It might look like semantics but there’s a world of difference between the current customs union arrangement between the EU and its member states and the one that the British government has announced it will seek after Brexit. The government announced yesterday that it is to seek a transition agreement on a common trade area between the EU and the UK. It is right to do so. Theresa May and her team need to ensure that businesses, homegrown and international, can continue to have confidence in their ability to do business unimpeded with the EU while new infrastructure and global trade deals are put in place. A customs union with the EU of the type being sought by the British government will be time limited. It will end. And at its end, David Davis hopes that the UK will have a deep and lasting trading relationship set up. At the same time our leaving will come with the UK leaving the Common Commercial Policy, giving Liam Fox the time and legal right to go and negotiate new bilateral trade deals that can come into force the day of the new regime. It turns out, after over a year of waiting, that Brexit plans are like buses. Not only are we getting two briefing papers in one week, the first one has come with two possible solutions to how trade between the EU and the UK would work. The first is “a highly streamlined customs arrangement,” where Britain would have a new customs procedure (using technology and light-touch regulation) that would be easier than any current procedure with a non-EU state – this would mean a bit more administration compared to the current system. The second is a bespoke arrangement that would involve mirroring the EU’s customs procedures for things that will eventually end up in their markets. In essence this to try and ensure that valuable supply chains, built up over decades, are maintained in full. This second suggestion is what I believe is known as the ‘have our cake and eat it’ policy. That’s not to say it wouldn’t be tasty, or indeed possible, but we need to be realistic. It’s more likely to be the former policy that we end up with than the latter. The EU will be looking to show its continuing members that choices are possible, but that there are trade-offs. Instead of worrying about political spats UK should focus on using the ability to do bilateral trade deals, as well as make a core part of the final EU-UK trade deal, to boost our economy’s comparative advantage – our services industries. Together these make up nearly 80% of the economy and we’re the second largest exporter of both financial services (exporting $84.7bn worth in 2015) and commercial services generally ($345bn in 2015). If we start to focus on services we can bring down some of the most stubborn nontariff barriers to trade. We know this works. Australia has been good at getting agreements with advanced economies for its services industries for over a decade. Since Australia brought down barriers to investment with Singapore, the heart of financial services trade in Asia, it has seen investment from the city-state more than double from AUD33.5bn to AUD80.2bn. Our regulatory bodies are global recognised as being world leaders – and the City’s position at the heart of international law and finance helps this. By focussing on getting countries to recognise British regulatory frameworks our accountants, brokers, investment agents, and others will be able to operate in more markets to the benefit of us all. We can also, importantly, ensure that demand for services is permanently increased. British services are, as the City UK has recently pointed out, not price sensitive and rely more on quality and ease of access. By making it easier for businesses across the world to access our services we can boost the economy at home. The government’s proposals are a good first step, they will meet some disagreement and different proposals from the EU. They will require negotiation and careful implementation. There may be spats, setbacks and comments from all sides. But it is getting clearer. There is a plan, it has solid logic, and Brexit really does mean Brexit.