Connect with us

Published

on

The Caucasus Mountain range in Georgia is one of the great sights in the south of Europe. Towering peaks, higher than any in the Alps, rise up from green meadows and grassy hills covered in wildflowers. Winding roads thread through deep valleys, overlooked by ornate Orthodox churches and monasteries.

But when I visited recently, I found a sight of an unexpected kind. The roads here have become dominated by a very particular kind of traffic: enormous convoys of trucks, carrying all manner of goods towards Georgia’s northerly neighbour: Russia. When I travelled north towards the checkpoint of Lars – the only road into Russia – I encountered a long queue of trucks waiting to clear customs and pass across.

I had come here in search of an answer to a puzzle that’s been preoccupying me for some time. It began with a chart. This chart showed that after Russia invaded Ukraine and sanctions were imposed by G7 nations, including the UK, the flows of certain goods to that country suddenly cratered, falling to zero. That went for the so-called “dual use goods” you could use to create a makeshift weapon or put into a drone, but also for the luxury goods banned from sale into Russia.

Read more
Car sales to Russia’s neighbours surge
Analysis: Questions remain on UK car exports

The theory back then was that by starving Russia’s war machine of the parts it needed and by starving senior Russian businesspeople and officials of the Western luxuries they coveted, European states could cause economic damage even if they weren’t directly at war with Vladimir Putin’s state.

But the data told a subtly different story. While exports of those goods to Russia certainly fell to zero, they suddenly rose sharply to a host of Russia’s neighbours. All of a sudden, Britain was sending drone equipment to Kyrgyzstan; all of a sudden, we were exporting luxury cars to Azerbaijan, in numbers we had never come anywhere close to before. Things got odder when you looked at Azerbaijan’s own export data, which showed a sudden spurt in its own luxury car exports (it does not manufacture luxury cars), to other countries in the Caucasus and Central Asia, including Georgia and Kazakhstan.

This posed a bit of a mystery. While sanctions experts said they suspected these Caucasus states were almost certainly being used as a kind of conduit, to send sanctioned goods to Russia, the data trail went cold when those cars entered the Caucasus. When we first raised this earlier in the year, Britain’s motor lobby group, the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT), said: “UK vehicle exports to Azerbaijan – as to many countries globally – have increased due to a number of factors, not least a flourishing economy, new model launches and pent-up demand.”

The implication, in other words, was that most if not all the cars stayed in the Caucasus (which would be entirely legal) instead of crossing into Russia (which would not).

A Ferrari seen by Sky News near the border
Image:
A Porsche seen by Sky News near the border

Like the driveway of a Mayfair hotel

All of which is how I found myself in the Caucasus mountains recently to see for myself whether this story really stacked up. We had gone there following a tip-off. A colleague in Georgia had sent us a photo from the border checkpoint, where a set of informal car parks was filled with the kind of concentration of luxury cars you would normally only expect to see outside a Mayfair hotel, or in a country like Dubai. There were Mercedes, high-end Lexus, BMWs and, there among a large number of German cars, two Range Rovers.

So we travelled out to Georgia to find out whether there were really UK-made cars still travelling into Russia. Now in some respects, our focus on cars might seem odd: after all, there are far more egregious breaches of the sanctions regime. Our previous investigation found radar parts and electrical equipment have also been sent from the UK to the Caucasus and Central Asia following the imposition of sanctions.

A Lamborghini and two Mercedes G-wagons
Image:
A Lamborghini and two Mercedes G-wagons

But the reason we were focused on cars is that while there’s no way of telling from the outside what’s inside a cargo truck or a shipping container, vehicles are far harder to move secretly. In short, if we could show that European, and for that matter British cars were being moved into Russia, then it would demonstrate visually, for the first time, how these sanctions are being broken.

We spent two days close to the border, watching the process as cars and other trucks were brought there, and then sent over into Russia. We spoke to numerous men engaged in the trade. What we discovered was a complex but finely-honed system designed to transport European cars into Russia.

A Mercedes seen by Sky News near the Russian border
Image:
A Mercedes seen by Sky News

‘This car will go to Russia and will remain there’

One group of men is charged with bringing the cars to the border – sometimes from showrooms in the capital, Tbilisi, sometimes from the Black Sea ports of Poti or Batumi. Mostly they don’t know where the cars come from beforehand – whether directly from countries like the UK or via other Caucasus states like Azerbaijan.

Once they bring the cars to the border, they leave them there in a set of car parks where they sit for a few days until the necessary paperwork is completed. That paperwork is not without its own complications: after European states imposed sanctions, Georgia introduced its own bans on sending cars into Russia. However, there are numerous loopholes that enable you to bring the cars across nonetheless.

A Porsche at an informal car park near the border
Image:
A Porsche waits at the car park

One way is to have the cars registered and custom cleared in Armenia before they come up north to the Lars checkpoint in Russia. Sometimes those taking the cars into Russia are advised to say they are only being driven through Russia to Kyrgyzstan but, as one Russian YouTuber puts it: “Let’s be honest: everyone understands everything perfectly well – everyone from the people who will register you at the traffic police and the people at the Georgian border – that this car will go to Russia and will remain there.”

Either way, eventually these cars are issued with transit registration plates, after which they can be driven over the border. And since Georgians can travel visa-free into Russia, and vice versa, taking the cars across the border is simply a question of driving them there, leaving the car on the other side where it will be collected by another group of men, and then hitching a ride back into Georgia.

Checkpoint at the Georgian-Russian border
Image:
Checkpoint at the Georgia-Russia border

Everyone wins – except the Ukrainians

We saw numerous cars being taken across the border in this way, and here’s the key thing about this system: first, no single person in the chain can easily be fingered for any crime – even though, when you put it all together, it certainly amounts to a contravention of sanctions law. Second, and just as importantly for our purposes, it means that the cars don’t show up in the customs data. From the point of view of a statistician, they simply arrive in Azerbaijan or Georgia and then they disappear.

This, we learnt, was only one of numerous routes sanctioned goods are taking into Russia, but such routes are, all told, a large part of the explanation for how Mr Putin is able to keep his regime equipped with the components it needs to wage war, and the luxuries needed to reward his cronies. The upshot is contrary to the promises when these sanctions were imposed: Russia’s economy remains strong, there are no shortages of essential and non-essential goods in Moscow and, along the way, Caucasus states like Georgia and Azerbaijan have seen an enormous economic boost from serving as an informal trade conduit. Everyone wins – except the Ukrainians.

Traffic waiting to cross from Georgia into Russia
Image:
Traffic waiting to cross from Georgia into Russia

But while we saw this process carried out at the border for many German cars – Mercedes and Porsches were the most prevalent brands – we didn’t find the Range Rovers our contact had photographed a few days earlier. They were, presumably, already over the border.

So after a few days we headed south towards Tbilisi to talk to more people in the export trade. But just outside the Georgian capital, we suddenly spotted a convoy of trucks heading in the opposite direction. Among those trucks were two car carriers with what looked like brand new Range Rovers. We turned the car around and began to follow them up the mountain, realising that we were witnessing this shadow trade route in person.

Up until then there had been no clear filmed evidence that British cars are actually leaving the Caucasus for Russia. So we followed the car carriers as they travelled slowly up the mountain roads towards the border.

When we arrived at the border, the atmosphere in the car park had transformed. What had been a quiet place during the day was a hive of activity. Clearly this was peak time – it seemed that most of the car deliveries happened in the dead of night. Not only were there two Range Rovers, there were countless other luxury cars, including top of the range Mercedes G-Wagons and a Lamborghini Urus.

When day broke the next morning, we checked the VIN numbers on the Range Rovers – the numerical fingerprint displayed on the windscreen, allowing you to trace these vehicles. They showed that these cars were brand new, made in Solihull in 2024. A document visible on the windscreen of one of them showed the date of April 2024.

Boxes inside one of the cars
Image:
Boxes inside one of the cars

No one is trying to hide what’s happening

Those dates were significant: we at Sky News had warned CAT logistics groups about the existence of this trade in March 2024. Jaguar Land Rover (JLR) and the SMMT had been aware of the risks posed by these vehicles ending up in the Caucasus before these cars had been manufactured. Yet here they still were, en route to Russia, joining the line to cross over the border.

A spokesperson for JLR said: “JLR stopped sales of vehicles to Russia and Belarus in February 2022. Sanctions compliance is a corporate priority, as well as an obligation for our third-party retail network.

“An ongoing investigation into these vehicles has confirmed they were not supplied by JLR to the Georgia market. They were supplied by JLR to retailers in countries that do not share a border with Russia and then in turn sold to customers in those countries, which are subject to similar sanctions and export controls as we are in the UK in relation to Russia.

Makeshift car park full of luxury cars near the border
Image:
Makeshift car park full of luxury cars, including Range Rovers, near the border

“JLR, along with its retailer network, continues to adapt its compliance strategies to counter the efforts of third parties seeking to circumvent sanctions against Russia and Belarus.”

However, while UK carmakers and authorities insist they are doing everything they can to clamp down on these unofficial trade routes, perhaps the most startling takeaway from our investigation is that there on the ground in Georgia, no one is trying to hide what’s happening. Everyone knows these high-end European cars aren’t supposed to be going into Russia, yet they are passing over the border one by one, every day. Everyone knows what’s happening, but no one is doing anything to stop it.

And one has to presume much the same thing is happening with all types of goods, including those inside the bowels of the trucks lined up at the border. The passage of these cars is only the most visible evidence that the sanctions regime is not preventing expensive, important items travelling from Europe into Russia. For the time being, policymakers and businesses seem powerless or unwilling to prevent this murky trade.

Continue Reading

Business

Post Office to unveil £1.75bn banking deal with big British lenders

Published

on

By

Post Office to unveil £1.75bn banking deal with big British lenders

The Post Office will next week unveil a £1.75bn deal with dozens of banks which will allow their customers to continue using Britain’s biggest retail network.

Sky News has learnt the next Post Office banking framework will be launched next Wednesday, with an agreement that will deliver an additional £500m to the government-owned company.

Banking industry sources said on Friday the deal would be worth roughly £350m annually to the Post Office – an uplift from the existing £250m-a-year deal, which expires at the end of the year.

Money latest: ’14 million Britons on course for parking fine this year’

The sources added that in return for the additional payments, the Post Office would make a range of commitments to improving the service it provides to banks’ customers who use its branches.

Banks which participate in the arrangements include Barclays, HSBC, Lloyds Banking Group, NatWest Group and Santander UK.

Under the Banking Framework Agreement, the 30 banks and mutuals’ customers can access the Post Office’s 11,500 branches for a range of services, including depositing and withdrawing cash.

More on Post Office Scandal

The service is particularly valuable to those who still rely on physical cash after a decade in which well over 6,000 bank branches have been closed across Britain.

In 2023, more than £10bn worth of cash was withdrawn over the counter and £29bn in cash was deposited over the counter, the Post Office said last year.

Read more from Sky News:
Water regulation slammed by spending watchdog
Rate cut speculation lights up as economic outlook darkens

A new, longer-term deal with the banks comes at a critical time for the Post Office, which is trying to secure government funding to bolster the pay of thousands of sub-postmasters.

Reliant on an annual government subsidy, the reputation of the network’s previous management team was left in tatters by the Horizon IT scandal and the wrongful conviction of hundreds of sub-postmasters.

A Post Office spokesperson declined to comment ahead of next week’s announcement.

Continue Reading

Business

Trump trade war: How UK figures show his tariff argument doesn’t add up

Published

on

By

Trump trade war: How UK figures show his tariff argument doesn't add up

As Chancellor Rachel Reeves meets her counterpart, US Treasury secretary Scott Bessent to discuss an “economic agreement” between the two countries, the latest trade figures confirm three realities that ought to shape negotiations.

The first is that the US remains a vital customer for UK businesses, the largest single-nation export market for British goods and the third-largest import partner, critical to the UK automotive industry, already landed with a 25% tariff, and pharmaceuticals, which might yet be.

In 2024 the US was the UK’s largest export market for cars, worth £9bn to companies including Jaguar Land Rover, Bentley and Aston Martin, and accounting for more than 27% of UK automotive exports.

Little wonder the domestic industry fears a heavy and immediate impact on sales and jobs should tariffs remain.

Money latest: ’14 million Britons on course for parking fine this year’

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Chancellor’s trade deal red lines explained

American car exports to the UK by contrast are worth just £1bn, which may explain why the chancellor may be willing to lower the current tariff of 10% to 2.5%.

For UK medicines and pharmaceutical producers meanwhile, the US was a more than £6bn market in 2024. Currently exempt from tariffs, while Mr Trump and his advisors think about how to treat an industry he has long-criticised for high prices, it remains vulnerable.

More on Tariffs

The second point is that the US is even more important for the services industry. British exports of consultancy, PR, financial and other professional services to America were worth £131bn last year.

That’s more than double the total value of the goods traded in the same direction, but mercifully services are much harder to hammer with the blunt tool of tariffs, though not immune from regulation and other “non-tariff barriers”.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

How US ports are coping with tariffs

The third point is that, had Donald Trump stuck to his initial rationale for tariffs, UK exporters should not be facing a penny of extra cost for doing business with the US.

The president says he slapped blanket tariffs on every nation bar Russia to “rebalance” the US economy and reverse goods trade ‘deficits’ – in which the US imports more than it exports to a given country.

Read more: Could Trump tariffs tip the world into recession?

That heavily contested argument might apply to Mexico, Canada, China and many other manufacturing nations, but it does not meaningfully apply to Britain.

Figures from the Office for National Statistics show the US ran a small goods trade deficit with the UK in 2024 of £2.2bn, importing £59.3bn of goods against exports of £57.1bn.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

IMF downgrades UK growth forecast

Add in services trade, in which the UK exports more than double what it imports from the US, and the UK’s surplus – and thus the US ‘deficit’ – swells to nearly £78bn.

That might be a problem were it not for the US’ own accounts of the goods and services trade with Britain, which it says actually show a $15bn (£11.8bn) surplus with the UK.

You might think that they cannot both be right, but the ONS disagrees. The disparity is caused by the way the US Bureau of Economic Analysis accounts for services, as well as a range of statistical assumptions.

Read more from Sky News:
Water regulation slammed by spending watchdog
Rate cut speculation lights up as economic outlook darkens

“The presence of trade asymmetries does not indicate that either country is inaccurate in their estimation,” the ONS said.

That might be encouraging had Mr Trump not ignored his own arguments and landed the UK, like everyone else in the world, with a blanket 10% tariff on all goods.

Trade agreements are notoriously complex, protracted affairs, which helps explain why after nine years of trying the UK still has not got one with the US, and the Brexit deal it did with the EU against a self-imposed deadline has been proved highly disadvantageous.

Continue Reading

Business

Public failed by water regulators and government as bills rise, spending watchdog says

Published

on

By

Public failed by water regulators and government as bills rise, spending watchdog says

Water regulators and the government have failed to provide a trusted and resilient industry at the same time as bills rise, the state spending watchdog has said.

Public trust in the water sector has reached a record low, according to a report from the National Audit Office (NAO) on the privatised industry.

Not since monitoring began in 2011 has consumer trust been at such a level, it said.

At the same time, households face double-digit bill hikes over the next five years.

The last time bills rose at this rate was just before the global financial crash, between 2004-05 and 2005-06.

Regulation failure

All three water regulators – Ofwat, the Environment Agency and Drinking Water Inspectorate – and the government department for environment, food and rural affairs (Defra) have played a role in the failure, the NAO said, adding they do not know enough about the condition or age of water infrastructure and the level of funding needed to maintain it.

More on Environment

Since the utilities were privatised in 1989, the average rate of replacement for water assets is 125 years, the watchdog said. If the current pace is maintained, it will take 700 years to replace the existing water mains.

A resident collects water at bottle station at Asda, Totton.
Pic: PA
Image:
The NAO said the government and regulators have failed to drive sufficient investment into the sector. File pic: PA

Water firms have grappled with leaky pipes and record sewage outflows into UK waterways in recent years, with enforcement action under way against all wastewater companies.

Despite there being three regulators tasked with water, there is no one responsible for proactively inspecting wastewater to prevent environmental harm, the report found.

Instead, regulation is reactive, fining firms when harm has already occurred.

Financial penalties and rewards, however, have not worked as water company performance hasn’t been “consistent or significantly improved” in recent years, the report said.

‘Gaps, inconsistencies, tension’

The NAO called for this to change and for a body to be tasked with the whole process and assets. At present, the Drinking Water Inspectorate monitors water coming into a house, but there is no entity looking at water leaving a property.

Similarly no body is tasked with cybersecurity for wastewater businesses.

As well as there being gaps, “inconsistent” watchdog responsibilities cause “tension” and overlap, the report found.

The Environment Agency has no obligation to balance customer affordability with its duty to the environment when it assesses plans, the NAO said.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Thames Water boss can ‘save’ company

Company and investment criticism

Regulators have also been blamed for failing to drive enough funding into the water sector.

From having spoken to investors through numerous meetings, the NAO learnt that confidence had declined, which has made it more expensive to invest in companies providing water.

Even investors found Ofwat’s five-yearly price review process “complex and difficult”, the report said.

Financial resilience of the industry has “weakened” with Ofwat having signalled concerns about the financial resilience of 10 of the 16 major water companies.

Most notably, the UK’s largest provider, Thames Water, faced an uncertain future and potential nationalisation before securing an emergency £3bn loan, adding to its already massive £16bn debt pile.

Read more from Sky News:
Hundreds of jobs at risk as The Original Factory Shop launches survival plan
Government to decide on ‘postcode pricing’ plan for electricity bills by summer

Water businesses have been overspending, with only some extra spending linked to high inflation in recent years, leading to rising bills, the NAO said.

Over the next 25 years, companies plan to spend £290bn on infrastructure and investment, while Ofwat estimates a further £52bn will be needed to deliver up to 30 water supply projects, including nine reservoirs.

A "Danger" sign is seen on the River Thames, on the day data revealed sewage spills into England's rivers and seas by water companies more than doubled last year, in Hambledon, Britain, March 27, 2024. REUTERS/Dylan Martinez
Image:
The NAO said regulators do not have a good understanding of the condition of infrastructure assets

What else is going on?

From today, a new government law comes into effect which could see water bosses who cover up illegal sewage spills imprisoned for up to two years.

Such measures are necessary, Defra said, as some water companies have obstructed investigations and failed to hand over evidence on illegal sewage discharges, preventing crackdowns.

Meanwhile, the Independent Water Commission (IWC), led by former Bank of England deputy governor Sir Jon Cunliffe, is carrying out the largest review of the industry since privatisation.

What the regulators and government say?

In response to the report, Ofwat said: “The NAO’s report is an important contribution to the debate about the future of the water industry.

“We agree with the NAO’s recommendations for Ofwat and we continue to progress our work in these areas, and to contribute to the IWC’s wider review of the regulatory framework. We also look forward to the IWC’s recommendations and to working with government and other regulators to better deliver for customers and the environment.”

An Environment Agency spokesperson said: “We have worked closely with the National Audit Office in producing this report and welcome its substantial contribution to the debate on the future of water regulation.

“We recognise the significant challenges facing the water industry. That is why we will be working with Defra and other water regulators to implement the report’s recommendations and update our frameworks to reflect its findings.”

A Defra spokesperson said: “The government has taken urgent action to fix the water industry – but change will not happen overnight.

“We have put water companies under tough special measures through our landmark Water Act, with new powers to ban the payment of bonuses to polluting water bosses and bring tougher criminal charges against them if they break the law.”

Water UK, which represents the water firms, has been contacted for comment.

Continue Reading

Trending