Do the Soviets retain their rights for reperations of most everything from East Germany, plus a full half of what they dig out of and smelt in the Ruhr? And I do wonder if Germany would do well in this world, as they wouldn't have as much investment. I also do doubt the Americans, British, and French all agreeing to this and they, along with the Soviets, would just see this as a neutral block of Germany, Austria, and Switzerland. Hmmm, if only there was a way to have the Germans stay in multiple states then make a neutrality union.
Well Switzerland and Austra are OTL completely neutral. The Stalin Note (whether intended or not) from memory (I'm away from home at the moment) offered a united Germany, potentially capitalist, as long as it's neutral. My assumption would be that the Soviets would asset strip anything they wanted before pulling the majority of forces back to Poland/Soviet Union, whilst possibly retaining some bases in what we would call East Germany for observation/insurance.
I see both sides seeing it as a better idea to have some neutral buffer space as the Cold War descends; I can't see either side wanting to be facing each other down directly across the border.
PS: Although the Swiss definitely rejected the EU in the 1990s, the EEA was a very tight run thing - with this EC being far less superstate-esque, and playing more of a "mediation" role with aligning national objectives, I think Swiss membership will be less controversial.
A very interesting read! I enjoyed it a lot. Lot's of intriguing changes of direction without getting too bogged down in details.
A couple of quick questions (maybe I missed the answers in the main text):
- What happened to Belgium? I seem to remember talk of a split, then it often seemed to disappear. Did it get absorbed into France and the Netherlands?
- Can you give some more details on the 'revolution' in Germany? Talk of the Reichstag as opposed to the Bundestag is intriguing, as is Soviet (and French!) acceptance of a reunited and rearmed (at least to a limited degree) Germany in the 1970s.
Thanks! Glad you enjoyed the waffle!

- Belgium. To be perfectly, honest, I had ideas of is splitting up, and Flanders joining Netherlands, and Wallonia joining France. After doing further research, I couldn't see it as being plausible, so I toyed with some thoughts of Flanders becoming an "overseas" territory of the Netherlands, and likewise Wallonia an "overseas" territory of France, so that both maintain a high level of autonomy. Then I pondered it having a "Czechoslovakian Split" (from this TL), in that basically everything is devolved and separate with the exceptions of defence, foreign affairs, EC affairs, and probably a few other things, which is probably the road I'd have gone down had I got up to around the 2000s as it seems more plausible then the previous ideas.
It seems to me that ITTL the British Pound will become the reserve currency of the EC.
Given the two largest economies at the inception of the EC were the UK and France, the Pound and the Franc would be the stronger currencies.
However, as the Franc underwent 100:1 reform in in 1960, the Pound would be seen as the more stable currency from the outset. The French may even try to fix the franc's value to the Pound to stabilise their new Franc post 1960.
In OTL the Irish Punt was fixed to the British Pound until 1979. Throw in that Dutch Guilder and Belgian Franc followed the Pounds devaluation soon after the second world war, it seems that the Pound would be the currency of choice for trade and business inside the EC early on. You may have de facto ERM based on the Pound.
Once Germany comes in it may seek to shadow the Pound (inverse of OTL early 1990's) but may fail due to its later economic resurgence post its escape from socialism post 1986. You could end up with a Pound zone in the "Original Six" of TTL and stand-alone currencies in DACH, Poland, Czechoslovakia.
If this all seems too supranational keep in mind most currencies were fixed under Bretton woods and even before many European currencies were fixed to their neighbours.
All fair and decent points - financials and economics to this level aren't a strong point of mine, so I'll defer to you. It doesn't seem particularly supranational; as you say the Irish £ was fixed to the UK £ in the 1970s.
In this case, London's status as financial heart is probably amplified as the EC's financial centre, but as long as other countries fix to the UK£ by their choice, I can't see that being any issue here bar any domestic considerations. I can see business plans and pan-EC businesses doing financials in UK£ as the de facto standard as you say - much as today my company's business plans are set in Euro€ despite the fact we are a UK arm, because we are part of an EU wide organisation.