5,923 -2,032 -7,9551999 -9,812 -3,677 -13,4892000 -6,823 -11,151 -17,9742001 -13,403 -10,609 -24,0122002 -23,603 -4,470 -28,0732003 -27,261 1,266 -25,9952004 -30,340 -2,146 -32,4862005 -37,372 -5,475 -42,8472006 -29,616 -11,921 -41,5372007 -35,235 -7,721 -42,9562008 -28,582 -9,178 -37,7602009 -27,957 -4,066 -32,023

Totals in billions - 438.128 5.635 - 432.493

Note:Figuresshowninmillions,totalsinbillions.Figuresmaybesubjecttorevisionuptofouryearsret-rospectively.ThesefiguresaretakenfromtheOfficeofNationalStatisticsPinkBookpublishedin2010andshowthefiguresadjustedretrospectivelyfrom2004.

UK Balance of Payments with EU and the USA 1973-2009

Table15contraststhebalanceoftradefiguresbetweentheUKandEUmemberstatesandtheUKandtheUSAforthetenyearperiod1999to2009.

Table 15 Trade Balance with Trade Balance with EU Countries in Goods USA in Goods & Services 2009 & Services 2009 Year million million1999 -9,812 4,9982000 -6,823 6,7802001 -13,403 4,9572002 -23,603 11,9972003 -27,261 14,7862004 -30,340 16,7592005 -37,372 16,7022006 -29,616 19,0102007 -35,235 21,4332008 -28,582 25,3682009 -27,957 23,441

Total in billions - 270.004 166.231

Note:Figuresshowninmillions,totalsinbillions.Figuresmaybesubjecttorevisionuptofouryearsretrospectively.ThesefiguresaretakenfromtheOfficeofNationalStatisticsPinkBookpublishedin2010andshowthefiguresadjustedretrospectivelyfrom2004.

Tables14and15clearlyshowtwothings:thattheUKisamassinganevergrowingtradedeficitwithotherEUmemberstates,andwehaveaneverdiminishingtradesurpluswiththerestoftheworld,andthatwehaveacomparativelyhealthybalanceoftradewiththeUSA.WhilewewanttradeandfriendshipwithEuropetheinescapableconclusionisthatournaturalandprofitabletradingpartnersaretheUSAandtheEnglishspeakingworld.


7.1 Trade and JobsThemainargumentofthoseinfavourofcontinuedBritishmembershipoftheEUisthatwearedependentonitfortradeandjobs.Onesometimeshearsthecry,but 50% of our trade is with the EU: if we left they wouldnt trade with us!Butisittrue?Firstofallin2008theproportionoftheUKeconomyinvolvedinexportinggoodsandservicesworldwidewasjustover22.2%.InthesameyearthesplitbetweenexportstotheEUandtherestoftheworldwasabout50/50.TheexactproportionoftheBritisheconomyexportingtotheEUwas11.1%:soabout77.8%oftheUKeconomyispurelydomestic,andwithhalfourexportsgoingtotheEUandtheotherhalftotherestoftheworld.

However100%oftheeconomyandbusinessaresubjectedtoEUregulationirrespectiveofwhethertheytradewiththeEUornotandofcourseabout89%donttradewiththeEU.WecanseealsofromTable 14thatwehaveamassiveandincreasingtradedeficitwithEUcountries(theysellusfarmorethanwesellthem),andfromTable 15thatwehaveahealthytradesurpluswiththeUSA(wesellthemmorethantheysellus).

WereBritaintoleavetheEUtradewouldcontinuebecause:therulesthatgoverninternationaltradearesetbytheWorldTradeOrganisationandtheEUcouldnotarbitrarilysetuptradebarriersagainsttheUKevenifitwantedto;andsinceEUcountriessellfarmoregoodsandservicestoBritainthantheybuyfromustheyarenotgoingtocutofftheirnosestospitetheirfacesandstoptradingwithus.

Thereisoneotherfactortotakeintoaccount:dowereallyexport50%ofourgoodsandservicestotheEU?ThereissomethingcalledtheRotterdam-Antwerp Effectthatshowsotherwise.RotterdamintheNetherlandsandAntwerpinBelgiumaretwoofthebiggestportsintheworld,andtheyhandlesubstantialquantitiesofBritishexports.SomeoftheseareconsumedinHollandandBelgiumandsomeareshippedontootherEUcountries,whileothersaretransferredtoroadandrailorcargovesselsandareshippedtonon-EUcountriesandtoothercontinents.TheseexportsareclassedasgoingtotheEUbutmaynevertouchEUsoilandcanendupinChina,Japan,Singaporeandanywhereelse.

TheUKGovernmenthasnottriedtoquantifythisdistortionbutthethinktankGlobal Britainhasattemptedtheexercisewithdatafor2009.Theirfindingsarethatthedistortionisintheregionofatleast10%. This means that the actual level of exports to the EU is more likely to be about 40% of the total than 50% as currently asserted.26ThatleveloftradewouldofcoursesublimelycontinueifBritainlefttheEUforthereasonsstatedabove.

7. Can Britain Afford the European Union?


AnothercrythatsometimesgoesupisthatThree million jobs depend on the EU: if we left wed lose them!Thisisfalseforthesamereasonsasgivenabove.IfmillionsofBritishjobsdependontradewiththeEUlikewisemillionsofEuropeanjobsdependontradewiththeUK,sincetheysellusfarmorethanwesellthem(seeTable14).SomeyearsagoinadiscussionontheBBCradionewsprogrammeTheWorldatOne,EUCommissionerNeilKinnockadmittedtoUKIPLeaderNigelFaragethatwereBritaintoleavetheEUnotasinglejobinexportingwouldbelost.

7.2 The EU, London and the UK Financial SectorThefinancialservicessectoraccountsforabout10%ofUKGDP,27higherthantheUSAshareof7.5%andthatofJapanat6.7%.InFranceandGermanythefinancialservicesshareoftheeconomyislowerat4.6%and3.8%respectively.ProfessionalservicescloselyconnectedwiththefinancialservicessectorintheUKcontributeanother3.9%ofGDP.Sointotal,financialandrelatedprofessionalservicesaccountforalmost14%ofUKGDP;thiscomparesto12%formanufacturingindustry.Employmentinthefinancialsectoraccountsforabout1 million peopleoutofthe31millioninemploymentintheUK,including319,000inLondonand128,000intheSouthEast.Taxcontributionsin2008/2009fromthefinancialsectoramountedto61 billion.

MuchoftheUKfinancialsectorissituatedintheCityofLondonandtheSquareMilealonecontributesnearly4%oftheUKGDP(55.7 billion)andLondonasawhole19% (264.6 billion)ofGDP.Therefore(whateverthecurrentcriticismsofsomeaspectsofthefinancialsectorandthefailureofregulationtocontrolitsworstelements)theUKfinancialsectorisavitalpartoftheUKeconomyandprovidessignificantandindispensableemploymentandtaxrevenue.

HoweverthisisnowbeingplacedinseriousdangerbytheEuropeanUnion.InOctober2010theEuropeanParliamentvotedintoexistencesixnewDirectivestoregulatethefinancemarketregulations.ThesewillincludeEUcontrolled:

CreditRatingAgencies EuropeanSystemicRiskBoard EuropeanBankingAuthority EuropeanSecuritiesandMarketsAuthority EuropeanInsuranceandOccupationalPensionsAuthority AlternativeInvestmentFundManagersDirective

Thislittlebookletdoesnotallowenoughspacetodiscusstheoriginsandcausesofthefinancialcrisisof2008,butProfessor Roland Vaubel of the


University of Mannheimhassaidthatthebankingcrisiswasduetotwohugeerrors:that the banks erroneously thought that their provisions against risk were sufficient; and that the regulators erroneously thought that their regulations were sufficient.28ProfessorVaubelsuggestsathreepartremedytotheproblem:more transparency in financial markets a task that can be left to national authorities; stronger precautions against risk, notably higher equity requirements the task of Basel,29 not the EU; and lastly diversity of regulatory experiments so that best practice can be found and imitated.

WhatisnotrequiredistheraftofEUinspiredandcontrolledregulationandregulatoryauthoritiestobeintroducedunderthesixnewdirectives.WeseefromthestatisticsabovethatthefinancialsectorinEuropeancountriesisfarlessimportantasaproportionoftheireconomiesandaccountsforlessemploymentandtaxrevenuethatitdoesinBritain.HoweverunderQualifiedMajorityVotingthemajorityofhighlyregulatedcountries,e.g.France,willbeabletoimposetheirhigherlevelofregulationontheUKtherebyreducingourlevelofcompetitivenesstotheirs.IntheageofglobalcommunicationsthereisnoneedforfinancialinstitutionstoremaininLondoniftheyfeeltheyarebeinghamperedbyuncompetitiveEUregulationandtheycaneasilyrelocatesomewhereelseintheworld.

WhywouldanyoneimaginethattheEuropeanUnion,whichgavetheworldtheCommonAgriculturalPolicyandtheCommonFisheriesPolicyandcripplinglevelsofover-regulationonbusiness,doacompetentjobofregulatingthefinanceindustry?British voters should be aware that in the European Parliament only UKIP MEPs voted against this legislation and to protect the national interest.LabourandLib-DemMEPsvotedinfavour,whileConservativeMEPseithervotedinfavour,absentedthemselvesfromthechamber,orinthecaseofthreemuchvauntedEuro-scepticMEPsvotedtoabstain.ThesesixnewdirectivesrepresentagravethreattothefutureofthefinanceservicessectorforLondonandtheUK.Britaincannotaffordtolosethisvaluablesourceofincome.

7.3 Shoring up the EuroOn9thMay2010theLabourGovernmentrepresentedbytheChancelloroftheExchequer,AlistairDarlingMP,signeduptotheEuropeanStabilisationMechanism.TheaimoftheStabilisationMechanismistopreserve financial stability in Europe.3060 billionhasbeenguaranteedbyall27MemberStatestobeavailabletothe13MemberStateswhoaremembersoftheEurozonewhorequirefinancialsupportbecausetheyareexperiencingdifficultiesorseriouslythreatenedwithseveredifficultiescausedbyexceptionalcircumstancesbeyondMemberStatescontrol.

TheUKisresponsiblefor12%ofthisfundwhichequatesto 7.2 billion,


whichatcurrentexchangeratesisabout6 billion.Thismoneyissupposedtobeintheformofloansthatifdrawnuponshouldeventuallybepaidbackwithinterest,butneverthelesstheindebtedBritishGovernmentisborrowingmoneytolendittocountriesthatwillnotfacerealityandleavetheEuro.GiventheextremelyprecariouseconomicsituationofcountriessuchasPortugal,Ireland,Spain,andGreece,whichfacepossiblefinancialcollapselargelybecauseoftheirmembershipoftheeuro,thisisanextremelydubiouspropositionthatwewillevergetthismoneyback.

OneoftheveryfewrightdecisionsmadebythelateandunlamentedLabourGovernmentwasnottojointheEuropeanSingleCurrency,butevensotheysaddleduswithanunnecessaryandunaffordablecommitmenttosupportthedoomedcurrencyexperiment.

7.4 The Example of Norway and SwitzerlandWeareallfamiliarwiththeEurophilemantrathatwemuststaymembersoftheEuropeanUniontopreservejobs,tradeandpeace.ButwhatofthoseEuropeancountriesthatarenotmembersoftheEU?TwonotableexamplesofdevelopedandsophisticatedEuropeannationsthathavenotfounditnecessarytojointheEUareNorwayandSwitzerland.

NorwayandSwitzerlandbothhavefreetradeagreementswiththeEU,NorwaythroughitsmembershipoftheEuropeanEconomicArea(EEA)andSwitzerlandthoughbilateralsectoralfreetradeagreements.NeithercountryhaseverbeenamemberoftheEuropeanUnion,31buttheydomakemodestfinancialcontributionstovariousEUprogrammes.

BothcountriesexportsignificantamountsofgoodsandservicestoEUMemberStates.NorwayhasheldvariousreferendumsonEUmembershipthroughtheyearsandthepopulationhasalwaysrejectedtheidea.In2006theSwissFederalGovernmentpublishedastudyonthevariousoptionsopentoitregardingEUmembershipandacostbenefitstudyofpotentialfullmembership.The study concluded that full EU membership would cost Switzerland up to six times more than its existing trading arrangements with the EU: not surprisingly they decided that joining was unnecessary and undesirable.

TheLisbonTreatyobligestheEUtonegotiatefreetradeagreementswithamemberstatethatwishestowithdraw,aswellaswithstatesthatarenotEUmembers.TheEUwillinfactsoonhavefreetradeagreementswith80%ofallnon-EUcountriesworldwide.ThereisnoneedforBritaintoremainamemberoftheEUinordertotradewiththeEUanymorethanthereisforNorwayandSwitzerland.


TheideathatBritainmustremainamemberoftheEuropeanUnioninordertopreservetradeandjobs,orinthewiderinterestsofpreservingpeaceandprosperityinEuropehavewornprettythinoverthelastfourdecades;andithastobedoubtedthatanyonewhounderstandsthesituationseriouslybelievesit.

TheEuropeanUnionisanideologicalmissiontocreateaUnitedStatesofEurope.Itisfundamentallyanti-democraticandundemocraticinnature.Afterthirty-eightyearsofmembershipwehavereachedasituationwheremostofourlawsarenowmadeintheEU.Wecontributebillionseveryyearinmembershipfeeswecannotafford.TheEUimposeseverincreasingburdensonfarming,fishingandindustrythatcostbillionsanddestroyjobs,andwhatprofitableindustrywehaveleftisbeingsurrenderedtoEuropeanregulationandcontrol.Wehavegivenupcontrolofourtradeandforeignpolicy,andindeedanyareaofpolicythatmatters.WearenowsacrificingourlegalsystemandtraditionalfreedomsunderthelawtocreateanoppressiveEUsystemofcriminallaw.Theworstthingaboutitisnottheeconomiccost,whichisbadenough,butthecorrosivepoliticalclimateoflies,dishonestlyandcynicismthatgrowsaspoliticiansfromtheoldfailedpartieshidefromthetruth.

The proposition of this booklet is simple enough. If the Coalition Government believes that membership of the EU is financially and economically beneficial to Britain then let them commission an independent cost-benefit analysis to prove it.

ParliamentariansfromallpoliticalpartieshavecalledonGovernmentsofbothcolourstoundertakesuchacostbenefitanalysissince1973withoutavail.IfaloneMEPwiththeassistanceofoneresearchercanproducethisstudythensurelytheGovernmentcancommissionanindependentandcomprehensivestudythatwouldquantifyhowmuchEUmembershipcostsBritainandwhetherwebenefitornot.They wont do it because they already know what it would prove: that Britain does not benefit from EU membership and that we do not need it to trade and survive in the modern world.

8. Challenge to Government


1 http://europa.eu/lisbon_treaty/glance/external_relations/index_en.htm2 http://ec.europa.eu/budget/budget_detail/deciding_en.htm3 http://ec.europa.eu/budget/budget_detail/deciding_en.htm4 Article312,TreatyontheFunctioningoftheEuropeanUnion.5 http://ec.europa.eu/budget/budget_detail/overview_en.htm6 TheConsolidateFund(CF)wasfirstcreatedin1787asonefundinto whichshallfloweverystreamofpublicrevenueandfromwhichshall comethesupplyofeveryservice.7 19thOctober2010,IP/10/1351 http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/10/1351 &format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en8 19thOctober2010,IP/10/1351 http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/10/1351 &format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en9 19thOctober2010,MEMO/10/503 http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction. do?reference=MEMO/10/50310 TheColumbiaJournalofEuropeanLawOnline.EurotaxandtheFiscal SovereigntyoftheMemberStates.http://www.cjel.net/wp-content/ uploads/2010/11/Leen-Eurotax-November-13-2010.pdf11 Statementonthe2006ECbudgetandmeasurestocounterfraudand financialmismanagement.May2006.http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk./ media/7/5/ecbudget250506.pdf12 6December2005http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,, 13509-1905742,00.html13 CouncilDecisionof7June2007onthesystemoftheEuropean Communitesownresources(2007/436/EC,Euratom).14 CouncilDecisionof7June2007onthesystemoftheEuropean Communitesownresources(2007/436/EC,Euratom). http://ec.europa.eu/budget/library/documents/revenue_expenditure/ own_resources/calc_own_res_2007_en.pdf15 27thOctober2010,MEMO/10/527. http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference= MEMO/10/527&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en16 6thSeptember2010,BBC.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/ world-europe-1119896017 24thNovember2010,HCColumn364http://www.publications. parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmhansrd/cm101124/text/101124w0003. htm#1011247600209118 IanMilne,DirectorofthecrosspartythinktankGlobalBritainsince 1999.ACostTooFar,PublishedbyCivitas,July2004.19 LabourEuro-SafeguardsCampaignBulletin,September2008.20 UKSeaFisheriesStatistics2009.Table2.6http://marinemanagement. org.uk/fisheries/statistics/documents/ukseafish/2009/final.pdf

9. References


21 UKSeaFisheriesStatistics2009.Table2.6http://marinemanagement. org.uk/fisheries/statistics/documents/ukseafish/2009/final.pdf22 January2009,TheTaxpayersAlliance.http://www.taxpayersalliance. com/home/the-price-of-fish-costing-the-common-fisheries-policy.html23 UKSeaFisheriesStatistics2009.Table3.1http://marinemanagement. org.uk/fisheries/statistics/documents/ukseafish/2009/final.pdf24 January2009,TheTaxpayersAlliance.http://www.taxpayersalliance. com/home/the-price-of-fish-costing-the-common-fisheries-policy.html25 InanarticleforthenewspaperWeltamSonntag,inJanuary2007, formerGermanPresidentRomanHertzogsaidthat84%ofGerman lawsstemmedfromtheEU.26 GlobalBritainBriefingNotes64.TheRotterdam-AntwerpEffectandthe NetherlandsDistortion.27 GlobalBritainBriefingNotes,6728 ProfessorRolandVaubelinaspeechgiventotheBrugesGroupin Londonon6thNovember201029 Newglobalregulatorystandardsonbankcapitaladequacyandliquidity agreedbymembersoftheBaselCommitteeonBankingSupervision.30 Article312,TreatyontheFunctioningoftheEuropeanUnion31 GlobalBritainBriefingNotes,61to65.


ThisstudywouldnothavebeenpossiblewithouttheinvaluableassistanceofmyresearcherFiona WisetowhomIamextremelygrateful.

Furtherassistancewasgivenby:

ProfessorTimCongdon IanMilne JohnMills TonyScholefield

10. Acknowledgements


TherearecurrentlytensofthousandsofEUDirectivesandRegulationsoperativeintheUK.

Thespreadsheetsonthefollowingtwopagesareasimplifiedversion(forspacepurposes)ofonepublishedbytheOpenEuropeThinkTank,ofthetop99Directivesincostterms.

JusttheTop99EUDirectiveshavecosttheUKanaccumulated113.8 billionandanongoingyearlycostin2010aloneofover20 billion.

11. Appendix


UK

legi

slat

ion

EUR

egul

atio

nS

tart

Dat

e O

ne-

off

R

ecu

rrin

g C

ost

to

R

ecu

rrin

g

cost

/m

co

st/

m

dat

e co

st in

20

09 p

rice

s

2010

/m

The

Wor

king

Tim

eRe

gula

tions

199

9D

irec

tive

93/1

04/E

C(H

AD

200

0/34

/EC

)A

ug-9

90

.0

3,4

89.0

38

,379

.0

3,52

3.9

The

Clim

ate

Cha

nge

Act

200

8&

The

Car

bon

Bud

gets

Ord

er2

009

Clim

ate

Act

ion

and

Rene

wab

leE

nerg

yPa

ckag

eM

ay0

9/13

0

.0

3,0

00.0

3,

000.

03,

030.

0Th

eB

uild

ing

and

App

rove

dIn

spec

tors

(Am

endm

ent)

Reg

ulat

ions

200

6A

rtic

les

3to

6,D

irec

tive

2002

/91/

EC

Mar

-06

21.

52

,150

.1

8,62

3.2

2,17

1.6

Not

yet

impl

emen

ted

Dir

ectiv

e20

08/1

04/E

C

Oct

-11

40.

01

,856

.0

0.0

1,87

4.6

The

Vehi

cle

Exci

seD

uty

Regu

latio

ns2

000

Dir

ectiv

e19

99/9

6/EC

Ja

n-01

0

.0

1,5

12.7

13

,614

.6

1,52

7.9

The

Mot

orV

ehic

les

Regu

latio

ns2

008

Dir

ectiv

es2

007/

34/E

Ce

tc

Jan-

09

0.0

1

,106

.5

1,10

6.5

1,11

7.6

Dat

aPr

otec

tion

Act

D

irec

tive

95/4

6/EC

Ju

l-98

1,1

50.0

9

49.1

12

,538

.8

958.

6W

ater

Env

iron

men

tRe

gula

tions

200

3D

irec

tive

2000

/60/

EC

Jan-

04

0.0

6

26.0

3,

756.

163

2.3

The

Wor

king

Tim

e(A

men

dmen

t)R

egul

atio

ns2

002

Dir

ectiv

e94

/33/

EC

Apr

-03

2.3

5

38.1

3,

769.

154

3.5

Con

trol

ofV

ibra

tion

atW

ork

Regu

latio

ns2

005

Dir

ectiv

e20

02/4

4/EC

Ju

l-05

279

.0

372

.3

2,14

0.4

376.

0Th

eG

enet

ical

lyM

odifi

edF

ood

Regu

latio

ns2

004

Regu

latio

ns2

004

Regu

latio

n(E

C)N

o.1

829/

2003

,183

0/20

03

Apr

-04

0.0

3

44.2

2,

065.

134

7.6

The

Sale

and

Sup

ply

ofG

oods

to

Con

sum

ers

Regu

latio

ns2

002

Dir

ectiv

e19

99/4

4/EC

M

ar-0

30

.0

331

.6

2,32

1.2

334.

9Fi

xed-

Term

Em

ploy

ees

Regu

latio

ns2

002

Dir

ectiv

e99

/70/

EC

Oct

-02

2.0

3

21.2

2,

571.

732

4.4

The

Empl

oym

ent

Equa

lity

(Age

)Reg

ulat

ions

200

6D

irec

tive

2000

/78/

EC

Oct

-06

219

.1

285

.0

1,35

8.9

287.

8Th

eM

arke

tsin

Fin

anci

alIn

stru

men

tsR

egul

atio

ns2

007

Dir

ectiv

e20

04/3

9/EC

N

ov-0

71

,000

.0

209

.8

1,41

9.6

211.

9Th

eW

aste

Ele

ctri

cal&

Ele

ctro

nic

Equi

pmen

tRe

gula

tions

200

6D

irec

tives

200

2/96

/EC,

200

3/10

8/EC

Ja

n-07

0

.0

159

.5

478.

416

1.1

Con

stru

ctio

n(D

esig

n&

Man

agem

ent)

Reg

ulat

ions

200

7D

irec

tive

92/5

7/EE

C

Apr

-07

0.0

1

53.1

45

9.2

154.

6Th

eN

on-R

oad

Mob

ileM

achi

nery

Reg

ulat

ions

200

4D

irec

tive

2002

/88/

EC

Sep-

04

0.0

1

51.7

91

0.2

153.

2Th

eM

oney

Lau

nder

ing

Regu

latio

ns2

003

Dir

ectiv

e20

01/9

7/EC

M

ar-0

41

2.5

132

.9

810.

113

4.3

Ani

mal

By-

Prod

ucts

Reg

ulat

ions

200

3Re

gula

tions

(EC

)No.

177

4/20

02,e

tc

Jul-0

34

0.0

116

.4

854.

511

7.5

The

Com

pani

esA

ct1

985

Regu

latio

ns2

005

Dir

ectiv

e20

03/5

1/EC

M

ar-0

50

.0

115

.2

576.

211

6.4

Fluo

rina

ted

Gre

enho

use

Gas

esR

egul

atio

ns2

009

Regu

latio

n84

2/20

06+

10

othe

rs

Feb-

09

131

.1

113

.2

244.

311

4.3

The

Insu

ranc

eM

edia

tion

Dir

ectiv

e20

03

Dir

ectiv

e20

02/9

2/EC

Ja

n-05

6

0.0

104

.7

583.

610

5.8

Food

Hyg

iene

(Eng

land

)Reg

ulat

ions

200

6Re

gula

tion

(EC

)Nos

.852

/200

4,e

tc

Jan-

06

132

.0

103

.7

546.

910

4.8

The

Ener

gyP

erfo

rman

ceo

fBui

ldin

gsR

egul

atio

ns2

007

Art

icle

s7

to1

0,D

irec

tive

2002

/91/

EC

Dec

-07

0.0

8

9.5

179.

090

.4Th

eEn

dof

Life

Veh

icle

sRe

gula

tions

200

5D

irec

tive

2000

/53/

EC

Mar

-05

0.0

8

2.2

411.

283

.1Th

eM

otor

Veh

icle

sRe

gula

tions

200

9A

rtic

le1

1,R

egul

atio

n71

5/20

07

Aug

-09

10.

06

9.0

79.0

69

.7C

ontr

olo

fNoi

sea

tWor

kRe

gula

tions

200

5D

irec

tive

2003

/10/

EC

Apr

-06

159

.8

62.

340

8.9

62.9

The

Nitr

ate

Pollu

tion

Prev

entio

nRe

gula

tions

200

8D

irec

tive

91/6

76/E

EC

Jan-

09

2.9

6

0.0

62.9

60

.6W

aste

Man

agem

ent

(Eng

land

&W

ales

)Reg

ulat

ions

200

6D

irec

tives

75/

442/

EEC,

199

9/31

/EC

M

ay-0

60

.0

53.

221

2.6

53.7

The

Mat

erni

tya

ndP

aren

talL

eave

Reg

ulat

ions

199

9D

irec

tive

96/3

4/EC

D

ec-9

90

.0

53.

053

0.2

53.6

The

Pres

sure

Equ

ipm

ent

Regu

latio

ns1

999

Dir

ectiv

e97

/23/

EC

Nov

-99

9.3

5

0.7

515.

851

.2W

ork

atH

eigh

tRe

gula

tions

200

5D

irec

tive

2001

/45/

EC

Apr

-05

0.0

4

8.9

244.

549

.4Th

eC

ivil

Avi

atio

nRe

gula

tions

2005

Re

gula

tion

(EC

)No.

261

/200

4A

pr-0

50

.0

45.

822

8.9

46.2

Con

trol

ofA

sbes

tos

Regu

latio

ns2

006

Dir

ectiv

e20

03/1

8/EC

N

ov-0

61

40.5

4

2.6

268.

443

.1Pr

oces

sed

Ani

mal

Pro

tein

s(E

ngla

nd)R

egul

atio

ns2

001

Cou

ncil

Dec

isio

nA

ug-0

12

0.0

42.

039

7.9

42.4

The

Car

riag

eof

Dan

gero

usG

oods

Reg

ulat

ions

200

4D

irec

tives

94/

55/E

C,e

tc

May

-04

44.

03

9.6

281.

740

.0B

ovin

ePr

oduc

tsR

egul

atio

ns2

005

Dec

isio

n20

05/5

98/E

C;R

egul

atio

nJa

n-06

1

2.0

39.

016

8.0

39.4

Feed

ing

Stuf

fs,F

eedi

ngS

tuff

sRe

gula

tions

200

3D

irec

tives

200

2/2/

EC,2

002/

32/E

C

Nov

-03

0.1

3

9.0

234.

039

.4Th

eIn

form

atio

nan

dC

onsu

ltatio

nof

Em

ploy

ees

Regu

latio

ns2

004

Dir

ectiv

e20

02/1

4/EC

A

pr-0

53

9.0

36.

722

2.4

37.0

The

Part

-tim

eW

orke

rsR

egul

atio

ns2

000

Dir

ectiv

e97

/81/

EC

Jun-

00

0.0

3

4.1

340.

934

.4Th

eTr

ansf

ero

fUnd

erta

king

sRe

gula

tions

200

6D

irec

tive

2001

/23/

EC

Apr

-06

0.0

3

0.7

122.

831

.0Pr

oces

sed

Cer

eal-B

ased

Foo

dRe

gula

tions

200

3D

irec

tive

2003

/13

Mar

-05

0.0

2

7.8

139.

228

.1W

ater

Sup

ply

(Wat

erQ

ualit

y)R

egul

atio

ns2

000

Dir

ectiv

e98

/83/

EC

Jan-

01

490

.0

27.

273

4.5

27.4

The

Fina

ncia

lSer

vice

san

dM

arke

tsA

ct2

000

Dir

ectiv

e20

00/2

6/EC

N

ov-0

22

4.1

23.

218

6.3

23.4

The

Road

Tra

nspo

rtR

egul

atio

ns2

005

Dir

ectiv

e20

02/1

5/EC

M

ar-0

53

7.5

21.

714

6.0

21.9

The

Pest

icid

esR

egul

atio

ns2

004

Dir

ectiv

es2

004/

59/E

C,2

004/

61/E

C

Oct

-04

111

.0

20.

423

3.3

20.6

The

Tran

snat

iona

lInf

orm

atio

n,C

onsu

ltatio

nof

Em

ploy

ees

Regu

latio

n19

99

Dir

ectiv

es9

4/45

/EC,

97/

74/E

C

Jan-

00

8.8

1

9.1

199.

419

.3Th

eD

ange

rous

Sub

stan

ces

and

Prep

arat

ions

Reg

ulat

ions

200

0D

irec

tive

94/2

7/EC

Ju

n-00

0

.0

18.

918

9.4

19.1

The

Com

pani

esA

ct1

985

(Am

endm

ent)

Reg

ulat

ions

200

4D

irec

tives

200

1/65

/EC,

200

3/51

/EC

N

ov-0

42

00.0

1

8.7

293.

418

.9Th

eC

onsu

mer

Pro

tect

ion

from

Unf

air

Trad

ing

Regu

latio

ns2

008

Dir

ectiv

e20

05/2

9/EC

M

ay-0

81

9.5

18.

456

.4

18.6

Fire

Pre

caut

ions

(Wor

kpla

ce)(

Am

endm

ent)

Reg

ulat

ions

199

9D

irec

tives

89/

391/

EEC,

89/

654/

EEC

D

ec-9

90

.8

18.

118

2.3

18.3

Dan

gero

usS

ubst

ance

san

dEx

plos

ives

Atm

osph

eres

Reg

ulat

ions

200

2D

irec

tives

98/

24/E

C,1

999/

92/E

C

Dec

-02

200

.0

17.

532

2.2

17.6

The

Sex

Dis

crim

inat

ion

Act

197

5(A

men

dmen

t)R

egul

atio

ns2

008

Dir

ectiv

e20

02/7

3/EC

A

pr-0

88

.8

160

.7

330.

116

2.3

The

Wel

fare

ofF

arm

edA

nim

als

Regu

latio

ns2

003

Cou

ncil

&C

omm

issi

onD

irec

tives

Fe

b-03

0

.0

16.

911

8.1

17.0

The

Car

riag

eof

Dan

gero

usG

oods

Reg

ulat

ions

200

5D

irec

tives

200

4/89

/et

cJu

l-05

39.

01

5.6

116.

815

.7Th

eM

obile

Roa

min

gRe

gula

tions

200

9Re

gula

tion

(EC

)No.

544

/200

9Ju

l-09

0.0

7

3.5

73.5

74

.2C

ontr

olo

fAsb

esto

sat

Wor

kRe

gula

tions

200

2D

irec

tives

98/

24/E

C

Dec

-02

1,3

96.0

1

5.1

1,50

1.9

15.3

Com

pani

esA

ct2

006,

D

irec

tive

2004

/109

/EC

O

ct-0

62

.4

15.

062

.4

15.2

The

Envi

ronm

enta

lDam

age

Regu

latio

ns2

009

Dir

ectiv

e20

04/3

5/EC

M

ar-0

94

.1

15.

019

.1

15.2

The

Pack

agin

g(E

ssen

tialR

equi

rem

ents

)Reg

ulat

ions

199

8D

irec

tive

94/6

2/EC

M

ay-9

85

.0

15.

019

9.7

15.1

Gro

undw

ater

Reg

ulat

ions

199

8D

irec

tive

80/6

8/EE

C

Dec

-98

76.

01

4.1

244.

814

.2Th

eW

aste

Bat

teri

esa

ndA

ccum

ulat

ors

Regu

latio

ns2

009

Dir

ectiv

e20

06/6

6/EC

M

ay-0

93

.6

13.

717

.3

13.8

The

Pass

enge

ran

dG

oods

Veh

icle

Reg

ulat

ions

200

5Re

gula

tions

(Var

ious

)Ju

n-05

1

5.2

11.

874

.3

11.9

The

Paym

ent

Serv

ices

Reg

ulat

ions

200

9D

irec

tive

2007

/64/

EC

Nov

-09

28.

03

6.2

64.2

36

.6Th

eC

ontr

olo

fSub

stan

ces

Regu

latio

ns2

004

Dir

ectiv

e20

03/5

3/EC

A

pr-0

54

.0

10.

858

.2

11.0

The

Offi

cial

Fee

dan

dFo

odC

ontr

ols

(Eng

land

)Reg

ulat

ions

200

7Re

gula

tions

(EC

)No.

882

/200

4an

d17

8/20

02

Dec

-07

0.0

1

0.3

20.7

10

.4Th

eRo

adV

ehic

les

Regu

latio

ns2

007

Dir

ectiv

e20

05/5

5/EC

O

ct-0

73

2.0

10.

061

.9

10.1

Bio

cida

lPro

duct

sRe

gula

tions

200

1D

irec

tive

98/8

/EC

A

pr-0

11

06.6

9

.9

195.

510

.0Th

eC

omm

onA

gric

ultu

ralP

olic

yRe

gula

tions

200

9Re

gula

tions

(EC

)(Va

riou

s)

Jul-0

94

.0

8.6

12

.6

8.7

The

Envi

ronm

enta

lPer

mitt

ing

Regu

latio

ns2

009

Dir

ectiv

e20

06/2

1/EC

Ju

l-09

27.

68

.5

36.1

8.

6Th

eFi

nanc

ialS

ervi

ces

and

Mar

kets

Act

200

0O

rder

200

7D

irec

tive

2003

/71/

EC

Oct

-07

2.3

8

.4

27.5

8.

5W

elfa

reo

fAni

mal

s(T

rans

port

)(En

glan

d)O

rder

Re

gula

tion

(EC

)No.

1/2

005

Jan-

07

0.0

8

.2

24.5

8.

3Th

eSh

eep

and

Goa

tsId

entifi

catio

n(E

ngla

nd)O

rder

200

0D

irec

tive

92/1

02/E

EC

Sep-

00

12.

07

.9

91.0

8.

0Ra

ilway

san

dO

ther

Gui

ded

Tran

spor

tSy

stem

sRe

gula

tions

200

6D

irec

tive

2004

/49/

EC

Apr

-06

0.0

7

.9

31.4

7.

9Th

eRo

adV

ehic

les

Regu

latio

ns2

005

Dir

ectiv

e20

03/9

7/EC

D

ec-0

50

.0

7.5

30

.0

7.6

Con

trol

ofS

alm

onel

lain

Pou

ltry

Ord

er2

007

Regu

latio

ns(E

C)N

o.2

160/

2003

and

116

8/20

06

Feb-

08

0.0

7

.4

14.7

7.

4Th

eTS

E(E

ngla

nd)(

Am

endm

ent)

Reg

ulat

ions

200

4Re

gula

tion

1915

/200

3Ju

l-04

0.0

7

.3

43.7

7.

4Th

eTo

bacc

oPr

oduc

tsR

egul

atio

ns2

002

Dir

ectiv

e20

01/3

7/EC

D

ec-0

22

0.4

7.0

69

.3

7.1

Coc

oaa

ndC

hoco

late

Pro

duct

s(E

ngla

nd)R

egul

atio

ns2

003

Dir

ectiv

e20

00/3

6/EC

A

ug-0

32

.5

6.3

46

.5

6.3

The

Stat

utor

yA

udito

rsa

ndT

hird

Cou

ntry

Aud

itors

Reg

ulat

ions

200

8D

irec

tive

2006

/43/

EC

Apr

-08

9.5

6

.9

23.2

6.

9Th

eM

edic

ines

for

Hum

anU

seR

egul

atio

ns2

004

Dir

ectiv

e20

01/2

0/EC

M

ay-0

40

.0

4.8

28

.6

4.8

The

Ecod

esig

nfo

rEn

ergy

-Usi

ngP

rodu

cts

Regu

latio

ns2

009

Regu

latio

ns(E

C)N

o.2

78/2

009

etc

Oct

-09

0.0

4

.6

4.6

4.6

Not

yet

impl

emen

ted

Dir

ectiv

e20

09/3

8/EC

2.0

4

.6

6.6

4.6

The

Con

trol

ofP

ollu

tion

Regu

latio

ns2

001

Dir

ectiv

es7

6/46

4/EE

Ca

nd8

0/68

/EEC

M

ar-0

21

15.0

4

.4

150.

14.

4G

reen

hous

eG

asE

mis

sion

sTr

adin

gSc

hem

eRe

gula

tions

D

irec

tive

2003

/87/

EC

Jan-

05

0.0

4

.2

21.1

4.

3Th

eC

harg

esfo

rRe

sidu

esS

urve

illan

ceR

egul

atio

ns2

007

Regu

latio

n(E

C)N

o.8

82/2

004

Oct

-07

0.0

4

.2

12.6

4.

2Th

eVo

latil

eO

rgan

icC

ompo

unds

inP

aint

set

c20

05

Dir

ectiv

e20

04/4

2/C

EN

ov-0

50

.0

4.1

16

.4

4.2

The

Ship

and

Por

tFa

cilit

y(S

ecur

ity)R

egul

atio

ns2

004

Regu

Documents

How Much Does The European Union Cost Britain?