Dr. Mark Cassidy:

We will get back to the Chairman with the exact figure. I know that overall housing-related tax revenues amount to 16% to 17%. Income tax always dominates in terms of what it contributes. The amounts are roughly similar, but the question is whether we consider housing as opposed to overall property, and there might be an element on top of that. I will confirm that for the Chairman. We have concerns about the degree of reliance on corporation tax receipts. While we welcome the high amount of revenue, we think the prudent course of action is not to spend what could turn out to be a temporary source of revenue.

Deputy Lahart referred to the other scenarios. Yes, we think that some form of deal is a more likely outcome than a disorderly, no-deal Brexit. He referred to two other scenarios, first, that some form of deal such as the withdrawal agreement materialises. In this case we would see a transition period until the end of 2020 and, after that, some restrictions on trade coming into effect but free trade and therefore no tariffs between the economies. Under these circumstances, we think that the long-term impact on output would be such that output would be around 1.7% lower than under a scenario in which Brexit had not taken place and that there would be around 19,000 fewer persons in employment than under a no-Brexit scenario. The other scenario the Deputy mentioned is one in which there is no deal but there is a transition period until that no-deal scenario. Under those circumstances, the impact on output over the longer term would be such that output would be around 3.2% lower than under a no-Brexit scenario and there would be around 50,000 fewer jobs.