IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/oec/ecoaab/16-en.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Economic Consequences of Brexit: A Taxing Decision

Author

Listed:
  • Rafal Kierzenkowski

    (OECD)

  • Nigel Pain

    (OECD)

  • Elena Rusticelli

    (OECD)

  • Sanne Zwart

    (OECD)

Abstract

Membership of the European Union has contributed to the economic prosperity of the United Kingdom. Uncertainty about the outcome of the referendum has already started to weaken growth in the United Kingdom. A UK exit (Brexit) would be a major negative shock to the UK economy, with economic fallout in the rest of the OECD, particularly other European countries. In some respects, Brexit would be akin to a tax on GDP, imposing a persistent and rising cost on the economy that would not be incurred if the UK remained in the EU. The shock would be transmitted through several channels that would change depending on the time horizon. In the near term, the UK economy would be hit by tighter financial conditions and weaker confidence and, after formal exit from the European Union, higher trade barriers and an early impact of restrictions on labour mobility. By 2020, GDP would be over 3% smaller than otherwise (with continued EU membership), equivalent to a cost per household of GBP 2200 (in today’s prices). In the longer term, structural impacts would take hold through the channels of capital, immigration and lower technical progress. In particular, labour productivity would be held back by a drop in foreign direct investment and a smaller pool of skills. The extent of foregone GDP would increase over time. By 2030, in a central scenario GDP would be over 5% lower than otherwise – with the cost of Brexit equivalent to GBP 3200 per household (in today’s prices). The effects would be larger in a more pessimistic scenario and remain negative even in the optimistic scenario. Brexit would also hold back GDP in other European economies, particularly in the near term resulting from heightened uncertainty would create about the future of Europe. In contrast, continued UK membership in the European Union and further reforms of the Single Market would enhance living standards on both sides of the Channel. Les conséquences économiques du BREXIT : les coûts d'une décision L’adhésion à l’Union européenne a contribué à la prospérité économique du Royaume-Uni. Les incertitudes entourant l’issue du referendum ont déjà commencé à affaiblir la croissance britannique. Une sortie du Royaume-Uni de l’UE (Brexit) conduirait à un choc négatif majeur pour l’économie du pays et aurait des incidences pour tous les membres de l’OCDE, en particulier en Europe. Dans une certaine mesure, le Brexit équivaudrait à un impôt sur le PIB, imposant un coût durable et croissant sur l’économie, qui ne serait pas encouru si Royaume-Uni restait dans l’UE. Ce choc serait transmis par le jeu successif de différents canaux. Sur le court terme, l’économie britannique serait affectée par le durcissement des conditions financières et l’affaiblissement de la confiance puis, après sa sortie officielle de l’Union européenne, par le relèvement des obstacles aux échanges et les conséquences précoces des limitations à la mobilité de la main-d’oeuvre. À l’horizon 2020, le PIB serait plus faible de 3 % qu’autrement (en cas de maintien dans l’UE), équivalent à un coût moyen de 2250 GBP par foyer (en prix actuels). Sur le plus long terme, les effets structurels s’affirmeraient par le biais de trois canaux : les capitaux, l’immigration et un progrès technique moindre. En particulier, la productivité du travail serait pénalisée par une baisse de l’investissement étranger direct et par l’accès à un volume de compétences plus limité. Le manque à gagner en termes de PIB se creuserait avec le temps. En 2030, selon le scénario de référence, le PIB serait inférieur de plus 5% qu’autrement – et le montant de l’« impôt Brexit » atteindrait alors 3200 GBP par ménage (en prix actuels). Les conséquences seraient encore plus marquées dans le scénario le plus défavorable, et resteraient négatives y compris dans le scénario favorable. Une sortie du Royaume-Uni de l’UE entraverait également le PIB dans d’autres économies européennes, notamment sur le court terme, en raison des incertitudes politiques sur l’avenir de l’Europe. À l’inverse, un maintien du Royaume-Uni dans l’Union européenne et la poursuite des réformes du marché unique amélioreraient les niveaux de vie des deux côtés de la Manche.

Suggested Citation

  • Rafal Kierzenkowski & Nigel Pain & Elena Rusticelli & Sanne Zwart, 2016. "The Economic Consequences of Brexit: A Taxing Decision," OECD Economic Policy Papers 16, OECD Publishing.
  • Handle: RePEc:oec:ecoaab:16-en
    DOI: 10.1787/5jm0lsvdkf6k-en
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1787/5jm0lsvdkf6k-en
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1787/5jm0lsvdkf6k-en?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Müge Adalet McGowan & Dan Andrews, 2015. "Labour Market Mismatch and Labour Productivity: Evidence from PIAAC Data," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 1209, OECD Publishing.
    2. Jean-Marc Fournier & Aurore Domps & Yaëlle Gorin & Xavier Guillet & Délia Morchoisne, 2015. "Implicit Regulatory Barriers in the EU Single Market: New Empirical Evidence from Gravity Models," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 1181, OECD Publishing.
    3. Jean-Marc Fournier, 2015. "The negative effect of regulatory divergence on foreign direct investment," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 1268, OECD Publishing.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Christine de la Maisonneuve, 2016. "How to boost export performance in Greece," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 1299, OECD Publishing.
    2. Kose,Ayhan & Ohnsorge,Franziska Lieselotte & Ye,Lei Sandy & Islamaj,Ergys, 2017. "Weakness in investment growth : causes, implications and policy responses," Policy Research Working Paper Series 7990, The World Bank.
    3. International Monetary Fund, 2016. "United Kingdom: Selected Issues," IMF Staff Country Reports 2016/169, International Monetary Fund.
    4. Balázs Égert & Peter Gal, 2017. "The quantification of structural reforms in OECD countries: A new framework," OECD Journal: Economic Studies, OECD Publishing, vol. 2016(1), pages 91-108.
    5. Burçak Polat, 2017. "Rate of return on foreign investment income and employment labour protection: A panel analysis of thirty OECD countries," Cogent Economics & Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(1), pages 1273588-127, January.
    6. Zoran Aralica & Ivan Mitrovic, 2016. "Analysing The Characteristics Of Student-Employer Interaction - The Case Study From Croatia," Economic Thought and Practice, Department of Economics and Business, University of Dubrovnik, vol. 25(2), pages 447-468, december.
    7. Andre Jungmittag, 2019. "Service trade restrictiveness and internationalisation of retail trade," International Economics and Economic Policy, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 293-333, April.
    8. Fernando Mistura & Caroline Roulet, 2019. "The determinants of Foreign Direct Investment: Do statutory restrictions matter?," OECD Working Papers on International Investment 2019/01, OECD Publishing.
    9. Christian Osterhold, 2018. "Fear the walking dead: zombie firms, spillovers and exit barriers," Working Papers w201811, Banco de Portugal, Economics and Research Department.
    10. Christine Arriola & Caitlyn Carrico & David Haugh & Nigel Pain & Elena Rusticelli & Donal Smith & Frank van Tongeren & Ben Westmore, 2018. "The Potential Macroeconomic and Sectoral Consequences of Brexit on Ireland," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 1508, OECD Publishing.
    11. Kateryna Zhylenko, 2017. "Investing And Production-Financial Activities Of Tncs' In The Conditions Of Globalization," Baltic Journal of Economic Studies, Publishing house "Baltija Publishing", vol. 3(4).
    12. Jan Stráský, 2016. "Priorities for completing the European Union's Single Market," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 1315, OECD Publishing.
    13. Balázs Égert, 2021. "Investment in OECD Countries: a Primer," Comparative Economic Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Association for Comparative Economic Studies, vol. 63(2), pages 200-223, June.
    14. Øystein Bieltvedt Skeie, 2017. "International differences in corporate taxation, foreign direct investment and tax revenue," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 1359, OECD Publishing.
    15. Stefano Micossi, 2016. "30 Years of the Single European Market," Bruges European Economic Policy Briefings 41, European Economic Studies Department, College of Europe.
    16. Graham Gudgin & Ken Coutts & Neil Gibson & Jordan Buchanan, 2017. "The Role of Gravity Models in Estimating the Economic Impact of Brexit," Working Papers wp490, Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge.
    17. Zongo, Amara, 2020. "The Impact of Restrictive Measures on Bilateral FDI in OECD Countries," MPRA Paper 101929, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. David Haugh & Alexandre Kopoin & Elena Rusticelli & David Turner & Richard Dutu, 2016. "Cardiac Arrest or Dizzy Spell: Why is World Trade So Weak and What can Policy Do About It?," OECD Economic Policy Papers 18, OECD Publishing.
    19. Mustafizur Rahman & Towfiqul Islam Khan, 2018. "BREXIT and Bangladesh: An Exploratory Study on Likely Economic Implications," CPD Working Paper 121, Centre for Policy Dialogue (CPD).
    20. Amara Zongo, 2022. "The effects of restrictive measures on cross‐border investment: Evidence from OECD and emerging countries," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(8), pages 2428-2477, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Brexit; Brexit; commerce; compétences; confiance; confidence; deregulation; European Union; FDI; IDE; immigration; immigration; incertitude; prime de risque; risk premia; skills; trade; uncertainty; Union européenne;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C54 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Quantitative Policy Modeling
    • E24 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Consumption, Saving, Production, Employment, and Investment - - - Employment; Unemployment; Wages; Intergenerational Income Distribution; Aggregate Human Capital; Aggregate Labor Productivity
    • E44 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Money and Interest Rates - - - Financial Markets and the Macroeconomy
    • H12 - Public Economics - - Structure and Scope of Government - - - Crisis Management

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oec:ecoaab:16-en. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/edoecfr.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.