Based on my research, here's what I found:
Reasoning:
- Under EU law, all member states except Denmark are legally committed to adopt the euro once they meet convergence criteria; the UK's pre-Brexit opt-out (Protocol 15) was tied to its membership and would not automatically carry over on rejoining.
- The Institute for Government states flatly that "joining the Euro and Schengen area are requirements for new member states," and that as a new member the UK would have "no such privileges" — it could only attempt to negotiate fresh opt-outs, which would require unanimous member-state approval.
- Legal analysis notes a returning UK "should not be described as having to adopt the euro immediately upon accession," but absent a newly negotiated exemption, the ordinary framework (commitment to eventual euro adoption) would govern it.
- However, there is genuine expert disagreement on whether the UK could escape this: former chief EU negotiator Michel Barnier says it is "perfectly possible" for the UK to rejoin while keeping out of the euro, while others argue the EU would likely insist on euro membership.
- Crucially, even for obligated states there is no timetable and no enforcement mechanism — Sweden has avoided the euro for decades despite having no opt-out. So the obligation is to commit in principle to eventual adoption, not to adopt it on any fixed schedule.
Conclusion: The claim captures a real legal default — rejoining would, absent a newly negotiated opt-out, oblige the UK to accept the euro-adoption commitment that applies to all member states except Denmark. But the word "require" overstates it: adoption is eventual and unenforced, and a fresh opt-out is possible though not guaranteed. The claim is substantially accurate but with important qualifications.
Overall validity: 70%