Mainly because many businesses that aren’t named Sonic have signs indicating that they won’t accept a charge of less than [some trivial amount, usually $5] because fees I guess. So the hesitance to charge such a small amount is just kind of ingrained into me. I’m sure that Sonic has much bigger things to worry about.
It’s one thing if the business has a sign indicating their preference (of not accepting charges of less than five bucks) but if the business doesn’t indicate their preference? (Also merchant fees on debit card transactions are much less than on credit card transactions.)
Thank you. Now that I follow you I agree completely.
Between evil governments and evil businesses there are lots of ways for an e-payment system to be used to harm the citizens both selectively individually and broad-brush collectively. If we’d thought about that here in the USA 50 years ago we might have been able to build in some safeguards. Which might now be able to slow down the current criminal regime and the corporate data harvesters a little bit. But we didn’t and now it’s very much too late. At least until we get a new and much more ordinary citizen-centric government.
The Chinese people didn’t even have the opportunity to build in safeguards. They are screwed.
Your “taxes” would most likely come in the form of transaction fees. And then you have the problem everyone is worried about of all your transactions being monitored by the government.
Almost every morning for a year or more I charged a $1 gas station coffee to my AmEx card. (“Any size drink $1!” - surely a loss-leader.) Nobody seemed to care, least of all the sleepy guy behind the register.
So, here in the US, if I make a series of eyebrow-raising purchases – say, a pressure cooker, a bunch of nails, a whole lot of gunpowder, etc. – am I likely to trigger a visit from the FBI? Or would such information only be useful if I were already on their radar, such as by participating in terrorist chats that they monitor?
Depends. Who did you vote for?
One man’s party’s terrorist is another man’s party’s Freedom Fighter & Patriot Extraordinaire.
Not the Regime that’s currently in charge.
I regularly buy an Arizona watermelon drink with my debit card during my 10-minute break at work. Cost with tax - 74 cents.
People are worried that government will be able to track financial activity? I have almost the opposite worry!
The government SHOULD monitor financial activity (on a large scale, not necessarily per person). Banking needs to be regulated; and even with regulation failures occur, e.g. Silicon Valley Bank.
But instead, unregulated crypto-currencies (including “stable-coins”) and unregulated private equity (e.g. hedge funds) are now doing much of the transactions that were done in the past by regulated banks. Tax evasions, invisible insolvencies, frauds and misallocations are enabled by the rise of “shadow banking.” US and the entire world are likely heading for new financial crises sooner rather than later.
It’s unclear how corrupt use of financial info may vary among countries. I’ll guess that most non-advanced countries’ governments lack the IT expertise and infrastructure to use data corruptly. But that may change soon. It would be interesting to understand how far-reaching China’s governmental data gathering is.
On the matter of “legal tender for all debts”, DEBTS is the key word. Businesses or individuals can specify how they accept payment for PURCHASES.
Question about mechanics: In US, EU etc. how are most small- and medium-sized purchases handled? With plastic cards? In Thailand most transactions are handled via phone Apps. Click ‘Scan QR-code’; point the phone, perhaps at vendor’s phone; click ‘Confirm’. Done.
Any idea how much those phone apps cost the merchant?
Not sure. AFAIK the government doesn’t actively monitor credit card transactions. The credit card company does (i.e. they alert you of fraud when their algorithms detect an unusual spending pattern). So the question is do the credit card companies make a similar report to the authorities if they see a bunch of suspicious purchases?
My WAG is no. There would probably be too many false positives for the FBI or Homeland Security to chase down to make this an effective law enforcement tool.
At my employer, a supermarket chain, Apple Pay (and whatever the Android equivalent is) has exactly the same cost as the underlying payment method. So if it’s Amex it’s a lot (like 2% on a $30 transaction), if it’s a vanilla debit card it can be as little as 20 cents.
We have tried to implement a store brand EFT card. It got no traction even with so rich a reward structure that it was as actually more expensive than Amex. People just do not want any us having access to their bank accounts. Given that I had my EFT “pass” at a popular convenience store chain hacked a year ago, I can see why. I had to close my accounts, which was a giant pain. They gave a 20 cent discount per gallon for using that pass, but in retrospect the $20 I saved in two years was not worth the risk.
Less than 20% of our transactions are cash, and well under 10% of the transaction value. This is down from 40%/20% twenty years ago, but the decline has slowed considerably.
We would dearly love to be cashless. Cash handling costs and now the penny shortage are a bitch.
Apparently in some European countries the transaction costs of EFT are very small and they are very secure. Don’t know his that is accomplished. I assume it’s because the banks are terrified of regulators, rather than vice versa.
Thanks but I was curious about the phone app transactions mentioned by @Gordon_G in Thailand.
A) Cite?
B) How does this in any way imply cashless? If what you said was true, it could just as easily apply to a cash transaction.
This cite from Capital One (a big credit-card issuer and bank in the U.S.), pulling statistics from various sources, gives these proportions for retail transactions:
- Credit Cards: 40%
- Debit and Prepaid Cards: 30%
- Digital Wallets: 16%
- Cash: 11%
- Account to Account 2% (I am guessing that this is ACH, checks, etc., as well as maybe app payments like Zelle, Venmo, PayPal, etc.)
So, still primarily plastic, cash is small but still a thing, but it’s been passed by digital wallets.
Here is what the FTC is worried about:
Now this is mostly from online usage, so you are right, it is not necessarily because of being cashless but that is how we make purchases online.
As to why it would not apply to a cash transaction, I think that is pretty obvious. When you are handing out someone cash, you can’t lookup the serial number on the bill to figure out where it has been before or when or where you got the bill, at least not in real time. With a cashless transaction, the need to use computers or to confirm you have enough funds means that you can, if the law allows it, look up your previous purchase history right there.
I do know how many people look at their credit card agreements but there is often an opt out clause about sharing your data to other affiliated companies. If you don’t opt out, you can start receiving communications for things or services you might want based on your purchase history. Unless you provide your id when you are making a cash purchase, there is no good way to tie the transaction to you and provide it to a third party to analyze and then market services to you based on it.
Once again, I am not advocating against a cashless society (I rarely carry cash myself) but I recognize that there is a danger that may not be obvious that has nothing to do with the government, thought of course depending on what country you live, it might be of higher concern.
//i\\
Oddly I was at the Shanghai airport in 2018 and the luggage storage at the airport would only accept cash. No credit cards, they told me firmly. Which turned out to be a problem because I had just arrived and had no Chinese cash, and the only ATM was out of order. I ended up having to exchange money at the currency exchange booth.