A FORMAL currency sharing deal between an independent Scotland and the rest of the UK would be "unlikely," one of the world's biggest banks has warned.
A detailed assessment by Citigroup issued yesterday said it was "astonishing" the Scottish Government had not outlined an alternative currency plan after UK ministers ruled out proposals to create a monetary union.
Analysts said an independent Scotland's prospects were unclear - largely as a result of uncertainty over the currency - but warned of higher borrowing costs.
The comments came as Chief Secretary to the Treasury Danny Alexander said the UK Govern-ment's opposition to the currency was "final".
In a separate blow to the Yes campaign, Dundee investment house Alliance Trust became the latest business to warn shareholders over the possible consequences of independence.
The 125-year-old firm said it was registering new companies in England as a precaution.
In response, the Scottish Government again insisted its "sensible proposals" for a currency union would be accepted in the event of a Yes vote as First Minister Alex Salmond chaired a meeting of his Council of Econo-mic Advisers, including business-man Jim McColl, at Bute House in Edinburgh.
In its analysis, Citi Research, an arm of the global bank, said: "We regard a sterling monetary union as unlikely but we are genuinely unsure what currency and monetary policy would be adopted by an independent Scotland.
"In our view it is astonishing the Scottish Government, in seek-ing independence, has reached this stage: seeking a currency union without agreement with the rest of the UK and without a clear alternative plan."
The report highlighted Scot-land's high fiscal deficit, falling oil revenues, the size of the banking sector compared with the rest of the economy and uncertainty over the currency as "concerns".
It warned of higher borrowing costs if an independent Scotland used the pound without agree-ment and back-up from the Bank of England.
However analysts said they did not regard threats from the Scottish Government to refuse to take a share of the UK's national debt, if a currency union was blocked, as "wholly a bluff".
They said the move - again raised by Finance Secretary John Swinney yesterday - would push up the cost of borrowing but should be taken seriously because of the scale of Scotland's debts.
Uncertainty over the currency was among a list of concerns raised by Alliance Trust. The company, which reported to shareholders yesterday, also cited regulation and tax on savings and pensions as possible risks.
In a statement chief executive Katherine Garrett-Cox said registering new companies in England would give the business "flexibility".
She said: "The referendum in September is creating uncertainty for our customers and our business, which we have a responsibility to address."
A number of firms, including generator giant Aggreko, Lloyds Banking Group, Barclays, Standard Life and Royal Bank of Scotland, have also listed indep-endence in risk management sections of annual reports in recent days.
Secretary of State for Scotland Alistair Carmichael said: "It's clear independence would be a big problem for Scotland rather than the solution."
Mr Swinney said: "The issues raised by Alliance Trust are entirely addressed by the propositions put forward by the Scottish Government, and show exactly why our proposals for a formal currency area are the right proposals, why they are in the best interests of business on both sides of the border and why that is what will be implemented by both governments."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article