The leave campaign has also sought to argue that EU regulation dampens economic activity in the UK. And according to Open Europe, a think tank promoting “flexible integration” into the EU, the 100 most burdensome EU regulations do indeed cost the country £33.3 ($48.8) billion annually — though the question remains whether these costs are outweighed by the benefits they provide in facilitating the common market.
Opponents, including many economists, stress that leaving the EU could be extremely costly for Great Britain. “For some people, this is political. For others, it’s economics.” says Glenn Hubbard, Russell L. Carson Professor of Finance and Economics and dean of Columbia Business School, says. “And I think a lot of what you’re seeing in the debate and the polls and the betting markets is which of those horses — the political horse or the economics horse — is likely to win that race.”
The UK’s National Institute of Economic and Social Research estimates that an exit would cost the country 1 percent of GDP by 2017, and as much as 7.8 percent by 2030. Open Europe, meanwhile, estimates that the country could improve GDP by 1.6 percent under a best-case scenario, or lose 2.2 percent under a worst-case scenario, depending on the trade deals it is subsequently able to strike. “Better trade and integration is also linked to productivity,” Hubbard points out.
Loss of access to the common market would be particularly painful for “the City,” as the UK’s finance hub in London is known. As Geoffrey Heal, a noted Welsh economist and the Donald C. Waite III Professor of Social Enterprise at Columbia Business School, has pointed out, much of the foreign investment in the UK has depended on easy access to the wider European market. Without that access, investors are likely to pick up and move on to Brussels or Germany.
The importance of access to the common European market for maintaining British standards of living further means that even an independent Britain is unlikely to truly be free of EU regulation or free migration. If the country wishes to remain part of the European Economic Area after exiting the European Union — the so-called “Norway model” — it would almost certainly still have to accede to the free movement of goods and people. It would also still be subject to the vast majority of the EU’s costliest regulation, but without a vote to amend them or to propose new regulations.
Hubbard points out that the issue may well be larger than this single election. “If I’m right, the real issue on global minds — not just UK voters’ minds — is: what are people around the world really saying about trade and integration.” The conflicts currently playing out at the national and supra-national level are further mirrored at the regional level — nearly every country in the EU contains at least one active separatist movement, from the Andalusians in Spain to the Walloons in France and Belgium.
Regardless of which way the vote goes, the referendum highlights the continued fragility of the political union four years after it was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for sixty years of advancing peace and reconciliation across the continent. “That it’s this close,” Hubbard explains, “says that whatever the outcome later this week, the volatility’s not going away for a while.”
ABOUT THE RESEARCHER

R. Glenn Hubbard
Professor Hubbard is a specialist in public economics, managerial information and incentive problems in corporate finance, and financial markets and institutions. He has written...
Read more.