100% Original, Plagiarism Free, Tailored to your instructions

Order Now!

effects of Brexit on the construction industry

Module Title: Business Communications
Level: 3
Weighting: 100%
Word Limit: 2000- words
Portfolio Tasks
This is an individual Assignment Portfolio.
? In order to pass the assignment, you must product work of a Pass standard in all three tasks.
The following limits must be adhered to: Task Task description Length
A Compose an email announcing a staff training session Your email must not be over 1 side of A4 in length
B Draft a letter refusing a credit request Your letter must not be over 1 side of A4 in length
C Prepare a report advising on the effects of Brexit on the construction industry 1000 words.
Task A
Compose an email announcing a staff training session
You are secretary to the mayor of Pinkershire City Council. Following a series of embarrassing road signs blunders, the mayor has decided to offer all its employees a six ? week fundamental writing skills workshop. Jane White, a regular freelance contributor to The Daily Telegraph, Radio Times and BBC Radio 4 will facilitate the sessions.
To encourage all employees to attend these optional sessions the mayor has instructed you to write an email that explains why the city council is offering the workshop and why all employees should participate. Include logistical information such as schedule, enrolment process and action deadline. (You may invent the details.)
Guidance for completing Task A
? The email must contain a suitable subject heading.
? All relevant information must be included.
? The email should not contain any grammar, spelling and punctuation errors.
? The email should be audience centred.
Your email must not be over 1 side of A4 in length
(Total = 25 marks)
Task B
Draft a letter refusing a credit request
Assume that you are the credit officer for Trump Fashions, a high street retailer. You have received an application for an in-house retail credit card from Melinda Clifton of 976, Ashbrook Drive, Holbeach, Lincolnshire, and PE5 I JK. Melinda?s employment records are not verifiable and she does appear to have excessive debt obligations.
Your task: Draft a letter explaining why her request has been denied. At the same time, strive to maintain her goodwill as a cash customer. Your refusal letter must leave an open door for future applications.
Guidance for completing Task B
? Your letter must not be over 1 side of A4 in length
? You must not make any grammar, spelling or punctuation errors
? The letter must be laid out correctly as a formal business correspondence
? The unfavourable news must be presented in a manner which the receiver will view as fair
? It should strive to maintain the customer?s goodwill and the refusal must leave an open door for future applications
Your letter must not be over 1 side of A4 in length
(Total = 25 marks)
Task C
This task is intended to assess your ability to incorporate researched materials in your work.
Your work for JK Roofers Ltd a small sized construction company based in Lincolnshire. Over 60 percent of JK Roofers Ltd skilled and semi-skilled workers are from Poland. Tom Clifford, the managing director of JK Roofers is extremely worried about the adverse consequences Brexit could have on his company.
Read the following three articles each of which considers the impact of Brexit on the UK?s construction industry and business in general.
Article 1: Skills, not Brexit, the main threat to the construction industry, says One Way
(Appendix 1)
Article 2: ?Brexit? and the impact on construction in the UK
(Appendix 2)
Article 3: Brexit what it means for your business
(Appendix 3)
From the information gathered, prepare a 1000-word report on how Brexit could impact JK Roofers Ltd.
In your report, include recommendations on strategies JK Roofers Ltd should put in place for the future.
Guidance for completing task C Title Page: This page will include the title of the report as well as the name of the person who prepared the report, and the date in which it was completed.
Table of Contents: This will consist of a list of all the headings and subheadings in the report and the number of the page on which each section begins.
Introduction: This should contain three specific facts:
The purpose the report;
The scope of the report;
The method by which you gathered your information.
Ensure the report is adapted to the target audience.
Allocate about 200 words for your introduction.
Body: This should include an organised presentation of the information you have accumulated.
Allocate about 500 words for this task.
Conclusion: This is an objective statement of what the report has shown.
The student should bring the report to a close by pulling together the main points emerging from the report
Allocate about 150 words the conclusion.
Recommendations: This should flow logically from the objective conclusion.
From your findings, recommend the best measure to be adopted by the corporation.
Allocate about 150 words for the recommendations.
Appendix: This section contains supplementary information often in the form of graphs or charts, that does not fit into the body of the report but that is essential to substantiate the date.
Include the sources used.
Additional notes
? How accurate is the information from each source? Is it precise and correct?
? How reliable is the information? Is it well researched and evidenced? Is it based on fact or merely opinion?
? Is the information up-to-date?
? How useful is the information to you? Does it provide you with all the details you need or does it leave gaps?
(Total= 50 marks)
Appendix 1
Skills, not Brexit, the main threat to construction industry, says One Way
Wednesday, 3 August 2016
A “crippling lack of skilled professionals” and not uncertainty over the UK’s exit from the European Union (EU) is the main threat to the UK construction industry, claims One Way.
Despite many experts suggesting the main threat to the sector is the knock on effects of Brexit, analysis by the construction and rail recruitment specialist found that to be “a bit of a red herring”.
Paul Payne, managing director of One Way, argues that the biggest potential risk to future productivity is the current skills crisis which “is being overlooked because of all the noise around Brexit”.
?We?ve seen little change since the result except for some natural hesitation brought on by the ?Armageddon scenarios? being pumped into the market,” he said.
“We?re as busy now as we were before the referendum and the real issue ? the crippling lack of skilled professionals in this country ? is being overlooked because of all the noise around Brexit.?
?Yes, the construction industry has benefited from being part of the EU as it has given the sector access to a lot of workers who have moved over and have filled lower skilled roles, however we?ve never seen any great influx of skilled professionals who can work as design managers or quantity surveyors, for example.
“These people are needed across the entire industry and in related fields like civil engineering and currently there are far, far too few of them. More robust and well prepared hiring firms like ourselves will always have the resources to be able to pluck individual experts from the EU regardless of changes to freedom of movement laws, but in reality there is no quick fix.
Payne believes the construction industry needs to focus on “growing our own” and encourage more women into the sector in order to meet demand.
“Targeting more apprentices and youngsters at school level as well as widening the scope of people who are potentially interested in working in the industry to include more women and professionals from diverse backgrounds.
“Even at the moment when there are a number of major projects being put on hold there simply aren?t enough people in the market to meet demand. Imagine what the situation will be like when the economy picks up and they?re given the green light.
“Ultimately, something needs to happen quickly as we?re rapidly approaching a breaking point where productivity will be affected.?
Builderandengineer.co.uk. (2016). Skills, not Brexit, the main threat to construction industry, says One Way | Builder & Engineer. [online] Available at: https://www.builderandengineer.co.uk/news/skills-not-brexit-main-threat-construction-industry-says-one-way [Accessed 24 August 2016] 10
Appendix 2
Brexit? and the Impact on Construction in the UK
Tue, 28 Jun 2016
There is still a great deal of uncertainty as to what the full implications of ?Brexit? are for the UK?s construction industry, but the view from Timetric?s Construction Intelligence Center (CIC) is that there are major downside risks to growth, with little or no upside.
Following the victory in the June 23rd referendum for the campaign for the UK to leave the EU and the subsequent decision by the prime minister, David Cameron, to announce his resignation, the CIC has made an initial revision to its forecast for growth in the construction industry in 2016. The CIC now expects growth of 2.8%; this is down from the previous projection of 3.4%, which was based on the assumption that the result of the referendum would be in favour of remaining in the EU.
A sharp downturn in growth in 2016-2017
The pace of growth in the UK?s construction industry will then slow to 1.5% in 2017 (down from 4% previously), reflecting a sharp downturn in investment as the UK government embarks on the two-year process of negotiating its exit from the single market. The timing of the government?s decision to invoke Article 50 is crucial in terms of determining exactly when the UK will be formally outside of the EU, but the negative impact on investor confidence stemming from the uncertainty over how the UK economy will perform outside of the single market will weigh heavily on the construction industry during this period.
Investors will also take steps ahead of the formal exit to ensure that they are protected from any negative fall-out, and this is likely to mean a drop-off in new projects and the potential for existing projects in the pipeline to be put on hold or cancelled.
Assuming that the UK will formally be out of the EU by 2019 and a clear picture emerges on the post-EU trading environment, investment will likely pick up again as new opportunities become apparent. However, there is little prospect of a surge in new activity at this time, as the UK is not expected to be in a position of strength to strike a deal that is favourable with respect to the EU.
The UK?s construction industry is currently reliant on foreign labour from within the EU owing to insufficient numbers of new and existing skilled domestic workers. Ahead of the referendum, the Chartered Institute of Building warned that tight regulation of migration would damage construction activity in the UK. Reduced access to skilled workers from the EU could exacerbate the skills shortage, potentially delaying projects and increasing labour costs.Potentially higher costs for labour and materials
The industry is also reliant on the import of construction materials and equipment from EU countries, in particular Germany, Sweden and Italy, and in the post-EU trading environment, the construction industry could face higher costs for key inputs in construction. There is still the potential for the UK to negotiate trade deals outside of the EU, but there is no guarantee as to whether these deals will be more favourable with respect to the goods and services required by the construction industry.
Pessimism among house builders
House builders were among the worst affected in terms of the sharp decline in their share prices in the hours after the referendum result was announced. This reflects the dire prediction for the real estate market. Prior to the referendum, the UK Treasury suggested that house prices could fall by up to 17% due to Brexit, and a group of 17 of the UK?s biggest house builders reported that Brexit would inevitably reduce the amount of housing being built, owing to labour shortages and increased import prices, together with reduced demand for property from overseas investors.
Infrastructure to lose key source of funding
There will also be direct consequences in terms of the loss of future funding from EU sources for major projects in the UK. The European Investment Bank (EIB), which is the EU?s bank and operates in the interests of EU member states, increased its lending to UK infrastructure projects to EUR5.5 billion in 2015. The UK has also received funds from the EU?s European Fund for Strategic Investment (EFSI), which is aiming to provide EUR315 billion in infrastructure investment across the continent. According to the UK?s Infrastructure and Projects Authority, the UK has been the second-largest recipient of funds under the EFSI, which has supported projects including smart meters and offshore wind projects.
The heightened political instability following the referendum, not least in terms of who will be the next prime minister, also means that some major infrastructure projects could be put on hold. For example, David Cameron was a major supporter of the large-scale expansion plans at Heathrow, while Boris Johnson, a leading member of the campaign for the UK?s exit from the EU, is a vocal opponent of the plans. Other major projects, including the GBP55 billion High-Speed 2 railway project could also be subject to further delays, impacting negatively on investor confidence.
In addition to these direct impacts, the future of the UK construction industry also greatly depends on how the UK economy holds up in the coming years. Although Timetric is not currently forecasting that the UK economy falls into recession, a slowdown in household spending and business investment, including the potential for an outflow of foreign capital, could result in a sharp deceleration in economic growth, curtailing activity in residential, commercial and industrial construction projects.
Reflecting this heightened risk, the UK has been downgraded in the latest update of Timetric?s Construction Risk Index. The UK has fallen six places to be ranked 15th out of the 50 countries in the index, and has been downgraded to B1. This reflects the upturn in political and market risk and also in operating risk given the uncertainty over how the regulatory environment will change.
The international ratings agencies have also downgraded the UK?s sovereign credit ratings. Standad & Poor?s, for example, cut the UK?s rating from AAA to AA (down two notches), and it also warned that further downgrades could be forthcoming reflecting the likelihood of a weaker and less effective policymaking environment in the UK and the negative impact this will have on the economy and fiscal and external balances
Financial Times, (2016). UK construction sector ?re-entered recession? in first half. [online] Available at: https://timetric.com/info/media-center/expert-insight/2016/06/28/brexit-and-impact-construction-uk/ [Accessed 24 August 2016]. 13
Appendix 3
Brexit ? what it means for your business
Post on: Jul 6, 2016
Allie Renison
Following the momentous decision by voters for Brexit in last month?s referendum, many business leaders were left asking: what next? Allie Renison, head of trade and Europe policy at the IoD, outlines the alternatives for a post-EU Britain and examines the steps UK businesses should be taking now
On 23 June, the UK took a monumental step towards changing its future direction of travel. Despite widespread predictions that it would choose pragmatism over principle, the principle of [self] control won out over most other considerations for British voters. For businesses, assessing the consequences of a Leave vote is a much taller task. But the Institute of Directors is committed to assessing its full implications, and ensuring that business not only feels as prepared as possible for it, but also stands equipped to capitalise on any opportunities that may accompany it.
In the wake of the referendum, the most pressing concerns for businesses are responding to the short-term consequences stemming from disruption to financial markets and preparing for longer-term ramifications and maximising any opportunities that a post-Brexit landscape stands to offer. We are already beginning to see some of the more immediate negative fall-out in the aftermath of the vote to leave, with more than ?120bn being wiped off the value of Britain?s biggest companies, the pound plunging to a 31-year low against the dollar and the UK being stripped of its AAA credit rating since the referendum.
Among IoD members too, trends are beginning to emerge, although it is still far too early to draw any dramatic or sustained conclusions about which way business is headed. A snap poll following the vote found that more than a third of directors plan to cut investment in their business, a quarter intend to put a freeze on recruitment, and one in five are considering moving some of their operations abroad.
Only time will tell if business leaders follow through on any of this, but there is clearly no room for complacency, even at this early stage. While much is still unknown about the shape of EU negotiations and indeed of the government that will be leading them, firms need to be in stock-taking mode at the very least to assess how, if at all, changes might affect them.
The narrative in respect of Brexit has often been to divide businesses along a line between big and small, trading and domestic-facing. But IoD research has found that the reality is much more complex, with 83 per cent of its membership having at least one form of commercial link to the EU ? be it direct exports, integration into an EU-facing supply chain, employing European nationals, importing from the bloc, or operating as the subsidiary of an EU-based parent company (and vice versa).
With such a high degree of integration into EU markets, it is vital that the IoD provides information to its members about the alternative scenarios to EU membership and what fundamental changes, if any, this could spell out for firms across a range of sectors. Politics will play an important role in shaping the outcome of these negotiations, and as such constrains our ability to predict economic and business outcomes with any degree of finite certainty. However, there are a number of areas where we can forecast a range of potential changes to policy that firms should take into account when making any adjustment plans in the wake of Brexit with both short and longer-term perspectives in mind.
This article examines possible implications and outlines some steps that businesses should be taking now. It calls on companies to assess their commercial links and exposure to the EU, sets out potential timescales, and examines the possible consequences for taxation, regulation, immigration, trade and commercial contracts.
What are your links to the EU?
The impact of Brexit is going to be felt well beyond exports; there is a wide array of commercial links (direct and indirect) that companies have with the EU across the B2B and B2C space, as well as with the EU itself. The IoD has surveyed its members to gain a better idea about the degree of business inter-linkages ? these are set out below. One of the critical lessons of the 2008 financial crisis was that the scope and scale of linkages between businesses in a globalised world are often underappreciated.
As such it is imperative to have conversations now with suppliers, clients or customers (especially those in the EU) to ensure you are clear about your contractual relationships with them post-Brexit, rather than leaving any unexpected surprise to materialise down the line. As far as possible, get to know your supply chain to determine where there are potential vulnerabilities ? sterling?s current volatility means that changes to import costs in particular are likely to be passed along to firms which are domestic-facing only.
Simply having links ? direct or indirect ? to the EU does not, however, automatically mean businesses are fundamentally at risk from Brexit. Indeed, it is primarily demand for goods and services which drives trade, rather than simply being a member of a formal trading bloc like the EU. At this stage, however, it is important for firms to understand the full extent of their engagement with this bloc in order to minimise the potential for any unexpected disruptions.
Process and timescales
There are two ways of exiting the European Union:
? Repealing the 1972 European Communities Act[1] ? immediate impact but entails no negotiations with the EU and would leave the UK defaulting to membership of the World Trade Organisation (WTO). Politically unlikely and would be incredibly messy from a legal point of view.
? UK government triggers Article 50 in the Lisbon Treaty by notifying the European Council[2] of its intention ? this provides for a two-year timescale in which to negotiate a new arrangement with the EU, which can only be extended with the unanimous consent of all other member states.
Before the trigger is pulled on exiting, much thought will undoubtedly be given to what kind of ongoing relationship the UK will seek with the rest of the EU:
? UK could join the European Economic Area (EEA), comprising Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein, to preserve its existing levels of access to the single market ? best solution for trading businesses in terms of continuity, but removes UK?s formal negotiating voice in the EU and means free movement continues[3].
? The Swiss government has over many years negotiated a complex series of bilateral agreements, dubbed the ?Swiss model?. It is highly unlikely that such a framework is going to be appropriate or desirable for the UK; it is more of a description of an iterative process rather than a model as such.
? Dependence on WTO rules. This is a comprehensive set of rules, but the guarantees on goods are much more ambitious and comprehensive than on services. If no agreement could be reached between the UK and the EU before the negotiating time ran out, trade would revert to WTO rules. It should be remembered that significant amounts of global trade take place under these rules, albeit with higher trade costs for market access and penetration.
Ultimately, three agreements are likely: one to formally relinquish the UK?s legal obligations to the EU; a final withdrawal agreement laying out new terms of bilateral trade; and a transitional agreement to provide for a graduated step-down in terms of market access before the new terms come into effect[4]. Voting on the final agreement takes place on the basis of qualified majority voting in the Council of Ministers and requires a simple majority consent from the European Parliament.
Our research has shown us that a majority of IoD members consider comprehensiveness ? getting a ?good deal? ? to be more of a priority than speed. Given that for the duration of the negotiations the UK remains a full member of the EU, there is reason enough to argue for taking the necessary time to ensure an appropriate level of ambition. This is also why neither the government nor business appears to want to rush the formal triggering of Article 50 to begin the negotiating process.
However, unless the UK opts for the EEA route (which requires rejoining the European Free Trade Association first) under its current structures, there is a potential risk that waiting too long may involve a trade-off in the content of the EU?s negotiating offer with respect to a bilateral trade agreement.
Opting for membership of the EEA, unless the UK seeks to negotiate some kind of amended EEA option (which is without legal precedent), is likely to be relatively straightforward. Negotiating a new bilateral trade deal with the EU would, in contrast, be unlikely to be completed within the two-year window provided, looking at the average length of negotiations with other major economies (which is about five-to-seven years).
In the event of a Brexit, the UK would no longer be bound by the EU?s VAT directives, and the government would have far more flexibility to set its own rate of sales tax along with the items subject to each rate. This has been a particular issue of late, with the so-called ?tampon tax? fuelling debate about the UK?s EU constraints in being able to reduce VAT below a certain minimum threshold.
But the administrative burden for businesses whose products travel through the EU would be likely to rise, given that they would no longer have access to the EU?s co-ordinated VAT collection system, and depending on post-Brexit arrangements, import duties would kick in. Businesses selling digital content to customers anywhere in the EU would still be bound by new place-of-supply rules, but would no longer have access to its VATMOSS system, which keeps firms from having to register for VAT in every single member state where a transaction is processed.
There is also the question of whether the UK no longer having to give effect to rules such as the EU?s Parent-Subsidiary Directive could lead to UK businesses with a parent company elsewhere in the EU, and vice versa, becoming subject to double taxation with respect to their profit distributions. The reality is that the UK has quite a high number of double tax treaties with many countries, including from the EU, although they are not as comprehensive in scope as the aforementioned directive.
It is very likely that the UK?s regulatory landscape in the wake of Brexit will not change significantly, certainly not for some time. The UK remains a full member of the EU until the terms of its new arrangement (assuming one is actually struck) come into force, which is likely to take years to negotiate. Even then, a transitional agreement is likely to soften the blow to some extent, and it is inconceivable that the government would not draw up legislation to give continued effect to much of the existing body of EU law that has been transposed into UK statute. For many businesses, regulatory stability and predictability are fairly important, even if there are some pieces of EU-derived law that proved problematic at the time of implementation.
The government may well use the period of its negotiations to undertake an ?audit? of that existing stock of transposed legislation and to decide ? following engagement with various stakeholders, including the business community ? what they intend to preserve and what might be stripped out going forward.
This will be a crucial time for the IoD to outline to government on behalf of its members where business wishes to see rules and standards maintained, to ensure some measure of regulatory stability and predictability, or removed to reduce any ongoing administrative burden. Whitehall civil servants have been reticent to remove much of the gold-plating that had crept into the regulatory framework over the years, for fear of breaching ?non-regression? clauses in EU directives[5]. Once out of the EU, the government would have no such grounds to fear judicial redress in stripping out some of the gold-plating that continues to exist.
Whether in or out of the EU, the reality is that the UK is likely to maintain and continue following most EU product standards as they develop to facilitate cross-border trade, particularly for regulated industries such as chemicals, pharmaceuticals and financial services. For these sectors, regardless of firm size, the lack of a formal influencing voice at the EU table (as well as in expert working groups and regulatory agencies where much of the substantive work on standards development takes place) is likely to be felt.
Once ? and only once ? the terms of the UK?s new relationship with the EU come into force, the UK could indeed negotiate its own trade deals as it chooses without having to worry about agreement from 27 other countries on the areas covered and level of ambition. However, it is likely that the UK may have to renegotiate trade agreements with more than 50 third-party countries that it currently enjoys preferential access to through membership of the EU. Under this scenario, the government may not have the capacity to open many new, large-scale negotiations with other countries for some time, as the immediate and shorter-term priorities will be the UK?s new EU arrangement and preserving its existing preferential access to the aforementioned third-party markets.
Any trade deal with the EU is likely to achieve substantive market access on goods, with some significant exceptions likely around agriculture, machinery, automobiles and chemicals. Implementation of a single market in services has proved difficult and will only become more difficult with the UK?s withdrawal, with British firms subsequently unable to rely on the European Commission or Court to enforce non-discrimination when operating across the EU.
Passporting for financial services firms (not having to face additional licensing requirements to operate across the EU once approved in member states) has been for the UK one of the most significant advantages of the single market. There are likely to be remaining EU members who are keen to shift this business from London to their own markets and so will seek to deny passporting. Difficult negotiations are likely to ensue over this issue, unless the UK opts for the EEA, in which its existing level of access in goods and services to the EU is preserved.
Commercial contracts
There will inevitably be consequences for commercial contracts. The IoD suggests looking into the following:
? Re-read all existing contracts This is where assessing the extent of your business?s direct and indirect links to the EU is essential.
? Pricing Exchange rate volatility could significantly alter the value of your importing (and/or exporting) costs and make the originally negotiated pricing mechanism too costly. New tariffs and changes to cross-border VAT could also add to these. These costs may be passed along the supply chain, so knowing where in the chain your business is situated is essential.
? Territorial scope Some firms (especially in financial services) may have contractual provisions referencing the EU and/or its right to operate within it. Clarification may be needed to ensure the parties can fulfil the terms of their agreement post-Brexit.
? Dispute resolution Where cases are heard in the event of a Brexit could start to matter for firms engaged in cross-border activity, at least with respect to enforcement.
In conclusion, it is clear the UK?s vote to leave, a momentous step in its own right, has unleashed far more questions than answers about the country?s economic prospects ? few of which look close to being answered before a new prime minister is chosen this autumn.
This is a crucial time for business to engage with the government ? and indeed with the EU ? to shape its priorities in both European and domestic context. Important decisions around infrastructure, taxation, digital policy and immigration cannot be ducked just because of ongoing negotiations with Brussels.
Ensuring that Whitehall and Westminster adopt a liberal, outward-looking approach to its trading relations with the EU and the world is an imperative for business. While two-thirds of IoD members may not have voted for Brexit, they are aware of the need to make the best of the situation at hand. Business has no time for political recriminations ? a testament to its resilience, determination and ability to adapt to new and changing circumstances where risk and uncertainty have become the norm. The IoD will do its part to make sure the politicians do the same.
Allie Renison is the IoD?s head of trade and Europe policy. Follow her on Twitter @AllieRenison Immigration
Immigration was easily the most heated area of debate in the referendum. Director outlines the various possibilities for free movement of people in the wake of the result
? Depending on the agreement reached, there may be a continuing commitment to free movement of people but it cannot be guaranteed. Free movement is one of the four central freedoms of the EU and continued access to the single market is almost certain to require it to continue. Trade-off between political/public pressure and certainty for business makes this hard to predict.
? There is likely to be protection for existing EU migrants. The government in seeking to provide reassurance to business is likely to reiterate its adherence to protecting acquired rights of EU nationals already in the UK. Which system would operate for new potential migrants in the transition from the existing EU system to a new regime is open to question.
? Long term, there may be a points-based immigration system. This would see points allocated for certain skills or qualifications, with parliament and/or the Home Office regularly reviewing point allocations depending on perceived business and economic need.
? The eventual immigration settlement may well turn out to be more neutral vis-?-vis EU and non-EU nationals settling in the UK, but that cannot be ascertained at this stage.
? The government?s continuing efforts to reduce net migration to the UK ?to the tens of thousands? mean it is very unlikely to make any real liberalising changes to Britain?s immigration policy in the event of a Brexit.
Brexit snapshot
? Eighty-three per cent of IoD members have some link with Europe, whether via export, import, supply chain, staff or operating as a subsidiary.
? It is imperative to begin conversations with EU clients and supply chain now, rather than leave nasty surprises lying in wait.
? Joining the EEA would be relatively straightforward and would preserve single market access, but would also remove the UK?s negotiating voice in the EU and means free movement of people continues.
? The administrative burden for businesses whose products travel through the EU would likely rise, given they would no longer have access to the EU?s coordinated VAT collection system, and depending on post-Brexit arrangements, import duties would kick in.
? Passporting for financial services firms has been for the UK one of the most significant advantages of the single market. There are likely to be remaining EU members, including France, Germany and Ireland, who are keen to shift this business from London to their own markets and so will seek to deny passporting.
Renison A. (2016), Brexit what it means for your Business-Director magazine. [online] Director Magazine. Available at: https://www.director.co.uk/brexit-what-it-means-for-your-business-0607/ [Accessed: 24 August 2016].

Our Service Charter

  1. Excellent Quality / 100% Plagiarism-Free

    We employ a number of measures to ensure top quality essays. The papers go through a system of quality control prior to delivery. We run plagiarism checks on each paper to ensure that they will be 100% plagiarism-free. So, only clean copies hit customers’ emails. We also never resell the papers completed by our writers. So, once it is checked using a plagiarism checker, the paper will be unique. Speaking of the academic writing standards, we will stick to the assignment brief given by the customer and assign the perfect writer. By saying “the perfect writer” we mean the one having an academic degree in the customer’s study field and positive feedback from other customers.
  2. Free Revisions

    We keep the quality bar of all papers high. But in case you need some extra brilliance to the paper, here’s what to do. First of all, you can choose a top writer. It means that we will assign an expert with a degree in your subject. And secondly, you can rely on our editing services. Our editors will revise your papers, checking whether or not they comply with high standards of academic writing. In addition, editing entails adjusting content if it’s off the topic, adding more sources, refining the language style, and making sure the referencing style is followed.
  3. Confidentiality / 100% No Disclosure

    We make sure that clients’ personal data remains confidential and is not exploited for any purposes beyond those related to our services. We only ask you to provide us with the information that is required to produce the paper according to your writing needs. Please note that the payment info is protected as well. Feel free to refer to the support team for more information about our payment methods. The fact that you used our service is kept secret due to the advanced security standards. So, you can be sure that no one will find out that you got a paper from our writing service.
  4. Money Back Guarantee

    If the writer doesn’t address all the questions on your assignment brief or the delivered paper appears to be off the topic, you can ask for a refund. Or, if it is applicable, you can opt in for free revision within 14-30 days, depending on your paper’s length. The revision or refund request should be sent within 14 days after delivery. The customer gets 100% money-back in case they haven't downloaded the paper. All approved refunds will be returned to the customer’s credit card or Bonus Balance in a form of store credit. Take a note that we will send an extra compensation if the customers goes with a store credit.
  5. 24/7 Customer Support

    We have a support team working 24/7 ready to give your issue concerning the order their immediate attention. If you have any questions about the ordering process, communication with the writer, payment options, feel free to join live chat. Be sure to get a fast response. They can also give you the exact price quote, taking into account the timing, desired academic level of the paper, and the number of pages.

Excellent Quality
Zero Plagiarism
Expert Writers

Custom Writing Service

Instant Quote
Single spaced
approx 275 words per page
Urgency (Less urgent, less costly):
Total Cost: NaN

Get 10% Off on your 1st order!