Brexit: One step forward, two steps back?

On March 29, 2019, the Brexit clock that began ticking two years earlier – triggered by the invoking of Article 50 – will strike midnight for the UK.

Yesterday, Prime Minister Theresa May declared that her country and the European Union had moved a major step closer to reaching a final Brexit deal before that deadline. May’s announcement followed agreement with the EU on a draft “political declaration” that outlines how trade, security and other issues would be addressed following the UK’s withdrawal from the bloc.

On Sunday, EU leaders will gather in Brussels to formally vote on both that political declaration – a legally non-binding statement of principles – as well as the far more critical “withdrawal agreement,” which was agreed in draft form last week.

If the EU endorses these documents – as is widely expected, despite Spain seeking additional clarity on the future of Gibraltar – the British parliament will then have to approve the same. That will clearly prove an uphill struggle for the embattled May government.

If parliament does not approve a plan by its own deadline of January 21, 2019, the likelihood a “hard Brexit” will increase significantly.

In such a scenario, economists have forecast a range of outcomes, from a short-term recession to a sustained contraction over the longer term. Inflation would likely spike in the UK in the short term, leaving the Bank of England in a bind at a time when growth would be stalling and inflation rising.

Already, the UK opposition has criticized the political declaration; opposition Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn called it “26 pages of waffle,” that “represents the worst of all worlds: no say over the rules that will continue to apply and no certainty for the future.”

Even if the word “consider” is used 19 times in that very high-level document, it’s worth asking how the political declaration – if ultimately approved by all sides – would shape the future of UK-EU relations, including on a wide range of areas of significant economic importance.

On trade, the two sides – as “separate markets and distinct legal orders” – “envisage” having a relationship that is “as close as possible with a view to facilitating the ease of legitimate trade.”

Those are vague statements, leaving unanswered to what extent the UK would need to respect EU standards in areas such as competition, tax, social and employment protection, and the environment. That’s why France, for example, is pushing for the UK to automatically incorporate future European climate change directives into law in return for agreement on the trade pact.

On financial services, it appears that “passporting” for UK firms will no longer be an option post any hard Brexit or post transition period if there is a deal, which also adds to the uncertainty.

Meanwhile, a “no-deal” scenario – a clear negative for investment decisions and economic growth – would see equity markets lurch lower. This is particularly important for businesses exposed to the UK economy, which tends to be the case for small and mid-cap firms. If positive developments continue, then the reverse is true: markets would move higher, at least in the short term, and UK-exposed businesses would breathe a sigh of relief.

Following May’s announcement, the pound moved sharply higher yesterday, recording its biggest single-day rise in three weeks. But 2019 will make or break sterling, and until we know the final outcome of negotiations, it’s impossible to predict the currency’s future direction. That said a no-deal scenario would put pressure on the pound.

Even if the process seems to be moving two steps back every time one step is taken forward, any progress is good news – as we see in currency markets.

The start of the formal Brexit transition process in March 2019 will provide much-needed clarity and will be supportive for both the UK and Europe, coming not long after the European Central Bank’s €2.5 trillion quantitative easing program finally ends.

For now, the politics of Brexit remain profoundly thorny. And at a time when worldwide markets are highly volatile and the global economy is entering the late stages of the growth cycle, the cost of sustained uncertainty appears extremely high.

Market Developments

If the deal doesn’t get through Parliament, then the increased probability of a “no deal” will start to be priced into markets. As has been the case since the referendum, sterling will feel the brunt of the impact and we could test new lows versus major currencies. Equities will have a mixed impact; a “no deal” is negative for investment decisions and economic growth – which would see equity markets lurch lower. This is particularly important for businesses exposed to the UK economy – which tends to be the case for Mid and Small Cap companies.   However, the impact of a lower sterling will also be a positive for overseas earnings making their way into the UK, with 70% of the FTSE 100 not being directly exposed to the UK economy.  To counter that, if the positive development continue then the reverse is true, markets are likely to be higher given greater certainty in the short term and UK exposed businesses will breathe a sigh of relief.


At more uncertain times like this it is important to remember that client portfolios are always well diversified across different asset classes as a means of managing risks associated with investing. This is as important as ever when we move into a more uncertain environment. Portfolios have asset classes where their role is to deliver growth (e.g. equities), and other areas which provide shelter during these times (e.g. uncorrelated assets such as cash). We also hold Bonds for diversification and in times of market stress these become ‘safe haven’ assets.

Toby Vaughan
Chief Investment Officer, Brown Shipley

Mr. Vaughan serves as UK-based Chief Investment Officer Brown Shipley, a member of KBL European Private Bankers, which is headquartered in Luxembourg. The statements and views expressed in this document are those of the author as of the date of this article and are subject to change. This article is also of a general nature and does not constitute legal, accounting, tax or investment advice.

Non-Independent Research

The information contained in this article is defined as non-independent research because it has not been prepared in accordance with the legal requirements designed to promote the independence of investment research, including any prohibition on dealing ahead of the dissemination of this information.

How to Use this Information

This article contains general information only and is not intended to constitute financial or other professional advice or a recommendation that any recipient of this information should make any particular investment decision. Always consult a suitably qualified financial advisor on any specific financial matter or problem that you have.

Except insofar as liability under any statute cannot be excluded, neither Brown Shipley nor any employee or associate of them accepts any liability (whether arising in contract, tort, negligence or otherwise) for any error or omission in this article or for any resulting loss or damage whether direct, indirect, consequential or otherwise suffered by the recipient of this article.

Investment Risk

Investing in stocks either directly or indirectly carries investment risk. The value of equity based investments may go down as well as up over time due to factors such as, market volatility, interest rates, and general economic conditions.