CEP LSE RSS Contact Us YouTube Facebook Twitter

BREXIT 2016
Policy analysis from the Centre for Economic Performance

CEP BREXIT Blogs

Comment and analyses by CEP academics concerning the referendum on Britain's membership of the European Union

Latest Posts:

26 October 2016
Four principles for the UK's Brexit trade negotiations
Thomas Sampson looks at what it might mean for the UK to pursue its own trade policy for the first time since joining the EU in 1973.


15 September 2016
Economics of Brexit
John Van Reenen presented the CEP research findings of how the Brexit vote will affect both the UK and International economies to the Brookings Institute in Washington DC.


4 August 2016
Brexit and Wage Inequality
Brian Bell and Stephen Machin blog
The vote to leave outcome of the EU referendum was in part shaped by issues of labour market inequality and the decision to leave has implications for what will happen to inequality in the future. In this piece, we discuss both of these, first showing some evidence that the spatial distribution of leave votes was correlated with low and stagnating real wage levels, and second considering some key areas of relevance of the vote outcome for some aspects of wage inequality.


2 August 2016
The aftermath of the Brexit vote - the verdict from a derided expert
John Van Reenen was disappointed but not surprised by the UK's vote to Leave the EU. Whilst his own research predicts serious economic and political damage in the case of Brexit, he thought a Leave vote was a real possibility ever since David Cameron committed to a vote in 2013. In his last post as Director of LSE's Centre for Economic Performance, he gives his verdict on the campaigns, the media, politicians, and being a derided expert.


6 July 2016
Who voted Leave: the characteristics of individuals mattered, but so did those of local areas
Individual demographics had a huge effect in determining the outcome of the referendum, but the characteristics of local areas mattered as well, explain Monica Langella and Alan Manning. Immigration, the decline in manufacturing and in other sectors, as well as politics, all played an important role in deciding the outcome.


22 June 2016
CEP Analysis of Brexit: Introduction to the collected E-Book
Professor John Van Reenen draws together the strands of the 7 chapters. He concludes that Brexit will clearly damage the prosperity of all British people, poor and rich. The only uncertainty is by exactly how much”


20 June 2016
Leaving the EU would almost certainly damage our economic prospects
The economic consequences of leaving the EU have naturally been a central focus of the referendum campaign. As June 23 draws near we bring together the conclusions from our research on the likely consequences, and reflect on some of the claims made.


20 June 2016
Why Economists for Brexit and Professor Minford remain Wrong
In what must be the largest ever poll of UK based economists, for every one economist who thought Brexit would bring benefits over the next five years, there were 22 who thought it would do harm...CEP economists explain why here in full article.


11 June 2016
The Long-Term Economic Effects of Brexit
CEP’s director John Van Reenen gives his final assessment of the likely impact on the UK economy of a vote to leave the European Union.


10 June 2016
Brexit: The Impact on Trade, Investment and Immigration, CentrePiece 21 (1)

Brexit: the impact on UK trade and living standards
Foreign investors love Britain - but Brexit would end the affair
Why immigration is no reason to leave the EU


10 June 2016
Why we are better off Remaining In the European Union
Opening stratement from John Van Reenen at a Panel Discussion Chaired by Ed Conway with Andy Bagnall, Andrew Lillico and Gerald Lyons. Presented at the Annual conference of UK in a Changing Europe, June 10th 2016, QE2 Conference Centre.


2 June 2016
The ‘Britain Alone’ scenario: how Economists for Brexit defy the laws of gravity
There is a degree of consensus among economists that a Brexit will make us worse off. The exception is recent work by Economists for Brexit. Their forecast of income gains from Brexit contrasts with all other economic analysis, explain Thomas Sampson, Swati Dhingra, Gianmarco Ottaviano and John Van Reenen.

Read More […]


2 June 2016
The distributional effects of Brexit across income groups: Who bears the pain?
In recent days, pro-Brexiteers have been saying that leaving the EU may hurt the rich but it will help the poor. Although there is now a strong consensus that leaving the EU would damage the overall economy (HM Treasury, 2016; IFS, 2016; OECD, 2016; NIESR, 2016, The Guardian 28 May 2016) there has been almost no breakdown of what the effects would be on different types of people.

Read More […]


1 June 2016
Why the UK should remain in the EU: A note to friends by Professor Nicholas Barr
This note is written by Nicholas Barr for those who have asked for a reasoned view. It includes links to evidence from credible sources, none (with the essential exception of the Financial Times) behind a paywall.

Read More...


31 May 2016
Brexiteers may not believe it, but our advice is strictly independent
Independent research centres are often accused by Brexiteers of bias because some of our funding is from the EU (under 5% in the case of CEP). Institute for Fiscal Studies Director explains why they are wrong (The Times Online - subscriber access only)


27 May 2016
How do ‘Economists for Brexit’ manage to defy the laws of gravity?
Their forecast of income gains from Brexit contrasts with all other economic analysis, write Thomas Sampson, Swati Dhingra, Gianmarco Ottaviano and John Van Reenen

Read More...


23 May 2016
HM Treasury estimates on the impact of leaving the EU on the UK Economy
Nicholas Bloom, Professor of Economics at Stanford University and Associate of the Growth Programme at CEP in a letter commenting on the HM Treasury document.

The Treasury document takes a very reasonable approach on estimating the short-run impact on the UK economy in the event of Brexit. My own estimates contained here from a couple of weeks ago actually predict an even larger negative impact.

Read More...


23 May 2016
280 economists now against Brexit as UCL and LSE sign a letter published in The Times
In a letter to The Times on the 12 May 2016, 171 academic and 25 non-academic economists said that Brexit would "entail significant long-term costs". The list of signatories has now grown to 280 names and still growing. The Economists against Brexit letter was pulled together by Tony Yates, of the University of Birmingham, Paul Levine, of the University of Surrey, and Simon Wren-Lewis, at Oxford. Professor Yates said that it had been "prompted by the tightening in the polls, and the publicity around the Economists for Britain and Economists for Brexit groups". Twenty-eight economists signed up to the two eurosceptic campaigns.

The updated list and the Times letter can be seen here.


19 May 2016
What is Brexit-related uncertainty doing to UK growth?
The LSE British Politics and Policy blog

The UK will soon vote on whether to end its 43-year membership in the European Union. Opinion polls suggest the vote is too close to call, with the ''stay'' and ''leave'' side switching leads on a regular basis, and this uncertainty is reflected in swings in the stock market, explains Nicholas Bloom. Using data from the Economic Policy Uncertainty Index, he explains why the uncertainty could be having a material negative impact on the UK's economic performance.

Read More...


12 May 2016
Immigration is no reason to leave the EU
The Adam Smith Institute blog

I've become extremely pessimistic about the Leave campaign lately as it has latched on to Faragist arguments about immigration as a major reason to get out of the EU. This is not just naïve liberalism - on virtually every count, the critics of EU immigration are wrong.
A new paper from the LSE’s John Van Reenen and others summarises the existing research.

Read More...


12 May 2016
EU immigration hasn't hurt jobs or wages. Here's why:
The Spectator 'Coffee House' blog

This morning’s national insurance figures have further stoked the debate about immigration, and the extent to which leaving the EU would make a difference. Many British people are concerned that high levels of immigration have hurt their jobs, wages and quality of life. However, the authors of this article - Jonathan Wadsworth, Swati Dhingra, Gianmarco Ottaviano and John Van Reenen - say the bottom line is that EU immigration has not significantly harmed the pay, jobs or public services enjoyed by Britons.

This post is based on Brexit and the Impact of Immigration on the UK, a CEP Brexit Analysis paper. It was originally published on the LSE Commentary blog.

Read More...


11 May 2016
Why immigration is no reason to leave the EU
LSE Business Review blog

EU immigration hasn't impacted employment or wages for the British people, write Jonathan Wadsworth, Swati Dhingra, Gianmarco Ottaviano and John Van Reenen.

Read More...


11 May 2016
Immigration from the EU is not a 'necessary evil' and does not drag down wages
LSE VoteBrexit blog

A major argument of the campaign to leave the EU is that Brexit would give the UK more control over the flow of immigrants from across Europe, who have supposedly hurt the jobs and pay of British workers. Research by Jonathan Wadsworth, Swati Dhingra, Gianmarco Ottaviano and John van Reenen shows that far from EU immigration being a 'necessary evil' to gain access to the greater trade and foreign investment that comes from being in the EU Single Market, immigration is at worst neutral and at best, an economic benefit of EU membership.

Read More...


11 May 2016
EU-turn if you want to. Brexit & Immigration
The State of Working Britain blog

Immigration has for some years been the uppermost worry among the issues thought to be facing Britain in many opinion polls so it - or rather people's perceptions of its extent and its effects - is almost certainly one of the key issues that will influence the upcoming vote on whether to stay or remain in the EU. A new report from the CEP looks into this. Workers have had a rough ride in recent times. Real (inflation adjusted) wages fell by around 10% in the years after the global financial crisis of 2008 and the ensuing austerity. Such a sustained fall in pay is unprecedented in British post-war history.

Read More...


15 April 2016
How Brexit will reduce foreign investment in the UK.... and why it matters
LSE Business Review

Leaving the EU could lead to a fall in inward foreign direct investment of close to a quarter, writes a CEP team.

Read More...


15 April 2016
How Brexit would reduce foreign investment in the UK - and why that matters
The Conversation

Foreign investors love Britain, but Brexit would kill the vibe. According to new research conducted at the Centre for Economic Performance, leaving the European Union could lead to a fall in inward foreign direct investment into the UK of close to a quarter. This would damage productivity and could lower people's real incomes by more than 3%.

Read More...


04 April 2016
The consequences of Brexit for UK trade and living standards
VOX - CEPR's Policy Portal

The economic consequences of leaving the EU are at the heart of the Brexit debate. This column studies how changes in trade and fiscal transfers to the EU following Brexit would affect living standards in the UK. Across a range of scenarios, Brexit leads to lower income per capita, but the magnitude of the loss depends on what trade policies the UK adopts post-Brexit. To minimise the economic costs of Brexit, the UK would have to remain closely integrated into the Single Market.

Read More...


21 March 2016
The question is not whether Brexit will cost the UK in economic terms but how much
LSE British Politics and Policy blog

For over two years, a research team at the Centre for Economic Performance (CEP) has been studying the likely impact of the UK leaving the European Union. Their latest report focuses on the impact of 'Brexit' through changing trade patterns. Under 'optimistic' assumptions, there is a fall in national income of 1.3 per cent (about £850 per household). Under 'pessimistic' assumptions, this doubles to 2.6 per cent. When the dynamic effects of higher trade costs on productivity are included, the cost may rise to between 6.3 per cent and 9.5 per cent in the long run.

Read More...