Navigating tariffs: legal considerations for UK business

Speakers

Bernardine Adkins

David Lowe

James Stunt

David Lowe: Hello and welcome to our Podcast on Tariffs following Trump's recent liberation day and his step back from high global tariffs yesterday. Today is 10 April 2025, that is important for this Podcast because this is a subject that is changing by the hour. My name is David Lowe, I lead our commercial contracts team, I am an expert in international supply contracts.

Bernardine Adkins: I am Bernardine Adkins, Partner in the EU competition and trade team.

James Stunt: And I am James Stunt, I am a Senior Associate in the EU trade and competition team.

David Lowe: So we are today going to put our heads together to try and work through what this might mean from a legal perspective, we are not going to pretend to be economists and we are not political commentators, we are going to focus more on the legal perspective.

START OF TRANSCRIPT

David Lowe: But first James, where are we, there is so much happening at the moment, exactly as we record this Podcast, what is the position?

James Stunt: Yes so as you said David this is something that is changing on an hourly basis so very important to note that we are recording this on the afternoon of 10 April 2025 UK time but where we stand at the moment. Obviously the big news item was that on 2 April 2025 President Donald Trump issued an executive order introducing tariffs on all of the US's trading partners for the UK as well as for a number of other countries. This meant that imports of all UK goods were subject to an additional 10% tariff on the value of those goods. At the date of the executive order, certain other countries including China as well as the EU were subject to additional tariff rates meaning that they would be required to pay a higher rate of tariffs on import of their goods into the US. However, on 9 April 2025 President Trump announced a 90-day pause on the country-specific tariffs with a notable exception of tariffs in relation to Chinese goods. What this means is that the current 10% baseline rate will continue to apply for imports of all countries' goods into the US but the higher countries specific rates, i.e. those rates on China, those rates on the EU, sorry I will take that back, but the higher countries specific rates, for example the 20% rate applied to the EU will not take effect for another 90 days.

David: OK and the EU was talking of retaliating and introducing tariffs but I think they have paused on that have they not?

James: Yes that's correct so the EU introduced a further set of tariffs on imports of US goods into the EU and that was at a rate of 25%, it wasn’t all US goods it was a selection of commodities. However, following the announcement by President Trump the EU has paused its tariffs, additional tariff measures for another 90 days. So in line with the US to pull back.

David: Remind me, China, US, what is the tariffs on imports into the US from China now?

James: I need to look that up sorry David, I think it is.

David: I think its 125.

James: I think it is but just making sure that's correct.

Bernardine: It certainly wont need to go up much more.

James: Yeah so China into US is 125, 84 for China yeah.

Bernardine: And that may increase obviously.

David: And then I am going to ask you about steel, aluminium on cars and car parts. So remind me James where are we on the US China tariffs what's the rate on imports into the US from China?

James: Yes, so as we are speaking now, the rate of US goods into China is a payment of 84% tariffs on the value of those goods. For Chinese goods entering the US it’s a tariff rate of 125% on those Chinese goods.

David: And then there's also those tariffs on steel, aluminium, cars, car parts, what's the position with that?

James: Yes so the US introduced tariffs of 25% on steel and aluminium imports as well as 25% on imports of cars and car parts. Those were introduced in March 2025. Those are still in effect so those are not subject to the 90-day pause.

David: So although big moment yesterday of Trump stepping back and the stock markets therefore responded, we shouldn’t lose sight of the fact that actually we have now got a lot more tariffs in place than we did pre-Trump.

James: Absolutely and I think there's a lot of talk at the moment around the tariffs having been lifted that of course is not the case from a UK perspective we are still as we were before 9 April so we are still required to pay 10% on imports of all goods into the US and we are still subject to those tariffs on steel and aluminium as well as automotives and automotive parts. I should also say there are some exceptions to the 10% tariff rate including copper, lumber but those are currently subject to investigation and being looked at by the US so they may well be subject to tariffs at a later point.

David: So my reading of those US investigations into those sectors is that's just an indicator that the US expects to introduce tariffs in those areas?

James: I think its fair that we can look at those as being areas that are under consideration and certainly if the business is active in those space they should keep an eye on the developments in case that exception no longer applies.

David: So assuming people listen to some mainly UK and European probably the pharmaceuticals is the one that will be the key area of interest, lumbers that’s probably more relevant to Canada I would have thought, copper obviously that’s global but we don’t source much copper in the UK.

OK right so that's where we are.

To Bernardine, we have got this 90-day period, I mean we can all chill out now can't we?

Bernardine: I think the word this sort of Damocles is the one that jumps to mind. So the idea seems to be there are allegedly I think 70 countries that have been given this day of execution and according to the Trump Administration they are the ones who have not already implemented their retaliatory tariffs so the idea is that some form of deal is going to be concluded from those 70 countries so even just having say three or four countries in a negotiation with even a country as large as the US with all the resources they will have it simply isn’t doable. So the question is what is going to happen in those 90 days.

So, I think first of all the idea of there being a what is a trade agreement? So, a trade agreement if we are still talking just about tariffs where you offer a tariff to a country under the WTO most favoured nation clauses you have to offer it to everybody else in the WTO because otherwise the whole concept is otherwise you have the big countries doing each other favours and the smaller arguably more impoverished countries being out in the cold. So this is fundamental to the proper functioning of the WTO. The only exception to that is if you do what I call a full-fat free trade agreement where substantially all the trade is the subject of open borders and is between you, in other words no tariffs. So that simply isn’t feasible or if one is being an open trade minded person near a liberal saying great if people offer zero tariffs not substantially on the trade to America because they are so concerned that the level of tariffs that will be coming their way. They have to offer that to everybody else so this could be paradise for open trade people, but I don’t think realistically I don’t think that’s going to happen.

So what will we see instead? So I think what we will see instead is quite a mishmash would be a huge variety of possibilities and its interesting also we see already the UK is nuancing its no longer talking about a trade deal its talking about an economic deal, so they are looking at things cooperation on AI and tech and arguably you know a trip in the gold carriage and the state visit is arguably part of that whole deal and so other countries will offer different things that they feel that may make a difference so I cannot help wondering whether we are going to be seeing a bit of Kabuki theatre right now and we saw a little bit of that the last time in Trump 1 when the President of the Commission came over and personally say with President Trump and offered and said yes we will buy natural gas from you and also we will buy more soy beans and yes we will all have discussions and talks to go to zero tariffs, nice idea, but the purchase of soy beans was not in Jean Claude's control yet that was deemed satisfactory so I cant help wondering as I say a little bit of performance in economic deals in the next 90-days and everybody can save face.

David: Which would be consistent with many of the things President Trump has done has he not the performance and appearance is often crucial.

Bernardine: Which would be nice because even if one was to say OK they will do enough now to you know delay the stay of those tariffs so they were taking off that ten percent would be good but there's a limit to how much more free trade how far people can cut into the bone of cutting back on tariffs because we have already had people do not realise we have already had decades of pushing and liberalising so we have had the Uruguay round, the Doras, which pushed back and back and back on these tariffs so where we still have tariffs its in relation to those products which necessarily a country it is imperative for a country to keep an indigenous industry, agriculture being the opposite one because heaven forbid in cases of times of war or as we saw in times of Pandemics you need to be able to grow your own food. We still are seeing that example now where notwithstanding how much it may cost the UK we are seriously looking at privatisation because its imperative we have something of an iron and steel industry irrespective of whether its loss making or not because if you need to build an army in a hurry you need some iron and steel so how so so much has been paired back and back and back so theres a limit into how far into the bone people can cut on these tariffs so I think we are going to see an awful lot of creativity emerging in these 90-days and perhaps a little bit of eccentricity in terms of what we regard as a quote unquote trade/economic deal.

David: You touched on the WTO because obviously the WTO so people cannot just simply say "tell you what America we will give zero percent on soya beans if in return you give us zero percent on wine" and doing some because that’s what President Trump thinks like, he will just think of it as a trade. But I think what you are saying is that is difficult to do within the WTO Framework.

Bernardine: Exactly within the framework of the WTO yes.

David: But where is the WTO now I mean is it relevant in this discussion? Has it become, is it going to survive because the US has starved it has it not?

Bernardine: I mean is it an effective organisation and people have maybe just ignored it. It does feel to me that they have not been able to reappoint the top end of the appellate bodies but what has happened because the WTO makes sense you know it has given us global prosperity, complex supply chains and people don’t want those ruptured so what has happened on the side a number of states including the UK, Europe, Canada, China but not the US they have their side deal so to speak of arbitration. So where there's a will there is always a will in this sort of thing so America OK is not playing because it felt that the appellate body was far too much about President setting, decision setting where as America where it sat in terms of its economic power possibly it was how Britain was a few hundred years ago saying well might is right I do not want to be subject to some form or jurisprudence or you know a tale of decisions I want things to be made on their merits at that time so it was not pleased, this was not just what this administration or the previous Trump Administration did this is consistent US policy. They do not like that appellate system and they are not playing with it but it absolutely does not mean that the WTC was broken by any stretch of the imagination.

James: OK so other countries do not seem to be treating it as such, we have already see China almost immediately after the introduction of the tariffs launched a complaint in the WTO so other countries are willing and prepared to use the WTO system and as you say Bernardine there are ways of navigating the WTO notwithstanding the issues it currently faces.

David: So the US might not care about the WTO but because everybody else is trading with everybody else they will care about the WTO so they will be bearing that in mind in their US deals what it might mean under the WTO Framework is what you are saying.

Bernardine: Absolutely yes.

David: And therefore it is, you do not think we are just going to see nice simple deals.

Bernardine: No.

David: Soya beans versus wine or whatever.

Bernardine: No, no.

David: And that therefore takes you to that creative performative area that you described.

Bernardine: Yes.

David: OK James I am conscious that the UK Government although no doubt hoping to keep its cool head and to see this through and hopefully do some kind of deal with the US its launched a consultation about tariffs, tell me about that and what could corporates being doing in response to that.

James: Yes so I think we have this 90-day period as I said earlier for the UK that makes limited impact but I think it’s a mistake to think that countries would be sitting on their hands during that period.

We saw the UK Government launch a consultation this was on 3 April 2025 in relation to possible tariffs that the UK might implement in respect of US goods entering the UK. The UK Government has stressed it is looking for views from businesses for all imports of US goods so real range there but it has also published what it is calling an indicative list of products on which it is more likely to impose tariffs. We obviously do not know the potential rates or indeed whether how much if any of those goods will be subject to tariffs but the Government is exploring its options and so if businesses are engaged in imports from the US or indeed consuming US goods then it is imperative that they examine the consultation and consider submitting responses if they onsider that their business, their customers, or indeed the UK economy as a whole might be affected by any measures that the UK introduces having a say when the Government is clearly looking for a say is really quite important.

David: And presumably if you are a UK company that would benefit from restrictions on US imports this would also be a good time to make that point.

James: Absolutely yes. The Government has made it very clear its preference is to negotiate an agreement but businesses views the impact on the economy is really high on their considerations so having an impact in this way is vital.

David: So there will be in-house lawyers listening to this and obviously massive commercial issues washing around which we will come on to but that’s probably something if I was an in-house lawyer I would be saying "hey what are we doing about this consultation is this relevant to us should you respond" that would be a really good action to take would it not?

Bernardine: Yeah.

James: Absolutely.

Bernardine: David can I flip it back a bit because you have been doing all the questions and we are doing all the work so to speak, in terms of because you are at the coal face in terms of these complex supply agreements, what do you think in this interim period should be of concern to people and what can they do?

David: Yeah of course the contracts are really important and the delivery point and the responsibility for import and export duties are obviously crucial in any contract and so obviously people will be looking at those contracts particularly starting with the customer contract I am selling goods to a customer cross border who between me and customers is responsible for export and import duties and if those duties change who is going to pick up the tab. Those people who have with UK businesses will have gone through all this with Brexit so actually should be in quite good shape on that very basic issue of what INCO term have I used and what does it mean? Very basically the only INCO term where the seller pays for import is DDP – deliver duty paid so if you are a seller and you have used any other INCO term it’s the buyer's problem. But it does not just stop there because obviously tariffs impact your supply chain and I think that’s the harder issue, it is obvious if tariffs are going to impact you on your sale delivery point but what about the huge supply chain behind you, what about the 10,000 components that go into a vehicle, they may be coming up from the supply chain and increasing the cost of your supply chain meaning the cost of your product is going up so obviously understanding what your contracts say if the costs goes up is really really important. Now, if you have got a short term contract, and the price is only fixed order by order then you are going to you may have commercial issues but legally you have got no issue changing your prices. If in a long term contract then the change mechanism in the contract is going to be really important and if you hadn’t got one that is going to be a really hard place to be. Now there is some speculation about whether the massive changes in tariffs could be a force majeure and in an English law contract force majeure will depend on exactly what the contract says, every contract is slightly different but as a broad rule of thumb increases in tariffs isn’t going to be a force majeure event so its unlikely to help you.

Some contracts have material adverse affect clauses, pretty rare in English law agreements more common in European continental agreements but if there is one yes maybe this is a material adverse affect. The real thing will be some kind of change mechanism and certainly that is what I am seeing clients talking to me about now is introducing to their contracts change mechanisms so that their costs go up and in particular tariff costs go up that they can seek a renegotiation.

I think obviously also people will be looking at well where is my supply chain impacted we have obviously got the 10% tariff globally so that is everywhere but obviously if your supply chain is touching China and ultimately your goods are going to the US you will be trying to work that through and if I was prioritising I would be going where does my supply chain touch China and where does it touch the US because that’s the really explosive bit to all this.

Bernardine: And then there's the question where do I want to divert it and where can I benefit from trade agreements tariff free trading and the question we are being asked quite a bit now James is what is this thing about origin of goods, do you want to explain that as best you can its complex in a nutshell please James, no pressure.

James: Yes as best I can for what is a complex topic, unfortunately this is a topic that does differ depending on where you are looking, what jurisdiction you are looking in and what agreement you are making use of but in general for the purposes of free trade agreements businesses can benefit from tariff free trade in their goods if their goods can be demonstrably or their goods can be shown to have originated in one of the parties to the trade agreements. There is a couple of ways that goods can be deemed to have originated in one of those countries. The most obvious one is they are wholly produced so if you are dealing with raw materials if they are extracted or taken from one of those countries that will clearly be a good that originates in that country. We obviously operate in a word where we have complex supply chains, advance manufacturing that incorporates components from here, there and everywhere and that’s where you start looking at more product specific rules of origin to determine whether those goods have undergone final processing in one of those countries. This is a very product-specific exercise in determining whether your goods originate. You need to understand what the commodity codes of your goods are, you need to understand where various components come from and also a full understanding of what exactly is taking place in respect of your products in the country that you are dealing with. For example, if you are importing all of your products into the UK they are finished goods you effectively just package store them, maintain them and then ship them somewhere else that’s not going to constitute a good originating in the UK so this is a very intensive exercise, there is a lot of deep understanding but the benefit of the cost benefits for doing that analysis and getting that understanding of what your supply chain looks like can bare dividends avoiding those potentially very significant tariffs on your imports.

David: So basically and I realise it all depends on the particular product quality codes but you are looking at, where was the finished product manufactured and then where did the components come for it and then you have got to then look at all the rules and work out how that comes together to work out what the origin of the problem is.

James: Yes yes.

David: So if the raw material, lets say it is a piece of industrial equipment that I have actually manufactured in the UK with a largely European supply chain of components but those components in turn of say use raw materials from China then its probably not going to be originating in China depenedent on everything.

James: Yes.

David: So roughly.

James: So I think what you would be looking at is how much of your product comprises Chinese originating goods so there are certain for certain goods there are certain quantities that allow their thresholds that apply but also there is the, in addition to the content that we are looking at, its also what processes are undertaken in the UK so you say its manufactured in the UK is it just assembled in the UK or is there a proper manufacturing operation that takes place there and these are those very kind of granular questions that you need to grapple with in order to understand exactly what is happening and whether you can benefit from the preferential trade.

David: And given I said the explosive one is where China and US touch you need to be checking I mean if you have got Chinese components and ultimately you are selling to the US then you are going to be looking very very carefully at that.

Bernardine: And you cannot just think you can ship them to Thailand, screw drive them together and say it’s a Thai product so there's anti-circumvention measures in place.]

James: And its worth pointing out as well that this is, we are talking about this in the language of free trade agreements but obviously you are also looking at this question when determining whether your imports to the US are subject to tariffs. So there is an exercise in understanding "are my goods of Chinese origin when I am sending them from the UK to the US because you may be looking at a shipment from the UK to the US but based on the US understanding of the origin of those goods they may be deemed to be Chinese goods so it’s a very complex tricky question.

David: And if you were US customs, something that was coming from Vietnam or Cambodia you are going to be looking quite carefully at it to see actually was it really made there is it just simply assembled from Chinese components that have been shipped to, because there's a big rise in that Vietnam trade isn’t there?

Bernardine: This is a perennial thing we say to clients know your supply chain but right now its more important than ever that there isn’t something coming from a jurisdiction actually when truly its origin is elsewhere and then you are suddenly hit with an unpleasant bill at the US border or elsewhere for that matter.

David: I think it relates to just a general and boring issues of customs compliance is it not? For me, one of the curiosities that has come out of this last week was the stuff about the Norfolk Island off the coast of Australia. Did you see that about how it was clobbered with a massive tariff from the US because it had imported to the US much more than, sorry it exported much more to the US than it had imported but the key trade that had driven that the export to the US was some equipment they had been sent from Norfolk UK not and it had been put on the customs form as Norfolk Island off the coast of Australia. Now that kind of stuff in a zero tariff doesn’t really matter does it but in this environment suddenly those kind of mistakes can have a huge impact can they not?

Bernardine: Yes yes absolutely.

David: So I mean I think that is the other thing is I think for corporate is there should be what are we doing about customs, how confident are we, it is more important to get it right because I think it is a fairly dusty boring area until now and now it has become really important.

James: And in understanding who is responsible, whose responsibility is it to ensure the customs compliance is checked and that goes to the point we were discussing earlier.

David: Yeah I think it is an interesting point because my observation is most people think their logistics provider of customs agent is responsible. What do you think to that James is that right?

James: Well no it is the responsibility on you as the exporter to negotiate the point around INCO terms you were discussing but it is unfortunately as you say a dusty subject the businesses now need to grapple with more so than arguably they have before I mean that is the export record is liable even if it outsourced to a customs agent and if you go and look in your customs agency agreement it will make that really clear and the liability of the consultation was really low and so yeah it is a really important part.

The other thing I wanted to touch on which is relevant on the here and now is currency because we were talking about tariffs but the impact on tariffs has been changed in the currency markets, the Chinese currency is weakening and it looks like they are actively weakening it so.

Bernardine: Allegedly.

James: Allegedly yeah it appears to me my opinion and judgement but who knows what is actually happening as its weakening which is I am sure what the US want to achieve but obviously that’s relevant in the contracts/

Bernardine: Because it neutralises the effect of the tariffs.

James: Exactly, and so you need to be conscious of what currencies you contract in because that might make an impact as to how bad or good it might be and I think that is not being talked about enough, because that is important obviously for corporates who will have made judgments on currency and hedge currencies in certain ways and that might not be appropriate.

David: OK I think that is enough here and now. What about beyond that? What is the medium term James?

James: So this is an element of Horizon scanning, but I think there are areas of possible concern but also potential benefits going forward for businesses if they are trying to navigate these changes. I will start with the bad perhaps. So, one area that we might see increasing measures and off the back of that increased burdens of compliance is export controls. We have seen that China introduced additional export controls following the US tariff increases and those export controls target particularly critical minerals. Export controls are an area of contention between the US and China, both jurisdictions have been ramping up on those areas, but these export controls specifically look to be targeting minerals that are critical for the defence sector, and so obviously an area of strategic interest for the US. What does that mean for businesses as a whole? Well it is crucial to understand that export controls are not a trade sanction and they do not apply just to the US, they apply globally, and as we have been discussing businesses may have supply chains that touch upon China, and may touch upon products that are subject to export controls. So as we see a proliferation in export control measures from US and from China, and indeed from elsewhere, businesses may find themselves caught out by changes in the regulations if they export products from China or from other jurisdictions without obtaining proper authorisation.

I think another area that we might see changes, potentially adverse changes is, as certain jurisdictions may become less viable to trade with, for example, if the higher tariff rates mean that the US becomes a less attractive market, we may see a surge imports from those countries that are targeted by higher tariff rates into other countries, like the UK, like the EU, and this may have an adverse impact on domestic industries. In the UK we have an authority called the Trade Remedies Authority, and that authority investigates whether it needs to take safeguarding measures to protect domestic industries. These measures can take a number of forms but can include additional tariffs that are payable on those types of goods, but also tariff rate quoters which means that it will allow for a certain quantity of goods to be imported into the UK, and above that higher tariffs will apply. The UK government has announced that the Trade Remedies Authority is currently looking and what measures the UK has in place at the moment, particularly in relation to steel, and it is currently working with industry to assess the potential impacts on the UK market and the UK industry. But it is important for businesses to know that they can approach the Trade Remedies Authority requesting that it initiates an investigation if it considers that this surge in impacts or potential surge in impacts is likely to have an adverse effect on their industry on their markets. So it is just an area to be aware of that this longer term impacts as we see supply chains shifting and demand shifting off the back of the tariff measures.

David: And what about the European anti-coercion thing?

Bernardine: Yeah it's the new toy. They are yet to use it, so they have created this monster but they are not allowed to use it at the moment.

James: Yes, so the anti-coercion instrument entered into force in 2023, as Bernardine said it has not yet been used but there is a lot of talk about whether it will use it. What this instrument does is to implement measures in response to economic coercion by a third party on the EU, so the question is, is the US engaged in economic coercion. If following an investigation and the EU considers that it is appropriate to use the anti-coercion instrument, the options available to it are numerous, so it can introduce additional restrictions, including tariffs, but crucially not just tariffs, it can impose restrictions on trade and services, it can introduce export controls, it can have restrictions on foreign investment, blocking participation in public procurement and also take measures relating to trade related aspects of intellectual property rights. So there are a broad range of measurers. I think the question is will we get to a situation where the EU will use it. At the moment it's unlikely but it's very much watch this space.

David: Well there is certainly going to be getting to be a much more complex and unpredictable place, and I think that is one of the key takeaways of corporate, which is unwelcome really because trade …

Bernardine: Yeah no-one likes uncertainty.

David: Prosperity thrives uncertainty doesn't it. The other thought that occurs to me, particularly loads of people who are in-house lawyers and compliances is that all of this is just going to feed the risk of corruption, it's going to be much more tempting isn't it, bribe the person at Chamber of Commerce to certify the origin of something, bribe the US customs official to waive something through. I would be worried, it's just the return on the corruption is now increased, it's now going to be much more tempting, so that is certainly something I think may be [Major Corporate?] should be keeping an eye out for.

Bernardine: Looking at it more positively though, I think people crave certainty. So, you can see America and arguably possibly China being more isolated, so what have we got? what's left on the table?, and something I think is largely underexplored is the [unclear 32:51] for example Canada, and the EU and the UK, because we do have CETA the Canadian free trade agreement in which the EU concluded with Canada, and it really is a gold standard free trade agreement. The UK flipped it over, and there is a lot in that which has not yet really come into play because before all of this tariff debark kicked off, the whole tariff discussion was pretty over, and really what mattered in terms of encouraging trade was actually alignment of regulatory standards, getting ridding of the TBT's technical barriers to trade. So if I produce, I don't know, a mobile according to a certain set of standards, a UK set of standards, and there is a different French one, I can't sell my UK mobile in the French market which is why these things are made according to global standards nowadays which means that this thing can be freely imported from across the globe, frankly. So the real power, I think the really interesting trading [unclear 33:50] are going to be those who align their standards, and obviously we are notwithstanding Brexit, we are in a pretty good position because our standards are for the time being aligned with those of the EU, and there is an awful lot of committees and talking as between Canada and the EU, but I think if people really want to start to give this, you know, create more certainty, there should be more and more work focussing on that alignment of regulatory standards and there has got to be a school of thought around the Brussels effect is of the big book on it how Brussels is creeping around, it's regulatory standards are creeping around the globe, but it does facilitate trade if people align on their health and technical regulatory standards, it means the people are more open to trade with one another, and it's not just about the tariffs which as I said up until a few months ago it was a bit of a redundant discussion.

David: Yeah the rest of the world is a big place and there is plenty to play for there and that certainly feels like the opportunity doesn't it?

Bernardine: Yeah and in many ways I think we should not be too distracted by what's going on in the US but focus on, OK that is what it is, it will be what it will, it's a [unclear 35:01] situation. Where can we get certainty and reliable allies that we can be certain of and where business will be comfortable and confident to invest.

James: I think we are seeing at the moment an increased certainly political interest in seeking those increased cooperation, so the UK as you mentioned Bernardine, it had that free trade agreement with Canada that was largely rolled over from CETA. There were talks about reinvigorating it, re-energising it and updating it which had largely fallen away but we have recently seen statements by Canada and by the UK seeking again to reopen those discussions, so thinking about where both from a political perspective but also from what businesses can be looking at, engagement with government and understanding and getting before government and talking about the benefits that can be unlocked from those trade agreements is quite important.

Bernardine: Absolutely but I think for the UK and Canada the real prize is to have a triangulation because at the moment there are two separate free trade agreements is where you have recognition of origin as between all three, but Brexit, I'm afraid the UK was not able to negotiate that, but that is something in terms of hopefully we are on a different place, we can try and negotiate that and allow triangulation as between these free trade agreements that we have with Canada, that you know, we have flipped over, but that may be a hard ask I don't know.

James: But having the adversity and the difficulty of the situation means hopefully we can drop those barriers between people they have got things [unclear 36:29]. I mean there has also been something in the press hasn't there about the UK India free trade agreement getting back on the agenda.

[OVERTALKING]

Bernardine: It is not realistic. India is a great marvellous complex, complex place, it has in my view there is a lot of work it needs to do in terms of protection of intellectual property standards etc. There is a huge amount to be said for India but it's a massive, massive great complex economy, and the idea that we would completely open out our borders to trade is like … no, I don't think we can do it.

David: Perhaps this is going to be the subject of a future podcast that we discuss the potential India UK free trade agreement or indeed elsewhere. I think we will call that a closed nail probably during the course of recording this podcast Trump has made another announcement and changed the world again, I hope not, but if so, we will be back with an update.

Thank you very much.

END OF TRANSCRIPT