Nigel Farage vowed to use Brexit freedoms to make life easier for Britain’s small businesses as he hit out at EU red tape. The Reform UK leader pledged to cut rules and regulations as he made his pitch to small and medium-sized business owners.
Speaking at a press conference in central London today, Mr Farage said the UK had faced “50 years of endless red tape” from Brussels. The Brexiteer said: “Some of it would have been regulations, rules, we sensibly might have put in place ourselves.
Get the latest politics news – straight from our team in Westminster and more
Invalid email
You agree you are 18 or over. We use your sign-up to provide content in ways you’ve consented to and to improve our understanding of you. This may include adverts from us and third parties based on our knowledge of you. You can unsubscribe at any time. More Info.
“But it’s actually a double problem. It isn’t just the EU rulebook, big problem though that is, it is the massive overinterpretation of that rulebook by regulators, by quangos, by bureaucrats in this country.
“And you speak to people out there working in all sorts of businesses and the regulators aren’t there to work with business, their culture is to work against business.
“I do think that the EU, its rules and regs, but I also think the way Tony Blair fundamentally changed the way the country’s run by taking enormous power away from elected ministers and politicians and handing it over to quangos and regulators, has made the life of small businesses much, much harder.”
The Clacton MP made the comments as he launched the insurgent party’s new group, Small Business for Reform.
Mr Farage said: “We get it. I’ve been in business, I’ve run my own businesses, as many of my colleagues have, as thousands of our members have.”
Reform UK leader Nigel Farage (Image: Getty)
He said Labour has “absolutely no comprehension of what it’s like” to set up and run a small business and warned the Government “only listens to big business”
The Reform leader said: “Some on the left will tell you ‘the economy is failing because capitalism is failing’.
“No. We’re not living in capitalism, we’re living in an age of global corporatism. We’re living in an age where the big businesses virtually control and own the political arena.”
A Labour Party spokesperson said: “Nigel Farage will say anything to get a headline, but Reform’s current plans would be a disaster for small businesses.
“Farage would rip up Labour’s deal with the EU leaving small businesses drowning in red tape, and his war on clean energy jobs would see SMEs in the energy sector and wider supply chain shut down across the country. Reform are not on the side of business or ordinary working people.”
Moment Nigel Farage Furiously Erupts at ’50 Years of Endless Red Tape’ from EU
Nigel Farage has reignited his long-running battle with the European Union, accusing Brussels of imposing decades of unnecessary regulation and arguing that Britain must resist any attempt to recreate the political and economic ties that existed before Brexit.
The Reform UK leader has repeatedly made opposition to closer European integration a central part of his political identity. More than a decade after he became one of the most recognisable campaigners for Britain leaving the EU, Farage continues to argue that Brexit was intended to give the United Kingdom greater control over its laws, borders and economic policy.
His latest criticism comes as the relationship between Britain and the European Union remains politically sensitive.
Farage’s description of “50 years of endless red tape” is a political characterisation rather than an objective measurement of all European regulation. Britain joined the European Economic Community in 1973 and later became part of the European Union. During that period, UK businesses operated within a common regulatory and customs framework shared with other member states.
Supporters of European integration have argued that common rules reduce barriers to trade and allow companies to operate across national borders more easily. Farage and other Eurosceptics have taken the opposite view, arguing that many of those rules restricted Britain’s ability to set its own policies.
The argument has never disappeared.
Indeed, Farage’s opposition to the European project dates back decades. During the Brexit campaign, he repeatedly presented the referendum as a choice between continued integration with Brussels and greater national sovereignty.
The 2016 referendum resulted in 51.9 per cent voting to leave the European Union and 48.1 per cent voting to remain. The UK subsequently left the EU in January 2020, with the transition period ending at the end of that year.
Farage has continued to regard that decision as one of the defining achievements of his political career.
But the post-Brexit relationship has also demonstrated that leaving the EU does not eliminate regulation or bureaucracy.
Britain remains geographically close to the EU and the bloc remains a major trading partner. Businesses exporting goods between Britain and the continent must comply with customs and regulatory requirements that did not apply in the same way when the UK was inside the single market and customs union.
That has created an important complication for politicians who argue that Brexit should reduce bureaucracy.
The United Kingdom has gained the ability to establish its own regulatory framework in areas previously governed by EU rules. At the same time, British companies trading with Europe often need to comply with EU requirements if they want access to the single market.
The result is that Brexit has changed the source and structure of many rules rather than eliminating regulation altogether.
Farage’s supporters argue that this is precisely why Britain should go further in using its independence.
They believe the UK should simplify domestic regulation, pursue trade agreements around the world and avoid automatically following European rules. Critics respond that divergence can create additional costs for businesses that operate on both sides of the Channel.
The issue is particularly relevant to small and medium-sized businesses.
A company selling products exclusively inside Britain may benefit from simpler domestic rules if the government reduces regulatory requirements. But a manufacturer exporting to France, Germany or Spain must still satisfy the requirements of the EU market.
This tension is at the heart of Britain’s post-Brexit debate.
The EU itself is continuing to reform its customs system. In September 2026, the Council of the European Union approved a major overhaul of the EU customs framework. The reforms include a new EU customs authority, a central customs data hub and changes designed to simplify procedures for the most compliant traders.
The EU says the new framework is intended to make customs more modern and efficient while strengthening controls over unsafe or non-compliant goods.
The Council also notes that the EU customs union has operated for more than 50 years and currently manages trade worth more than €4.3 trillion. Around 84,000 customs officials work across 2,200 customs offices, according to the EU institution.
For Farage, however, the existence of such a large regulatory system is evidence of precisely the problem he has opposed throughout his political career.
His argument is based on the principle that Britain should be able to make its own decisions without having to follow rules established by an external political institution.
That principle remains popular among Brexit supporters, but the economic consequences of regulatory divergence are more complicated.
The EU is Britain’s largest trading bloc, and British businesses therefore have a practical interest in maintaining workable arrangements with European customers and suppliers. Recent data cited by the Washington Post showed that EU countries accounted for around 41 per cent of British exports and roughly half of UK imports.
That means the debate is not simply about whether regulation is good or bad.
It is also about which rules should apply, who should make them and how much economic friction Britain is prepared to accept in exchange for greater regulatory independence.
Farage’s political answer has generally been clear: sovereignty should take priority.
At Reform UK’s 2026 conference, he continued to present his party as a political force committed to changing the direction established by successive governments. The conference included proposals on immigration, taxation, public services and energy, with Reform presenting itself as a party prepared to make substantial changes during its first 100 days in government.
The EU question fits naturally into that broader message.
Farage has argued that Britain should use the freedoms created by Brexit rather than seeking closer alignment with Brussels. That could mean reducing regulations, changing domestic policies and pursuing agreements with countries outside Europe.
But there is another side to the argument.
Businesses generally value predictable rules. If British and European standards diverge significantly, companies may have to maintain separate processes for domestic and export markets. Supporters of closer cooperation therefore argue that alignment can sometimes reduce costs even when it limits Britain’s freedom to establish completely different rules.
This is why the phrase “red tape” can mean different things to different people.
To a politician such as Farage, a regulation imposed by an institution outside Westminster may represent an unnecessary restriction on British sovereignty.
To a business operating across borders, the same regulation may provide a common standard that allows products to be sold across multiple countries without having to satisfy entirely different national requirements.
The political argument is therefore unlikely to disappear.
Farage has spent much of his career turning this distinction into a central political question: should Britain prioritise maximum national autonomy, or should it accept some shared rules in exchange for easier economic cooperation?
Brexit answered that question politically in 2016, but it did not end the debate.
Instead, it transformed it.
Britain now has greater freedom to make its own rules while remaining economically connected to a neighbouring bloc that has its own extensive regulatory system. Every new disagreement over standards, customs, trade or immigration can therefore reopen the wider argument about what Brexit was supposed to achieve.
For Reform UK, that creates a powerful political theme.
Farage can point to examples of bureaucracy and argue that Britain has not gone far enough in using its post-Brexit freedoms. Labour and other parties can respond by highlighting the practical importance of trade and cooperation with Europe’s largest market.
Neither side can simply wish away the underlying economic relationship.
The Channel remains the same. British companies continue to sell goods to European customers, and European businesses continue to trade with Britain. Regulation therefore remains an unavoidable part of the relationship.
Farage’s latest outburst is consequently part of a much larger political argument.
His language reflects his longstanding belief that Britain’s relationship with Europe involved excessive regulation and insufficient democratic accountability. Supporters see that as a continuation of the Brexit cause; critics argue that the description overlooks the economic benefits of common European standards and the practical complications created by divergence.
The central question for Britain is now less whether Brexit happened—it did—and more how the country chooses to use the regulatory independence that followed.
Farage clearly wants that independence used aggressively.
Whether voters and businesses ultimately support that approach remains a matter for democratic debate. What is certain is that the argument over European regulation, British sovereignty and the practical costs of Brexit will continue to occupy a significant place in Britain’s political conversation.
And for Farage, the battle over Brussels is far from finished.