CEPR - Center for Economic and Policy Research

Multimedia

En Español

Em Português

Other Languages

Home Publications Blogs Beat the Press Do Small Countries Really Spend 0.4 Percent of GDP Changing Currency?

Do Small Countries Really Spend 0.4 Percent of GDP Changing Currency?

Print
Monday, 02 June 2014 04:13

That's what the NYT told readers in an article reporting on the debate over Scottish independence. The article referred to a study by a Scottish engineering company, the Weir Group, that Scotland would incur $840 million in transactions costs if it were to adopt its own currency. This would be the equivalent of roughly $65 billion a year in the United States. Since many countries that have smaller economies than Scotland have their own currencies, it is difficult to believe they incur these sorts of costs. (Trading costs on most currencies are typically in the range of 0.01 percent.)

The article also said that Great Britain may not let Scotland keep the pound if it were to become independent. Actually Great Britain really doesn't have any choice in the matter. Any country can use any currency it wants as their official currency. Several countries (e.g. Ecuador and Panama) use the U.S. dollar as their currency. They did not ask the United States for permission to do so.

The better question is why an independent Scotland would want to keep the pound as its currency. Presumably one of the goals of independence would be to free Scotland from the grips of the austerity policies being pursued by the conservative government. This would not be possible if Scotland remained tied to the pound, just as the euro zone countries cannot break from the path of austerity as long as they stay in the euro zone.

The piece also includes the claim, based on two studies, that:

"Creating a border with Scotland’s largest trading partner — the rest of Britain — could also be costly. Researchers at the University of Edinburgh and the University of Stirling project that such a change could reduce Scottish output more than 5 percent."

This implies an enormous cost to international borders. The implication is that Canadians effectively pay a tax of roughly $2,000 per person per year because their country is not part of the United States. That doesn't seem plausible.

Comments (2)Add Comment
No reason to maintain the pound
written by Jonathan R, June 02, 2014 11:14
Dr. Baker, thank you for bringing this subject to our attention.

Same thing with Quebec and Canada; part of seeking sovereignty (the mot du jour of Quebec separatism) is the opportunity to have your own fiscal policy.
...
written by Bloix, June 02, 2014 2:33
Presumably Scots with savings and pensions are fearful that independence will mean devaluation. Which it would, presumably, if an independent Scotland rejected austerity and targeted higher inflation.

Write comment

(Only one link allowed per comment)

This content has been locked. You can no longer post any comments.

busy
 

CEPR.net
Support this blog, donate
Combined Federal Campaign #79613

About Beat the Press

Dean Baker is co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, D.C. He is the author of several books, his latest being The End of Loser Liberalism: Making Markets Progressive. Read more about Dean.

Archives