Food exporters from Britain to the European Union could gain substantial relief from post-Brexit paperwork if a proposed UK-EU agreement moves forward. The draft deal would remove specified sanitary and phytosanitary checks on covered products, while the government has linked the wider agreement to an eventual benefit of £5.1 billion a year for the UK economy.
For small food businesses, the issue is immediate rather than abstract. Certification fees can make a modest shipment harder to justify, while border delays add costs and can put pressure on perishable products.
What the draft agreement covers
Reporting from Small Business UK described an early-stage proposal to remove checks on food and agriculture exports and questioned the continued role of the existing Sanitary and Phytosanitary Agreement. The Guardian reported that the food and drink element was largely agreed, although the wider joint statement remained in draft.
The reported scope includes fresh meat, fish, shellfish and seed potatoes, with many of these exports coming from Scotland. Covered exporters would no longer need a £200 veterinary certificate demonstrating that products met EU safety requirements. A separate £25 plant health certificate could also become unnecessary for listed goods such as trees, shrubs and certain wooden or leather products.
This is not a blanket removal of food-export rules. It concerns specific products and certificates, and the food deal is expected to require legislation in Britain before it can be implemented in early 2028.
Why certification costs hit small exporters
Export Health Certificates can add thousands of pounds to individual loads, according to Small Business UK, alongside extra border delays. For a large operator, those charges may be spread across a substantial volume. For a smaller producer, the same expense can consume a disproportionate share of the margin on a limited order.
The British Chamber of Commerce surveyed 1,000 businesses and found widespread frustration with the continuing complexity of Brexit red tape. The chamber’s trade policy head, William Bain, said businesses generally regarded the proposed measures as beneficial because they could lower costs, reduce delays and improve market access.
Northern Ireland stands to gain particular attention. Goods moving from other parts of the UK into Northern Ireland still require checks even though the region remains within the single market. The reported proposal would scrap those checks.
Our analysis: lower barriers are not the same as restored sales
The clearest potential winner is the small exporter whose order is already viable but whose margin is weakened by repeated certification and compliance costs. Removing a fixed fee could make a direct sale to an EU customer more practical without requiring a change to the product itself.
The benefits could also reach companies considering Europe for the first time. Less administration means less time spent preparing documentation and a smaller delay when the shipment arrives. That can matter when an EU buyer has an alternative supplier without the same paperwork burden.
However, the proposal does not guarantee stronger export sales. British poultry and egg exports to the EU fell by a third after Brexit, according to National Farmers’ Union analysis cited by The Guardian. Lower costs can make exports more competitive, but they cannot by themselves rebuild distribution networks, customer relationships or product recognition. The NFU has also argued that the food sector will need substantial financial and marketing support to regain scale in European markets.
Businesses outside Britain should not assume that the change directly alters their own export certificates. Its indirect relevance is greater for companies using UK distributors or competing against British suppliers in the EU.
| Business issue | Current position described in reporting | Proposed position | What to watch |
|---|---|---|---|
| Veterinary certification | A £200 certificate is required for relevant exports | The certificate would be removed for covered products | Exact product list and implementation guidance |
| Plant health certification | Listed goods can require a £25 certificate | The certificate would be removed for covered goods | Which trees, shrubs, wooden and leather products qualify |
| Northern Ireland movements | Goods from the rest of the UK can face checks | Those checks would be scrapped | Operational arrangements for moving goods |
| Timing | Existing checks remain part of the process | Implementation is expected in early 2028 | Final agreement, legislation and commencement details |
What businesses should do now
Exporters should calculate the potential saving without treating it as guaranteed. Start with the landed cost of a current delivery, separating product, packaging, certification, freight, delay-related labour and distributor fees. Then model the same order without the relevant certificate, but label the difference as conditional on implementation.
If the saving is material, the result may support smaller or more frequent shipments, subject to the distributor’s requirements and the treatment of perishable goods. Businesses should also ask customers and logistics partners which paperwork they expect once the rules change.
The final text and detailed implementation guidance will determine the real value. The decisive test will be whether a particular certificate disappears for a particular product, rather than whether the broader political announcement sounds favourable.
Bottom line
The draft agreement could give small food exporters a meaningful cost and time advantage by removing checks on selected products. Northern Ireland could benefit from simpler movements within the UK market, while established EU suppliers could face greater competition if British exports recover.
The trade-off is timing and uncertainty. The rules are not yet operational, and lower compliance costs will not by themselves reverse the decline in British food exports. Exporters should watch the final product scope, legislation and implementation timetable before committing capital to a sales plan built on the proposal.
Key takeaways
- The proposal would remove specified veterinary and plant health certificates from covered UK exports.
- Lower fixed compliance costs could matter more to small producers than to businesses handling large volumes.
- Northern Ireland could benefit from the removal of checks on goods arriving from elsewhere in the UK.
- Implementation is expected in early 2028, so businesses should model savings as conditional rather than certain.
- Reduced paperwork can improve competitiveness, but marketing, distribution and customer demand remain separate obstacles.
Frequently asked questions
Which food exports could benefit from the agreement?
The reporting names fresh meat, fish, shellfish and seed potatoes among the products covered by the proposed removal of checks.
Which certificates may no longer be required?
Covered exporters may be able to dispense with a £200 veterinary certificate, while a £25 plant health certificate could be removed for certain listed goods.
Is the agreement already in force?
No. The wider statement remained in draft, and the food deal is expected to require British legislation before implementation in early 2028.
How could smaller exporters benefit?
They could avoid some fixed certification costs and reduce the time lost to documentation and border delays, potentially making smaller shipments more commercially viable.
Does the proposal directly affect non-UK exporters?
Not generally. It may affect them indirectly if they use British distributors, supply UK customers or compete with British suppliers in the EU market.