The UK isn't asking for a standard deal - it's copied the text of the bits it likes from Japan, Canada etc.

But at the end of the day it is still an FTA, much closer to those precedents than Ukraine or Switzerland.

How much constraint on its autonomy is such a deal worth? 1/

When the UK chose to leave the SM it baked in significant economic cost, at which point the incentive to constrain its autonomy further is fairly low.

It's not that a basic deal doesn't matter, but that the price of one is high given what the EU wants in exchange. 2/

The EU made clear that it wants a certain level of obligation on LPF no matter what the UK asks for. These obligations are unique, and at least on state aid, much closer to Ukraine than Japan.

For tariff reduction, who would cede this? Ukraine gets a lot more bang for its buck 3

If the EU is sure that the UK gets such a big advantage from being close and being a former member state, that it needs controls on UK autonomy well beyond Japan, why doesn't the UK just take that advantage? Why trade it for removal of tariffs and some bells and whistles? 4/

I actually don't think there's a huge advantage, because being outside the SM, with the EU having the ability to impose duties to defend itself from unfair trade is sufficient really.

But the EU is acting as if it really is a big advantage to the UK. 5/

I don't think that in the event of no deal the UK will do a lot differently when it comes to LPF - particularly in comparison to other member states. It may go backwards because of the lack of enforcement but this will hardly undo the single market or give it some great advantage