Scottish independence

Borrowedtune

IronWolf wrote: »

Either the government would be dissolved as the majority was lost and a new one formed from the remaining MPs, or (more likely imo) they'd call another general election.

Sorry, I should have elaborated further. My question was more about the negotiation/transition process. If the Scots vote yes and a Labour Govt takes over from May 2015 that is dependent for its majority on Scottish MPs, are they in a position to negotiate satisfactorily on behalf of the rUK ?


I think the negotiation/transition has to be finished by May 2015 so we know where we we'll stand and so that Scottish MPs have no conflict of interest.

DavidF

colsten wrote: »

Simple enough for me. Any of my money will only be with any institutions that are / remain authorised and regulated by the UK PRA/FCA. It might be a bit of an inconvenience to have to move the money but move it I will if the circumstances of the financial institutions I have money with will change. I am pretty sure that other people will do exactly the same.

There is just no way I would ever have a penny of my money in a foreign country - not after the Iceland debacle.

Perhaps you shouldn't be accusing other people of not having much of a clue as you seem to be falling into that category yourself. Santander UK plc is authorised by the UK PRA and regulated by the UK FCA and the UK PRA. Part of their UK licence is that they cannot remove capital out of the UK without the prior agreement of the FCA. Santander UK plc also are part of the UK FSCS, meaning customer funds are guaranteed up to £85K. Therefore it is irrelevant for the normal customer that they are part of Banco Santander.

it is not at present, due to them being authorised and regulated by the UK PRA/FCA. Post independence, they would need to set up UKsubsidiaries and seek UK PRA/FCA approval. They would only receive this if they agree, like Santander, to have minimum amounts of funds domiciled in the UK, not to remove funds from the UK, and to be part of the UK FSCS scheme.

even if that were the case, Martin Lewis will probably remember to the end of his days the flack he got after listing ICESAVE ISAs as a best buy. Since that experience, he has been warning people of the perils of having money outside the UK FSCS. More than that, customers will remember the Icelandic debacle, the Euro crisis, and the Cyprus debacle, and will have very little to no appetite to hand over their funds to institutions that are outside the jurisdiction they live in.

If Scotland wants to keep the savings and investments of UK people, there's an easy answer to it: vote no. If you vote yes, substantial amounts of money will move South, perhaps even with a whole host of jobs. But you probably won't notice this as you are such a prosperous nation.

So from that lot we have deduced that a financial company that is Scottish based would need to set up a mailing address in R-UK and appear electronically at least to have £Xxxx in the UK. Lets also not pretend that the UK FSCS PRA FCA are doing a "good" job.
Still no mention of how the UK is going to service that debt or plug the pension black hole ? Maybe the best bet is move all of it out of UK/Scotland to somewhere more prosperous ?

CLAPTON

Ownership of a financial institution is only part of the issue : regulation and financial guarantee is the major concern.


The UK deposits in Santander are guaranteed by the UK system and not by the Spanish ... basically the UK government will pay out in the event of default.

I would not wish my pension fund to be regulated other than in the England ; however I do not know enough about pension guarantees to know whether a pension north of the boarder would be safe : on the precautionary principle I would move my pension pot to England


Stocks and shares : well make one choices as always based on whether the company will do well. If one thinks that tax etc will rise in Scotland then maybe hold fewer shares in Scottish companies

colsten

DavidF wrote: »

So from that lot we have deduced that a financial company that is Scottish based would need to set up a mailing address in R-UK and appear electronically at least to have £Xxxx in the UK.

You should read up about PRA, FCA and FSCS. I can assure you there is more than a mailing address and an "electronic appearance" of money involved in obtaining, and keeping, a UK banking licence.

DavidF wrote: »

Lets also not pretend that the UK FSCS PRA FCA are doing a "good" job.

As you have demonstrated that you don't know much about the FCA/PRA/FSCS, you are probably not qualified to comment on how good or otherwise a job they do. As an aside, it might interest you that Mr Salmond recently said that FCA/PRA and FSCS would be replicated on a 1:1 basis in an independent Scotland.

Chadsman

DavidF wrote: »

So from that lot we have deduced that a financial company that is Scottish based would need to set up a mailing address in R-UK and appear electronically at least to have £Xxxx in the UK. Lets also not pretend that the UK FSCS PRA FCA are doing a "good" job.
Still no mention of how the UK is going to service that debt or plug the pension black hole ? Maybe the best bet is move all of it out of UK/Scotland to somewhere more prosperous ?

Where a company is registered will affect where it pays a larger slice of its corporation and other taxes- it is not a triviality.
If Scotland were to vote 'yes' it would not be a matter for it how rUK were to service its debt.
...but for starters moving all UK government jobs and the various private sector jobs whose companies relocate currently situated in Scotland to rUK would be a decent start.

CLAPTON

DavidF wrote: »

So from that lot we have deduced that a financial company that is Scottish based would need to set up a mailing address in R-UK and appear electronically at least to have £Xxxx in the UK. Lets also not pretend that the UK FSCS PRA FCA are doing a "good" job.
Still no mention of how the UK is going to service that debt or plug the pension black hole ? Maybe the best bet is move all of it out of UK/Scotland to somewhere more prosperous ?

the demographics (pension black hole) are worse for Scotland than for the RoUK

kangoora

DavidF wrote: »

So from that lot we have deduced that a financial company that is Scottish based would need to set up a mailing address in R-UK and appear electronically at least to have £Xxxx in the UK. Lets also not pretend that the UK FSCS PRA FCA are doing a "good" job.
Still no mention of how the UK is going to service that debt or plug the pension black hole ? Maybe the best bet is move all of it out of UK/Scotland to somewhere more prosperous ?

I am English, if Scotland vote yes for independence they will become, in effect, a foreign country. I want my pension savings and banking in an English/UK financial institution, regulated by UK regulators and backed by a UK government.

I do not want my money in a Scottish company, subject to Scottish law and backed up by whatever will be put in place by the Scottish government.

I'll be perfectly happy if every Scotsman wants to withdraw their equivalent monies from UK financial systems and place it within a Scottish institution so I'm struggling to understand why you seem determined to try and convince me otherwise.

I believe certain larger financial firms are already putting in place contingency plans to move their bases south of the border , certainly for things like pension funds where maybe 80% or more of their assets are from UK companies and people so maybe I won't have to bother moving anyway

Buzby

IronWolf wrote: »

When people say they are moving cash out of Scotland, may I ask how? Surely any bank you choose will have an address for you, and if you're in Scotland then they will just put you into a Scottish subsidiary if need be and do any forced currency conversion.

The only safe way I can see is to either withdraw saving in cash, or go into either bonds or equities (or gold). Or move to England.

Nothing to do with an 'address'. I have accounts denominated un US$ and €. My GBP will stay in Sterling, and if there is a proposed currency change, it will be up to its owner to decide what he wants it converted to.

IveSeenTheLight

kangoora wrote: »

I am English, if Scotland vote yes for independence they will become, in effect, a foreign country. I want my pension savings and banking in an English/UK financial institution, regulated by UK regulators and backed by a UK government.

I do not want my money in a Scottish company, subject to Scottish law and backed up by whatever will be put in place by the Scottish government.

I'll be perfectly happy if every Scotsman wants to withdraw their equivalent monies from UK financial systems and place it within a Scottish institution so I'm struggling to understand why you seem determined to try and convince me otherwise.

I believe certain larger financial firms are already putting in place contingency plans to move their bases south of the border , certainly for things like pension funds where maybe 80% or more of their assets are from UK companies and people so maybe I won't have to bother moving anyway

I think the pensions query has already been answered.

For one, There are many UK residents who live abroad and receive a UK pension

Maybe you would like to consider the following publication

Pensions in an Independent Scotland

Archi_Bald

kangoora wrote: »

I believe certain larger financial firms are already putting in place contingency plans to move their bases south of the border , certainly for things like pension funds where maybe 80% or more of their assets are from UK companies and people so maybe I won't have to bother moving anyway

It would make sense (? see next para) if financial institutions currently only domiciled in Scotland would create a full presence in rUK and moved all the accounts of rUK customers to that new rUK presence. As if they didn't, they would lose the vast majority of their customers (cybernats, don't even try to tell us we wouldn't move our money into our jurisdiction because we most definitely would. We are entitled to making our own decisions just the same way as you are). Similar would obviously also apply in the reverse for rUK companies with scottish customers, though there would be much fewer of these.

The only thing that would not make any sense is the cost (setup and ongoing) involved in having to do it. Setting up a company abroad (which rUK would be) would add absolutely zero to the competitiveness of the company. The customers would obviously somehow settle the bill, directly or indirectly, so might leave for a an institution that is rUK based already......The other party that would lose out is the Scottish tax payer, as the corporation tax would go to HMRC, not to the scottish taxman.

Talk about shooting yourself in the foot...............