Printer Friendly

LEAVING EUROPE? WHY THE UNITED KINGDOM NEEDS A UNIQUE TRADING ARRANGEMENT WITH THE EUROPEAN UNION THAT TRANSCENDS THE DEFICIENT EUROPEAN MODELS.

I. INTRODUCTION

When the British public voted to leave the European Union through a referendum, global leaders were surprised as to why a key member of the European Union, since 1973, decided to leave. (1) Although E.U. membership has numerous benefits, such as access to the world's largest economic entity for trading, one of the reasons why the public voted to part ways was due to the surge of immigrants entering the United Kingdom. (2) In addition, a significant amount of money was continuously injected into the European Union as required for their E.U. membership. (3) In an effort to avoid being heavily regulated by E.U. laws, the United Kingdom will have to create a separate trade agreement with the European Union where they can access the single market without being an active member. (4) The two most popular trading models that have been proposed for the United Kingdom are the European Economic Area (EEA), also known as the Norwegian Model, and the Swiss Model. (5) The United Kingdom has a difficult task in deciding which trading arrangements they want to create with the European Union in order to remain the fifth largest economy in the world. (6)

This Note explores Britain's options for alternative trade agreements with the European Union by criticizing two trading models: The Norwegian Model and the Swiss Model. (7) Part II of this Note discusses the evolution of Britain's relationship with the European Union since 1973. (8) Part III of this Note will explain Brexit and how the people of Britain voted in the June 23, 2016 referendum. (9) Part IV of this note will explicate reasons why the Norwegian Model and the Swiss Model are not sufficient options for Britain following their departure from the European Union. (10) Finally, Part V of this Note will conclude that in order for Britain to have more autonomy over their trading regulations, they will have to establish a distinctive trading arrangement. (11)

II. HISTORY

A. Foundations of the European Union

1. Treaty of Paris

In 1950, following the catastrophic impact of World War II on continental Europe, a French statesman named Robert Schuman proposed the creation of the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC). (12) This proposition helped mitigate the fears that Germany's dominance in the coal and steel industry would hinder Europe's ability to economically recover by opening up the Franco-German steel and coal alliance to other European countries. (13) This community was officially established under the Treaty of Paris in 1951, with the sole purpose of gaining closer integration with Europe. (14) It was the first time a group of European countries formulated an entity for future economic recovery and prosperity. (15)

2. Treaty of Rome

The Treaty of Rome, created in 1957, expanded on the ECSC and created the European Economic Community (EEC) that strived for stronger economic relations between European countries; the EEC expanded on the Treaty of Paris in order for its members to achieve Schuman's vision of a single European entity. (16) It was initially an economic model that grew into a global model for European integration, but falling short of Winston Churchill's idea of a "United States of Europe." (17) In an effort to promote prosperity, this Treaty established a common market and a Customs Union for economic interactions between members. (18) Costs were kept low and tariffs for trade were eliminated. (19) The Treaty of Rome also established important European entities, such as the European Parliament and the European Commission. (20) As the EEC has expanded over time, the members were able to implement polices to improve the living standards of its citizens and access other areas to promote equality and transparency. (21)

3. Treaty of Maastricht

In 1992, the Treaty of Maastricht was signed and formulated to be a response to the economic situation caused by the re-unification of Germany. (22) This treaty created a cohesive political and economic union building upon the principles established by the Treaty of Rome. (23) Additionally, the treaty created the three pillars of the European Union: the European Communities, the Common Foreign and Security Policy, and the Justice and Home Affairs. (24) The pillars covered all the political, economic, and social aspects of European life to implement the European Union's vision of a more unified Europe. (25) An example of this unity came in the form of the single currency adopted by a majority of the members. (26) Ultimately, the Treaty of Maastricht was one of the most important treaties in European history for establishing the most powerful economic entity in the world, known as the European Union. (27)

4. Treaty of Lisbon

The Treaty of Lisbon was signed in 2007 and introduced changes that would build upon the regulations effectuated by the Treaty of Maastricht; this was achieved by expanding the scope of the European Union as a supranational entity. (28) Article 49 A is a key provision of the Treaty of Lisbon that signifies the formal process that a member has to follow in order to leave the European Union. (29) By officially triggering Article 49 A, an E.U. member has two years to negotiate its departure from the European Union by negotiating out of all the agreements that the E.U. member has incorporated into its domestic laws. (30) The two-year period also allows the E.U. member to negotiate a new trade agreement with the European Union to ensure that both parties continue to sustain a positive economic relationship. (31)

The European Union also grew as an institution with twenty-seven members by 2009, being governed by regulations that were aimed at regulating the activity of its initial members that signed in 1992 or shortly after. (32) The members wanted to reflect these changes in the E.U. Constitution to keep in touch with the changes in the global political realm. (33) There will unlikely be more amendments to the E.U. Constitution for many years to come due to the established nature of the European Union as a single economic entity; it is a vital trading partner for countries such as the United States and it is important for the European Union to remain a stable political and economic entity. (34)

B. The United Kingdom's trade relations with the European Union

Prior to becoming a member of the EEC, the United Kingdom's economic growth was relatively low compared to other members of the EEC, which fortunately changed when the United Kingdom did become an active member. (35) On January 1, 1973, when the United Kingdom joined the EEC, they gained access to a supranational economic entity that did not exist beforehand. (36) In order to do this Britain had to create the European Communities Act of 1972 that formally integrated the EEC into U.K. law. (37) When the idea of the EEC first developed, Britain's response was to be part of the European Free Trade Association (EFTA), as a source of competition to the EEC. (38) Britain soon realized how uncompetitive this association would be against the EEC because of the vast number of people that the community covers. (39) French President Charles de Gaulle had opposed the United Kingdom's entry into the EEC for a multitude of reasons, one of them relating to his belief that Britain would do anything to maintain its independence; despite his efforts, de Gaulle resigned in 1969 allowing the United Kingdom to eventually join the EEC in 1973. (40)

When the United Kingdom participated in a referendum two years after joining the EEA, then Prime Minister Harold Wilson was relieved that the public voted to stay in the EEC. (41) After the referendum, the United Kingdom was able to economically prosper with the creation of the single market. (42) Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher further contributed to this success by providing stern opposition to any proposed idea to expand the scope of the single market. (43) The United Kingdom had come to terms that their continued relations with the British Commonwealth, from an economic perspective, would not be beneficial, as the EEA granted them access to a larger market. (44) Rather, they focused on participating in a trading community in Europe that was not politically motivated; this community had a particular focus on free trade between the Member-States. (45) Ultimately, the United Kingdom utilized the support of the British Commonwealth for the integration of the EFTA to reducing internal disagreements between domestic political parties; the United Kingdom understood that European integration would be a difficult process. (46)

C. Norwegian Model: The European Economic Area

The EEA is an economic entity formulated in 1994, with the sole purpose of furthering the integration of countries that are members of the EEA into the E.U.'s internal market. (47) In 1945 following the conclusion of World War II, then U.S. Secretary of State, George Marshall, created a plan to rebuild Europe. (48) He believed that in order for the United States to remain as the leader of the capitalist world, it was essential to restore the European economy. (49) In order to implement George Marshall's ideas, the Organization for European Economic Co-operation (OEEC) was created to ensure that Europe would receive the necessary aid after World War II; the creation of this entity, along with the EFTA, laid the foundation for the EEA. (50) The cooperative nature of the OEEC enabled certain countries to participate in this entity because their sovereignty would be respected. (51) By 1977, EFTA members such as Iceland, Liechtenstein, and Norway were able to remove import tariffs on industrial goods by entering into trade agreements with EEC. (52) The same Member States entered into an agreement with the EEC to create a European Economic Space, in which the active members would be able to further their collaborations in trading goods. (53)

The EEA incorporates the four freedoms of the internal market: free movement of goods, people, services, and capital. (54) By participating in this membership, the numerous countries involved have access to the single market in which they have to adopt the four freedoms, but still have the independence to implement their own policies with respect to "employment law, agriculture, and home affairs." (55) Citizens of a member country are allowed to work in any country within the European Union without any imposing restrictions. (56) Companies that conduct business within the European Union are allowed to trade freely among themselves without trade barriers. (57) The members are also able to impose a variety of restrictions on immigration, subject to heated negotiations between E.U. members. (58) On the other hand, members are not entitled to have a say on the regulations implemented by the European Union and would only have limited ability to reject the regulations. (59)

D. Swiss Model

Switzerland has always remained an independent country that has not acceded membership to a major European entity and has resorted to establishing a unique relationship with the European Union. (60) This relationship took the form of 120 bilateral agreements with the European Union that enabled Switzerland to continue accessing the E.U. market. (61) The purpose behind Switzerland's numerous bilateral agreements was to enable them to maintain a sufficient bilateral trading system with the European Union, while also adhering to the multilateral system that they are part of with the World Trade Organization (WTO). (62) In conjunction with Iceland, Norway, and Lichtenstein, Switzerland utilizes its membership in the EFTA because they are more influential as an economic entity when they are part of a group; thereby making themselves a more appealing trade partner. (63) The Swiss Government was open to the idea of joining the EEA for the possibility of closer integration with the European Union, but ultimately rejected the transition into the EEA and subsequently rejected E.U. membership in 1992. (64)

Alternatively, Switzerland has been able to create a distinct trading arrangement with the European Union. (65) This arrangement consisted of two bilateral agreements in the late 1990s, seeping into the early 2000s, where the agreements allowed them to access various sectors of the European Union's single market. (66) Treaties with the European Union, however, come at a cost because Switzerland would have to adhere to the four fundamental freedoms of the single market. (67) Due to their complex nature, Switzerland took nine years to negotiate these bilateral agreements; they are also part of the Schengen Area that does not have any internal border checks, nor do they have any restrictions on the movement of people. (68) Ultimately, Switzerland has a complicated arrangement with the European Union and would be difficult for many countries to replicate. (69)

III. FACTS

A. Why Did Britain Have a Referendum

There has always been tension in the United Kingdom amongst a division of the population who have grown to resent their membership in the European Union. (70) For example, issues with immigration, the rise of the U.K. Independence Party (UKIP), and the influence of big political figures all played into this idea that the United Kingdom would be prosperous without the influence of E.U. regulations. (71) More specifically, UKIP focused on the rise of immigration as the main reason why the United Kingdom had to leave the European Union, which resonated strongly with a large portion of the U.K. population. (72) Then Prime Minister David Cameron had promised, before his Conservative Party's victory in the 2015 elections, that a referendum would be held to decide if the United Kingdom should stay in the European Union. (73) Regardless of the reasons pertaining to the UKIP influence, it is difficult to know with certainty if the referendum was carried out due to the amount of capital put into the European Union, increased nationalism, or the way the European Union is governed. (74)

B. The Ultimate Result

The referendum that was held on June 23, 2016, resulted in the United Kingdom deciding to leave the European Union. (75) The results were broken down by region and age group. (76) The results had a negative initial impact on the global economy and especially on the British Pound. (77) Global leaders have voiced their surprise at the United Kingdom's decision and are unsure whether this decision will benefit the United Kingdom's long term prosperity. (78) The United Kingdom will now have to decide when they want to initiate Article 50 of the Treaty of Lisbon in order to officially leave the European Union and whether they want to initiate a "hard" or "soft" Brexit. (79) Nevertheless, many are considering whether the outcome of this referendum was a result of judgment being clouded by emotions or whether there was a pragmatic thought process behind the reasons for wanting to leave the European Union. (80)

Following the initial impact of the referendum, the United Kingdom's economy has started to slowly stabilize and rebuke opinions that the economy will suffer catastrophic consequences. (81) Whether or not the economy will stabilize or even start to grow depends on the type of trading model they adopt. (82) Numerous models have been suggested, such as the Norwegian model or the Swiss model, but it is still difficult to assess whether any of the models would respect the reasons why the United Kingdom decided to leave and whether they would have to try to create a distinctive agreement altogether. (83)

IV. ANALYSIS

A. The Norwegian Model Would Stop the United Kingdom from Influencing E. U. Policies

The Norwegian Model would be problematic for the United Kingdom because they will be regulated without any voting rights or from influencing the policy making process. (84) The United Kingdom's current E.U. membership enables them to influence the policies before incorporating them into their domestic legal system. (85) The membership will have limited benefits such as providing input over decisions made concerning the European Union and Schengen area. (86) Nevertheless, the United Kingdom should still maintain positive trading relations with the European Union regardless of the model employed because not only are they entitled to make reservations to new E.U. laws that are pending implementation, the European Union is still the largest economic entity in the world. (87) Although the United Kingdom will have no representatives on the European Court of Justice, the European Parliament, and the Council of Ministers, they will have the opportunity to continue trading goods and services into the European Union, as well as negotiate investment agreements with non-E.U. members, such as the United States. (88) The United Kingdom would have to implement E.U. policies regardless of the United Kingdom's opinion of the policy. (89)

As Norway is outside the Customs Union, the goods exported to the European Union would be subject to European Union's customs regulations. (90) This will impose administrative costs because U.K. companies will have to provide the correct documentation at every U.K. border for goods going into the European Union. (91) Norway is also required to adhere to E.U. regulations that have no bearing on the single economic entity, such as environment standards and consumer protection. (92) Both the EEA and the EFTA have not conducted trade negotiations with major economies like the United States and China, which would have to be negotiated separately by the United Kingdom in order to benefit from trading with powerful economies. (93)

The United Kingdom's membership in the EEA would require continued contributions to the European Union, which would prevent the United Kingdom from saving any money when they leave the European Union. (94) Although membership in the EEA would reduce the amount of financial investment into the European Union compared to its current contributions, the United Kingdom would still be contributing a significant amount of capital that goes beyond what they would be comfortable paying in the long term. (95) These contributions go towards helping the less-economically developed E.U. nations. (96) The United Kingdom will have to continue adhering to the four freedoms; this will be an issue because the British public voted to leave the European Union primarily due to concerns with rising immigration. (97) The United Kingdom would want to maintain access to the European Union's single trading market without sacrificing their influence in the decision making process, thereby making the EEA a less attractive proposition. (98)

B. The Swiss Model Will Be Too Time Consuming to Emulate

As the United Kingdom is currently the fifth largest economy in the world, it cannot afford to spend many years recreating the Swiss trading arrangement in which the United Kingdom will have to create individual bilateral agreements with the Eu ropean Union. (99) The numerous bilateral agreements only allows Switzerland to access a portion of the E.U. market that pertains to goods and a limited number of services, not including Switzerland's infamous banking regulations. (100) As Switzerland never fully integrated into the European Union, the numerous bilateral agreements that they have with the European Union are constantly subject to amendments in order to incorporate the changing E.U. regulations into the Swiss legal system. (101) The European nation also does not have any representation in the numerous E.U. institutions, which if implemented by the United Kingdom would also prevent it from influencing E.U. policies. (102) Switzerland is also in a unique geographical location for business activity, because it is surrounded by E.U. members, a luxury not afforded to the United Kingdom. (103)

If the United Kingdom follows the Swiss Model for trading with the European Union, it will forcefully have to abide by E.U. rules and regulations in order to continue accessing the single market. (104) For example, the United Kingdom would have to respect and incorporate the four freedoms of the European Union into its legal system. (105) This would be concerning because the United Kingdom would want to restrict freedom of movement in order to align with its beliefs on immigration. (106) Unfortunately, it is unlikely that any E.U. member would allow a non-member, who wants to be part of a trading arrangement, to limit one of the four freedoms that are essential to the European Union; especially if the non-member wants to access the single market. (107) Like the Norwegian model, the Swiss model prevents the United Kingdom from influencing any E.U. regulations and would also require continued financial contributions to the European Union. (108) Ultimately, considering the time and cost associated with creating an agreement like the E.U. agreement with Switzerland, it is unclear whether the remaining E.U. members would be willing to offer a similar trade agreement to the United Kingdom. (109)

C. A Unique Model Will Have to be Created

The United Kingdom will have to create an altogether unique trading system in order to respect the British public's decision to leave the European Union. (110) Implementing the Norwegian or Swiss model would increase costs and reduce access to many sectors of the European Union for foreign and domestic companies. (111) A unique model would consist of higher trading costs, because E.U. members are aware that the United Kingdom would no longer have the same ties to the European Union as it did when it was a member. (112) The United Kingdom should create a distinctive trading model that best represents the ideals and beliefs that would benefit its countries, even if that means the United Kingdom may or may not obtain favorable terms in future negotiations with the European Union and non-E.U. members. (113) If the United Kingdom cannot create a suitable model, they could potentially join the Customs Union, like Turkey, or trade with the European Union under the WTO rules. (114) If the United Kingdom considered, for example, the Customs Union, this would be problematic because the Union does cover the financial sector, which is a key sector for the UK's economy. (115)

Similar to the Norwegian and Swiss trading models, membership to the Customs Union would prevent the United Kingdom from influencing any potential E.U. policies that relate to trading and would limit the types of access they would have to the European Union. (116) Trading under the WTO would require adherence to the most-favored nation principle in which all members will be treated the same with respect to the trading of goods. (117) It would also require the United Kingdom to pay an E.U. common external tariff. (118) U.K. businesses would have to continue complying with E.U. regulations if they want to participate in trade deals with E.U. businesses. (119) Although the United Kingdom will have the right to create their own trading arrangements with many countries outside of the European Union, the reaction of other countries to Brexit will ultimately dictate the terms in which the United Kingdom will participate in any future negotiations. (120)

V. CONCLUSION

It is difficult to predict whether the United Kingdom correctly decided on leaving the European Union. (121) It is a decision that continues to shock countries around the world and will require vigorous negotiations by the United Kingdom. (122) Although the United Kingdom will not be tied down by E.U. regulations to the same extent as an E.U. member, they will lose some influence and creditability on an international scale. (123) Special attention will have to be given to the United Kingdom's financial sector, which is essential for their economic growth. (124) Regardless of the trading model implemented by the United Kingdom, it will take many years to renegotiate agreements with countries outside of the European Union. (125) The United Kingdom will certainly face a period of difficulty and economic uncertainty for the near future because they will never experience the same benefits as a member of the European Union in the future. (126)

(1.) See Timothy B. Lee, Brexit: What Happens When Britain Leaves the EU, Vox.com--Explain the News (June 25, 2016), available at http://www.vox.com/ 2016/ 6/23/12021222/brexit-what-happens-next (explaining what Brexit means and its upcoming impact on global scale). The former Prime Minister David Cameron knew that Brexit would be bad for the country, yet decided to hold a referendum due to the constant pressure he was under by the public and the opposing political parties. Id. The people of Britain want to leave the largest economic entity in the world and will decide on a particular trading model that would not be constrained by the numerous E.U. regulations. Id. This is a referendum that many people have demanded from the prime minister, who eventually acquiesced and held one on June 23, 2016. Id.

(2.) See Kim Hjelmgaard & Gregg Zoroya, Exploding UK Immigration Helped Drive 'Brexit' Vote, Usa Today (June 28, 2016), http://www.usatoday.com/story/ news/world/2016/06/28/exploding-uk-immigration-helped-drive-brexitvote/86424670/ (explaining increases in immigration leading people to vote for "Brexit"). There has been a big increase in the number of legal migrants, especially from Eastern Europe, arriving into the United Kingdom. Id. Approximately "one in 20 people living in the U.K.--3 million people--were citizens of another E.U. country just two years ago...." Id. See also Lindsay Holmes, The One Factor In the Brexit Vote No One Is Talking About, The Huffington Post (June 24, 2016), http://www.huffingtonpost. com/entry/psychology-voting-brexit_us_576d636ae4b0fl683239641 f (analyzing how Brexit occurred because of emotion rather than pragmatism). People were very angry at the vast increase in immigrants and refugees in Britain over the past couple of years, but the public needs to think about the implications of leaving the European Union on "job security, safety and economic growth...." Id. People are more concerned with themselves rather than thinking about the greater implications of leaving. Id.

(3.) See Ivana Kottasova, How Much Money Does the EU Really Cost Britain? Cnn Money (June 2, 2016), available at http://money.cnn.com/2016/06/02/news/brexiteu-budget-cost-uk/ (indicating Britain's actual investment into European Union). Many supporters of the Leave campaign were arguing that Britain was wasting money by giving the European Union GBP350 million a week, when in reality the amount is closer to GBP188 million a week. Id. See also Anthony Reuben, Reality Check: Would Brexit Mean Extra 350 Million Pounds a Week for NHS?, Bbc News (Apr. 15, 2016), http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36040060 (discussing how money saved from European Union will have to go elsewhere). The money that the United Kingdom saves from investing into the European Union will have to be put into other sectors depending on the trade agreement established. Id. Because the United Kingdom may save some money does not mean that it will automatically go to important government sectors such as the National Health Service (NHS). Id. This is because the government will have to think about which government sector is in need of funds following its departure from the European Union. Id. See also Vageesh Jain, Don't Listen to the Brexiteers- Leaving the EU Won't Save the NHS, it will Cripple it, Independent (Apr. 25, 2016), http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/dont-listen-tothe-brexiteers-leaving-the-eu-wont-save- the-nhs-it-will-cripple-it-a6999611.html (describing how money will be invested into E.U. market). Countries such as Norway and Switzerland have to make payments to the European Union based on their unique trading relationship and is something that the United Kingdom may have to do in order to continue accessing the single market. Id.

(4.) See Kylie MacLellan, Britain to Seek Independent Membership of WTO after Brexit-newspaper, Reuters (Sept. 25, 2016), http://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu-fox-idUSKCNll V0C5 (discussing Britain potentially becoming part of WTO). See also Andrew Walker, Uncertainty for UK Trade Outside EU, says WTO Chief, Bbc News (June 7, 2016), http://www.bbc.com/news/business-36470809 (noting expenses associated with WTO membership for United Kingdom). By becoming a member of the World Trade Organization (WTO) without any deal with the European Union being implemented, Britain may have to pay a higher tariff on imports from the European Union and other countries. Id. It is also important to consider the greater implications this may have on how other WTO members would perceive Britain's potential desire to adopt E.U. tariffs. Id. See also Peter Ungphakorn, Nothing Simple about UK Regaining WTO Status Post-Brexit, International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (June 27, 2016), available at http:// www.ictsd.org/opinion/nothing-simple-about-uk-regaining-wto-status-post-brexit (analyzing complications of Britain renegotiating trade deals with WTO and E.U.). Because Britain is a member of the WTO in which its membership terms are mixed with its E.U. obligations, both Britain and the European Union would have to create separate trade agreements acknowledging their separation, which itself will be a time consuming process with many complications along the way. Id. See also Peter Dominiczak and Peter Foster, Britain Warned it Could Take Five Years to Agree Trade Pact with 'Impossible' EU as Canada says the 'Ball's in Europe's Court' to Rescue Landmark Deal, The Telegraph (Oct. 22, 2016), http://www.telegraph.co.uk/ news/2016/10/21/eu-is-impossible-to-do-deals-with-canada-says-sparking-fears-abo/ (describing potential effect of Brexit). The United Kingdom will have to be patient in negotiating any future deals with the European Union and other nations. Id.

(5.) See James Blitz, Brexit latest: The Interim European Economic Area Option, Financial Times (July 25, 2016), available at https://www.ft.com/content/931bffc85253-1 Ie6-befd-2fc0c26b3c60 (explaining implication of joining European Economic Area). Joining the European Economic Area (EEA) could provide Britain with the possibility of participating in the single market but under certain restrictions. Id. By doing so, they would not be able to restrict the free movement of people within the single market, unless they want their access to the single market reduced. Id. Not only would Britain have to comply with E.U. regulations, they will not have a say in the types of regulations that are enforced. Id. Britain and the European Union could agree on a short term deal whereby Britain can join the EEA and also try to create a different deal that would be sufficient for both parties, assuming the other E.U. Member States would be okay with this proposition. Id. See also Charlotte Wold, Brexit: Would the Swiss Model Work? Investopedia (July 1, 2016), http://www.investopedia .com/articles/markets/070116/brexit-would-swiss-model-work.asp (explaining Swiss trading model that Britain could implement). Switzerland is part of the European Free Trade Association where it has numerous investment treaties with the European Union without being a member. Id. Switzerland's European Free Trade Association membership entails free trade involving non-agricultural goods between Switzerland and the European Union, but when it comes to services, Swiss companies have subsidiaries in different E.U. countries to trade freely within the European Union. Id. They also have over one hundred treaties with the European Union since its creation in 1972. Id.

(6.) See Michael Keating, What are the UK's Alternatives to EU Membership? University Of Edinburgh, http://www.europeanfutures.ed.ac.Uk/article-3391#Author (last visited Mar. 20, 2018) (analyzing United Kingdom's numerous trading options). The United Kingdom may choose to ignore other trade agreements and instead adhere to the rules and regulations of the WTO. Id. They could also sign a free-trade agreement with the European Union or join either the EEA, colloquially referred to as the "Norwegian Option," the "Swiss Option," or the European Free Trade Association. Id. See also Alice Foster, Will Britain opt for Norwegian, Swiss, Canadian or Turkish model in Post-Brexit World!, Sunday Express (June 27, 2016), available at http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/673190/EU-referendum-2016-Brexit-trademodels-Norwegian-Swiss-Canadian-Turkish- WTO-South-Korea (discussing alternative trading models United Kingdom could potentially adopt). The Norwegian model, consists of maintaining access to the European Union by adhering to the regulations they propose without actually having a say in the creation process. Id. The Swiss model, a country that is not a member of the EEA but is a member of the European Free Trade Association, consists of a vast number of separate bilateral treaties with the European Union and may be more time consuming than the United Kingdom would hope for. Id. Switzerland also has to allow "the free movement of employed people and still has to contribute to EU funds." Id. See also Adrian Favero, Britain After Brexit: Could the Swiss Model be an Option, University of Edinburgh (June 22, 2016), available at http://www.european futures.ed.ac.uk/article-3474 (explaining problems with Swiss trading model). The United Kingdom should be aware of the time-consuming process of creating a Swiss-style trading arrangement. Id. They must also realize that their domestic regulations are constantly subject to change depending on the E.U laws that are created. Id. See generally Chris Giles, UK slips below France in global economy table, Financial Times (Oct. 4, 2016), https://www.ft.com/ content/7508bfle-8a46-11e6-8cb7-e7ada1d123b1 (stating how United Kingdom's economy currently weakening). The International Monetary Fund believes that, based on the market exchange rates, the United Kingdom has fallen to sixth position below France when it comes to the most powerful economies in the world. Id. Boris Johnson says that if we were to look at the "gross domestic product per person," Britain would not be ranked in the top 10. Id. Countries such as Luxembourg and Qatar would be ranked above the United Kingdom. Id. When it comes to purchasing power, the United Kingdom is ranked further behind many other modernized countries such as, Japan, Germany, and Russia. Id. See generally Murat Yapici, Turkish Perspective on FTA's under the Turkey-EU CU, Europa (June 18, 2013), available at http://www.europarl.europa.eu/document/ activities/cont/201306/20130619ATT68026/ 20130619ATT68026EN.pdf (detailing Turkey's arrangement with European Union). The Customs Union established in 1995 requires Turkey to implement laws regarding the free movement of goods. Id. They are not entitled to influence the types of E.U. policies that are created, but nevertheless have to incorporate them into their domestic legislation. Id.

(7.) See Blitz, supra note 5 (providing insight into EEA).

(8.) See infra Part II (explaining Britain's historical relationship with European Union).

(9.) See infra Part III (explaining Britain's decisions in response to Brexit).

(10.) See infra Part IV (analyzing current options for Britain to help them prosper).

(11.) See infra Part V (concluding Britain's need to create new trade agreements).

(12.) See Karen J. Alter and David Steinberg, The Theory and Reality of the European Coal and Steel Community, Northwestern University (Jan. 2007), available at http://buffett.northwestern.edu/documents/working-papers/Buffett_07-001_Alter_ Steinberg.pdf (explicating realities of this Treaty). The ECSC resulted from the impact of World War II. Id. Germany's desire to govern Europe, and to extent the world, led to vast devastation that the members of the ECSC did not want to repeat in the future. Id. When Robert Schuman first proposed the idea of the ECSC, he was aware that Germany had the strongest steel industry and Ruhr coal in the continent. Id. This is known as the Schuman Declaration. Id. He was also concerned about Germany's dominant position in the steel industry and how they could harm other European countries. Id. See also Sergio Pistone, The Federal Perspective in the Schuman Declaration, The Federalist (May 10, 2010), available at https://www.thenew federalist.eu/The-federal-perspective-in-the-Schuman-declaration-Part-1 (explaining importance of Schuman Doctrine). Because of Schuman's idea and desire for a Franco-German coalition, Europe was beginning to develop the foundations for a united Europe. Id. The Minister of Foreign Affairs in France, Aristide Briand, predicted that following the end of the war, European countries would have to either unite or continue to suffer. Id. Not only was American aid contingent on a unified Europe, the United Kingdom was stubbornly hesitant about reducing their sovereignty for its fellow Europeans. Id.

(13.) See Pistone, supra note 12 (recalling why Schuman wanted ESCS). Numerous European countries wanted to make sure the deal reflected their desire to have the necessary resources to be able to rebuild and improve. Id. See generally, World War II Fast Facts, Cnn (Aug. 19, 2016), http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/09/world/worldwar-ii-fast-facts/ (recognizing World War II's global impact). Not only were there a multitude of reasons why the war began, there was also a large amount of deaths in all the participating countries involved. Id. See also Margaret MacMillan, Rebuilding the world after the Second World War, The Guardian (Sept. 11, 2009), https:// www.theguardian.com/world/2009/sep/11/ second-world-war-rebuilding (analyzing World War II's devastation). Not only were new organizations being created such as the United Nations and the International Monetary Fund, empires and regimes were crumbling. Id. Britain had to step aside for the United States and the Soviet Union to become the new superpowers of the world. Id. A vast amount of attention was rightfully given to Germany following the Nazi regime. Id. Not only was Germany under allied control (east/west division of Berlin and iron curtain), steps were being taken to ensure that the rightful culprits from that regime were being prosecuted and a new system was being set up such that anything remotely similar to the holocaust does not happen again in the future. Id. See generally Britain and World War II, Daily Mail (Aug. 12, 2006), http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-400277/BritainWorld-War-I I.html (explaining impact of World War 11 on United Kingdom). Prior to both World Wars, the British Empire was still a dominant force in the world. Id. Following the two World Wars, the British Empire was crumbling down with colonies seeking independence. Id. Even though the United Kingdom is still one of the most powerful nations on earth, it does not have the same level of influence as it once did many years ago. Id. Then Prime Minister Lloyd George was able to provide some stability in Europe by being one of the influential figures in creating and implementing the Treaty of Versailles. Id. Both wars had a devastating impact on the United Kingdom, with thousands of people losing their lives for an importance cause. Id. Following World War II, the United States and Soviet Union became the two most powerful countries in the world. Id.

(14.) Treaty Establishing the European Coal and Steel Community, 18 April 1951, 261 U.N.T.S. 140 (stating various provisions in which countries can try to achieve peace). The following countries established this agreement: France, Germany, Belgium, Italy, Luxembourg and the Netherlands. Id. The six foundational countries wanted to create this union in which they can prevent future bloodshed between countries and instead hope for closer integration as a continent. Id. See Will James, History of European Union, Civitas (March 2006), available at http://civitas.org.uk/ content/files/OS.3.History.pdf (explaining history behind European Union). Robert Schuman and Jean Monnet wanted to force the members to share their coal and steel resources in order to aid the rebuilding of Western Europe following the Second World War. Id. This Treaty created a foundational model upon which the European Commission, European Council, and European Parliament were eventually created and utilized by the future organization called the ECC. Id. See also The Founding Fathers of the EU, Europa (Oct. 10, 2016), available at https://europa.eu/europeanunion/about-eu/history_en (describing Founding Fathers of European Union). Men such as Winston Churchill, Konrad Adenauer, Alcide De Gasperi, and 11 others were visionaries in their desires to create a United Europe. Id.

(15.) See Alter and Steinberg, supra note 12 (commenting on why this Community was established). A form of European integration in this format has never been achieved before and it was something that the Member States believed would be the start of an economic entity furthering the desire of members to recovery. Id. See also Peter Novak, The First Treaties, Europa (Oct. 2016), available at http://www.euro pari.europa.eu/ftu/pdf/en/FTU_l. 1.1.pdf (elucidating impact of ECSC). The goal was to establish a foundational aspect of future integration and edge towards an economic model that encompasses other aspects of economic growth. Id.

(16.) See Consolidated Version of the Treaty Establishing The European Community, Dec. 24, 2002, O.J. (C 325). (establishing provisions of Rome Treaty).

(17.) See Will James, Treaty of Rome, Civitas (Nov. 2005), http://civitas.org.uk/ content/files/TR.l.Treaty-of-Rome.pdf (describing purpose for Treaty of Rome). Al though this entity was just the beginning of the vision of a United Europe, it was able to establish many new features that was unparalleled in the past. Id. It encouraged Member States to see cohesion and enable the movement of goods, services, and capital. Id. It was also important for the Member States to help each other out if this vision was to be achieved. Id. The Treaty was criticized for potentially setting an unrealistic goal; this idea of a United Europe, along with the creation of new governmental bodies that were unique in nature. Id. Jean Monnet once said that the six founding countries were essential to the future creation of a United Europe. Id. See also Patrick Garrity, Churchill, Britain, and European Unity, Hillsdale C. (Mar. 9, 2016), https://winstonchurchill.hillsdale.edu/churchill-britain-and-european-unity/ (stating Churchill's "United States of Europe" ideology). Realizing that another World War had to be avoided at all costs, Churchill envisioned a "United States of Europe." Id. Churchill envisioned an efficient relationship between Britain and its Commonwealth, as the empire had greatly reduced in size following World War II. Id. This "United Europe" that he foresaw was meant to be part of a big picture in which Britain would be an important member. Id. He further stated how German and French unity were key in establishing a peaceful Europe, by claiming that the unity of France and Germany is essential to any plan for reconstructing Europe. Id.

(18.) See From common market to people's Europe, Europa (Jan. 2, 2008), http:// europa.eu/50/news/article/080102_en.htm (detailing parts of Treaty of Rome). Equality among genders was promoted by ensuring "access to work, training, career advancement and working conditions, as well as equal pay, security benefits and the right to parental leave." Id. Different European agencies and laws were created to make transparent the inner-workings of the European Economic Community (EEC) to the public. Id.

(19.) See id. (commenting on Treaty of Rome's proposed rules). See also Tracy A. Kaye, European Tax Harmonization and the Implications for U.S Tax Policy, 19 B.C. Int'l & Comp. L. Rev. 109, 110 (1996) (dissecting purpose behind Treaty of Rome). The main purpose for this Treaty was to get closer to the ultimate goal, which was a single European market. Id. In order to achieve this goal, the Member States had to eliminate border controls to allow the free movement of goods, services, people, and capital. Id. Direct and indirect taxes both have different consequences on the EEC and both needed to be carefully structured. Id. Discrimination based on nationality was also prohibited under Article 26 of the Treaty. Id.

(20.) See James, supra note 17 (introducing how Treaty of Rome establishes governmental agencies). The numerous governmental entities were created for greater European cohesion. Id.

(21.) See id. (noting EEC's wider influence on its members). See also Joaquin Roy, Reflections on the Treaty of Rome and today's EU (Apr. 2007), available at http:/ /www6.miami.edu/eucenter/Roy_ReflectionsTreatyRome_spec07_edi.pdf (reflecting on Treaty of Rome and its internal structure). The focus of the Treaty was on the creation of a harmonious society under the umbrella of an economic vision for prosperity. Id. It was also intended to create a smooth transition between international business dealings. Id.

(22.) See James, supra note 17 (concluding reasons for Treaty of Maastricht). Former Chancellor of Germany during this time, Helmut Kohl, was happy that he was able to negotiate the entrance of Germany into the European Union and quash any hostility he had with France and its President, Francois Mitterrand. Id. Both countries wanted to make sure that they were able to negotiate the best deals for their respective countries, but ultimately realized that some form of a compromise was required in order to gain access to something grander. Id. See also Michael J. Braun, The Maastricht Treaty As High Politics: Germany, France, and European Integration, 110 Pol. Sci. Q. (1995-96), available at http://www.uasb.edu.ee/UserFiles/372/File/ pdfs/CENTRO%20ANDINO%20DE%20ESTUDIOS%20INTERNACIONALES/ Timo%20Goosmann%20Baun_1995_Maastricht_as_High_Politics-l.pdf (explaining importance of German re-unification on creation of Treaty of Maastricht). Once the Berlin Wall fell down and the Cold War was coming to an end, Germany had to assess its own identity and had to understand what role it would have in Europe. Id. at 609. As other European countries were fully aware that a unified Germany would be more powerful, they wanted to strengthen the ties between other European countries by trying to create a system in which Germany could be part of any establishment that would be created. Id. A key proponent of creating a closely integrated Europe was France. Id. at 609-10. Not only was France concerned about the level of power that a unified Germany would have, they were also concerned that their own influence in Europe would be reduced. Id. France was benefitting from a militarily controlled Germany for a multitude of reasons, one of them being the declining value of the deutschmark. Id. Britain was equally fearful of what a unified Germany would mean for the balance of power in Europe. Id.

(23.) See Treaty of Maastricht Amend the Treaty on European Union, Feb. 7,1992, O.J. (C 191) 01 (detailing how EEC became European Union); Morgane Griveaud, Why is the Maastricht Treaty considered to be so significant?, (May 29, 2011), available at http://www.e-ir.info/2011/05/29/why-is-the-maastricht-Treaty-considered-to-be-sosignificant-2/ (analyzing significance of Maastricht Treaty). This Treaty was able to create a political union in Europe along with strengthening the economic union between the states. Griveaud, supra. This was achieved by the creation of the Economic and Monetary Union. Id.

(24.) See Braun, supra note 22 (explicating Treaty of Maastricht). The European communities were the most important out of the three because they established a single market that would ultimately unify all the EEC members. Id. They were able to remove any borders preventing the free movement of goods, services, people, and capital. Id. They were the one pillar that governed on a supranational level, whereas the other two pillars worked on a more intergovernmental level. Id. Prior to the enactment of the Treaty, the Yugoslavian crisis proved to be quite troublesome. Id. The Member States at the time could not decide on how to approach the Yugoslavian crisis. Id. Even if the members were able to stop the crisis, they could not decide on whether to legally recognize the new state that was created as a result. Id. The Treaty ensured greater cooperation among Member States that would enable them to address situations like the Yugoslavian crisis in the future with more unity and efficiency. Id. See Petr Novak, The Maastricht and Amsterdam Treaties, Europa (Oct. 2016), available at http://www.europarl.europa.eu/ftu/pdf/en/FTtJ_1.1.3.pdf (summarizing Maastricht Treaty and its three pillars). The common foreign and security policy was tasked with implementing certain foreign and security policies for the benefit of its Member States. Id. The members had to make sure they were unified in implementing these policies as it was for the good of the members. Id. The members had to ensure that they abided by the United Nations charter and respected the fundamental values and principles that pertain to the mission of the European Union. Id. The third pillar, justice and home affairs, covered areas focusing on justice and security. Id. It specifically focused on:
   rules and the exercise of controls on crossing the Community's
   external borders; combating terrorism, serious crime, drug
   trafficking and international fraud; judicial cooperation in
   criminal and civil matters; creation of a European Union Agency for
   Law Enforcement Cooperation (Europol) with a system for exchanging
   information between the national police forces; controlling illegal
   immigration; common asylum policy.


Id. The Treaty of Amsterdam made changes to the Treaty of Maastricht to further the goal of a closer European integration. Id. It was signed on 2 October 1997, but ratified by 1 May 1999. Id. It focused on increasing the powers of the European Union by taking a balanced approach to ensuring cooperation among states. Id. European Parliament also had more legislative power than before, allowing them to work with the E.U. Council in implementing legislation. Id. They were finally able to develop a coherent system that laid out the laws and procedures for governing. Id.

(25.) See Novak, supra note 24 (discussing how far Maastricht Treaty reaches). This Treaty aimed to include a unified Germany and to turn over a new leaf following the Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union. Id. There was a cause for concern because people did not know how this would pan out because this particular union was unique in terms of its size. Id. Under this union, the European Parliament had more influence on national governments of its Member States. Id. They would also have to implement laws with respect to the European Council, which allowed them to have more of a say in the types of legislation that was implemented among the entire Union. Id. The Yugoslavian crisis prior to the integration of the European Union shows how the Member States that eventually accepted the newly recognized states that split from Yugoslavia, were starting to understand the purpose of this union and were willing to show more unity in these types of situations. Id. There was some difficulty in ratifying the Treaty due to Danish and British concerns. Id. Denmark was concerned because of the control that the European Union would have on their national sovereignty, thereby causing a debate in Denmark on whether E.U. membership was worth the potential impact on their national identity. Id. Britain was similarly concerned because their government did not want to be told what to do by external governmental bodies. Id. They were also able to negotiate, to such an extent, where the European Union accepted that Britain would not adopt a single currency. Id.

(26.) See Maastricht Treaty, Bbc News (Apr. 30, 2001), available at http:// news.bbc.co. uk/2/hi/in_depth/europe/euro-glossary/1216944.stm (extrapolating key points of Maastricht Treaty). Not only did it define the three pillars of the union, it also provided a more unified system in terms of how it approached employment and social issues. Id. The ultimate purpose of this Treaty was to reach the penultimate point of European integration that the European Union, as an entity, would be able to compete with the United States. Id.

(27.) See id. (stating importance of Maastricht Treaty on creation of European Union). By allowing the free movement of people to live in any member country, and establishing a single currency, the Maastricht Treaty was able to establish a "blueprint" in which European countries would continue to work on for a long period of time. Id.

(28.) See Treaty of Lisbon Amending the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty Establishing the European Community, Dec. 13, 2007 O.J. (C 306) 1 (describing creation of European Union). This Treaty builds upon the foundations laid by the numerous treaties before it by creating a Treaty that makes the European Union more efficient and effective. Id.

(29.) See id. at art. 49 A (explaining importance of Lisbon Treaty). The following text explains one of the provisions of Article 49 A that an E.U. member has to follow in order to leave the European Union:
   A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European
   Council of its intention. In light of the guidelines provided by
   the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an
   agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its
   withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future
   relationship with the Union. That agreement shall be negotiated in
   accordance with Article 188 N(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning
   of the European Union. It shall be concluded on behalf of the Union
   by the Council, acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the
   consent of the European Parliament.


Id. Not only does the leaving member have to negotiate their departure from the union, they also have to negotiate how they will maintain relations with the European Union. Id. See Benjamin J.W. Eddington, 41 Suffolk Transnat'l L. Rev. 101, 101-118 (2018) (detailing how Article 50 can be triggered).

(30.) See Eddington, supra note 29 (explaining how Article 50 gives E.U. members two years to negotiate its departure). Although the process of leaving the European Union should take two years from the day it is triggered, the amount of time can be extended if the European Council unanimously agrees to do so. Id. at 117-118. This can be a difficult process because the leaving member has to negotiate the terms of its departure with the European Union and each member has to agree to the terms. Id. at 101. The difficulty in the entire process, especially in the case for the United Kingdom, is negotiating a new trading arrangement with the European Union. Id. at 102. A further difficulty would be to balance the interests of the European political leaders in wanting to deter other E.U. members from following the United Kingdom and the interests of business personnel in wanting to reduce the economic damage done to the U.K. economy by leaving the single market. Id. at 118. See Treaty of Lisbon, supra note 28 (discussing vetoing rights of E.U. member states). Those same nembers have the legal right to veto any of the terms or conditions that are discussed between the parties. Id.

(31.) See Brexit: Article 50 has been triggered--what now? Bbc News (Mar. 29, 2017), http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-39143978 (explaining what happens during two-year negotiating process). During the two-year negotiating system, both parties should amicably negotiate the exit terms for the member that triggered Article 50. Id. The exit terms that are agreed to has to be accepted by the remaining twenty seven E.U. members. Id. The United Kingdom would not be allowed to independently negotiate trade agreements with other countries during the two-year negotiating process. Id.

(32.) See Francisco J. Lorca, The Treaty of Lisbon and the Irish Impasse, University of Miami (Aug. 2008), available at http://aei.pitt.edu/11057/1/LorcaFranciscoLisbonLong08edi.pdf (evaluating reasons for Lisbon Treaty). The Treaty of Lisbon has often been described as the final step required for the creation of a unified Europe, regardless of the difficulties that the union had to face ever since the creation of the ESCS. Id. See also Bob Bryan, Europe is bigger than the US, Business Insider (June 30, 2015), available at http://www.business insider.com/charts-eu-economy-is-biggerthan-the-us-2015-6 (discussing size of E.U. economy compared to U.S. economy). It should also be considered a success for an entity to surpass the United States, as the largest economic entity in the world, provided that the European Union is considered a single entity; otherwise the United States, as a single country is the largest economy in the world. Id.

(33.) See Lorca, supra note 32 (dissecting background of Lisbon Treaty). The drafters of the E.U. Constitution had to keep in mind each country's history and culture to understand the impact of each provision on the members. Id. Hostilities arise when members feel that the regulations imposed are contradictory to their national Constitutions and are unsure as to how they should approach this dilemma because there will be pressure from the public on the home front and the bureaucrats at the European Union. Id.

(34.) See id. (describing ultimate goal of Treaty of Lisbon). This Treaty was created to enhance clarity and democracy among the Member States. Id. This will involve changes in the structure and governance of the European Union. Id. See also Giorgio Maganza, The Lisbon Treaty: A Brief Outline, 31 Fordham Int'l L.J. 1603, 1609 (2009) (stating changes introduced by Lisbon Treaty). This Treaty made the necessary changes to relax public tensions regarding the implications of these changes, in which the aim was to enable closer European integration in conjunction with keeping the principles in place prior to this Treaty's enactment. Id. The creation of a President of the European Union and a foreign minister adds a new democratic element that has never concretely occurred in the past, particularly not in an entity of this magnitude. Id. at 1611-12. See also Bruno Waterfield, Lisbon Treaty Q & A: your guide to what it means and what happens next, The Telegraph (Sept. 4, 2009), http:// www.telegraph.co.uk/news/majornews/6257617/Lisbon-Treaty-Q-and-A-your-guideto-what-it-means-and-what-happens-next.html (examining post-Treaty implications). The idea behind creating a Presidential post at the European Union is so that decisions can be made in a quicker and efficient manner than previously before. Id. The President will be paid 250,000 [pounds sterling] as an annual salary and will also have at his/her disposal "a large supporting staff and an advisory cabinet of between 16 and 22 salaried political aides." Id. Whether this additional job proves to be a success is left to be seen due to its unique nature in European history. Id.

(35.) See Chris Giles, What has the EU done for the UK, Financial Times (Feb. 24, 2016), available at https://www.ft.com/content/202a60c0-cfd8-Ue5-831d-09f7778e 7377 (recognizing Britain's history with EEC). Britain's growth was exceeding its allies in the form of "Italy, Germany and France" ever since their incorporation into the EEC, which became the European Union. Id.

(36.) See David McKie and Dennis Barker, A timeline of Britain's EU membership in Guardian reporting, The Guardian (June 25, 2016), https://www.theguardian.com/ politics/2016/jun/25/a-timeline-of-britains-eu-membership-in-guardian-reporting (highlighting key periods in Britain's history since 1961). Then Prime Minister MacMillan battles with politicians in the British parliament in an attempt to bring Britain into Europe. Id. See also Edward Heath: A profile of the former UK Prime Minister, Bbc News (Aug. 4, 2015), available at http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-33772016 (commenting on Edward Heath's tenure as Prime Minister). As an active member of the Royal Artillery during World War II, he was able to formulate the opinion of how beneficial it would be to join the European Union. Id. Approximately twelve years after then Prime Minister Edward Heath stated in parliament that he would start the formal application to the join the European Union. Id. It was the first time an individual without an upper-class background was able to become the leader of the Conservative Party. Id. He was a "life long bachelor" who was able to achieve his lifelong ambition of joining the European Community. Id.

(37.) See European Communities Act 1972, c. 68 (Eng.), available at http://www. legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1972/68/pdfs/ukpga_19720068_en.pdf (describing how United Kingdom will join ECC). This act describes the ways in which the U.K. law changed to incorporate E.U. law and how there is a parliamentary procedure that the United Kingdom has to follow in order enact European law into domestic legislation. Id. at 2.

(38.) See Adrian Williamson, The case for Brexit: lessons from the 1960s and 1970s, History & Policy (May 5, 2015), available at http://www.historyandpolicy.org/policy-papers/papers/the-case-for-brexit- lessons-from-1960s-and-1970s (detailing Britain's initial reaction to EEC's creation). In order for the EEC and any future entity to succeed as an economic model, there was a need for greater international cooperation by countries. Id. The fact that Parliament voted to join the EEC without the need for a referendum shows the level of support that this movement picked up. Id. The second referendum was merely to sort out the international quibbles within the Labour party, which ultimately did not have a major impact on the referendum as the United Kingdom still voted to stay in the EEC. Id.

(39.) See id. (assessing Britain's reason for initially not joining EEC). Initially Britain was reluctant to join the EEC for both political and economic reasons. Id. Britain was heavily linked with the Commonwealth, which is a group of former British colonies. Id. Britain still considered itself to have a powerful empire because of its association with the former colonies. Id. They were worried that by joining the EEC they would no longer remain an independent entity and will damage its numerous agreements with the Commonwealth. Id. Britain was also reluctant to give us part of its sovereignty to join a supranational entity that it had originally no intention of joining. Id. See generally Derek Brown, 1956: Suez and the end of empire, The Guardian (Mar. 14, 2001), https://www.theguardian.com/politics/ 2001/mar/14/ past.education 1 (detailing Suez Canal Crisis). Following the Suez Canal Crisis, relations between Britain and the United States were becoming more tense due to their different opinions of the crisis. Id. The former colonies were also starting to become independent, ultimately leading Britain to feel isolated. Id. This is why they wanted to be part of the European Free Trade Association (EFFA) to counteract the EEC. Id. Unfortunately, the EFTA did not have too many powerful countries other than Britain, compared to the EEC where many powerful European countries, such as France, were members. Id. Britain realized it would be better off for the nation if they joined the EEC rather than try to compete with it. Id.

(40.) See Kathryn Hadley, Back when Britain was banging on Europe's door, The Guardian (Oct. 13, 2012), https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/oct/13/ britain-europe-david-cameron-eu (explaining Charles de Gaulle's belief about Britain). British diplomats knew that since President de Gaulle would not be open to British inclusion into the EEC, they had to work another angle by becoming friendlier with Francois Mitterand, who the United Kingdom recognized as a potential candidate for future president of France. Id. After several attempts to try to wiggle their way into the EEC, it was finally achieved. Id. The United Kingdom wanted to be part of the EEC and the lengths that they had to go to in order to achieve membership. Id. See also Sam Wilson, Britain and the EU: A long and rocky relationship, Bbc (Apr. 1, 2014), available at http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-26515129 (detailing why Charles de Gaulle opposed British entry into EEC). French President Charles de Gaulle opposed British entry because he believed that British entry would not be in line with the core principles of closer integration as a continent. Id. He also felt that Britain was only interested in joining the EEC to further its relationship with the United States. Id. See generally Charles Moore, David Cameron can prove de Gaulle was right about us all along, The Telegraph (Jan. 18, 2013), http://www.telegraph. co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/9811265/David-Cameron-can-prove-de-Gaulle-wasright-about-us-all-along.html (explaining de Gaulle's pessimism about Britain's entry into EEC). Charles de Gaulle essentially did not want the United Kingdom to be given special consideration for their desires to the EEC to accommodate their beliefs. Id.

(41.) See Matthew Holehouse, How Harold Wilson was warned Europe threatened British democracy, The Telegraph (Aug. 27, 2014), http://www.telegraph.co.uk/ news/ world news/europe/11057170/How-Harold-Wilson-was-warned-Europethreatened-British-democracy.html (discussing Prime Minister Wilson's relief with staying in Europe). Prime Minister Harold Wilson was relieved that the British public decided to stay in Europe because his political party was deeply split by the countries membership into the EEC. Id. He wanted to change the terms in which the country initially negotiated with the European community regarding its membership. Id. He faced a lot of political heat from his own party because numerous members believed that joining the European community would result in a "gross infringement of the sovereignty." Id. They also believed that "[t]he transfer of Parliament's legislative powers to the Council of Ministers, and even more so to the Commission which was not elected and not accountable to the people of the United Kingdom, represented the most serious attack on Parliamentary democracy with which this country was faced." Id. See also Matthew Elliot, Seven lessons from Britain's 1975 EEC referendum, The Telegraph (June 5, 2015), http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/ eureferendum/11652504/Seven-lessons-from-Britains-l 975-EEC-referendum.html (explicating Britain's 1975 referendum). There were numerous things that Britain learned about from the referendum with regards to how they should approach the relation between themselves and the EEC in the future. Id. Clear goals have to be established beforehand in order to efficiently utilize the negotiations. Id. Treaties have to be adjusted to acknowledge the realities of the situation and to avoid any uncertainty that may hinder the relationship between the parties. Id. Parliament should also be more involved in the process for negotiations so the important political figures need to keep them informed. Id. See also Brian Wheeler, EU referendum: Did 1975 predictions come true? Bbc News (June 6, 2016), available at http:// www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-36367246 (stating reasons behind wanting to stay in European Union). As the country was still recovering from the shire damage done by the second World War, the stay-camp wanted to continue participating in a trade agreement with the EEC. Id. "[T]here has never been a rational alternative to a European base for the redevelopment of Britain." Id. At the time, out campaigners wanted to leave because they felt that Britain was not benefitting from the current trading agreement with the EEC. Id. They were importing way more than the goods they were exporting into Europe. Id. There were also concerns that due to the British Empire declining at an astronomical rate, there was a vast amount of uncertainty with how the relationship between the United Kingdom and its former colonies would progress forward. Id.

(42.) See Giles, supra note 35 (describing Britain's economic rise). The early stages of the integration into the EEC and the single market proved to be highly beneficial to the British economy. Id. Although there is no direct correlation between the U.K.'s membership in these respective entities and their economic rise, others have claimed that the reason behind Britain's rise was former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. Id.

(43.) See Julian Coman, Margaret Thatcher: 20 ways that she changed Britain, The Guardian (Apr. 14. 2016), available at https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/ apr/14/margaret-thatcher-20-changes- (recognizing Thatcher's influence on British trade with European Union). Britain's Margaret Thatcher was in favor of participating in the single market but was not overly optimistic about the European Union as an institution. Id. Her logic and reasoning behind why the European Union was not a great institution created a vast number of "Eurosceptics and changed the chemistry of the Tory party." Id.

(44.) See Nauro Campos and Fabrizio Coricelli, Why did Britain join the EU? A new insight from economic history, Vox (Feb. 3, 2015), available at http://voxeu.org/ article/ britain-s-eu-membership-new-insight-economic-history (explaining Commonwealth's economic weakness). Prime Minister Wilson wanted to maintain the option of predominantly trading with the Commonwealth, but when it was revealed that exports from the Commonwealth were not as competitive or as sufficient as those from more developed nations, the United Kingdom first tried to enter the EEA. Id. See also Giles, supra note 35 (assessing impact of E.U. membership on U.K. economy). When the United Kingdom initially decided that they needed to be part of the single market, they wanted to gain access to the largest market at the time in order to bring economic prosperity to the country. Id. Now, there is widespread debate as to whether E.U. membership has genuinely benefitted the U.K. economy since they have become a member. Id.

(45.) See Greg Rosen, A British free-trade deal outside the EU? History shows that's easier said than done, The Telegraph (Mar. 3, 2016), http://www.telegraph.co .uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/12182032/A-British-free-trade-deal-outside-theEU-History-shows-thats-easier-said-than- done.html (rationalizing difficulty of creating free-trade agreements outside of European Union). The British government during the 1950s did not comprehend how difficult it would be to try and create a European Community by not being part of any European entity. Id. The United Kingdom was also one of the founding members of the EFTA, creating this agreement under the assumption that the EEC was not going to last very long. Id. They also thought that they would get support from the United States and other E.U. members for wanting a free-trade area or for the common market to adopt the EFTA, all of which did not happen. Id. With regards to the United States, they were more in favor of the United Kingdom maintaining closer ties with the EEC, even if it meant joining them. Id. The reason behind this is that regardless of the historical importance of the U.S.-U.K. relations, the United States would not adhere to the requests of the United Kingdom if the trading plan was not economically sound. Id.

(46.) See id. (summarizing U.K.'s process from creating EFFA for competition to EEA, to eventually joining EEA). After understanding the difficulty of competing with the EEA and understanding that the EFTA would not be able to compete with the EEA, the United Kingdom joined the EEA in 1992 when the Treaty of Maastricht was signed. Id.

(47.) See The European Economic Area, Switzerland and the North, European Union (Jan. 2018), http://www.europarl.europa.eu/atyourservice/en/displayFtu.htm! ?ftuId=Ftu_5.5.3.html (detailing how EEA will operate). This agreement was signed on May 2, 1992 and implemented on January 1, 1994. Id. It includes twenty-eight Member States and three EEA/EFTA states: Norway, Liechtenstein, and Iceland. Id. In 2009, Iceland initially wanted to be part of the European Union following the economic downturn of 2008, but in 2015 they rejected E.U. membership in favor of a separate agreement that would better serve the interests of Iceland. Id. See Foster, supra note 6 (elucidating EEA and EFTA). See also Antonio Bavasso et al., Implications of EEA membership outside the EU--different name, same game?, Allen & Overy (2016), available at http://www.allenovery.com/Brexit-Law/Documents/Macro /EU/AO_BrexitLaw_-_EEA_Membership_Jul_2016.PDF (explicating E.U.'s four freedoms). The "Four Freedoms" associated with the European Union is "the free movement of goods, services, capital, and persons." Id. at 2. These are fundamental principles by which no E.U. regulation should remove or abuse. Id.

(48.) See Sven Norberg and Martin Johansson, The History of the EEA Agreement and the First Twenty Years of Its Existence, The Handbook of EEA, (Carl Baudenbacher, ed., Ist ed., 2016) (discussing EEA's history). The Marshall Plan was designed to help rebuild Europe. Id. at 4. When the European countries joined in, the Organization for European Economic Co-Operation (EEOC) was created in Paris. Id.

(49.) See Einde O'Callaghan, The Marshall Plan 1: Its History and Development, 9 Fourth Int'l 51 (Mar. 1948) available at https://www.marxists.org/archive/pablo/ 1948/03/ marshalll.htm (assessing creation of Marshall Plan). George Marshall came up with an idea of helping the European countries that had suffered following the devastation caused by the war. Id. He realized that the United States, being the leader of the capitalist world, had a duty to help rebuild Europe to the great continent that it was. Id. From an economic perspective, the goal of the Marshall Plan was:
   To contain a Soviet thrust in the near future by supporting the
   capitalist structure of Western Europe which is on the verge of
   collapse; b) To give this support a content that can, at the same
   time, assure what Truman calls in his statement of January 14,
   1948, "long-term prosperity" for American economy. This means to
   rebuild shattered European capitalism under American control, which
   will prevent an independent development of productive forces in
   Europe capable of competing with American economy, and yet assure
   the latter a maximum of possible markets. This would permit the
   maintenance of the present level of production in the United
   States, the postponement of the outbreak of the economic crisis,
   and limit the scope of the crisis in case it should come.


Id. By integrating these economic policies with the political goals, George Marshall wanted to stabilize the political sphere in Europe under the leadership of the United States. Id. His "historical" speech at Harvard consisted of the following ideas:
   a) the reconstruction of Europe would require more time and effort
   than was at first believed; b) visible destruction was less
   important than the organic dislocation of Europe's productive
   apparatus: c) American aid was absolutely indispensable for
   European reconstruction; d) however, it was no longer a question of
   dealing with each European nation separately, but it was essential
   to start with Europe, or a part of Europe as an economic unit.


Id. As the plan came to fruition, over $11 billion was given to European countries between 1945-1947. Id. Britain, France and the Soviet Union participated in the Conference of Three discussing how they would utilize the aid given by the Marshall plan. Id. As the Soviet Union and the two western European states could not agree on how they would utilize the Marshall Plan, Britain and France decided on collecting a group European states willing to participate in a European reconstruction in which the United States will maintain close attention as to how the reconstruction will be carried out. Id. As the Soviet Union did not agree with Britain and France, sixteen European countries participated in a conference in 1947 whereby the Western Bloc of Europe was created under the leadership of the United States. Id. Britain and France had envisioned a Europe without the influence of the Soviet Union and United States, but they realized that the Marshall Plan made economic sense for Europe. Id. The United States deemed the creation of the western bloc as a success because it allowed them to rebuild Europe from a capitalist perspective rather than a communist one by the Soviet Union. Id.

(50.) See Norberg and Johansson, supra note 48 (explaining how OEEC established fundamental grounds for EEA). It is important to know how the changing relationship between the members of the EFTA and the European Union impacted the EEA. Id. Initially, due to the EFI A's opposition to the creation of the European Communities, they were perceived as being on the opposing side to what proponents of the European Communities were trying to implement. Id.

(51.) See id. (highlighting positives of OEEC). The OEEC could be described as a cohesive entity that enabled countries to be part of a particular union but also to respect each other's sovereignty. Id.

(52.) See The European Economic Area (EEA), Efta (Oct. 2014), available at http://www.efta.int/media/publications/fact-sheets/EEA-factsheets/EFTAFactsheet EuropeanEconomicAreaEEA.pdf (dissecting EEA's history). European Union President Jacques Delores wanted to create an agreement that allowed both the EFTA and the European Union to work together for the benefit of the continent. Id.

(53.) See id. (expanding on how EEA was created). The EFTA members understood that the European Union wanted to create a more integrated market and wanted to further establish relations between the EFTA and the EC. Id. at 1. It was a troubling situation for ETFA members and the European Communities to agree to work on some areas while ignoring others. Id. The President of the European Communities at the time implemented a new type of partnership that ultimately led to the creation of the EEA. Id. Switzerland voted against membership to the EEA and instead has created numerous bilateral agreements with the European Union that allows it to maintain a certain degree of access to the single market. Id.

(54.) See Brexit Essentials: Alternatives to EU Membership, Slaughter and May (Jan. 2016), available at https://www.slaughterandmay.com/media/2535258/brexit-essentials-alternatives-to-eu- membership.pdf (recognizing various aspects of EEA). As a potential member of the EEA, the United Kingdom will have to adhere to the four freedoms of the E.U., but the United Kingdom will have to draft new regulations pertaining to certain areas, such as agricultural and setting a new value added tax system. Id. at 2. See also Bavasso et al., supra note 47 (expanding on benefits of EEA membership). The free movement of goods allows the market to function as entity without any internal boundaries. Id. at 3. The free movement of people allows Europeans to move to another E.U. member state for the purposes of work and allows them to pursue legal action at the European Court of Justice for discrimination carried out against them on the basis of their nationality. Id. at 3. The freedom to provide services is also an inherent right where Member States are allowed to provide cross-border services. Id. at 6. Lastly, the European Union allows the free movement of capital within the internal market, thereby enabling countries to provide financial payments to each other. Id. at 2.

(55.) See Slaughter and May, supra note 54 (discussing various sectors not covered in EEA). Certain sectors are not part of the EEA and will require a separate agreement with the European Union in order to receive the benefits of the single market. Id. at 3.

(56.) See also Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, The EEA Agreement and Norway's other agreements with the EU (Oct. 12, 2012) http://www.eu-norway.org/ Global/SiteFolders/webeu/MeldSt5_UD_ENG.PDF. (analyzing importance of EEA to Norway's domestic policies). The EEA has provided Norway with an important avenue to participate in the single market that will allow Norwegian businesses from being able to benefit from their membership. Id. It has continued to provide a source of stability for the Norwegian economy. Id. Fortunately for Norway, they have not fully felt the repercussions of the economic downtown from 2008. Id. They have been able to provide some stability to their fellow EEA members by increasing their financial contribution to the International Monetary Fund and by offering financial aid to its neighbors. Id. See also HM Government, Alternatives to membership: possible models for the United Kingdom outside the European Union (Mar. 2016), available at https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/504604/ Alternatives_to_membership_-_possible_models_for_the_UK_outside_the_EU.pdf (assessing various trading models including Norwegian and Swiss Models).

(57.) See Laura Whitcombe, Will Britain be Norway, Switzerland or Canada ? The trade deals the UK could follow to strike a Brexit deal with the EU, This is Money (July 8, 2016), available at http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-3667718/ Will-UK-Norway-Switzerland-Canada-Brexit-trade-deals-follow.html (articulating Norway's economic position within European Union). Norway still has to put money into the European Union, but in return it has no say over the policies that are created. Id. Norway also has to respect the freedom of movement as part of their agreement to do any business with the European Union. Id.

(58.) See Keating, supra note 6 (expanding on Norway's role within EEA). Because of the EEA, Norway does maintain a close relationship with the European Union, even if there are certain voting restrictions in place regarding the implementation of European laws. Id.

(59.) See id. (stating restrictions for countries in EEA). Norway is considered the primary EEA member primarily because it has rejected membership into the European Union on two occasions. Id. Even though Norway, just like other Member States, has the ability to trade without too many problems, it does not have much of a say on the types of law the European Union adopts. Id. The Members also have a right to not accept future E.U. laws but there are tight restrictions on when they can reject an entire law. Id. See also Liz Alderman, After 'Brexit,' Britain Could Look to Norway as a Model, New York Times (July 13, 2016), http://www.nytimes.com/2016/ 07/14/business/international/after-brexit-britain-could-look-to-norway-as-amodel.html (reiterating Norway's rights in EEA). See Whitcomb, supra note 57 (analyzing how EEA operates). The EEA arrangement does not include E.U. policies such as: common agriculture and fisheries policies; Customs Union; common trade policy; common foreign and security policy; justice and home affairs; taxation or economic and monetary union. Id.

(60.) See Jonathan Lindsell, Lessons From Switzerland: How might Britain go about business outside the EU, Civitas (Oct. 2015), available at http:// www.civitas.org.uk/ content/files/lessonsfromswitzerland.pdf (describing Switzerland's unique trading model). Switzerland created the European Free Trade Association in 1960 that included the membership of countries such as the United Kingdom, Austria, Sweden, Denmark, and Norway. Id. This agreement allowed the members to carry out free trading. Id. They were able to maintain free trade agreements with the countries that had moved onto the European Economic Community. Id.

(61.) See Imogen Foulkes, EU Referendum: Can Switzerland Show UK Route to Brexit?, Bbc News (Feb. 23, 2016), http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-35615604 (explaining how Switzerland accesses E.U. market). Switzerland's arrangement with the European Union enables them to implement trade deals with countries from outside the single entity. Id. Professionals in Switzerland have discussed how difficult it can be to do business with the European Union. Id. In order to have any agreement with the European Union, Switzerland had to allow the free movement of E.U. citizens into their borders. Id. The European Union has a "nocherry-picking policy" in which E.U. members cannot pick and choose which of the four freedoms it wants to implement. Id. Members are also not allowed to create agreements that would restrict one of the four freedoms. Id. See also Micheline Calmy-Rey and Doris Leuthard, Bilateral agreements Switzerland-EU, Europa (2009), available at http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2009_2014/documents/ deea/dv/2203 _07/2203_07en.pdf (explaining various sectors of Switzerland's numerous bilateral agreements with European Union). The first talks regarding the Bilateral I Agreements became effective in 2002 and covered sectors such as agriculture, civil aviation, trade, and many others. Id. The Bilateral II discussions were "approved by electorate in 2005" and covered sectors such as environmental issues, crimes, education, and many others. Id. Switzerland is an important market for the European Union behind countries such as the United States and China. Id.

(62.) See Lindsell, supra note 60 (expounding on EFTA's inner workings). Outside of the European Union, the EFTA is the European Union's third largest trading partner, valued at 12% of the E.U.'s external trade. Id.

(63.) See EFTA Secretary-General, This is EFTA 2015,11 (Mar. 2015), available at http://www.efta.int/sites/default/files/publications/this-is-efta/this-is-efta-2015.pdf (dissecting EFTA's free trade agreements). The EFTA has been able to negotiate free trade agreements with 35 partners outside the European Union. Id. They are also in the process of negotiating with numerous Asian countries such as India, Indonesia, and Malaysia, but have halted negotiations with countries such as Thailand, Belarus, and the Customs Union of the Russian Federation. Id. They are an attractive country to do business with because of their obsessive desire to create sufficient products that are competitive in the global market. Id. at 28. More specifically, Switzerland is a global leader in a multitude of sectors such as pharmaceutical, biotechnology and banking. Id.

(64.) See id. at 18-26 (outlining Switzerland's negotiations with EEA then European Union). See also Alan Riding, Swiss Reject Tie to Wider Europe, N.Y. Times (Dec. 7, 1992), http://www.nytimes.com/1992/12/07/world/swiss-reject-tie-to-wider-europe.html (recalling Switzerland's decision to reject integration to European Union). The Swiss people voted to stay out of the European Union in favor of an isolated form of governing, rather than being exposed to the potential risks associated with the single entity. Id. The vote conspicuously shows how people were very pessimistic about the European Union as an entity. Id. Proponents of integration argued that Switzerland would fail to maintain its competitiveness if it slowly moved away from European unity. Id. This was further expanded upon when business executives were claiming that investment into Switzerland would dry up. Id. Critics of integration stated that joining the European Union would hinder their "unique grass-roots democracy" because of the decision-making abilities they would have to transfer over to the bureaucrats in Brussels. Id.

(65.) See Daniel Mockli, Switzerland and The EU: The Prospects of Bilateralism, 3 Center for Security Studies in Security Policy, at 2 (2008) (Switz.), available at http://www.css.ethz.ch/content/dam/ethz/special-interest/gess/cis/center-for-securities-studies/pdfs/CSS-Analyses- 37.pdf (describing Switzerland's bilateral treaties and its history). "The first set of bilateral treaties" focused on closer integration with the single market, which was "negotiated between 1994 and 1999. . ." Id. Of course, the matter of free movement of people caused negotiations to go on longer than expected, as it was something that Switzerland wanted to restrict. Id.

(66.) See id. (explaining Switzerland's trading model). See also Swati Dhingra and Thomas Sampson, Life after Brexit: What are the UK's options outside the European Union?, Ctr. Econ. Perf., London Sch. Econ. & Pol. Sci., Feb. 2016, at 5-6, available at http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/brexit01.pdf (explicating Switzerland's model with regards to their treaties). Switzerland has created numerous treaties pertaining to "insurance, air traffic, pensions and fraud prevention." Id. at 5. By creating these independent treaties, Switzerland is able to interact in small increments with the single market in return for making payments that goes towards implementing E.U. policies. Id. at 6. Switzerland also has considerably more freedom to choose the types of treaties it wants to create with the European Union unlike the Norwegian Model. Id. Switzerland does not have an agreement with the European Union regarding the trading of services. Id. Therefore, Swiss companies often have subsidiaries in London in order to access the greater financial markets that the European Union has to offer. Id. By having numerous agreements with the European Union, Switzerland has given up a portion of their sovereignty in order to have some access to the single market. Id. See also Slaughter and May, supra note 54 (describing various trading models for United Kingdom to adopt). The Swiss and Norwegian models are the two most popular models discussed that the United Kingdom could adopt. Id. at 1. If the United Kingdom decides to create a different model, they may look at the Customs Union, as Turkey has, or trade under the rules implemented by the WTO. Id. See also Subidey Togan, The EU-Turkey Customs Union: A Model for Future Euro-Med Integration, MedPro (Mar. 9, 2012), available at http:// www.medpro-foresight.eu/system/files/MEDPRO%20TR%20No%209%20WP5%20 Togan.pdf (assessing relationship between EU-Turkey Customs Union). In order for Turkey to do business with third-party countries, countries outside the European Union and customs union, they have to ensure that they follow E.U. regulations with respect to the trading of goods. Id. at 1. See also Foulkes, supra note 61 (stating how Switzerland negotiated more than 100 treaties). The numerous agreements indicate Switzerland's particular trading arrangement with the European Union and how it may be difficult for the United Kingdom to replicate in a short period of time. Id.

(67.) See Directorate for European Affairs, Switzerland and the European Union, Federal Department of Foreign Affairs (2016), available at https://www .eda.admin.ch/dam/eda/en/documents/publications/Europaeische Angelegenheiten/ Schweiz-und-EU_en.pdf (providing input regarding Switzerland's economic history). Switzerland has to maintain close relations with the European Union for business purposes because of its geographic location. Id. In conjunction with its location, the growing population of the European Union makes it more important for Switzerland to maintain sufficient trading ties to the European Union. Id. A significant amount of capital comes from the European Union with regards to its direct investments, which shows the importance of maintaining sufficient bilateral treaties. Id. See also Keating, supra note 6 (comparing Swiss and Norwegian models). The agreements apply only to existing E.U. policies so that, unlike Norway, Switzerland is not bound to future E.U. decisions. Id. Unlike Norway, Switzerland does not have to make too many changes to its own laws to accompany the E.U. laws, but it does still have to create laws to acknowledge its integration into the Swiss legal system. Id. For example, Switzerland is technically not bound by the decisions created by the European Court of Justice, but its joint Committee does incorporate those rulings into its domestic legal system. Id.

(68.) See Andrew Sentence, Four reasons a post-Brexit UK can't copy Norway or Switzerland, Telegraph (June 10, 2016), http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/ 06/10/three-reasons-a-post-brexit-uk-cant-copy-norway-or-switzerland/ (articulating differences between Switzerland and United Kingdom). In order for Switzerland to maintain any kind of business relationship with the European Union, they had to allow the freedom of movement for E.U. citizens. Id. This is something that the United Kingdom has been trying to restrict for a long period of time. Id.

(69.) See id. (emphasizing complexity of Switzerland's trading arrangement). Creating 120 bilateral agreements is a time consuming process. Id.

(70.) See Rowena Mason, How did UK end up voting to leave the European Union, Guardian (June 24, 2016) https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/24/howdid-uk-end-up-voting-leave-european-union (explaining why Brexit may have happened). Not long after Britain joined the European Union in 1972, many British citizens were unhappy about the direction of the country. Id. The issue of whether people wanted to leave the European Union remained quiet up until the economic disaster of 2008, where many "backbenchers" (members of parliament that hold no governmental office) were increasing pressure on then Prime Minster David Cameron to create a potential poll in the near future where the people of Britain could decide whether or not they want to stay in the European Union. Id.

(71.) See id. (explaining reasons why United Kingdom chose to leave European Union). The public was not happy with the vast increase of Europeans entering into Britain from over the past decade or so. Id. This was particularly evident when the European Union expanded into area's encompassing the eastern region from 20042007, which Prime Minister Cameron, who promised to curb immigration before he was elected in 2010, failed to do so. Id. Nigel Farage and his UKIP had started to receive more attention from the voters because of their desire to tighten immigration and were able to gain popularity with some members of both the Labour Party and the Conservative Party. Id. See also Mason, supra note 70 (discussing how Boris Johnson and Michael Gove gave more support to leave campaigners). See also Eight reasons Leave won the UK's referendum on the EU, BBC News (June 24, 2016), available at http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36574526 (expanding on reasons for why Brexit happened). Although the UKIP party received a lot of criticism for their tactics in order to get the public support, it seemed to have worked now that a formal referendum took place. Id. Nigel Farage's comments about Turkey becoming a potential member of the European Union seemed to also influence the public's opinion as to whether Turkey joining the European Union would help reduce migration or increase it. Id. See generally Alex Hunt, UKIP: The story of the UK Independence Party's rise, BBC (Nov. 21, 2014), available at http://www.bbc.com/ news/uk-politics-21614073 (explicating UKIP's rise in U.K. politics). The entire purpose of the UKIP party was to leave the European Union because they believed that the European Union as a political institution is disorganized and has not benefitted the United Kingdom in a very long time. Id. This party was created on September 3, 1993 by members of the Anti-Federalist League. Id. It was created because this party wanted to established migration policies that were sensible, which was something that was not possible if Britain remained in the European Union and had to adhere to their relaxed migration policies that would ultimately trump U.K. law. Id. The influence of Boris Johnson and Michael Gove cemented a strong advantage for the leave campaign, especially when both political figures are close friends of then Prime Minster David Cameron. See generally Jake Burman, Nigel Farage warns Turkey joining EU could EXPOSE bloc to evil ISIS terrorists, Express (Dec. 3, 2015), available at http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/623849/UKIP-Nigel-Farage-Turkey-EuropeanUnion-Brussels-Ankara-Islamic-State-Migration- ISIS-Daesh (explaining Turkey's negative impact on EU migration). Nigel Farage emphasized that if Turkey became a member of the European Union, not only will the immigration issues continue, the European Union will also be further exposed to potential ISIS activities due to their presence in the Eurasian region. Id.

(72.) See Mason, supra note 70 (explaining reasons behind Brexit). See also Holmes, supra note 2 (clarifying why Brexit may have occurred due to public emotions).

(73.) See Rishi Iyengar, These 3 Facts Explain Why the U.K. Held the "Brexit' Referendum, time (June 24, 2016), available at http://time.com/4381184/uk-brexit-european-union-referendum-cameron/ (detailing three potential reasons for 'Brexit' Referendum). Initially David Cameron was not in favor of holding a referendum as he rebuked the idea of leaving the European Union, but after he was elected to be Prime Minister, the European Union Referendum Act 2015 was created to start the process of creating a referendum and for it to explain the implications of the vote. Id. Furthermore, Britain had participated in a referendum regarding their membership in the E.U. in 1997, where it only managed to get 2.6% of the vote. Id. See also European Union Referendum Act 2015, c. 36, (U.K.) (stating how U.K. referendum will take place). The European Union Referendum Act conspicuously states what the vote is about and how it will be conducted by laying out individual provisions. Id.

(74.) See George Friedman, 3 Reasons Brits Voted for Brexit, Forbes (July 5, 2016), http://www.forbes.com/sites/johnmauldin/2016/07/05/3-reasons-brits-voted-forbrexit/#5al423df78cl (opining three reasons for Brexit). The opponents of the European Union believe that it has failed as an economic entity in terms of what it was created to do. Id. There are still many differences between the economic conditions of countries in Southern Europe compared to the current, most powerful E.U. country, Germany. Id. Proponents of the leave-campaign understand that London will remain a financial hub for many years to come, as it may be implausible that financial institutions would try to relocate to Frankfurt instead. Id. See also Tim Wallace, London will remain the top financial centre post-Brexit, says Deutsche Bank chief, Guardian (Aug. 31, 2016), http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/ 2016/08/31/londonwill-remain-the-top-financial-centre- post-brexit-says-deu/ (explaining importance of United Kingdom as Europe's top financial center).

(75.) See Brian Wheeler & Alex Hunt, Brexit: All you need to know about the UK leaving the EU, BBC News (Oct. 2, 2016), available at http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-32810887 (discussing Brexit and its implications). The leave campaigners won 52% to 48% in which more than 30 million people turned out to vote. Id.

(76.) See id. (recalling how Britain voted by region). A vast majority of England voted to leave the European Union, along with Wales, whereas Scotland and Northern Ireland voted to remain. Id. The breakdown is as follows: England (53.4 % to leave and 46.6% to stay), Wales (52.5% to leave and 47.5% to stay), Scotland (62% to stay and 38% to leave), Northern Ireland (55.8% to stay and 44.2% to leave). Id. See also Arnau Guardia, How Brexit vote broke down, Politico (Jun. 06, 2016), available at http://www.politico.eu/article/graphics-how-the-uk-voted-eu-referendum-brexitdemographics-age-education-party- london-final-results/ (describing differences in voting outcome for Brexit). The nation's financial center, London, evidently voted to stay within the European Union with only a few constituencies voting to leave such as: Hillington, Sutton, Bexley, Havering, Barking, and Dagenham. Id. A vast majority of the nation's youth (18-24) voted to stay in the European Union, with the next age group (25-49) also voting to stay, indicating that the older generation voted to leave. Id. People with a higher level of education greatly favored to stay in the European Union, whereas people with only a high school degree voted to leave. Id. See also Andrew McGill, Who Voted for the Brexit! Atlantic (June 25, 2016), http:// www.theatlantic.com/ international/archive/2016/06/brexit-vote-statistics-United-kingdom-european-union/488780/ (reiterating similarities in characteristics for campaigners). Although correlation does not mean causation, there is a lot of information showing that those with at least a bachelor's degree voted to stay, which could cause a person to infer that those with a certain level of education understood the implications of leaving the union. Id. It should be emphasized that a lot of the statistical relationships could be a mere coincidence and should not be perceived as some time of causation. Id.

(77.) See Wheeler & Hunt, supra note 75 (discussing initial impact of Brexit). The Pound dropped to a thirty-year low but has divided opinion as to the long-term effects of Brexit. Id. They have also lost their AAA credit rating, which means that it will be a lot more costly for the government to borrow money. Id. Whether or not this exit increases the costs for some firms remains to be seen due to the fluctuating value of the British pound. Id. See also Tribune news services, 'Shocked' British bracing for world economy to punish U.K. after Brexit, Chicago Tribune (June 26, 2016), http:// www.chicagotribune.com/news/nation world/ct-brexit-economy-20160626-story.htm (analyzing numerous reactions to Brexit). There is a huge amount of uncertainty as to what Brexit means for the future of the United Kingdom. Id. The initial impact showed that numerous financial leaders were hurrying to reassure businesses and households that the U.K. financial sector can contain the initial detrimental impact on the value of the pound, price inflations, and declining share values in U.K. banks. Id. Some economists have even suggested that the United Kingdom, as a result of this referendum, will see almost zero economic growth for the following year, and that many firms may consider relocating many jobs to other parts of the European Union rather than keep them in British cities such as London. Id. However, others have stated that no major firms or banks will be leaving London because of its history of being the financial hub "for more than a thousand years and will continue to do so," and that by leaving the European Union, the United Kingdom will now be able to negotiate with the European Union on new foundations that would benefit the country. Id. Exports will also be cheaper and therefore more attractive for foreign businesses. Id.

(78.) See Brian McBridge &Louise Dewast, Brexit a 'Wake-up Call' and 'End of a World' for Global Leaders, ABC News (June 24, 2016), http://abcnews.go.com/ International/end-world-leaders-express- grim-reality-brexit-vote/story?id=40099408 (stating various reactions to Brexit from international leaders). The initial reaction from the European leaders suggests that the decision lo leave the European Union was wrong and that this could be a detrimental decision for the future of the U.K. economy. Id. President Francois Hollande stated how disappointed he was in the outcome but that ultimately they have to respect the decision of the British people. Id. German Chancellor Angela Merkel also stated her regret that the British people voted to leave, but she wants to maintain good relations with the United Kingdom and that the rest of Europe "shouldn't draw 'quick and simple conclusions' that would create further division." Id. Reactions from outside of Europe indicate that many countries are surprised as to how the British people voted, but nevertheless they will continue to maintain strong relations with the United Kingdom. Id. See also Steve Guest, Read Obama's Four Sentence Response To Brexit, daily caller (Jun. 24, 2016), available at http://dailycaller.com/2016/06/24/read-obamas-four-sentence-response-to-brexit/ (stating President Obama's response to Brexit). President Obama stated that he would like the United States and the United Kingdom to continue working together because of their historical relationship that has brought many benefit to both countries and is something that should not be forgotten. Id. However, he has also said that the United Kingdom will be at the back of the line for any potential trade agreements in the near future. Id. See also Nicole Gaouette & Stephen Collinson, Why the U.S. is freaked out about Brexit, CNN (June 25, 2016), http:// www.cnn.com/2016/06/24/politics/donald-trump-brexit-scotland-press-conference/ (discussing implication of Brexit on its relationship with U.S). President Obama has stated that although it wants the United States to continue with its strong relationship with the United Kingdom, they will not receive any special treatment purely because of that historical tie. Id. See also Patrick Christy, Angela Merkel WARNING to May: Accept EU's four freedoms or FORGET about single market, Express (Jan.10, 2017), available at http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/752058/Angela-Merkel-TheresaMay-Brexit-European-Union-single- market-four-freedoms-politics (showing importance of European Union's four freedoms). German Chancellor Angela Merkel has warned Prime Minister Theresa May that the United Kingdom will have to decide whether they want to respect the four freedoms or not. Id. Germany will not allow the United Kingdom to pick and choose which of the four freedoms it can implement and which it can ignore. Id. See also Zoie O'Brien, Merkel says UK CAN'T block freedom of movement as ALL EU nationals will want it, Express (Oct. 15, 2016), available at http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/721605/Angela-Merkel-UK-blockfreedom-of-movement-EU-nations (explaining why Angela Merkel opposes U.K.'s ideal trading arrangement). See generally John Springford and Simon Tilford, The impact of leaving the EU on the UK's trade and investment, Centre For European Reform (Oct. 21, 2016), available at http://www.cer.org.uk/sites/default/fiIes/publications/attachments/pdf/2014/pb_britishtrade_l6janl4-8285.pdf (elucidating numerous consequences of leaving European Union). Although it appears that the United Kingdom is a large economy that will be able to negotiate an efficient and productive trade agreement, the United Kingdom will have to understand that they "cannot assume that it could dictate terms because it runs a trade deficit with the European Union." Id. The United Kingdom would have to consider that its ability to access non-EU markets would ultimately depend upon the level of access it has to the European Union market. Id.

(79.) See Wheeler & Hunt, supra note 75 (discussing how United Kingdom will initiate process for leaving European Union). Pursuant to Article 50 of the Treaty of Lisbon, the party that wants to leave has to start a negotiation process with the European Union regarding the terms of the split, which has to be fulfilled within two years from when the Article is triggered. Id. Prime Minister Theresa May has stated that she wants to begin this process by the end of March 2017, upon which the world will have a better understanding of what types of agreements the United Kingdom establishes with the single market. Id. Regardless of the time stated by Theresea May, it is still unclear how long Brexit will take, primarily due to the fact that no member state has ever invoked Article 50. Id. This is further complicated by the fact that not only does the United Kingdom have roughly 43 years of treaties and regulations with the European Union that has to be addressed, the trade deal that is agreed upon must be approved by all the Member States. Id. The government will have to start the process of enacting a bill that will end the governing of E.U. law over U.K. law, but at the same time it can also decide which aspects of E.U. legislation it wants to keep or remove from U.K. law. Id. See also Dan Stewart, Britain Doesn't Actually Doesn't Have To Abide by the Results of the E.U. Referendum, Time (Jun. 24, 2016), available at http://time.com/4381645/eu-referendum-brexit-sovereign-parliament-results/ (evaluating how U.K. politics works with respect to referendums). The E.U. referendum is advisory in nature due to the fact that only the U.K. parliament can create the laws. Id. The Prime Minister could put the referendum vote to parliament to see if the government wants to accept the results of the referendum. Id. However, this would be problematic considering how many people turned up and voted, so it is not farfetched to consider the public outcry if their decision to leave is not respected by their government and politicians. Id. See also Treaty of Lisbon art. 50, Dec. 13, 2007, 59. (stating how Article 50 works). Article 50 sets out the process that a country has to adhere to in order to officially leave the union. Id. The country has to normally give notice to the union about its desire to leave and then go through the necessary domestic process. Id. The respective state will have exactly two years to negotiate its departure from the union. Id. See also Alexandra Sims, What is the difference between hard and soft Brexit? Everything you need to know, Independent (Oct. 3, 2016), available at http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-hard-soft-what-is-the-difference-uk-eu-single-market-freedom- movement-theresa-may-a7342591.html (analyzing differences in "soft" and "hard" Brexit). A "hard" Brexit would be if the United Kingdom decided to concede some form of access to the single market and Customs Union. Id. This would allow the United Kingdom to control its borders and the type of trading it conducts with other countries. Id. However, the United Kingdom will be subject to many tariffs on goods and services that it trades with the European Union. Id. Powerful economies such as the United States have stated that they will prioritize a trade deal with the European Union ahead of the United Kingdom. Id. A "soft" Brexit would mean that the United Kingdom would continue to have access to the single market and would not have to worry about tariffs and extra trading costs. Id. See also Adrian Lowrey, Confused about 'hard' and 'soft' Brexit, the Norway Model and the Swiss Solution? We explain the options, This Is Money (Oct. 08, 2016), available at http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-3825388/Handy-Brexit-tableexplains-options-UK-s-exit-EU.html (clarifying differences between "soft" and "hard" Brexit). If the United Kingdom chooses a "soft" Brexit and becomes part of the EEA, they will be allowed to negotiate bilateral trade agreements with non-EU countries, something that E.U. membership does not allow unilaterally. Id. If the United Kingdom decides to choose a "hard" Brexit or a "soft" Brexit but with continued access to only the Customs Union like Turkey, they will be severely restricted in what they can negotiate or have access to with the European Union. Id. For example, the United Kingdom will not be able to access the single market. Id. Prime Minister Theresa May, Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs Boris Johnson, and Secretary of State for International Trade Liam Fox are all of the position that a "hard" Brexit would be in the best interests of the United Kingdom. Id. An important positive about the Customs Union as a potential model is that the United Kingdom would be able to retain control over their population. Id.

(80.) See Holmes, supra note 2 (discussing whether people voted to leave European Union because of increases in immigration). See also Anushka Asthana, Immigration and the EU referendum: the angry, frustrated voice of the British public, The Guardian (Jun. 20, 2016), https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jun/20/seventowns-one-story-referendum-voters-say- too-many-foreigners (stating how voters used sentiment to leave European Union). Many people were worried about whether their children would be able to get admissions to a school when there are so many foreigners coming in. Id. One woman was quoted as saying "The rape's gone up, the deaths, the crime rate, its all gone up," which may stem from the idea that many people believe that immigrants from eastern Europe are coming into the United Kingdom and committing a large proportion of the crimes. Id. The public is grappling with this idea of needing to take back the country's borders and to have a greater sense of control. Id. There are many skilled immigrants coming into the country that have benefitted the country in some form, but at the same time there are issues with school placements for children and the employment rate. Id. See generally Ben Chu, Why did people really vote for Brexit ? If we don't face the psychological reasons, we'll never bring Britain together, Independent (Jun. 26, 2016), available at http:// www.independent.co.uk/ voices/brexit-eu-referendum-why-did-people-vote-leave-immigration-nhs-a7104071.html (analyzing various other reasons for Brexit occurring). The United Kingdom voted to leave the European Union could be a much more abstract discussion than previously thought, compared to simply thinking about immigration issues or to leave an E.U. controlled by "Brussels Bureaucrats." Id. Other problems could relate to the dire need for change regarding the NHS, or that the economy has not been recovering as quickly as it should have. Id. Some have even suggested that the cause for the referendum was the vast number of people who were not in favor of "multiculturalism, social liberalism, feminism and environmentalism." Id. Another reason could also be the generational gap between those over 50 years of age and those below 50 years of age, where the people below 50 years of age are more liberal, open to cultural integr ation, and open to social changes, compared to those over 50 years of age that may have preferred a Britain from the past. Id.

(81.) See Tim Wallace, Brexit boom: The five charts which show Britain has escaped an economic apocalypse, Telegraph (Aug. 19, 2016), http://www.telegraph.co.uk/ business/2016/08/19/what-brexit-apocalypse-no-sign-of-economic-woe-after-thereferen/ (portraying five ways Britain has stabilized their economy). Not only has unemployment dropped briefly in July 2016, consumer spending has gone up which helps to support the economy and reassures business as to the direction of the United Kingdom. Id. Furthermore, economists predict that the United Kingdom will avoid the much-anticipated recession. Id. Moody's Investors Service has predicted that the United Kingdom will avoid a much-anticipated recession. Id. See also Katie Allen, Tourist spending in UK surges after pound's Brexit slump, The Guardian (Aug. 22, 2016), https://www.theguardian.com/ business/2016/aug/22/ tourist-spending-uksurges-following-pounds-brexit-slump (analyzing increases in spending). Ever since the value of the pound has gone down, there has been a huge increase in spending by foreigners, especially by people from countries where the British pound has been traditionally higher, e.g. Japan, China, Indonesia, and the United States. Id.

(82.) See Blitz, supra note 5 (describing alternative trading models). The United Kingdom could join the EEA, also known as Norwegian model, or adopt the Swiss Model, which entails developing over 150 individual treaties with the European Union that takes many years to negotiate. Id. The United Kingdom could mimic Turkey and enter into some form of a Customs Union with the European Union, where they could have access to manufactured goods. Id. This Customs Union will prevent the United Kingdom from having any access to the financial services, which would prove to be a problem for the city of London that is viewed as a financial powerhouse. Id. Another potential option for the United Kingdom would be to negotiate trade agreements under the rules of the WTO, which would require the United Kingdom to start from nothing and possibly be exposed to high tariffs. See also Peter Foster, What would Brexit mean for British Trade, Telegraph (June 14, 2016), http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/19/what-would-brexit-mean-for-british-trade/ (describing U.K.'s options for trade). Although the Norwegian model would allow the United Kingdom to implement its own rules for "agriculture, justice, and home affairs," they will have to "implement E.U. laws relating to the internal market." Id. The Swiss Model also requires that the United Kingdom would have to follow certain E.U. laws especially when it comes to paying into the E.U. budget and not being able to have a say on the types of regulations that are implemented. Id. See also Phillip Inman and Angela Monaghan, WTO head says leaving EU would cost UK consumers 9bn [pounds sterling] a year, The Guardian (May. 25, 2016), https://www.theguardian .com/business/2016/may/25/wto-eu-uk-consumers-trade-deals (reviewing implications of joining WTO). Roberto Azevedo, current Director-General of the WTO, has stated that the United Kingdom would have to "renegotiate trade deals with all 161 WTO members in an unprecedented move." Id. The United Kingdom would not be in a position to reject the tariff charges that would be imposed on them because they will have to start from the beginning and other countries are aware of the U.K.'s need to establish new trade agreements. Id. Not only will this be a very time consuming activity, the other members of the WTO have to be in a position to negotiate, which entirely depends upon whether that Member-State has other priorities or not. Id. See also Jim Pickard, Most Britons want both single market access and immigration curbs, Financial Times (Nov. 16, 2016), available at https://www.ft.com/content/flefaed2abea-1 1e6-9cb3-bb8207902122 (describing United Kingdom's ideal relationship with European Union). The United Kingdom public would want to maintain access to the E.U. single market and also restrict immigration. Id. Theresa May has also constantly reiterated, without stating specifics, that she would work to ensure that the United Kingdom negotiates the best possible trading arrangement with the European Union that would best suit the interests of the country. Id.

(83.) See Inman and Monaghan, supra note 82 (providing information on alternative trading models). See also Kate Allen & Jim Pickard, Post-Brexit Britain to seek 'unique' model as great trading state, Financial Times (Aug. 31, 2016), available at https://www.ft.com/content/cb781d3e-6f8b-11e6-a0c9-1365ce54b926 (describing Britain's desire to seek trading models enabling them to control immigration). Although Britain wants to establish a trading arrangement with the European Union without being tied down by E.U. regulations, they also want to control the amount of people who enter the country from Europe. Id. There are two stances that describe the way Britain could operate in the near future: "soft Brexit" entails the continued access to the European Union and minor restrictions on immigration, whereas a "hard Brexit" would mean "trade tariffs and even visas for European citizens who wish to vacation in the United Kingdom." Id. Some have suggested that the United Kingdom should come out of the European Union Customs Union because it will allow for the free movement of goods without any imposing tariffs. Id. However, there will be some form of administrative costs and "tariff barriers at its external borders." Id. Others have suggested that the focal point of any potential negotiations should be Britain's financial sector. Id. Regardless of the decision, the United Kingdom will have to battle with the European Union in trying to create some kind of a trade agreement that would benefit them, but also allow them to impose strict immigration rules to prevent the free movement of people, which is one of the main reasons why Britain is in this situation to begin with. Id.

(84.) See Slaughter and May, supra note 54 (explicating Norwegian trading model with European Union). Norwegian Minister for Europe, Vidar Helgesen, described Norway's agreement with the European Union by stating that even though they have access to the single market, they have no influence over the types of policies that the European Union creates and that Norway incorporates into its domestic laws. Id. See also Blitz, supra note 5 (detailing pros and cons of joining EEA). The United Kingdom would be unable to prevent the free movement of goods, services, people, and capital, as they are the four freedoms that established the European Union. Id. See also Dhingra and Sampson, supra note 66 (describing cons of EEA membership). Membership to the EEA does not give that member access to the Customs Union that, for example, Turkey is a key participant. Id. This means that EEA members would have to meet the "rules of origin" requirement in order to enter the E.U. market duty-free. Id. If not, then the EEA member would have to pay a certain amount in order to have their goods entering the Customs Union. Id.
   With the growing complexity of global supply chains, verifying a
   product's origin has become increasingly costly. If the UK joined
   the EEA, part of this cost would be borne by UK firms. Exporters
   would have to limit their use of inputs imported from outside the
   EU to meet the EU's rules of origin (Stewart-Brown and Bungay,
   2012). The EU can also use anti-dumping measures to restrict import
   from EEA countries, as occurred in 2006 when the EU imposed a 16%
   tariff on imports of Norwegian salmon. Campos et al (2015) find
   that Norway's failure to undertake the deeper integration pursued
   by EU countries has lowered Norway's productivity.


Id. This would be problematic for the United Kingdom because they do want to be part of a trading model that will force them to incur a vast amount of costs in doing business with the European Union. Id.

(85.) See Keating, supra note 6 (explaining restrictions for members of EEA). The United Kingdom would have to implement policies that they cannot influence before they have been created. Id. These types of restrictions would more likely than not go against the reason for why Brexit occurred. Id. See also Alderman, supra note 59 (describing potential downsides of EEA membership). In order for the United Kingdom to control the movement of people coming into the country, it will have to give up the level of access it currently has to the single market. Id.

(86.) See Keating, supra note 6 (examining membership restrictions). With regards to the Schengen area, this would be a possible point of discussion for the United Kingdom as the Schengen area allows free movement of people, which is one of the four freedoms that the European Union was built upon. Id. See also Bavasso & Friend et al., supra note 47, at 3 (explaining exception to four freedoms). Pursuant to Article 112 of the EEA Agreement, members can take certain precautionary measures in the event of any continuous "economic, societal or environmental difficulties relating to a particular region or sector." Id. An example of this, as demonstrated by Liechtenstein, could be that a country can implement restrictions on one of the four freedoms that would ordinarily be forbidden. Id.

(87.) See Slaughter and May, supra note 54 (explaining membership rules to EEA). These reservations can only be utilized on a limited basis and often require a special reason as to why a member is rejecting the E.U. regulation. Id. See Whitcomb, supra note 57 (stating positive of EEA membership). Although EEA members have to accept the four freedoms, they are free to implement their own rules and regulations pertaining to agriculture, employment law, and legal issues. Id. EEA membership will also protect U.K. citizens living in the European Union. Id.

(88.) See Whitcomb, supra note 57 (describing how United Kingdom will have no European Union representative as part of EEA). As a member of the EEA, the United Kingdom will have no representative in any influential position within the European Union, which further goes to the idea of how the United Kingdom will have to stick with any policy the European Union comes up with, even if it goes against what the United Kingdom agrees with. Id. The United Kingdom will have to do this in order to maintain access to the single market. Id. See also Slaughter and May, supra note 54 (stating how EEA members have to give up some control). Nikolai Astrup, a spokesperson for the Norwegian Conservative Party who focuses on European issues, stated that "If you want to run the EU, stay in the EU. If you want to be run by the EU, feel free to join us in the EEA." Id.

(89.) See Slaughter and May, supra note 54 (detailing Norway's lack of influence on European Union policy creation). By creating an arrangement that mimics Norway, the United Kingdom will have to adopt E.U. policies on a wide range of issues without having the right to vote on the policies. Id. This would evidently be problematic for a democratic nation. Id. As the United Kingdom prides itself in being a strong democratic country, it seems unlikely that they would be happy in taking a back seat to the creation of E.U. regulations. Id. Prime Minister David Cameron talked about the Norwegian model and how the United Kingdom is better off staying in the European Union. Id. This is because the United Kingdom will still have more influence over E.U. policy-making by continuing to be a member than if we left to adopt a Norwegian-style model. Id.

(90.) See HM Government, supra note 56 (clarifying impact of customs regulations on goods coming into European Union). If the United Kingdom was to implement the Norwegian model for trading, they will have to abide by numerous customs regulations in order for those goods to enter the E.U. single market. Id. The United Kingdom will no longer experience fluidity when it comes to trading with the European Union. Id.

(91.) See id. (detailing increase in costs associated with EEA membership). The former Norwegian Minister for Europe, Vidar Helgesen, believed that due to the United Kingdom's global ambitions and contributions, he finds it incomprehensible that United Kingdom would be happy with a Norwegian style trading arrangement with the European Union. Id. Norway and the United Kingdom differ in many respects, but when it comes to their respective economies, Norway only has a limited number of products that it relies on from exporting. Id. See also Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, supra note 56 (stating Norway's agreements with European Union).

(92.) See HM Government, supra 56 (explaining EEA policies on non-trade related issues). As part of their arrangement, Norway is expected to comply with certain regulations in sectors that are not entirely related to the European Union. Id. "This includes the Working Time Directive, Agency Workers Directives and Renewables Directive." Id.

(93.) See Phillip Inman and Angela Monaghan, supra note 82 (setting forth how United Kingdom will have to negotiate with other countries outside European Union). This would be problematic because the major world economies such as the United States and China will become aware that the United Kingdom is not as economically strong as it was when it was a member of the European Union. Id. This may lead to the United Kingdom accept unfavorable terms as a consequence for leaving the European Union as the other major economies may not be too confident with the U.K. economy following Brexit. Id. See also Keating, supra note 6 (explaining potential fear of U.K. membership to EEA). The European Union may be concerned if the United Kingdom did join the EEA because they are a major economy that would potentially increase the influence of the EEA on a global scale. Id. Another fear that the European Union could have is that, if the United Kingdom is striving under their membership to the EEA, it may convince other E.U. members to leave the single market and join the EEA in hopes of replicating the United Kingdom. Id.

(94.) See HM Government, supra note 56 (clarifying how United Kingdom has to continue contributing to E.U. budget). By leaving the European Union, the United Kingdom will not be saving a vast amount of money because if they decide to join the EEA, they will have to contribute money to the E.U. budget. Id. By joining the EEA, the United Kingdom will have to continue contributing money to the E.U. budget on a weekly basis. Id.

(95.) See Dhingra and Sampson, supra note 66 (detailing costs associated with EEA membership). As a non-E.U. member in 2011, Norway was contributing approximately 106 [pounds sterling] per capita compared with the U.K.'s 128.5 [pounds sterling]. Id. The House of Commons Library predicted that if the United Kingdom did leave the European Union, they would contribute significantly less than Norway. Id.

(96.) See Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, supra note 56 (noting how EEA members help economically weaker members). Being part of the European Union or EEA requires members to help each other financially to ensure the stability of the European Union or EEA overall. Id.

(97.) See Christy, supra note 78 (explaining importance of respecting E.U.'s four freedoms). German Chancellor Angela Merkel has made it clear that the United Kingdom cannot choose a "soft" or "hard Brexit." Id. The United Kingdom will not be able to pick and choose the type of agreement it will have with the European Union. Id. Angela Merkel has repeatedly stated that the United Kingdom will not be allowed to have the best of both worlds and instead should decide whether or not they want to respect the four freedoms of the European Union. Id. If the United Kingdom does not respect the four freedoms, then the negotiations should be centered on limited access to the single market. Id. See also Hjelmgaard & Zoroya, supra note 2 (demonstrating why U.K. public voted to leave European Union). Although immigration was not the only reason for why the United Kingdom decided to vote against staying in the European Union, it was nevertheless a major reason. Id. There had been an increase in immigrants from other European countries that angered some of the Pro-Brexit voters. Id.

(98.) See Pickard, supra note 82 (explaining what U.K. public wants for its country). The U.K. public seem to want unfettered access to the single market and also to restrict the free movement of people, thereby reducing immigration. Id. The public ultimately wants to reduce one of the four freedoms of the European Union, which will not be accepted by the other members. Id.

(99.) See Favero, supra note 6 (detailing issues with Swiss trading model). Negotiating bilateral agreements is a time-consuming process and is not something that the United Kingdom could quickly resolve. Id. The European Union will also not allow the United Kingdom to pick favorable agreements. Id. "The United Kingdom would likely face a period of heightened economic uncertainty following a vote for Brexit, at least in the short term, while becoming entangled in protracted negotiations with a rather stubborn opponent." Id. See also Dhingra and Sampson, supra note 66 (delineating complexities of Swiss trading model). In 2014, Switzerland carried out a referendum in which the public was asked whether or not the Swiss government should implement some restriction on immigration. Id. Even though the people voted to restrict immigration, it is unlikely to be thoroughly implemented because it violates one of the four freedoms of the European Union. Id. If Switzerland wants to maintain good relations with the European Union then they will have to make the necessary changes to their immigration referendum in order for it to comply with the freedom of movement. Id. Furthermore, the Swiss Model will not provide a sufficient level of economic integration nor will it provide the same level of access to the European Union as it currently does as a member or even as a potential EEA member. Id.

(100.) See HM Government, supra note 56 (examining Switzerland's bilateral agreements with European Union). Not all sectors are covered within the Swiss Model for trading with the European Union. Id. For example, Switzerland has limited access to certain sectors such as finance and legal. Id. Certain professionals, according to E.U. law, are only allowed to provide their services to the E.U. market for up to 90 days per year, which negatively impacts Switzerland's ability to supply a steady stream of services to the European Union. Id. See also Keating, supra note 6 (discussing Switzerland's trading relationship with European Union). In 2004, Switzerland concluded 120 bilateral agreements with the European Union. Id. Unfortunately, the European Union believed that continuing to create individual bilateral agreements that were narrowed in scope were time-consuming and not as fruitful as the EEA. Id.

(101.) See HM Government, supra note 56 (showing how Switzerland created their unique arrangement with European Union). The Council of European Union believes that Switzerland's various agreements have reached a certain limit now in which some of them need to be reconsidered in order to actually benefit Switzerland in the long term. Id. See also Wold .supra note 5 (assessing viability of implementing Switzerland's unique arrangement in United Kingdom). Switzerland has created a unique arrangement over a long period of time that will be time consuming and complicated for the United Kingdom to replicate. Id.

(102.) See HM Government, supra note 56 at 27 (explaining Switzerland's lack of representation in E.U. institutions).

(103.) See Keating, supra note 6 (describing Swiss Model). The negotiations between Switzerland and the European Union took many years to complete and would very difficult to replicate by the United Kingdom. Id.

(104.) See Wold, supra note 5 (explicating Switzerland's responsibilities to European Union). See also Swati Dhingra and Thomas Sampson, supra note 66 at 5-6 (detailing Switzerland's numerous bilateral agreements with European Union). In order for Switzerland to gain access to the single market, they had to create numerous bilateral agreements over the course of many years. Id. Even though Switzerland has access to the single market, it still has to adhere to E.U. policies, especially concerning certain areas of trading. Id.

(105.) See Bavasso et al., supra note 47 at 2-3 (stating European Union's four freedoms). All E.U. members must respect the four freedoms when drafting and implementing domestic legislation. Id. See also Foulkes, supra note 61 (discussing potential issue with European Union). When the Swiss population voted to place restrictions on immigration, it was unaware of the potential repercussions for restricting the freedom of movement. Id.

(106.) See Mason, supra note 70 (illustrating reasons for Brexit). One of the reasons for why the public voted to leave the European Union was because of the vast increase in European immigrants coming into the United Kingdom. Id. Regardless of the type of trading model that the United Kingdom implements, it will want to have more control over immigration. Id. This will be difficult to achieve if it wants to stay in the single market in which the freedom of movement cannot be restricted. Id.

(107.) See O'Brien, supra note 78 (describing Merkel's fear if United Kingdom disallows freedom of movement). German Chancellor Angela Merkel is concerned that if the United Kingdom is allowed to create a trading model in which it can restrict migration and still continue to access the single market, other countries may use that as precedent and try to restrict freedom of movement into their countries. Id. She insists that the United Kingdom has to accept the European Union's four freedoms otherwise they should not be allowed access to the single market. Id. By allowing the United Kingdom to restrict any of the four freedoms, other E.U. members could potentially follow suit. Id. If more E.U. countries are allowed to place restrictions on one or more freedoms, then the European Union may fail as an entity. Id.

(108.) See Keating, supra note 6 (stating how Switzerland is restricted in influencing European Union policies). Just like the Norwegian Model, the Swiss Model would prevent the United Kingdom from influencing any of the policies that the European Union decides to create. Id. This would be troublesome for the United Kingdom, because Switzerland has to allow the free movement of people as required under E.U. law. Id.

(109.) See Favero, supra note 6 (showing potential difficulties for United Kingdom in creating numerous bilateral agreements with European Union). If the United Kingdom does decide to create a Swiss style-trading model, it is unclear if other E.U. members will be as patient and accepting of the United Kingdom as they have been of Switzerland, considering the vast amount of time and complexity surrounding Switzerland's bilateral agreements with the European Union. Id. The Swiss arrangement continues to be a present day problem because of its intricate nature. Id.

(110.) See HM Government, supra note 56 (stating United Kingdom's desire for positive outcome). The United Kingdom will need to establish a completely different relationship with the European Union if it wants to stay within the spirit of Brexit. Id. This is primarily because the European Union has taken a strong approach towards Brexit and has warned the United Kingdom that it will not have the same level of access that it once did. Id. at 41.

(111.) See id. (analyzing difficulties of non-E.U. membership). More likely than not the United Kingdom will find it extremely difficult to recreating the perks it had as an E.U. member by deciding to go it alone. Id. See also Keating, supra note 6 (demonstrating uncertainty around United Kingdom's future). It is difficult to predict how the United Kingdom will respond to the referendum. Id. Some argue that the United Kingdom will have more freedom in negotiating trade agreements with other countries without any constraints. Id. Others have argued that the United Kingdom's future success as an economic player hinges on the type of agreement they can create with the European Union. Id.

(112.) See Swati Dhingra and Thomas Sampson, The Consequences of Brexit for UK Trade and Living Standards, London sch. of econ. and pol. science (Apr. 2016), available at http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/brexit02.pdf (demonstrating risings costs for United Kingdom outside of European Union). Because of Brexit, the United Kingdom will face higher trading costs. Id. "Non-tariff barriers include a wide range of measures that raise the costs of trade such as border controls, rules of origin checks, cross-country differences in regulations over things like product standards and safety, and threats of anti-dumping." Id. at 2.

(113.) See HM Government, supra note 56 (setting forth difficulty for United Kingdom to establish new trading model). The United Kingdom will face a long period of uncertainty and difficulty in trying to implement the type of trading model that Prime Minister Theresa May sees fit for the United Kingdom. Id. It is unclear whether the United Kingdom will be able to negotiate a favorable deal while also neglecting one of the four freedoms. Id. See also Keating, supra note 6 (exploring U.K.'s trading options). The United Kingdom may have to "go it alone" if they want to secure their sovereignty, which does appear to be a high priority. Id. Unfortunately, in doing so the United Kingdom would have limited access to the European Union. Id.

(114.) See Foster, supra note 6 (outlining Turkey's arrangement with European Union). Turkey is also under the same restrictions as members of the EEA and EFTA. Id.

(115.) See Id. (expanding on Turkey's relationship with Customs Union). See also Togan, supra note 66 (illustrating issues with Customs Union). As Turkey is desperately seeking EU membership, they became part of the Customs Union in order to trade goods and have access to the European Union. Id. See also Yapici, supra 6 (overviewing free trade arrangements between Turkey and European Union). The European Union essentially controls the types of free trade agreements that Turkey can be part of along with the countries that Turkey can negotiate with. Id. Some have argued that Turkey should be entitled to negotiate free trade agreements in conjunction with the European Union, thereby having some influence on the types of agreement they create. Id. By negotiating together, Turkey and the European Union would both pay attention to each other's obligations making the entire process more equal. Id.

(116.) See Togan, supra note 66 (elucidating issues with joining Customs Union). By trading solely with the Customs Union, the U.K.'s key financial sector will be neglected and therefore negatively harm the U.K. economy. Id. This in turn will damage the U.K.'s reputation as a financial hub for business investments. Id. See also HM Government, supra note 55 (explaining issues with membership to Customs Union). One negative aspect of the Customs Union is when the European Union conducts business with a third country, Turkey has to allow that country to access its own market. Id. In order to receive a reciprocal arrangement, Turkey would have to create a separate agreement with that third country in order to access that countries market. Id.

(117.) See Slaughter and May, supra note 54 (describing WTO rules). By relying on WTO rules, the United Kingdom would have to agree on trading terms that are equal to the terms agreed to by other members, regardless of how big or powerful the country may be. Id.

(118.) See Id. (describing United Kingdom's potential costs with WTO membership to access European Union). WTO membership would mean that the United Kingdom would be on equal footing with third countries that do not have any trading agreement with the European Union. Id. A major concern for the United Kingdom would be that their potential membership to the WTO would not include financial services. Id. The United Kingdom would also have negotiate tariffs with the European Union in compliance with the guidelines laid out by the WTO. Id.

(119.) See Lindsell, supra note 60 (hypothesizing how United Kingdom may conduct business following Brexit). If they adopt the Norwegian or Swiss Model, they will have to comply with E.U. regulations for business activities with any E.U. member. Id. See also Nicole Gaouette and Stephen Collinson, supra note 78 (illustrating difficulty for United Kingdom, to trade with other countries without adhering to E.U. regulations). Unless the United Kingdom maintains some kind of a trading relationship with the European Union, countries such as the Unite States will not prioritize a U.K. deal ahead of an E.U. deal. Id.

(120.) See McBridge and Dewast, supra note 78 (overviewing how world leaders reacted to Brexit). President Obama has expressed his surprise at the Brexit referendum result. Id. He also clarified that the United Kingdom will have to go to the back of the line for any potential trade agreements with the United States. Id. Outside of the European Union, many countries have said that they will closely monitor the potential effects of Brexit and based upon that they will determine a course of action. Id. The Foreign Minister of Japan, Fumio Kishida, said how the country will monitor the initial impact of Brexit and respond accordingly. Id. South Korea's economic and financial authorities held a meeting to discuss how the country will respond to the economic and financial implications of Brexit. Id.

(121.) See HM Government, supra note 78 (pointing to uncertainty for future of United Kingdom). Regardless of the trading model that the United Kingdom adopts, they will not be as influential as they currently are as a member. Id. The U.K. government will have to balance any benefits with trading with the single market to the potential costs associated with trading as a non-E.U. member. Id. It is unclear whether any future trading model will give the United Kingdom the unfettered access that it enjoys as a member. Id.

(122.) See Dominiczak and Foster, supra note 4 (recalling United Kingdom's difficulty in creating trade agreements with E.U. members and other nations). Leaders in Brussels have requested that the United Kingdom should not negotiate separate trade agreements with non-E.U. members until the United Kingdom has finalized an agreement with the European Union. Id. French President Francois Hollande has informed the United Kingdom that they will not make the negotiating process easy for the United Kingdom because the demands made by the United Kingdom are not possible. Id.

(123.) See HM Government, supra note 56 (acknowledging United Kingdom's reducing influence on European Union). The U.K.'s lack of influence in the political and legislative process in the European Union will, to an extent, impact U.K. businesses and the U.K.'s economy. Id. U.K. businesses will also not be protected by the E.U.'s strict regulations pertaining to competition law and will be unable to use the wide array of options to seek redress. Id. The United Kingdom will also face a difficult time trying to agree upon terms with the European Union as each member state will want to promote its own interests and could further complicate a process that would have been easier had the United Kingdom voted to stay in the European Union. Id.

(124.) See Wallace, supra note 74 (explaining importance of financial sector for United Kingdom). The United Kingdom will continue to be Europe's financial hub for banking activities between European countries. Id. The financial industry will be different as the U.K.'s relationship with Europe will change due to Brexit. Id. According to Deutsche Bank's chief executive John Cryan, even if foreign companies ultimately decide that they want to transact through an E.U. country, the United Kingdom will still be viewed as an attractive place to invest and do business. Id.

(125.) See Slaughter and May, supra note 54 (detailing UK's desire for unique arrangement with European Union). The Polish Foreign Minister, Radek Sikorski, is pessimistic that the United Kingdom would be able to negotiate a trade agreement with the European Union in which they are able to maintain all the benefits that an E.U. member would have, without incurring any of the costs associated with E.U. membership. Id.

(126.) See id. (concluding how United Kingdom will struggle in replicating E.U. membership perks). The United Kingdom will face a period of uncertainty that may or may not detrimentally impact the U.K.'s economy and its relations to the rest of the world. Id. Other nations are fully aware of the U.K.'s vulnerable position as a global business leader and may potentially use that as a bargaining factor to ensure a better deal for them. Id. The United Kingdom would want to do maximize value yet minimize risk. Id.
COPYRIGHT 2018 Suffolk University Law School
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2018 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Patel, Hetan
Publication:Suffolk Transnational Law Review
Date:Jun 22, 2018
Words:23787
Previous Article:ENFORCING THE UNENFORCEABLE: HOW TO RELY ON INTERNATIONAL LAW TO CURB CHINA FROM ILLEGAL TERRITORIAL CLAIMS IN THE SOUTH CHINA SEA.
Next Article:THE COST OF TERROR: HOW TERRORISM AND ANTI-TERROR LEGISLATION IN THE EUROPEAN UNION MAY HINDER BUSINESS.
Topics:

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2020 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters