Via TBH, from The Independent:
Britain would keep paying into the EU budget for years after a no-deal Brexit under contingency plans drawn up by the European Commission. In a move likely to enrage Brexiteers and cause yet another political row in Westminster, on Wednesday Brussels unveiled proposals for the UK to keep up its payments for the 2019 EU budget and beyond.
Ho hum, in exchange for what, exactly? They've had three years to plan for this.
From The Belfast Telegraph:
The Irish economy could be around 4% smaller in the event of a no-deal Brexit, the Irish Finance Minister has said. Minister for Finance and Public Expenditure & Reform Paschal Donohoe said that although the Irish government are hopeful of a deal, plans must be in place for a “disorderly” Brexit.
From the BBC:
An Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) study found that Dutch exports to the UK could drop by 17% in the event of a no-deal Brexit.
While the UK's customs authority HMRC says it has "well-developed plans" for a functioning system from day one, fruit and vegetables are the Dutch exports most vulnerable to disruption.
Also from the BBC:
The head of France's main farmers' union has warned that a no-deal Brexit could have a severe impact on French agricultural exports. Christiane Lambert of the FNSEA union said French wine and spirits producers would be hit hardest, as their sector had a €1.3bn (£1.1bn; $1.5bn) annual surplus in trade with the UK.
From coop.news:
In a press statement published on 17 January, the Spanish federation of agri food co-ops (AGACA) said it regretted the outcome of the vote on the deal, which, it argued, had led to more uncertainty...
Should the UK leave the EU without a trade deal, both sides will have to apply WTO tariffs from 29 March. Under WTO rules, tariffs for agri food products average at 20%. However, they go as high as 100% for meat, dairy and sugar products, between 40% and 90% for grains and 30% or more for fruit and vegetables.
(That last bit is bollocks. If a Spanish business imports food from the UK, it will have to levy EU-mandated import tariffs, not "WTO Tariffs" which aren't compulsory or even guidelines, but recommended maximum limits. The UK can impose any old tariffs it likes up to those limits, or none at all).
But the overall tenor is clear - the EU itself, from the point of view of the top dogs in Brussels, doesn't care about economics, they care about "ever closer political union" and so the UK must be seen to be punished most severely for leaving - for example by being a choice between a completely unacceptable May's Deal and the vague threats of "disorderly Brexit". And then being expected to continue paying in.
Actual producers in EU Member States care very much about economics, i.e. minimal disruptions to trade, I doubt whether they give a hoot whether the UK leaves the EU or not as long as they can keep selling us food and cars and so on, which we are perfectly happy to buy from them. In whose interests is it to disrupt this? Why don't those affected put a bit of pressure on the top dogs in Brussels to stop being such complete bastards?
Debate Magazine
