Research commissioned by the UK’s luxury sector has revealed that it could lose up to £6.8 billion in exports a year in the event of a no-deal brexit.

Names such as Burberry, Bentley, Rolls-Royce and Harrods are at risk.

The UK is home to the world’s fifth largest economy, and with weeks left until the departure date, a no-deal Brexit looks more and more likely.

The study was commissioned by Walpole. With a membership of 250 luxury brands, the lobby group for the luxury industry said that up to a fifth of luxury exports is in danger if the nation fails to reach an agreement on the terms of its departure.

According to Reuters, CEO of Walpole Helen Brocklebank said that the “British luxury businesses are committed to staying in Britain, but we are losing patience with the government taking us to the knife edge of no-deal.”

“The cost to the UK economy in lost exports from British luxury will be nearly £7 billion and we believe that money should be used to strengthen the country not diminish it. We urge the government categorically to rule out no-deal exit,” the CEO continued.

Roughly 80% of the nation’s luxury goods are exported, with Europe being its largest market.

Just weeks away from the official departure date and Brexit talks have been described as “deadlocked” in Brussels following a weekend of negotiations.

The automobile sector is bracing itself for the impacts of a no-deal Brexit, with Aston Martin announcing that it will reserve up to £30 million as part of a no-deal Brexit contingency plan. This is just one of a string of actions by the car sector ahead of the official departure date.

Elsewhere, in the insurance sector Aviva and Admiral recently made headlines waning of the impacts Brexit could have on their businesses.

Car insurance specialist Admiral said that market volatility, free movement of people between the UK and EU, impacts on the import of car parts, capital position and future dividend payments were all potential Brexit risks.

Will May be able to secure a deal in the next two-and-a-half weeks?

Previous articleAngels deserve to pay even less tax
Next articleDWF premium lacks attraction of legal peers