The Financial Times:
Brexiters' idea of unilateral free trade is a dangerous fantasy
9 June 2016
Economists for Brexit, argues that such an alternative exists. It rejects post-exit deals with the EU and instead recommends unilateral free trade and reliance for market access on the rules of the World Trade Organisation. Does this make sense? The short answer is: no. The longer one is that unilateral free trade would not be economically superior to EU membership, would be less simple than imagined and would also be politically unacceptable. ...
Start with the economics. Patrick Minford of Cardiff University suggests that, under this option, UK economic welfare would rise by 4 per cent after Brexit. The economy would also end up specialising in services and lose manufacturing. In analysing the same option, economists at the London School of Economics reach a quite different conclusion: a reduction of 2.3 per cent in welfare, only marginally less than the 2.6 per cent reduction they believe would follow a Brexit without such unilateral reductions in tariffs.
This article was published by The Financial Times on June 9, 2016
Link to article here
Related publications
Economists for Brexit: A Critique, Thomas Sampson, Swati Dhingra, Gianmarco Ottaviano and John Van Reenen, CEP Brexit Analysis Paper No.6, May 2016
The complete CEP Brexit Analysis Series is available online here
Related links
Thomas Sampson webpage
Swati Dhingra webpage
Gianmarco Ottaviano webpage
John Van Reenen webpage
Growth Programme webpage
Trade Programme webpage