The UK’s 86 Freeports and Special Economic Zones (SEZs) are a £64 billion heist, looting public coffers to line corporate pockets while communities are left to rot.
EUROPEANPOWELL
These deregulated zones—12 Freeports and 74 SEZs—are a Tory-Labour-Reform sham, delivering just 22,067 jobs at a jaw-dropping £896,246 each, with 66-80% displaced from nearby areas. Meanwhile, the EU’s 82 SEZs, like Poland’s Katowice or Ireland’s Shannon, are tightly regulated, reinvesting 60-70% of profits into public goods and creating sustainable jobs without distorting markets.
Post-Brexit, the UK’s capital-starved Tory and Labour parties have unleashed a corporate coup, handing public assets to firms like BlackRock in defiance of EU state aid rules (Articles 107-109 TFEU). From Plymouth’s threat to Dartmoor’s wilds to Birmingham’s eviction of 6,000 tenants, the UK’s SEZs are a betrayal of the public.
I will contrast the EU’s community-driven model with the UK’s corporate feeding frenzy, exposing a Britain sold to the highest bidder and a near-impossible path to EU reentry.
EU SEZs: Public Wealth, Public Good
EU SEZs are disciplined engines of equity, governed by Articles 107-109 TFEU and the General Block Exemption Regulation (GBER). Incentives—capped at €200,000 over three years for SMEs or higher for regional development—are transparent, Commission-approved, and tied to job creation or sustainability. Profits are plowed back into communities at 60-70%, ensuring public benefit over corporate greed.
Here are five examples that shame the UK’s mess:
- Katowice Special Economic Zone (Poland): Since 1996, Katowice has turned Silesia’s coal-scarred rustbelt into an automotive powerhouse, creating 80,000 jobs with firms like Opel and drawing €8 billion in investment. Tax exemptions (up to 50% corporate income) are capped under EU Regional Aid Guidelines, targeting deprived areas. The Katowice SEZ Co. reinvests 65% of profits into schools, roads, and training, boosting local living standards without market distortion.
- Shannon Free Zone (Ireland): Launched in 1959, Shannon employs 8,000 in aviation and tech, attracting €3 billion with export-focused GBER grants. After the 2017 Apple ruling (€13 billion clawed back), it avoids selective tax deals, sticking to a 12.5% corporate tax. The state-owned Shannon Group reinvests 70% of profits into green tech hubs and regional infrastructure, prioritizing communities over corporates.
- Madeira International Business Centre (Portugal): Since 1987, Madeira’s MIBC has driven 3,000 jobs on a remote island with a 5% tax rate, capped at €3 million per firm. It’s attracted €1.5 billion, focusing on SMEs in IT and shipping. The Madeira Development Company reinvests 60% of profits into healthcare and public services, aligning with EU cohesion goals, not corporate profit.
- Łódź Special Economic Zone (Poland): Established in 1997, Łódź revitalized a textile-ravaged region, creating 40,000 direct jobs and 100,000 indirect ones with €4.5 billion from Bosch and Fujitsu. GBER-compliant tax relief (up to 50% for SMEs, 25-50% of investment costs) is capped and transparent. The Łódź SEZ Authority reinvests 60% of profits into vocational training and roads, transforming Łódź into a tech hub while uplifting locals.
- Trieste Free Zone (Italy): Since 1954, Trieste’s port-based zone employs 10,000 in shipbuilding and green tech, drawing €2 billion from Wärtsilä. Its 10% export tax rate is GBER-capped, with 70% of profits reinvested by the Trieste Port Authority into offshore wind farms and SME contracts, boosting Friuli Venezia Giulia’s sustainability.
The EU’s SEZs are forensically audited—think the 2016 Starbucks ruling (€20-30 million recovered) or 2017 Apple case (€13 billion)—ensuring no market distortion. They deliver sustainable jobs (80,000 in Katowice, 40,000 in Łódź) and public reinvestment, prioritizing miners in Silesia, islanders in Madeira, and coastal workers in Trieste. The UK’s SEZs, by contrast, are a corporate mugging.
UK Freeports: Public Money, Private Profits
The UK’s 86 Freeports and SEZs are a taxpayer-funded corporate orgy, flouting EU state aid rules with uncapped NIC exemptions (0% on salaries up to £25,000), business rates relief, and lax planning. ‘The FDI facade’ reveals £19.78 billion spent by 2024, with £64 billion pledged by 2048, for a measly 22,067 jobs—66-80% displaced, per the NAO. SMEs face £4,236 NIC hikes while corporates feast. Four examples expose the carnage:
- Teesside Freeport: Launched in 2021, Teesside promised 18,000 jobs but delivered 2,500 by 2024, mostly poached from Middlesbrough (NAO, 2023). Private Eye uncovered a £200 million public land transfer to Teesworks Ltd. (90% privately owned) for £1, with developers banking £500 million. The public got £50 million—a 90:10 private-to-public split. Uncapped rates relief and NIC exemptions violate EU rules, and Deloitte’s audits hide cronyism. Hartlepool’s schools crumble while corporates cash in.
- Thames Freeport: Covering London Gateway and Tilbury, Thames pledged 25,000 jobs but delivered 3,000 low-wage warehousing roles by 2024. BlackRock, owning 80% of key ports, saves £37,500 per 10 hires, totaling £300 million in tax breaks. SMEs in Thurrock, hit with £8,613 rates hikes, are collapsing (Centre for Cities, 2024). Public reinvestment? A pitiful £20 million—a 94:6 private-to-public ratio. Tilbury’s youth training center was scrapped for a corporate hub, leaving locals jobless.
- Plymouth and South Devon Freeport: Launched in 2021, this Freeport spans 75km, engulfing Dartmoor and South Hams without public consultation (Plymouth Live, 2022). It promised 3,500 jobs but created fewer than 1,000 by 2024, with 70% displaced from nearby Plymouth and Tavistock (West Country Voices, 2023). Tax breaks at Devonport, Sherford, and Langage sites favor marine and defense firms, but relaxed planning rules threaten Dartmoor’s National Park status. Posts on X highlight fears of lithium mining, risking arsenic and lead pollution, with no environmental safeguards (FormerSpring, 2025). The Freeport’s £100 million in public funds has yielded £10 million for locals—a 90:10 private-to-public split—while South Hams faces housing and service cuts.
- Birmingham’s 6 SEZs: Birmingham hosts six SEZs, rolled out under secondary legislation with zero public input (Guardian 2024). They’ve triggered a mass Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) targeting 6,000 tenants for eviction to clear land for corporate investors (EuropeanPowell, 2025). By 2024, only 1,500 jobs were created, mostly low-skill logistics roles displaced from Solihull (Centre for Cities, 2024). Public funds of £500 million have delivered £40 million in community reinvestment—a 92:8 private-to-public ratio. Bankrupt Birmingham Council, gutted by austerity, is selling public services to private SEZ operators, leaving tenants homeless and schools underfunded.
Unlike EU SEZs, UK Freeports are opaque and corporate-skewed. Teesside’s land grabs, Thames’ BlackRock bonanza, Plymouth’s Dartmoor threat, and Birmingham’s evictions show a system where 90-94% of profits go private. The £19.78 billion spent could fund 565,723 median-salary jobs or lift kids out of poverty by scrapping the two-child benefit cap. Instead, it’s corporate welfare on steroids.
The Corporate Coup: Tory-Labour Sellout
Post-Brexit, Tory and Labour desperation for capital has fueled a corporate coup, transferring public wealth to firms like BlackRock. “Labour Didn’t Just Inherit the Tories’ Freeports” exposes bipartisan complicity: Tories birthed the zones under Rishi Sunak’s 2021 budget, and Labour’s Andy Burnham and Steve Rotheram entrenched them with deals like Greater Manchester’s Fujitsu pact (pending). “Labour’s Freeport Fiasco” reveals Starmer’s BlackRock ties, with Teesside’s NE Security Ltd. (linked to crime) and Angela Rayner’s delayed audits signaling a public asset fire sale. Birmingham’s 6 SEZs, imposed without scrutiny, and Plymouth’s Dartmoor grab, unconsulted per West Country Voices (2023), show democracy sidelined.
The £64 billion commitment—£896,246 per job—isn’t growth; it’s theft.
EU SEZs like Łódź reinvest 60% into training, Trieste 70% into green tech. The UK’s 90-94% private profit split, backed by libertarian ideologues like Shanker Singham (“Shanker Singham: The Brexit Svengali”), apes Honduras’ Próspera, where locals lost water and land. BlackRock’s £22.8 billion Freeport stake and JCB’s Teesside projects, shielded by ISDS and LCIA clauses, could spark £11 billion lawsuits if EU rules are enforced (“Corporate Courts”). This is a deliberate handover of Britain to corporates.
EU Reentry: A Distant Dream
Rejoining the EU requires state aid compliance, but UK Freeports are a dealbreaker. Katowice’s 50% tax caps, Shannon’s transparency, and Trieste’s 70% reinvestment show the EU’s model: regions over corporates. The UK’s uncapped handouts—Thames’ £300 million for BlackRock, Birmingham’s £500 million for evictors—violate TFEU, risking Commission rulings like Starbucks (€20-30 million). Renegotiating 25-year ISDS/LCIA contracts could trigger billions in claims, each costing £4-5 million to defend (UNCTAD). Honduras’ Próspera, unresolved since 2022, warns of a 5-10 year slog.
The UK’s 39 FTAs in 2025, including the UK-India deal’s ISDS clauses and the US-UK’s limited tariff relief, entrench corporate power (GOV.UK, 2025). The UK-EU FTA eases food exports but flags state aid scrutiny. With Tory-Labour backing—Burnham’s Fujitsu deal, Birmingham’s CPOs—reentry before 2035 is a pipe dream, as the EU’s 2004 enlargement showed with years of audits.
Stop the Corporate Carve-Up
EU SEZs—Katowice’s 80,000 jobs, Łódź’s 40,000, Trieste’s green tech—prove zones can serve people with 60-70% public reinvestment and capped aid. The UK’s Freeports—Teesside’s £500 million developer windfall, Thames’ £300 million BlackRock grab, Plymouth’s Dartmoor threat, Birmingham’s 6,000 evictions—are a corporate coup, fueled by Tory-Labour capital hunger. The £64 billion could fund schools, hospitals, or UBI, as Guy Standing urges, not BlackRock’s empire. Scrap ISDS/LCIA clauses, redirect funds to SMEs, and demand transparency—force Starmer to ditch his corporate mates. It’s a decade-long fight, but a corporate-run Britain, Singham’s dystopia, is worse. Rise up or or look forward to swapping your role as a citizen for that of a customer in a Feudal enclave.
Sources: European Parliament 2020 Briefing, TFEU Articles 107-109, UNCTAD ISDS data, GOV.UK, Reuters, BBC, Private Eye, NAO 2023, Centre for Cities 2024, West Country Voices 2023, Plymouth Live 2022, provided documents, Polish Investment & Trade Agency, Shannon Group, Madeira Development Company, Łódź SEZ Authority, Trieste Port Authority.
This article (EU SEZs vs. UK Freeports – A Corporate Coup Ransacking Britain) was created and published by EuropeanPowell and is republished here under “Fair Use”
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of The Liberty Beacon Project.
Leave a Reply