≡ Menu

Could Scottish independence upend your investments?

Should we give a toss about Scottish independence from an investing standpoint?

What would Scottish Independence mean for your investments?

It’s not something I’ve heard much discussed, even as the political accent has turned decidedly Scots recently.

Other consequences of Scotland doing a bunk – such as perpetual Conservative rule over the remains of Blighty, or what the Scottish would do with the US nuclear deterrent – get a lot of airtime.

But there could be far-reaching effects for UK investors that stretch beyond what to call RBS or Scottish Widows south of the border afterwards.

Your investments in Scotland

RBS (aka Royal Bank of Scotland), Scottish Widows, and HBOS (Halifax Bank of Scotland) are just a few of the big names associated with the large Scottish financial sector.

Scots hoarding their money may be a myth, but it’s been happily taken to heart by generations of fund managers and bankers.

No offence to any Welsh readers, but the departure of the Principality Building Society and the car insurer Admiral from the ranks of UK PLC wouldn’t be anything like as wrenching as a change of domicile for Scotland’s financial sector.

According to the Fundwatch website, some 14% of total assets under management – about £550 billion – are managed in Scotland. What’s more:

There are also six FTSE 100-listed companies headquartered in Scotland (Aggreko, Cairn Energy, Royal Bank of Scotland, SSE, Standard Life and Weir Group) and a further 15 in the FTSE 250 (Aberdeen Asset Management, Aberforth Smaller Companies Trust, Alliance Trust, AG Barr, British Assets Trust, Devro, Edinburgh Dragon Trust, Firstgroup, Monks Investment Trust, Personal Assets Trust, Scottish Investment Trust, Scottish Mortgage Investment Trust, Stagecoach, Templeton Emerging Markets Investment Trust and Wood Group).

According to the London Stock Exchange, there are 116 companies listed on the main exchange and the Alternative Investment Market in total (including a number of investment trusts and investment companies) that call Scotland home.

This does not include other companies with significant business in Scotland or those owned by other companies, such as HBoS.

I’m personally in Caledonia Investments, which is the family vehicle of a colourful bunch of Scots and also in the FTSE 250, but which seemingly doesn’t count (perhaps they all live in Mayfair?) There’s also the Edinburgh Investment Trust, which presumably escapes inclusion on the grounds it’s run by a sassenach, Neil Woodford.

Let’s leave aside whether it’s likely that Scotland will overturn the Act of Union with the aplomb of a distant relative down from Kilmarnock for a Home Counties wedding who upends a table after one too many whiskeys/snotty jibes.

What are the issues for investors that could arise from Scottish independence, for investors on either side of the border?

Stock market listings

The good news is I don’t see any immediate problem in owning Scotland-based companies now on the London market. Scotland might want to resurrect the Glasgow Stock Exchange someday, but at first Scottish companies would surely continue to trade alongside the many Chinese, Russian, and Kazakstanian companies listed in London. So neither Scottish or ongoing British (let’s call them British from here) would be left with hard-to-shift holdings.

Currency

The prevailing view is Scotland would stick with Sterling in the short-term, although before the Euro became as popular as a Greek at a plate factory, many Scottish Nationalists sang its praises. Whether the two countries using the pound would work is arguable, but there’s a grander experiment going on over the Channel. In the long-term, if Scotland was to adopt the Euro, Scottish-based investment trusts and OEICs might offer a choice of currency-denominated shares, as some other multinationals already do with say dollars and pounds.

Taxes on dividend income

If Scotland won the right to tax and spend on its own account after so many years, I don’t see why foreign investors in Scottish companies would be let off the hook. Presumably, withholding tax would become liable for UK owners of Scottish investments, and vice-verse. Hopefully, our shared history would encourage brokers and other platforms to make managing the tax far more straightforward, or even automatic.

Regulation

Scotland won’t be able to properly police its financial services from day one. Though the UK hardly does a perfect job either, I’d guess Scotland would ‘rent’ the services of the FSA and others, for a few years at the least. It would be important to keep an eye on where and how your investments (including cash accounts) were being regulated, who would stand behind compensation claims, and so forth.

North Sea Oil

Ah, the black gold that will have Peak Oilers decamping to Aberdeen at the first sign of Scotland becoming a commodity economy! How exactly the oil reserves would be divvied up would be crucial. If Scotland got a per-capita allocation to rights to the oil, then with less than 10% of the UK population it would hardly be a bonanza. However, if the SNP and others got their way, it could receive over 90% of the reserves according to geography, which Reuters estimates is worth about £13 billion a year. Useful, given some argue Scotland is receiving a £16 billion or so subsidy from the rest of the UK today.

UK debt

Despite wanting most of the oil, the SNP only wants its population’s share of the UK’s enormous national debt. And who can blame it? We’d be getting into the realms of politics here, but needless to say neither country – or its investors – is going to get a treasure-filled settlement as a result of the divorce.

The UK state-backed banks

Another thing the SNP apparently doesn’t want a share of is the UK State-backed banks RBS and Lloyds, or the £66 billion bill for investing in them. It says the banking crash is London’s problem. Former chancellor Alistair Darling disagrees, saying that the RBS and HBOS fiasco was made in Edinburgh, and that they only survived because the whole country supported them. The Scottish economy is only worth £140 billion, so it would be even less able to shoulder the £1.5 trillion or so in assumed liabilities of the banks than the UK.

As a Londoner, I’d personally be happy with Scotland leaving these debts and assets to us. I think British taxpayers will eventually make a profit on our by-then foreign owned banks.

The UK gilt market

Another elephant in the room. Dividing up the UK gilt issuance by population on a roughly 8:92 basis between Scotland and the ongoing UK would be nightmare, and would trigger a credit event in bond market terms. It’s more likely the new governments would create some kind of debt facility that the Scots would have to pay-off in lieu of their share of gilts.

Scotland’s credit rating

According to the specialists at M&G’s Bond Vigilantes blog, Scotland would be unlikely to get a AAA-rating for its debt, mainly on account of its spindly GDP growth. The UK might still warrant a AAA rating on fundamentals, but the turmoil merely hinted at above of splitting Scotland from the UK could see our debt downgraded anyway on sentiment grounds.

A re-rating for England and Wales?

Still, I wonder if the remaining UK would actually enjoy an upgrade in the wake of Scottish independence? The markets might react favourably to perma-Tory government (even if many citizens wouldn’t) as well as the loss of the drag from the heavily public sector-weighted Scottish economy and its liabilities.

The loss of the UK’s oil reserves wouldn’t be the disaster they’d have been 20 years ago, and I’m not some oil groupie anyway. Give me the more vibrant and creative South East over a bunch of black gloop that’s boiling the planet.

These are just some of the issues for investors that might emerge from Scottish independence – please do share your own thoughts in the comments below!

{ 8 comments }
Weekend reading

Some good reading from around the Web.

After this week’s post on historical house prices, reader Guy asked if it was sensible to use a Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT) to save for a deposit on a first home.

The big problem with this strategy in the UK is there are no residential REITs!

Some companies have made noises about launching them here, but currently all our REITs invest in commercial property – and the prices of offices and warehouses don’t move in tandem with suburban semis and Rose Cottages.

There are residential REITS in the US, however, and coincidentally Mike at Oblivious Investor looked at this same question from a US perspective this week.

Mike concluded that it’s better to save for your house in cash, warning:

A REIT fund will likely earn you greater returns than a savings account would. But when I say “likely” here, all I mean is “greater than 50% probability.” It’s not at all something you can count on. And it makes the worst-case scenario significantly worse (home prices increasing while the value of your savings is decreasing — something that can’t happen with a savings account).

[continue reading…]

{ 15 comments }

The Slow and Steady passive portfolio update: Q4 2011

The portfolio is down 1.7% on the year.

Last quarter I had the unfortunate duty of reporting the Slow and Steady portfolio’s first plunge into the red.

We were down 9.32%, as the sovereign debt crisis waded into our holdings like Godzilla chewing up Tokyo.

Since then I’ve filled an entire notepad with the near endless dirge of economic misery reported by the media:

  • The Bank of England announced QE2.
  • Global growth forecasts have been cut.
  • Many analysts think we’re already in recession.
  • The break up of the Eurozone is widely predicted.
  • The ECB is providing €500bn in life support to the European banks that no-one else will lend to.

And where does all this doom and gloom leave our passive portfolio? Down 1.70% on the year, but up 6.83% on last quarter.

Significantly, our benchmark – the FTSE All-Share index – is down 5.51% on the year, so we’ve at least beaten that, thanks to our diversification into gilts.

The Q4 results for the Slow and Steady portfolio

Reminder: The Slow and Steady portfolio is Monevator’s model passive investing portfolio. It was set up at the start of 2011 with £3,000. An extra £750 is invested every quarter into a diversified set of index funds, heavily tilted towards equities.

You can read the original story and catch up on all the previous passive portfolio posts here.

What 2011 has done to our portfolio

  • The US fund is the single equity bright spot over the year, gaining 3.11% as US economic indicators continue to defy the general expectation that we’re all going to hell in a shopping trolley. Happily, at 27.5% the portfolio allocates more to the US than any other fund.
  • Of course, Europe has been a basket case and we’ve lost 12.47% on that fund over the year. And it doesn’t look like things are going to improve any time soon.
  • Plainly the UK is in pretty poor shape too and our FTSE All-Share fund has lost 3.17% in 2011. The All-Share is dominated by multi-nationals, however, and their ability to scour the globe for opportunities has mitigated the impact of bad news on the home front.
  • Japan is still struggling to come to terms with the aftermath of the tsunami, not to mention the strong yen, so unsurprisingly we’re down 10.39% there.
  • Similarly the Pacific ex Japan fund has lost 10.36% as their major trading partners struggle in the economic headwinds.
  • The portfolio’s biggest percentage loss was the 14.64% vaporised from the Emerging Markets fund. Chinese equities fell as the government tightened lending while India’s markets and currency also plunged.
  • Our main bulwark against the negativity has been the UK gilt fund. It’s continued to appreciate throughout the year, gaining 14.65%. The movement of our gilt fund against the grain of our equity holdings has been a textbook illustration of the value of non-correlated assets. And a textbook dumbfounding of the forecasts that the only way for bonds was down.

So despite the abrupt end of the bull market and a year where I continually expected to find the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse drinking in my local, we’ve ended up £89.65 down on our 2011 contribution of £5,250.

I think I can handle that, but if you can’t then increase the percentage allocated to bonds in your portfolio.

New purchases

Every quarter we add another £750 to the portfolio.

This time we’re also going to up our bond allocation by 2% to 22%, as we’re a year older.

The portfolio initially had a 20-year time horizon (now 19) and the slow shift from volatile to non-volatile assets acknowledges the fact that we’ve got less time to bounce back from major stock market declines as we edge towards retirement.

To keep things simple we’ll just knock 1% off each of our two biggest holdings: UK equity and US equity.

UK equity

HSBC FTSE All Share Index – TER 0.27%
Fund identifier: GB0000438233

New purchase: £77.50
Buy 23.5279 units @ 329.4p

Target allocation: 19%

Developed World ex UK equities

Split between four funds covering North America, Europe, the developed Pacific and Japan.

Target allocation (across the following four funds): 49%

North American equities

HSBC American Index – TER 0.28%
Fund identifier: GB0000470418

New purchase: £80.96
Buy 42.1253 units @ 192.2p

Target allocation: 26.5%

(Note: TER up from 0.25% to 0.28%)

European equities excluding UK

HSBC European Index – TER 0.31%
Fund identifier: GB0000469071

New purchase: £116.19
Buy 28.4989 units @ 407.7

Target allocation: 12.5%

Japanese equities

HSBC Japan Index – TER 0.29%
Fund identifier: GB0000150374

New purchase: £63.36
Buy 109.178 units @ 58.03p

Target allocation: 5%

Pacific equities excluding Japan

HSBC Pacific Index – TER 0.37%
Fund identifier: GB0000150713

New purchase: £40.44
Buy 19.182 units @ 210.8p

Target allocation: 5%

Emerging market equities

Legal & General Global Emerging Markets Index Fund – TER 0.99%
Fund identifier: GB00B4MBFN60

New purchase: £88.38
Buy 206.3554 units @ 42.83p

Target allocation: 10%

(Note: TER up from 0.98% to 0.99%).

UK Gilts

L&G All Stocks Gilt Index Trust: TER 0.25%
Fund identifier: GB0002051406

New purchase: £283.17
Buy 156.0167 units @ 181.5p

Target allocation: 22%

Total cost = £750

Total cash = 5p

Trading cost = £0

A reminder on rebalancing: This portfolio is rebalanced to target allocations every quarter, mostly using new contributions. It’s no problem to do as our vanilla index funds don’t incur trading costs.

Take it steady,

The Accumulator

{ 28 comments }
Weekend reading

Before I started focusing all the time I spent faffing on the Internet into one blog, I posted a lot on various money forums.

One phrase I used a fair bit was ‘your future self’. To be honest, I think I assumed I’d invented it.

Not in a self-aggrandising way, you understand. More like you presumably know what you had for breakfast.

However, it’s become clear in recent years that either:

A) I’m overdue a Noble prize in economics for coining the concept of ‘the future self’, which has gone on to be used everywhere

Or,

B) The term ‘future self’ was in action well before I pinched it.

I’m an autodidact dilettante when it comes to economics (and pretentious vocabulary) so perhaps you know full well that the concept of the future self was coined by, say, Carl Jung in the 1930s, when he was too lazy to diet, and wanted a conceptual get-out clause. (Or perhaps he was just looking forward to spanking Keira Knightley).

Whatever my accidental hubris, a reader kindly thought of me – perhaps remembering my post on borrowing from your future self – when he saw this TED lecture by Daniel Goldstein on the battle between your present and future self:

Goldstein’s insights seem appropriate as we make our New Year’s resolutions.

[continue reading…]

{ 10 comments }