Oh in Australia everyone has a bank account and most have Visa Debit or at worst EftPOS cards, these normally don’t attract a fee. Great system.
In the UK, for an SME business using one of the mobile payment companies (SumUp, iZettle, Square etc) fees are around 1.7% per transaction. I’m assuming it’s similar in the US. Whether that’s cheaper than cash handling depends on how you value the time it takes to bank that cash and the extra security involved in cash handling. Personally, I’d rather take the hit for card payments, and I assume larger companies can negotiate lower fees for card processing.
OB
Right now I think governments are right to insist bricks and mortar retail still accept cash, for the reasons given.
However there will likely be a point where the number wanting to use cash will be so vanishingly small that such a law will not be enforced any more. At that point hopefully there is some kind of net for those left behind (eg some kind of debit card anyone is eligible for but can work in place of a credit card)
Governments typically don’t insist on this. The market does. Governments only insist that cash be accepted in settlement of debts, but not in other business or commercial transactions.
The suggestion in this thread, I think, is that we are reaching this point now. Governments should either require business to accept cash, or require financial institutions to provide non-cash payment alternatives free of charge to the user. And the latter is problematic since there is presumably a class of person with whom financial institutions do not wish to deal on any terms, or for any purpose.
Thanks. A nice distinction there.
Is this descriptive or prescriptive?
I know for example here in China there is such a law, and a store where purchases could only be made using a smartphone app was forced to accept cash.
That would be a strange suggestion if so. In countries like the US, cash is still used for a large proportion of transactions.
I wasn’t alluding to the point where cash is disfavored.
I mean the point where cash is used so rarely that the cashier / waiter / automatic kiosk has to contact the manager because he / she / it doesn’t know what to do.
You have obviously never seen two children squabbling over identical toys, or who gets which piece of identically sized pie pieces.
Not to mention there will still be rare or one-of-a-kind items.
Assuming it’s not a post-scarcity society (which is way far off, if it is even possible) then certain times will require more time to accrue sufficient “credit” (or whatever) to get, in which case stealing is a short cut.
Then there’s stealing to f*** with someone because bullies and mean people exist.
There will still be motivation for theft.
Again - antiques, unique items, etc. And some people like the buying/bartering of yard sales and flea markets as entertainment of a sort.
What? You think an actual millionaire or billionaire has a room full of bills and coins? You funny.
Unless, of course, a business has no capacity for taking cards at all - cash-only businesses are getting more and more rare but they still exist.
That’s true in all 50 states. Probably other US territories as well.
Significant fees on those. Much higher than standard credit and debit cards.
In most states the only benefits-on-cards are either WIC or EBT - which are strictly food only benefits. For everything else they need cash or credit/debit.
At the store where I work you can use cash to purchase cards for thinks like Google Play or Amazon and use those on-line.
The only way a cashless society can work (and also be just) is if EVERYONE can get a credit-debit card, ideally without usurious fees
Yes, if you’re willing to pay exorbitant fees. I’ve seen cards where just the “activation” and other initial fees can eat 25% of the value.
^ This.
Start around $4 for a $25 card and go up from there. So, 16% to start. Some re-loadable cards have re-loading fees, monthly fee, and so on that can really add up.
Here in the US? Ha!
That said - although most of the transactions at the store I work at are cashless we still have cash involved in about 1/3 of our transactions. While they tend to be smaller amount there are exceptions - I have had someone pay a $900+ total in cash. So we aren’t going cashless any time soon, we can’t afford to lose 1/3 of our business.
(We also still take paper checks)
Another thing - the networks that allow for use of plastic instead of cash do, from time to time, have problems or stop working. If you have a cashless society then commerce stops when that happens. Cash, on the other hand, does not require batteries or wifi. In a heavily urban center that may not be a concern, but out in the boondocks which are as wired-up and have fewer folks to maintain and/or repair the system that might be a worry.
Heck, you can speed the process of going post-cash in America by expanding civil-forfeiture rules and letting police officers seize any amount of cash off any person at any time on the basis that it might be used to buy drugs.
I was surprised a few years ago when I stopped at the DMV for a duplicate driver’s license and discovered they didn’t accept cash. I thought about it and said, “wow, they must really not trust you” and the clerk laughed.
My business happily accepts cash or credit card (no checks). About 80% of all transactions are plastic. I occasionally get an older farmer who owes me $310, waggles his brows, and says, “how about if I pay cash?” I’ll play along and tell him $300. He thinks I’m dodging taxes, but I’m not; it’s more complicated than it’s worth.
Your brother wasn’t working under the current NY rules. In NY, for an employer to pay wages through a pre-paid debit card, there must be a no-fee atm within a reasonable distance of he employee’s home or job, there must be a place where the employee can withdraw the total amount of wages, the employer must notify the employee of these locations and there can be no fees for normal use of the card.
I know those reloadable check cards are pricey, but I don’t recall ever paying a fee for a Visa gift card.
Here’s one on sale at Walmart right now. “$100+5.38 purchase charge.”
In my experience the fee is about that much regardless of the value of the card. So the bigger the card the lower the percent. Doesn’t help poor people too much, unless their employer pays their whole paycheck on one card, and handles the fee-- for the employer, thatg should be a miniscule expense.
Prepaid cards aren’t all equally expensive. Here’s a list
The leading choice there is an AMEX one where the card is free online, though $3.95 it bought in a physical store, free to reload, though $4.95 monthly fee.
Also you can’t necessarily compare that to ‘free, free, free’. If you have a job which pays by check, you’ve got to cash the check to get paper cash, and that costs money also if you don’t have a bank account. And, there isn’t a fundamental economic reason banks would provide ‘free’ bank accounts just for the interest margin they can make on the balance in a zero interest checking account, irrespective of that balance, and of interest rates (a reduction in ‘free’ checking offers in recent years when short term interest rates in the US were near zero was not a coincidence).
Also, even people paid in paper money often have to pay by money order for some things, like rent. So cash directly costs the consumer in that case too (besides the cost of handling and protecting cash being indirectly factored into prices for all consumers).
Nor is it clear social policies, eg. forcing merchants to take cash by collective action, should encourage the use of cash when it facilitates tax cheating and criminal activity. Although that case, cash’s role in facilitating illegal activity, is a more populist v elite than right v left issue. People on the left might be more ready to force additional mandates on merchants or employers to secure more ‘free’ services, but it’s generally left leaning economist/academics who propose stuff like eliminating the $100 bill from circulation. Populists on the right are quite hostile to that idea.
It’s conceivable the evolution in payment methods could be something the govt shouldn’t get that involved in*. Just conceivable, I’m not one to say the govt should never get involved in anything.
*the most likely exception IMO is anti-trust aspect of a few networks setting fees on things, rather than various mandates to provide things ‘free’.
I’ll play devil’s advocate here…
Wouldn’t the businesses that deal with the non-banking customers pretty much have to accept cash, or else suffer?
This seems like a tempest in a teapot; what exactly are these situations where some business is going to do business in an area where people habitually transact in cash, and proclaim that they only take cards? That’s not going to be a very successful model.
I’d argue that the only needed legal protection would be that governmental agencies and regulated monopolies (like say… electric power companies) must accept cash, as they provide necessary services across the spectrum. But if a Subway decides to move into a lower income area and refuse to take cash? Big deal- they’re the ones who will get less business as a result.
Put another way, all those shitty bodegas are going to continue to take cash, because that’s how their customers pay. If 7-11 puts in a store down the road and takes only cards, they just cut out a huge number of customers, who will continue to shop at the bodegas.
A Visa gift card, which can be used anywhere Visa is accepted, nearly always has a fee. A store gift card, which can only be used in a particular store (or sometimes their sister stores owned by the same corporation) will generally have no fees, but of course has much more limited utility.
Someone without a bank account would have a hard time in Australia, all pays go into the bank, all government rebates/welfare is via a bank account (with the exception of some areas that use a prepaid debit card) and all banks/credit unions offer debit Visa/Mastercards as standard.
Cheques are so rare these days, my mum sent a cheque to my 16 yo daughter and she looked at and said what do I do with this!
FYI, in the U.S., 7% of households are classified as “unbanked” (i.e., they don’t make use of any banking services whatsoever). This means that they don’t have checking accounts, debit cards, etc. The primary reason given for not being banked is not having enough cash to open and maintain an account.
Another 20% or so of U.S. households are classified as “underbanked.” These people make use of some bank services, but not others. They may have a checking account, or a savings account, but they probably don’t have both. Households also get classified as “underbanked” if they make use of alternative financial services (i.e., money orders, check-cashing stores, payday loans, rent-to-own, etc.) in addition to banks.
Sources:
https://www.ozy.com/acumen/one-out-of-every-4-americans-is-underbanked/87796
http://www.microbilt.com/news/article/unbanked-vs-underbanked-who-they-are-and-how-they-differ
I don’t think that’s the issue, because you’re right, . No business in an area where people habitually use cash is going to decide to only take cards. But suppose I live in a lower income area, where everyone uses cash. But I work in a different area, where most people use cards, so I can’t buy a coffee or run errands on my lunch break.Or there’s no supermarket in my neighborhood, and the one in the next neighborhood over has decided to go cashless. Or I don’t live in a low-income neighborhood, but I don’t want to use cards because the stores can find out too much about me that way.
I'm not saying I agree with the proposed law- I haven't thought enough about it to take a position. But those are the sort of situations the proponents are thinking about.
I’m pretty liberal, but this is a stupid argument. For example, the practice, at Thomas Keller’s NYC restaurant Per Se, of having a $355 chef’s tasting menu excludes a whole swathe of poor and more vulnerable people, who can not afford it. Should New York require that they have a less expensive tasting menu as well? Of course not. And similarly the cashless business exist alongside other business that accept cash, some of which are cash-only.