Scottish Indpendence - Personal Finance Implications

grey_gym_sock

i don't think independence will happen, at least this time.

if it did, this is a fair question, but can't really answer it yet. there might be sufficiently reassuring answers that there wouldn't be much to worry about. and both governments would surely want there to be ...

a lot of big scottish financial institutions are now part of larger UK institutions, e.g. RBS (though it still has that name) now includes Natwest (which is the bigger part of it); bank of scotland is part of lloyds group; so is scottish widows ... so there would have to be a lot of cross-border co-operation with regulating some institutions.

Totton

If Scotland does go independent then I think they will be encouraging investment. There is a large Investment Trust base that will be careful to ensure that Mr Salmon doesn't pose a threat to jobs which could easily move to England if they had to.

I think investors based outside Scotland have little to fear.

missile

If the jocks vote for independence, there would be very little impact.
Almost every financial institution operates internationally as was demonstrated during the fincial crisis.

I'd expect Scottish companies wanting to operate in England to do something similar. Halifax could become Bank of Scotland (England and Wales) plc.

For example: Barclays trades in Spain as Barclays.es and RBS would continue to trade in England, Wales and let's not forget Northern Ireland.

pqrdef

Totton wrote: »

There is a large Investment Trust base that will be careful to ensure that Mr Salmon doesn't pose a threat to jobs which could easily move to England if they had to.

Oh they'll have to. They aren't going to make money on the Scottish Bourse, and trying to run their entire operation cross-border would expose them to unacceptable and unnecessary risks. They'll have already booked the Pickfords trucks for the move south. Or they'll just sell out to London companies.

pqrdef

missile wrote: »

Almost every financial institution operates internationally as was demonstrated during the fincial crisis.

I think the question is whether they would operate as English banks, or as foreign banks (like Icesave). For instance, who would be their central bank and lender of last resort.

It's also on the cards that a payment from a NatWest account to an RBS account could become an international payment even though it stays on the same computer. Then they'd have the excuse to charge for it.

missile wrote: »

and let's not forget Northern Ireland.

Oh please let's

srcandas

Interesting theorectical discussion but it ain't going to happen unless Mr Salmon sees sense. The vote needs to be held in England then he'd have a good chance :rotfl:

pqrdef

opinions4u wrote: »

The main issue would be currency change.

There's a bad precedent because the Irish kept the pound for a while before they punted it.

Of course the pound was still used all over the Empire then. And the forex markets were a different world entirely, what with gold standards and trade tariffs everywhere.

Thing is though, if the SNP were to win the referendum, it would be very hard for Cameron then to play hardball. If the Scots want it and the English make it impossible or disastrous, we'll never hear the last. So it'll be like the Israelites rushing out of Egypt, pausing only long enough to relieve the Egyptians of their gold and jewellery as the price of their willing departure.

Salmond will try to pin Cameron down on all the concessions he wants, before the referendum. Then Cameron has a choice of (a) cave in and promise Salmond he can have what he wants, or (b) be obnoxious, and the Scots will hate him and the Tories and the Sassenachs and vote for independence anyway.

srcandas

pqrdef wrote: »

Salmond will try to pin Cameron down on all the concessions he wants, before the referendum. Then Cameron has a choice of (a) cave in and promise Salmond he can have what he wants, or (b) be obnoxious, and the Scots will hate him and the Tories and the Sassenachs and vote for independence anyway.

Good point but it works both ways. Now the date is set Cameron can stall conceding anything.

But I think I am like many Englishman (the welsh different I think but they'll wait and see) will say that if the scots want independance then good luck to you, we wish you well. Personally I think the long term impact on the UK might be for the good but certainly negligible. We may even get rid of nuclear bombs and certainly stop paying for life on remote islands

The biggest issue for Salmon, apart from lack of support for total independance, is if the OP thinks this is a possible issue for savings then what dothe business world think? Already there are scottish based businesses saying they will move south if this looks likely. And any current investment decision makers might well consider it (the uncertainty if nothing else).

Salmon defends by offering tax cuts but can't see many businesses making decisions on meaningless optimism.

I reckon Salmon will be lucky to get 30%, and 10% of those will vote knowing it isn't going to happen but to indicate a need for greater autonomy.

Further even after a vote it will take years so 'back on topic' plenty of time to sort our investments :beer:

innovate

Presumably Salmon wouldn't want any London-based government to continue to have a majority share in RBS. Where's he going to find the few billion to buy out the UK government?

grey_gym_sock

the government stake in RBS is going to be sold off at some point. there would be no point in scotland trying to buy them out before that point, especially considering it would be very expensive.

since it includes Natest, RBS has bigger operations in england & wales than in scotland. so why would a South British government be prepared to allow a Scottish government to own a majority stake?

incidentally (several ppl have got this wrong), it's Salmond, not Salmon - unless you're trying to make a joke about winning the referendum being like trying to swim upstream.