UK–EU “Switzerland Plus” Deal: Could Britain Return to the Single Market Without Rejoining?
Introduction
The United Kingdom could regain substantial access to the European Union's single market without rejoining the EU through a proposed “Switzerland Plus” deal. Such an arrangement could restore economic rights in selected sectors while leaving Britain outside the Union's political institutions. It would not automatically provide full single-market participation, and any additional rights would depend on the obligations negotiated with Brussels.
The proposal gained attention on October 15, 2026, when Bernd Lange, chair of the European Parliament's Committee on International Trade, suggested that Britain could develop a Swiss-style relationship with the EU, supplemented by closer political and strategic cooperation. His intervention followed Prime Minister Andy Burnham's call for a broader discussion about Britain's future relationship with Europe ahead of a UK–EU summit scheduled for November 20.
Switzerland provides an established precedent for substantial economic integration without EU membership. Yet its relationship with Brussels involves free movement of persons, regulatory commitments, financial contributions, and institutional obligations. For Britain, the central question is how much single-market access could be recovered through bilateral agreements and what legal and political concessions would be required.
1. What Is the Switzerland Plus Proposal?
“Switzerland Plus” describes a possible framework for closer UK–EU relations based on Switzerland's extensive bilateral agreements with the European Union. It is not an existing treaty, an agreed negotiating mandate, or a formal offer from Brussels. Its precise scope remains undefined.
Speaking at Europe House in London on October 15, Bernd Lange suggested a relationship involving economic agreements alongside cooperation on security, critical raw materials, digital policy, and other strategic interests. He also expressed support for Britain's eventual return to EU political decision-making, although he recognized that such a decision would belong to Britain.
Lange's position gives the suggestion political significance. As chair of the European Parliament's trade committee, he participates in the scrutiny of European trade agreements. He cannot independently authorize negotiations or commit the Union to a new treaty. Under Article 218 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), those responsibilities belong to the EU institutions exercising their respective treaty-making powers.
The proposed “Plus” element could extend beyond Switzerland's traditional sectoral economic arrangements. Cooperation on security and foreign policy, for example, could develop through separate political agreements without conferring additional internal-market rights. Lange suggested that negotiations might be completed within months following a British political decision, but this was an assessment of feasibility rather than an agreed timetable.
2. How Switzerland Participates in the EU Single Market
Switzerland is neither a member of the European Union nor a party to the European Economic Area (EEA) Agreement. After Swiss voters rejected EEA participation in December 1992, the country pursued economic integration through bilateral agreements covering specific sectors. This approach provided access to important areas of the European internal market while preserving Switzerland's status as a nonmember state.
The legal distinction is significant. The EEA extends much of the EU's internal-market legislation to Norway, Iceland, and Liechtenstein. Switzerland instead obtains rights through individual agreements defining the economic activities covered, applicable regulatory requirements, and institutional procedures.
Consequently, Switzerland does not participate in the entire single market on the same terms as EU member states. Its arrangements demonstrate that economic integration can extend well beyond an ordinary free trade agreement without conferring comprehensive internal-market rights.
2.1 The Bilateral Agreements and Their Limits
The first major package, Bilateral Agreements I, was signed in 1999. Its seven agreements addressed free movement of persons, technical barriers to trade, agriculture, public procurement, research, and transport. Bilateral Agreements II, signed in 2004, extended cooperation into additional fields, including Swiss participation in the Schengen and Dublin systems.
These agreements provide practical commercial advantages. The mutual recognition agreement reduces duplicate conformity assessments for covered products, while transport agreements facilitate access to European markets. The Agreement on the Free Movement of Persons grants qualifying Swiss and EU nationals reciprocal rights to live and work across borders. It also provides for the recognition of professional qualifications within its scope.
However, Switzerland remains outside the EU customs union. Customs declarations, rules of origin, and applicable border procedures continue to affect trade. Its agreements also do not provide comprehensive access to financial services or the full range of establishment rights available within the EU.
The original Bilaterals I package contains a further limitation. The agreements are linked through a termination mechanism commonly called the guillotine clause. Under this arrangement, termination of one linked agreement causes the others to cease applying. The mechanism reflects the EU's insistence that the concessions negotiated in 1999 form an interconnected package.
2.2 What the 2026 Bilaterals III Package Changes
Switzerland's bilateral relationship underwent substantial modernization through negotiations beginning in March 2024. The substantive negotiations concluded in December 2024, and the principal agreements were signed in Brussels on March 2, 2026. The Swiss Federal Council submitted the accompanying legislative package to Parliament on March 13.
Known as Bilaterals III, the package updates existing arrangements and establishes further cooperation concerning electricity, food safety, and health. It also introduces revised institutional provisions addressing regulatory alignment, supervision, and dispute settlement. These changes are designed to maintain consistent conditions in the sectors where Switzerland participates in the internal market.
A separate EU Programs Agreement was signed in November 2025, enabling Swiss participation in specified European programs, including arrangements applying retrospectively to research activities from January 2025.
The principal agreements signed in March 2026 remain subject to the applicable parliamentary and other approval procedures. Their signature did not bring every provision into force. The new institutional mechanisms, including those concerning dynamic regulatory alignment and arbitration, must consequently be distinguished from the arrangements already operating under Switzerland's existing bilateral agreements.
3. What Single-Market Access Could Britain Regain?
Britain's existing economic relationship with the EU is principally governed by the Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA). The agreement was provisionally applied from January 1, 2021, and formally entered into force on May 1. It provides preferential treatment for goods and establishes commitments covering services, investment, transport, energy, and other economic activities.
The TCA does not reproduce Britain's former participation in the internal market. British businesses operate as businesses from a third country, subject to the market-access rights granted by the agreement and applicable EU legislation.
A Swiss-inspired settlement could extend these rights in selected sectors. Its economic significance would depend on the obstacles removed. The distinction between tariff preferences, regulatory recognition, and unrestricted market participation is particularly important.
3.1 Goods Trade, Customs, and Border Controls
Under the TCA, goods meeting the relevant rules of origin can move between Britain and the EU without tariffs or quotas. Businesses nevertheless face customs requirements, product standards, and regulatory controls. The absence of tariffs does not eliminate the administrative obligations associated with trading across a customs and regulatory border.
A Switzerland Plus agreement could reduce some of these barriers through mutual recognition and closer regulatory alignment. For example, a British manufacturer exporting machinery to Germany could benefit if conformity assessments performed in Britain were recognized under an expanded agreement. This could eliminate duplicate testing for covered products, although customs procedures and other applicable requirements would remain.
Agricultural trade offers another possibility. A common sanitary and phytosanitary area could reduce veterinary certification and physical checks affecting food products. The UK and EU have already identified this as an area for negotiation. Such an arrangement would not, by itself, establish customs-union membership or remove every border formality.
Northern Ireland would require particular consideration. Under the Withdrawal Agreement, as modified by the Windsor Framework, specified EU goods rules continue to apply there. Closer regulatory alignment across Britain could reduce some trade frictions between Great Britain and Northern Ireland, but the existing legal arrangements would still require specific treatment.
3.2 Services, Financial Markets, and Establishment
Financial and professional services present greater difficulties because Switzerland's bilateral model does not provide comprehensive access to the EU services market. Switzerland does benefit from specific arrangements concerning professional qualifications and temporary service provision under its free-movement agreement, but these rights do not amount to general participation in the internal market for services.
Before Brexit, authorized British financial institutions benefited from EU passporting arrangements that permitted many regulated activities across member states. Those general rights ended when Britain left the internal market. The TCA does not restore them, while EU equivalence decisions operate in particular regulatory areas and remain subject to separate conditions.
Professional qualifications illustrate another restriction. British qualifications are generally subject to national recognition procedures when recognition is required to practice a regulated profession in an EU member state. Article 158 and Annex 24 of the TCA establish a mechanism for profession-specific recognition arrangements, but they do not provide universal automatic recognition.
A Swiss-style agreement focused on goods could consequently deliver substantial benefits to manufacturers while leaving important barriers affecting professional and financial services largely unchanged. Additional rights concerning establishment, professional mobility, or regulated financial activities would require separately negotiated commitments.
4. The Legal and Political Conditions of Market Access
Closer integration would involve obligations as well as economic benefits. Switzerland's experience demonstrates that extensive access to the internal market is associated with regulatory commitments, free movement, financial contributions, and mechanisms for enforcing agreed rules.
Free movement of persons is an important example. Switzerland's 1999 agreement provides reciprocal residence and employment rights under specified conditions. Bilaterals III contains negotiated revisions, including safeguards concerning immigration and wage protection. Those revisions remain subject to the applicable approval and entry-into-force procedures.
Britain could seek narrower provisions, but there is no assurance that Brussels would offer comparable economic privileges without corresponding mobility commitments. The precise relationship between immigration rights and economic access would depend on the sectors covered and the concessions negotiated.
Regulatory alignment would raise further questions concerning British legislative autonomy. Under the institutional arrangements provided for in Bilaterals III, Switzerland would be obliged to maintain alignment with relevant developments in EU law within the sectors covered. However, dynamic alignment would not mean that new EU legislation automatically became binding throughout Switzerland.
The incorporation of relevant legal acts would follow agreed procedures, including the necessary Swiss constitutional approval processes. Switzerland could decline to incorporate a development, but doing so could have consequences under the applicable agreements.
The new dispute-settlement arrangements would initially refer disagreements to the relevant joint committee. If negotiations failed, disputes could proceed to arbitration. Where interpretation of EU law was necessary, the arbitral tribunal could refer the relevant question to the Court of Justice of the European Union. The Court would interpret EU law rather than independently determine the entire bilateral dispute.
The package also provides for proportionate compensatory measures in specified circumstances, subject to procedural safeguards and arbitral review. These new institutional provisions should not be treated as fully operational before the relevant agreements enter into force.
Comparable arrangements would allow Westminster to retain domestic legislative authority while accepting international obligations to maintain specified standards. Parliament could still legislate inconsistently with a treaty commitment as a matter of domestic constitutional law, but doing so might expose Britain to consequences under the agreement.
Financial contributions would also require negotiation. Under Bilaterals III, Switzerland has agreed to a regular contribution mechanism intended to reduce economic and social disparities within the EU. The first contribution period, covering 2030–2036, provides for CHF 350 million annually.
The package also includes transitional financial commitments, with disbursement dependent on the agreements taking effect and the applicable implementation arrangements. Britain has not agreed to any comparable payment under Switzerland Plus, and Swiss contribution levels provide no automatic formula for British obligations.
5. The UK–EU Reset and the November 2026 Summit
The Switzerland Plus suggestion emerged during an existing diplomatic effort to strengthen relations between London and Brussels. At their summit on May 19, 2025, Britain and the EU established a renewed strategic partnership while reaffirming the importance of the Withdrawal Agreement and the TCA.
Their Common Understanding identified several areas for closer cooperation, including a common sanitary and phytosanitary area, possible British participation in the EU electricity market, emissions-trading cooperation, and a youth mobility scheme. The UK and EU also signed an agreement in April 2026 enabling British association with Erasmus+ from 2027.
These negotiations already contemplate obligations similar to parts of the Swiss framework. The proposed sanitary and phytosanitary agreement envisages dynamic alignment with relevant EU rules, arbitration-based dispute settlement, and a role for the Court of Justice in interpreting EU law. It also envisages British consultation during the development of relevant legislation and a financial contribution.
The proposed electricity agreement likewise contemplates regulatory alignment, relevant state-aid requirements, arbitration, and arrangements for British participation in shaping decisions without granting EU legislative voting rights. These commitments remain elements of the negotiating framework rather than obligations under a completed comprehensive agreement.
Britain and the EU have thus already identified ways to deepen sectoral integration within their existing relationship. Any Switzerland Plus proposal would need to establish which additional rights and obligations it would introduce beyond those under discussion.
Prime Minister Andy Burnham's October 12 parliamentary statement placed these negotiations within a broader political debate. He identified the November 20 summit as an opportunity to advance agreements on food trade, energy, emissions trading, youth mobility, and security cooperation. He also called for a subsequent discussion of Britain's longer-term options, without committing the government to a Swiss-style settlement.
The summit in Brussels will bring Burnham together with European Council President António Costa and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. Britain has also sought inclusion in aspects of the EU's proposed “Made in Europe” industrial arrangements. A provisional Franco-German understanding announced in October envisaged possible British participation in certain automotive provisions, subject to reciprocity and alignment with relevant EU trade-defense measures.
Those industrial proposals still require the applicable EU legislative approvals. They illustrate how access to particular economic advantages may depend on regulatory concessions, but they do not establish that either side has adopted Switzerland Plus as an official negotiating objective.
6. Could Britain Conclude a Swiss-Style Agreement?
European Union law permits extensive economic association with nonmember countries. Article 217 TFEU authorizes agreements establishing reciprocal rights, obligations, common action, and special procedures. An important point is that Britain's existing TCA was itself concluded on this legal basis.
Council Decision (EU) 2021/689 expressly relied on Article 217, together with Article 218(6) and Article 218(8) TFEU, when approving the TCA on behalf of the Union. Britain would not necessarily need an entirely new association framework to negotiate closer integration. The parties could pursue supplementary agreements, amend existing arrangements where permitted, or negotiate a more comprehensive settlement.
Article 218 establishes the procedures governing EU international agreements. The Council authorizes negotiations and adopts the relevant decisions, while the European Parliament must consent to association agreements. Council unanimity applies to such agreements, and additional national ratification may be necessary depending on the subject matter and allocation of competences.
British constitutional procedures would also apply. Under section 20 of the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010, treaties covered by the ordinary procedure must generally be laid before Parliament for 21 sitting days before ratification, subject to statutory qualifications and exceptions.
This is a scrutiny mechanism rather than a requirement that Parliament expressly approve every treaty. New implementing legislation could also be necessary. Negotiating an economic association agreement would not automatically create a legal requirement for a referendum.
A separate UK–EU agreement concerning Gibraltar, signed on July 14, 2026, and provisionally applied from July 15, demonstrates that additional arrangements can be concluded outside the principal TCA framework. Gibraltar's particular territorial circumstances make it an imperfect comparison, but the agreement illustrates the availability of differentiated legal arrangements.
The European Economic Area offers another alternative. Norway, Iceland, and Liechtenstein participate in a broader internal-market system incorporating substantial EU legislation on goods, services, persons, and capital. Britain would need to negotiate the relevant accession arrangements; membership of the European Free Trade Association would not automatically confer EEA participation.
Lange's suggestion that a Swiss-style agreement could be negotiated within months is difficult to assess without defined terms. Switzerland's modernization negotiations took place during 2024, followed by legal preparation, signature in 2026, and further approval procedures.
Existing regulatory similarities could assist British negotiations, but political agreement, treaty drafting, ratification, and implementation would remain separate requirements. The legal possibility of closer association does not establish the speed at which the parties could reach an acceptable settlement.
7. Economic Benefits, Political Costs, and Feasibility
Closer economic integration could reduce costs for British businesses trading with the EU, particularly where certification, administrative requirements, and regulatory differences create obstacles. Manufacturers operating across European supply chains could benefit from more predictable rules, while agricultural exporters might experience fewer documentary and inspection requirements.
The economic advantages would depend on the scope of any agreement. A settlement covering agricultural products and industrial standards would not necessarily resolve restrictions on financial services or professional mobility. The distinction is significant because the value of market access differs considerably across economic sectors.
The Office for Budget Responsibility's March 2026 forecast assumptions estimate that the existing post-Brexit trading relationship will reduce long-run UK productivity by approximately 4% compared with remaining in the EU. This reflects its assessment of higher non-tariff barriers and their economic consequences.
That figure is a counterfactual forecast, not a measured productivity loss or an estimate of the gains available from Switzerland Plus. Without agreed treaty provisions, the economic effects of the proposed arrangement cannot be reliably quantified.
The principal political difficulty concerns the relationship between market access and regulatory autonomy. Switzerland participates in selected European markets while remaining outside the institutions responsible for adopting EU legislation. Although its agreements provide consultation mechanisms, Switzerland does not possess the legislative voting rights of an EU member state.
Britain could face a similar arrangement. Additional access might require continuing alignment with rules adopted in Brussels without direct British participation in their adoption. Supporters could regard this as a practical means of reducing economic barriers without immediately reopening EU membership. Opponents could question the resulting constraints on immigration policy, regulatory independence, and public expenditure.
Brussels would have its own concerns. The EU has a strong institutional interest in maintaining consistent competitive conditions within its internal market. Extensive privileges without equivalent obligations could weaken the coherence of existing arrangements with other nonmember countries.
The economic case for closer integration is consequently distinct from the political case for a particular institutional model. Britain would need to determine which additional rights justify the accompanying obligations, while the EU would need to decide whether the proposed settlement adequately protects its regulatory system.
Also read
Conclusion
Britain could negotiate substantial access to selected areas of the EU single market without rejoining the European Union. Switzerland's bilateral relationship demonstrates that such integration is legally possible, although it does not reproduce comprehensive single-market participation or the political rights associated with EU membership.
A Switzerland Plus arrangement could reduce barriers affecting manufacturing, agricultural trade, energy cooperation, and potentially selected services. The extent of those benefits would depend on the sectors covered and the rights negotiated. Greater access could also require free-movement commitments, regulatory alignment, financial contributions, and institutional arrangements limiting Britain's freedom to depart from agreed standards.
As of October 16, 2026, Switzerland Plus remains a political proposal rather than a negotiated agreement. The existing UK–EU reset already provides mechanisms for closer sectoral cooperation, but a broader settlement would require further political decisions and treaty negotiations. The Swiss precedent establishes that economic integration without EU membership is possible; it also demonstrates that such access carries obligations without granting the legislative representation enjoyed by member states.
References
Agreement on the European Economic Area (1992) Signed 2 May 1992; entered into force 1 January 1994. Official Journal of the European Communities, L 1, 3 January 1994. Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/agree_internation/1994/1/oj (Accessed: 15 October 2026).
Agreement on the Withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community (2020) Entered into force 1 February 2020. Official Journal of the European Union, L 29, 31 January 2020, pp. 7–187. Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/treaty/withd_2020/sign/eng (Accessed: 15 October 2026).
Agreement in respect of Gibraltar between the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community, of the one part, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, of the other part (2026) Signed 14 July 2026; provisionally applied from 15 July 2026. Available at: https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/documents/treaties-agreements/agreement/?docLanguage=en&id=2026009 (Accessed: 15 October 2026).
Blenkinsop, P. (2026) ‘France, Germany agree deal on car emissions and UK special status’, Reuters, 16 October. Available at: https://www.reuters.com/business/france-germany-agree-deal-car-emissions-uk-special-status-2026-10-16/ (Accessed: 15 October 2026).
Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010 (2010) 8 April 2010, c. 25, Part 2, section 20. Available at: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/25/part/2 (Accessed: 16 October 2026).
Council of the European Union (2021) Council Decision (EU) 2021/689 of 29 April 2021 on the conclusion, on behalf of the Union, of the Trade and Cooperation Agreement between the European Union and the United Kingdom and the Agreement concerning security procedures for exchanging and protecting classified information. Official Journal of the European Union, L 149, 30 April 2021, pp. 2–9. Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32021D0689 (Accessed: 16 October 2026).
Council of the European Union (2026) ‘Council greenlights signing of package of agreements with Switzerland’ [online]. 24 February. Available at: https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2026/02/24/council-greenlights-signing-of-package-of-agreements-with-switzerland/ (Accessed: 16 October 2026).
Decision No 1/2023 of the Joint Committee established by the Agreement on the Withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community (2023) 24 March 2023, laying down arrangements relating to the Windsor Framework. Official Journal of the European Union, L 102, 17 April 2023, pp. 61–83. Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dec/2023/819/oj/eng (Accessed: 16 October 2026).
Department for Business and Trade (2025) Recognition of UK professional qualifications in EU member states [online]. 18 December. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/recognition-of-uk-professional-qualifications-in-eu-member-states/recognition-of-uk-professional-qualifications-in-eu-member-states (Accessed: 16 October 2026).
Department for Education (2026) ‘UK and EU finalise agreement to bring UK into Erasmus+ in 2027’ [online]. 15 April. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-and-eu-finalise-agreement-to-bring-uk-into-erasmus-in-2027 (Accessed: 16 October 2026).
European Council (2026) ‘EU-UK summit to take place in Brussels on 20 November’ [online]. 12 October. Available at: https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2026/10/12/eu-uk-summit-to-take-place-in-brussels-on-20-november/ (Accessed: 16 October 2026).
European Union and United Kingdom (2025a) UK-EU Summit – Common Understanding. 19 May. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/ukeu-summit-key-documentation/uk-eu-summit-common-understanding-html (Accessed: 16 October 2026).
European Union and United Kingdom (2025b) UK-EU Summit – Joint Statement. 19 May. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/ukeu-summit-key-documentation/uk-eu-summit-joint-statement-html (Accessed: 16 October 2026).
Office for Budget Responsibility (2026) Brexit analysis [online]. Updated 20 July 2026, incorporating assumptions from the March 2026 Economic and Fiscal Outlook. Available at: https://obr.uk/forecasts-in-depth/the-economy-forecast/brexit-analysis/ (Accessed: 16 October 2026).
O'Carroll, L. (2026) ‘UK could quickly re-enter EU with “Switzerland plus” deal, senior MEP says’, The Guardian, 16 October. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/oct/16/uk-eu-europe-switzerland-plus-bernd-lange-brexit (Accessed: 16 October 2026).
Rennolds, N. (2026) ‘“Switzerland plus” deal option for UK as it seeks closer ties with EU, senior MEP says’, Euronews, 16 October. Available at: https://www.euronews.com/2026/10/16/switzerland-plus-deal-option-for-uk-as-it-seeks-closer-ties-with-eu-senior-mep-says (Accessed: 16 October 2026).
Swiss Federal Council (2026a) Institutional elements. Factsheet, 13 March. Bern: Swiss Federal Council. Available at: https://www.europa.eda.admin.ch/dam/en/sd-web/KOzaVT8Bhqos/01%20Faktenblatt%20Institutionelle%20Elemente_EN%20.pdf (Accessed: 16 October 2026).
Swiss Federal Council (2026b) Swiss contribution. Factsheet, 13 March. Bern: Swiss Federal Council. Available at: https://www.europa.eda.admin.ch/dam/en/sd-web/ct-spg6N7nu4/Schweizer%20Beitrag_EN.pdf (Accessed: 16 October 2026).
Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs (2025a) Bilateral agreements I (1999) [online]. 16 January. Available at: https://www.europa.eda.admin.ch/en/bilateral-agreements-1-1999 (Accessed: 16 October 2026).
Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs (2025b) Free movement of persons [online]. 16 January. Available at: https://www.europa.eda.admin.ch/en/free-movement-of-persons (Accessed: 16 October 2026).
Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs (2026a) Bilateral agreements II (2004) [online]. 1 February. Available at: https://www.europa.eda.admin.ch/en/bilateral-agreements-2-2004 (Accessed: 16 October 2026).
Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs (2026b) Content of the package Switzerland-EU (Bilaterals III) [online]. 13 March. Available at: https://www.europa.eda.admin.ch/en/content-package-switzerland-eu (Accessed: 16 October 2026).
Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs (2026c) Dispatch on the Switzerland-EU Package (Bilaterals III) [online]. 13 March. Available at: https://www.europa.eda.admin.ch/en/dispatch-swiss-eu-package (Accessed: 16 October 2026).
Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (2016) Consolidated version, Articles 217 and 218. Official Journal of the European Union, C 202, 7 June 2016, pp. 144–146. Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/treaty/tfeu_2016/2020-03-01/eng (Accessed: 16 October 2026).
Trade and Cooperation Agreement between the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community, of the one part, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, of the other part (2021) Signed 30 December 2020; provisionally applied from 1 January 2021; entered into force 1 May 2021. Official Journal of the European Union, L 149, 30 April 2021, pp. 10–2539. Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:22021A0430(01) (Accessed: 16 October 2026).
UK Prime Minister's Office (2026) ‘Prime Minister to attend UK-EU summit in Brussels on 20 November’ [online]. 12 October. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/prime-minister-to-attend-uk-eu-summit-in-brussels-on-20-november (Accessed: 16 October 2026).