Ah, the old "they need us more than we need them" chestnut! How's that working out so far? Those German car manufacturers are going to break down Angela Merkel's office door and demand a deal any day now I reckon.
I'd wager a significant amount of that GDP is generated as a result of our EU membership, if we leave with no deal that will be badly impacted in my opinion and we'll be back to being the basket case we were before we joined before very long.
Not sure if this is directed at me but if you're suggesting that a 10% tariff on new cars exported from the UK and increased friction at the borders won't make a difference to a car manufacturer's long term plans then I think you're wrong. Only time will tell because, while irreversible decisions are being taken now, the impact of them will only really become apparent in the coming months and years. Obviously a car factory or plane factory cannot simply pack everything up in the back of a van and move overnight but, again, if you think they won't, I think you're wrong. I think Airbus will be the next to announce significant job losses at Filton now the A380 is being discontinued, that will be the cue to withdraw manufacturing from the UK.
If they are not. Heres a reason as to why they should be. . .
"Some events intrude. And some fail to intrude. The promised reassertion of parliamentary control over Brexit was one of the latter. The House of Commons has rejected a cunning mechanism that might have procured a Brexit reversal. Then there is the category of events that did manage to intrude, but not in an obvious way.
An example would be Donald Trump’s threat to impose tariffson car imports. But what has that got to with Brexit? The anticipation of the US president’s tariffs has the potential to change the way the EU will look at its future trading relationship with the UK.
To understand this, let us imagine that the Brexit talks were to break down. The UK would crash out of the EU in March next year with no transitional deal in place. British goods entering the EU would be subject to EU tariffs, and vice versa. The EU levies a 10 per cent tax on car imports. The UK could levy reciprocal tariffs.
Consider the position of German carmakers. According to the German association of the automotive industry, the country last year exported 769,000 cars to the UK, its single largest export market.
The US came second with 494,000 cars. German carmakers also export 258,000 German-made vehicles to China, plus those produced in US and Chinese factories. If the UK were forced into a cliff-edge Brexit in March, the German car industry would face tariffs in its two largest export markets within a few months of each other. Daimler-Benz issued a profit warning last week, and this only in relationship to the expected rise in Chinese tariffs on Mercedes cars made in the US. Just imagine what might happen once the US levies tariffs on European cars sometime in 2019, and possibly only a few months after Brexit.
If the UK were to join in a tariff war, the industry would suffer the commercial equivalent of a cardiac arrest. This would come on top of an escalating diesel emission scandal. Mercedes may need to recall 774,000 cars to remove software-cheating devices.
Add to this the long-term commercial impact of diesel bans in cities, the surge in sales of electric cars and the complex impact of artificial intelligence, and the outlook for the German industry has worsened dramatically since the Brexit referendum. Of course, the EU is not negotiating Brexit for the benefit of German industry. Nor should it. Angela Merkel said after the 2016 Brexit referendum that she does not want industry bosses to intervene in these delicate negotiations. But the German chancellor does not have the political room for manoeuvre she needs to persevere with a stance that could risk the loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs. The last thing she needs is an intra-European trade war. Geopolitics have also changed since the Brexit referendum.
Mr Trump poses a dual challenge for Germany and the EU — both on trade and foreign policy. His withdrawal of the US from the Iran nuclear deal and the Paris climate agreement have brought the EU and the UK closer together. Meanwhile, UK prime minister Theresa May has turned out to be a reliable ally for the EU.
The interests of the UK and the EU are more aligned now than they were two years ago. A customs union with a single market access for goods only would go a long way to serve the mutual interest, more than any of the other Brexit blueprints that carry the names of the countries with whom they were negotiated: Norway, Switzerland or Canada. It would minimise the economic effects on both sides, respect the commitments on the Irish border, and maintain the integrity of the single market.
For a deep customs union to work, manufactured goods would remain subject to the rules of the EU’s internal market. The UK would formally become a member of the single market. That said, the EU is in a position to offer a tailor-made customs union agreement, for goods but not services, with the various rights and obligations that come with this arrangement. Would this turn the UK into a vassal state as some of the Brexiters are claiming? Of course not. The UK would not be subject to the European treaties.
The customs union would set clear but finite limitations on sovereignty: no third-country trade agreements in respect of manufactured goods; acceptance of the EU’s product standards; and a minimum commitment on freedom of movement but well short of the obligations that apply today.
This is no comparison to the constraints on sovereignty that come with full EU membership. And these concessions are trivial compared to the crippling economic, social and political costs of a cliff-edge, no-deal Brexit.
The decisive argument in favour of a customs union is that important events have intruded since the referendum, for the UK and the EU too."
https://www.ft.com/content/c06b1762-761d-11e8-b326-75a27d27ea5f