Scandinavia is facing renewed pressure to rethink its currency strategies. Sweden, Denmark, and Norway have long used their own versions of the krona, but recent global shifts are bringing the euro back onto the political agenda.
Could adopting the euro help stabilize their economies and reinforce their influence within the EU? Or would it mean surrendering crucial monetary control?
Why Scandinavian countries are discussing about changing their currencies
With Donald Trump back as USA President and a new wave of protectionist measures—such as significant tariffs imposed on European products—the debate over currency policy in Scandinavia has reignited with renewed urgency.
This evolving global context, marked by economic volatility, intensified geopolitical rivalries, and growing concerns over trade disruptions, has led policymakers and economists in Sweden, Denmark, and Norway to reconsider their long-held positions on national currencies. There is now a growing sense that deeper integration with the European Union, particularly through the adoption of the euro, could offer a path to greater economic stability, predictability, and political influence within the EU framework.
Adopting the euro in Scandinavia could also strengthen the region’s position in the global economy, simplify cross-border trade, and reduce foreign exchange costs—factors that are increasingly important for economic resilience and competitiveness.
Sweden may adopt the Euro soon?
In Sweden, the conversation about switching to the euro is gaining momentum, driven by both external pressures and internal evaluations of economic performance. Peter Magnus Nilsson, a former advisor to Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson and now director of the liberal think tank Timbro, has made headlines by stating that Sweden could adopt the euro before the end of 2025. Nilsson warns that Trump’s administration may seek to manipulate global currency values, using threats of tariffs and reduced security guarantees to pressure countries like Sweden into supporting a weaker dollar.
“If Sweden is left alone with the Swedish krona, we could face serious economic consequences,” Nilsson said in a recent interview.
He believes that a transition to the euro would protect Sweden from such external pressures while giving the country a stronger voice within the EU.
Legally, Sweden is already committed to adopting the euro under the Maastricht Treaty, even if no binding timetable has been set. According to Jan Ludvig Andreassen, chief economist at Eika Gruppen, the benefits of remaining outside the eurozone are increasingly unclear.
“The krona has become more of a liability than an asset,” he remarked.
In his view, key national stakeholders—including trade unions, financial institutions, and export-oriented businesses—will soon advocate for euro adoption, driven by the desire for currency stability, economic integration, and reduced transaction costs.
Denmark may remove its Euro opt-out?
Denmark’s relationship with the euro is unique. The country is not part of the eurozone due to special opt-outs secured in the 1990s, known as the “EU-forbehold.” Nevertheless, Denmark has maintained a fixed exchange rate policy, pegging the dansk krone tightly to the euro since 1999. This strategy has given Denmark many of the euro’s economic advantages without full participation in the European Monetary Union.
However, this halfway position is now being reexamined. At the Moderates’ (Moderaterne) recent annual meeting in Copenhagen, Foreign Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen called for the removal of all remaining EU opt-outs. He argued that, in a world where USA commitments to Europe’s security can no longer be taken for granted, full integration into EU structures—including adopting the euro—is essential.
“Our geopolitical environment is more unstable than it has been in decades. If we want to shape the future of Europe, we need to sit at the table, not stand outside the room,” Rasmussen said.
Denmark’s currency already functions as a de facto euro, so a formal switch would be largely symbolic economically—but politically transformative. It would signal Denmark’s full commitment to the EU project and allow Copenhagen to participate in eurozone decision-making. For Denmark, adopting the euro would also simplify fiscal policy alignment and improve its economic standing within the European single market.
Norway: caught between EU membership and Euro
Norway presents a distinct case. Not a member of the EU, Norway maintains access to the internal market through the European Economic Area (EEA). This arrangement allows for free movement of goods, services, capital, and people—but excludes participation in EU monetary policy. For Norway to adopt the euro officially, it would first need to join the EU, a prospect that has historically met with public resistance.
Still, changing times may alter this calculus. Jan Ludvig Andreassen argues that Norway would benefit significantly from adopting the euro, whether through full membership or a transitional arrangement. He estimates that the country spends approximately NOK 5 billion (about €430 million) annually on currency exchange fees and food import protections—funds he believes could be redirected to support domestic agriculture and other priorities.
“The business sector would benefit from predictable exchange rates, and consumers would likely see more stable prices,” Andreassen said.
He advocates for an initial step of pegging the norsk krone (Norwegian krone) to the euro, similar to Denmark’s model, while leaving the door open for full euro adoption if political conditions allow.
The potential domino effect—where a Swedish move triggers debates in Denmark and Norway—is central to Andreassen’s thesis. “If Sweden leads, others will follow,” he predicts. “And eventually, Norway will face a moment of reckoning.” This reflects a broader trend in Scandinavian monetary policy, where eurozone accession is increasingly seen as a strategic necessity.
Critics: monetary independence versus European influence
Opponents of euro adoption emphasize the importance of monetary sovereignty. In Norway, former finance minister Trygve Slagsvold Vedum (Sp) argues that the floating krone helps cushion the economy against global shocks. Central bank governor Ida Wolden Bache supports this view, noting that Norway’s monetary flexibility aids in targeting inflation and employment.
In Denmark, in 2024 Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen has previuosly pointed to the 2000 referendum result rejecting the euro as a stance to be respected, but maybe now she has changed her mind. However critics worry that joining the euro would transfer too much power to the European Central Bank. While Denmark’s krone is pegged to the euro, resistance to full adoption remains politically significant.
Swedish critics also highlight the loss of flexibility euro adoption could bring. Some economists argue that retaining the krona allows for policies better suited to national conditions, while others fear exposure to instability in weaker eurozone economies.
Still, euro proponents across the region contend that in today’s globalized economy, monetary independence is mostly symbolic. They argue the euro would offer greater stability, lower transaction costs, and stronger influence in EU economic policy-making.
Scandinavia at a crossroads?
Many experts now believe that Scandinavian currencies—while once symbols of economic resilience—are becoming liabilities in an increasingly integrated and uncertain global landscape. “This is a pivotal time for Europe,” Andreassen stated. “Sweden recognizes the need to participate directly in setting the rules of the game. Others will not want to be left behind.”
If Sweden follows through on its plan to adopt the euro in 2025, it could create political momentum in Denmark to end its opt-out, and potentially push Norway toward a more serious debate about EU membership. What was once considered a distant or theoretical discussion is now rapidly becoming a real and urgent policy question.
The era of Scandinavian exceptionalism in currency policy may be nearing its end. As global dynamics evolve, the region must decide whether to maintain monetary independence or embrace the benefits—and obligations—of deeper European integration. The decision to join the eurozone could redefine the economic future of Scandinavia, shaping its role in both regional cooperation and the global economy.
