A Decade of Brexit: Challenges Still Facing UK Small Businesses

Key Points

• Ten years after the 2016 referendum, many UK small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) report persistent trade disruptions, higher costs and increased paperwork as a result of Brexit.
• A Federation of Small Businesses (FSB) study found 63% of UK SMEs trading with the EU faced “significant” trade barriers in the past year; one third plan to reduce or stop EU trade under the current legal framework.
• Business leaders from Brandauer, Reidsteel, Brookvent and Provender Nurseries describe longer lead times, higher import costs, regulatory friction and mixed outcomes across UK regions.
• Rowan Crozier of Brandauer reports material lead times that rose from 24–48 hours pre-Brexit to at least a week post-Brexit.
• Simon Boyd of Reidsteel says leaving the EU “hasn’t given us the benefits we were hoping to get” and criticises EU carbon rules driving higher-emission steel imports.
• Declan Gormley of Brookvent highlights Northern Ireland’s unique position within the EU single market for goods and says the firm’s EU business has grown while UK sales remain static.
• Provender Nurseries’ owner, Mark McKenna, says paperwork and higher import costs have raised prices and made business more difficult.
• Some firms have adapted successfully due to specialist markets or global supply chains; others plan to scale back EU trade or shift sourcing internationally.
• The article compiles interviews and reporting from business leaders and the Federation of Small Businesses to present a comprehensive picture of a decade of Brexit’s effects on SMEs.

Birmingham (Britain Today News) — June 20, 2026 — A decade after Britain voted to leave the European Union, small- and medium-sized businesses across the UK continue to feel the friction of new trade rules, higher costs and extra bureaucracy, industry leaders and studies show.

What has changed for UK SMEs since Brexit 2026?

As reported by the Federation of Small Businesses in its recent study, 63 percent of UK SMEs trading with the EU faced “significant” trade barriers in the past 12 months. The FSB’s findings, reflecting new customs checks, regulatory divergence and logistical delays, reveal a picture of persistent disruption rather than a short-term adjustment.

Rowan Crozier, head of Brandauer, told AFP via an interview that “it’s still impacting us.” He said the firm — which manufactures extremely small metal components in Birmingham — has seen lead times for materials increase noticeably since the UK left the EU.

“If you look at the facts and figures, our lead times for all of our materials went up post-Brexit,”

Crozier said.

“Before exiting, we could expect a shipment to come from the UK to the EU or the other way around, and it would be 24, 48 hours. No problem. And now it’s at least a week.”

Those longer lead times are not only a scheduling issue; they translate into higher working capital requirements, sudden production slowdowns and customer dissatisfaction for firms operating on tight margins and just-in-time supply chains.

Why are paperwork and cost burdens still growing?

As reported by the Federation of Small Businesses, the additional customs paperwork, safety declarations and compliance checks have added staff time and cost to daily operations. Mark McKenna of Provender Nurseries in southeast England said:

“It’s made life more challenging. I’ve got people doing more paperwork and all paperwork is a cost to the business.”

He added:

“It’s made plants more expensive by importing. So it’s made our product more expensive and more difficult for people to buy.”

Business owners most affected by the additional administrative burden are those without large export departments or the financial buffer to hire customs specialists. Many small firms now outsource compliance, a recurring cost that further squeezes margins.

How have trade patterns shifted for companies with cross-border operations?

Declan Gormley, head of Brookvent, a ventilation systems manufacturer headquartered in Northern Ireland, told AFP that the firm now effectively has “a foot in both camps.” Northern Ireland remains part of the EU single market for physical goods under the protocol designed to protect the open border with Ireland, so Brookvent’s European-wide business has expanded since 2016, while its UK business has remained largely static.

“The European Union to me offered that pre-Brexit and it offers it post-Brexit,”

Gormley said.

“In the period since 2016 to now, we’ve seen a substantial growth in our European-wide business, but our business in the UK has basically remained static.”

For companies straddling the UK and EU markets, the Northern Ireland protocol has been a material advantage — but it also underscores the uneven effects of Brexit across the UK.

What do manufacturing leaders say about regulation and environmental rules?

Simon Boyd, head of Reidsteel — which builds structural steelwork including warehouses, bridges and stadiums — offered a different perspective. As reported in his interview, Boyd, a known Brexit supporter, criticised EU approaches to carbon trading and emissions regulation.

“One of the big problems in Europe and with us … is all the nonsense over carbon trading and carbon emissions,”

he said.

“The race to net zero here in the UK is suicidal.”

Boyd argued that stringent regional environmental regulations have led some UK buyers to source steel from outside Europe, where production emissions are higher.

“Rather than reducing carbon into the atmosphere, we are increasing it by buying steel from countries outside the EU… where the emissions are much higher,”

he said. Boyd concluded:

“Leaving the European Union hasn’t done us any harm, but it hasn’t given us the benefits that we were hoping to get.”

Boyd’s comments highlight a tension between environmental policy and trade outcomes: differing regulatory regimes can shift where goods are sourced and inadvertently change the global emissions footprint.

How many firms are reducing EU trade or planning to stop it?

The FSB study indicates a significant shift: one third of SMEs surveyed that trade with the EU plan to reduce or stop trading with the bloc under the current legal framework. For firms that depend on predictable cross-border movement of goods, repeated disruption, customs costs and VAT complications have made the economics less attractive.

Smaller exporters often cite the complexity of rules of origin, sanitary and phytosanitary checks and increased documentation as factors pushing them away from EU markets. For many, redirecting supply chains to non-EU countries or focusing on domestic markets is now a strategic decision driven by cost and predictability.

Which sectors and regions are hardest hit?

Manufacturing, horticulture and specialist engineering have been among the most visible sectors to report continued problems. Birmingham-based Brandauer — whose micro-metal components serve highly specialised industries — sees global demand but heightened friction for EU trade.

Horticulture businesses like Provender Nurseries cite higher plant import costs and logistical headaches; Europe was a fast-moving market for perishable goods and tight timescales, a dynamic made harder by customs delays.

Northern Ireland presents a contrast: firms with access to the EU single market retain smoother physical trade routes but face legal and political uncertainty that still injects complexity into long-term planning.

How have firms adapted or found opportunities?

Some businesses have adapted by leaning on specialisms or diversifying markets. Brandauer’s Crozier said their niche manufacturing expertise

“has helped us to overcome some of the challenges that Brexit threw at us.”

Firms producing highly specialised goods often face less direct competition and can absorb higher compliance costs.

Brookvent, with its position in Northern Ireland, has expanded its EU sales, illustrating how geography and market positioning can turn regulatory arrangements into commercial advantage.

Others have invested in customs expertise, restructured supply chains, or absorbed costs temporarily while searching for new efficiencies. But the FSB’s data shows many SMEs still consider the added burden significant and damaging.
Explore More about Business:
Chichester Tyre Recycling Plant Suspended by Environment Agency Over Fire Risks
UK Inflation Holds at 2.8% as Food Prices Ease While Oil Costs Stay High

What are the broader economic and social consequences?

Business leaders interviewed said the economy has borne costs that consumers and employees now feel. McKenna of Provender Nurseries said plainly:

“The economy has suffered, the people have suffered. There’s no winner.”

That sentiment reflects both immediate price pressures and long-term shifts in market access and competitiveness for SMEs.

Higher import costs have fed into retail prices in some sectors; delays have affected fulfilment times; and administrative burdens have forced reallocation of staff hours from growth activities to compliance. For smaller firms, these are not marginal inconveniences but structural changes that alter strategic choices.

How are policymakers and business groups responding?

The Federation of Small Businesses has repeatedly called for measures to reduce friction at the border, simplify procedures and support SMEs with guidance and financial help to manage new administrative requirements. The FSB’s study, cited above, provides evidence used to lobby for streamlined processes and better resourcing of HM Revenue & Customs and logistics infrastructure to avoid chronic delays.

Business leaders also urge clearer, business-friendly regulatory pathways that align environmental commitments with competitiveness, so firms are not pushed to high-emission alternatives.

What do business owners want going forward?

Across interviews, business owners expressed a mix of regret, realism and pragmatic adaptation. Crozier said he

“did everything I could to try and persuade my staff that, for business reasons, it’s the wrong thing to do,”

reflecting the view that Brexit was economically unhelpful for certain sectors. Yet he also underlined a pragmatic approach: his firm has adapted where possible.

McKenna expressed a longing for earlier conditions:

“What I hope for, is what it was pre-vote: frictionless transport, working together with our European partners, taking down the borders, taking down the restrictions, working together instead of working against each other.”

Gormley of Brookvent acknowledged the benefits Northern Ireland has experienced while noting his preference the UK had remained within the European community overall.

“Northern Ireland is a benefactor of Brexit… but my preference would have been if the UK in total would have stayed within the European community,”

he said.

Are there winners from Brexit among SMEs?

The picture is uneven. Some businesses, notably those with specialist products, unique capabilities or a base in Northern Ireland, have retained or even expanded trade with the EU. Others have seen trade decline or reorient toward non-EU markets. Overall, the consensus among the business owners interviewed and the FSB data suggests that while some firms have found ways to mitigate the impact, many SMEs continue to pay a price in paperwork, delay and cost.

What long-term outlook do business leaders see?

Looking ahead, many SME owners emphasise the need for regulatory pragmatism, better infrastructure and clearer trade arrangements to restore confidence. Whether adjustments in policy, technology (for customs processing) or targeted support for SMEs will materially change the trajectory remains an open question. For now, a decade after the vote, Brexit remains a defining factor in the strategic choices of UK small businesses.

As Declan Gormley put it:

“Any business wants to actually find itself in the best possible market with the best possible opportunity. The European Union to me offered that pre-Brexit and it offers it post-Brexit.”

That ambivalence — relief for some, loss for others — captures the complex legacy that the referendum has left on Britain’s small-business landscape.