6 ms·

That is incorrect for EU countries. The EU, through Directive 2014/92, mandates that banks cannot refuse basic accounts to legal EU residents (unless they belie

That is incorrect for EU countries. The EU, through Directive 2014/92, mandates that banks cannot refuse basic accounts to legal EU residents (unless they believe you're laundering money or financing terror groups). I live in an essentially cashless country, but even countries where cash is still used would be very hard to live in without a bank account, so that legislation is important.

Retra 8y ago
Do if you're not a legal EU resident, you will be unable to purchase food/lodging/transportation?
- vinay427 8y ago
  No, you certainly wouldn't be unable. You would not have the right to a basic bank account in the EU country, but you could use one of many possible payment methods from your home country. If you're traveling to another country in the first place, you probably have those options available to you.
- jdietrich 8y ago
  Monzo will give a bank account to pretty much anyone with a verifiable form of ID, regardless of their residency status. https://monzo.com/blog/2018/05/29/getting-bank-account-immigrant/ https://monzo.com/blog/2018/05/29/getting-bank-account-immig...
  - falsedan 8y ago
    As long as they have a reasonably recent smart phone
- ACS_Solver 8y ago
  If you're not an EU resident, it's your own responsibility to have some valid means of payment from your home country. Which could also be cash you exchanged for the local currency, though if cash is all you have, some countries could prove difficult. Or you could find a local bank that will give you an account - they may of course do so even when not legally required. But to take an extreme case, there's nothing preventing you from getting yourself into trouble due to a lack of valid payment methods. For example, Americans have visa-free access to the EU, so nobody will check their finances, and an American could theoretically land somewhere in the EU without a payment card and only carrying US dollars, which aren't legal tender.
  - dontbenebby 8y ago
    >But to take an extreme case, there's nothing preventing you from getting yourself into trouble due to a lack of valid payment methods. For example, Americans have visa-free access to the EU, so nobody will check their finances, and an American could theoretically land somewhere in the EU without a payment card and only carrying US dollars, which aren't legal tender. I thought part of the job of immigration officers is to screen travelers for ability to sustain their trip? Visa waiver does not mean you are entitled to enter. When I (an American) visited the UK and EU on a backpacking trips, the immigration official asked me how I'd cover my expenses, and specifically queried about backup plans if my card wasn't accepted. (This was back before chip and sig rolled out) Though they did just take me at my word I had enough US dollars that I could convert them to pounds and get a room if needed...
    - ACS_Solver 8y ago
      > I thought part of the job of immigration officers is to screen travelers for ability to sustain their trip? Visa waiver does not mean you are entitled to enter. Correct, but in practice the level of scrutiny depends on where you're from, and which country you're entering. From what I've heard, people from rich Western countries, like the US or Canada, are generally allowed in with only perfunctory questioning, especially in countries where the immigration officers are known to be more relaxed. So an unprepared American is still likely to get into the EU, but a Colombian would probably be questioned more, despite being in the same legal category as a US citizen.
  - jlokier 8y ago
    It's very easy to go from being a legal UK resident for years (sometimes decades), to not being a legal UK resident. You get about 2 weeks to leave, which is not enough to wrap up years of settled life when it's a surprise. When that happens you don't have a home country that you have a meaningful connection to, and you certainly don't have a bank account there. For some it happens due to predictable visa expiry and rules ordinary people can comprehend. But for others it is impossible to know in advance (I have some experience with lawyers who are unable to figure out how the law applies in practice in some cases - few can afford a proper judicial review to find out). There are numerous articles in the press in recent years about people who were resident in the UK for a long time, have long since settled with families, then suddenly found they lost basic rights. The ones which shocked me most where people who were branded "persona non grata" as if terrorists, because they filed minor corrections to their tax returns - the problem with that is not only do the then immediately lose UK rights, they also get a stamp that excludes them from most other countries of the world. That's a harsh price for doing the right thing. That sounds implausible, until you know that the UK Home Office has exclusion targets, and will use any random tick-box to exclude people no matter if it's not justified and would lose on appeal in front of a judge. (Most appeals against Home Office decisions about residence overturn the decision, which shows how dodgy the decisions are, but the right to appeal has now been removed in many cases.) Right now, there are a large number of people in the UK who do not know with certainty whether they will be allowed to maintain legal residence in the next few years or not. So far, non-UK EU citizens do not need visas or similar documentation while being resident in the UK, even for their whole lives. This means they don't tend to keep a strong paper trail. But that is probably about to change, and for many of them this already creates uncertainty about their future rights, because the UK has a harsh reputation for refusing long-term residence for bogus reasons, such as a gap in perfect record of household bills going back a few years, or failing to purchase some obscure kind of private health insurance a few years ago which nobody knew was needed but is now cited. The situation to come is worse for, for example, non-EU spouses of UK citizens, who obtained the right to bring their spouse into the UK via EU law (the human right to a family life). Surprisingly, a UK citizen does not have an automatic right to have their spouse live with them in the UK - there is a substantial earnings threshold. This may force spouses who thought they were settled here to have to leave the UK and their families, over the next few years. When any of these events happens, you are denied the ability to rent privately (even in cash), to have a bank account, or to use health services. Very few of these people have a bank account in their home country. Why would they? They've been living and settled in the UK for years. Working, married, with families, all legally, until the day they find out they aren't.
jstanley 8y ago
> banks cannot refuse basic accounts to legal EU residents (unless they believe you're laundering money or financing terror groups). This is little comfort if you're not a legal EU resident, or if they believe you're laundering money or financing terror groups (whether you actually are or not). As long as there are any caveats to "cannot refuse bank accounts to all people" then switching to a cashless society would create an underclass of people who are just not allowed to have money.
- the8472 8y ago
  Not being a resident means you are the resident of a different country, so the assumption is that you have a bank account there. And being illegal or a suspected terror financer would already put you in an underclass anyway.
  - theonemind 8y ago
    The assumption that everyone has a country causes problems for people who actually don't: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statelessness https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statelessness
    - bolyarche 8y ago
      I think statelessness is related to citizenship as opposed to residency. You can be a resident of a country wihout being a citizen.
    - TomMarius 8y ago
      Stateless persons can be legal residents.
  - nothrabannosir 8y ago
    The problem is rarely the intention of a law, rather than the imperfections of its application. Governments are quite imperfect, and humans are a varied bunch. There are exceptions to everything , and exceptions to that. The Windrush generation is just a recent example that comes to mind: luckily, they were numerous enough to get their story heard. But people fall through such cracks every single day. Sometimes an imperfection in the law, sometimes an “overzealous” public servant.
deogeo 8y ago
> unless they believe you're laundering money or financing terror groups Do they have to prove this, or is their belief enough? And are we okay with the punishment for money laundering being death by starvation and homelessness?
- ACS_Solver 8y ago
  There's a fairly high burden on the financial institution, they have to show you're not complying with anti-laundering legislation, but that falls short of proving actual money laundering. So there's a problem. I think the way it would work legally is that a person would automatically regain access to a bank account if they receive welfare, as said welfare would then be income with a known legal origin, but I am not sure about that.
  - repolfx 8y ago
    Not quite. For one individuals don't have to comply with AML rules if they're just behaving as normal individuals, those rules affect companies. For another, banks don't have to show anything. It's risk management, they can close your account if they believe you're high risk, partly because if they didn't they'd get fined by the USA for money laundering. See: HSBC, whose fines were largely due to not closing accounts aggressively enough.

Retra 8y ago

Do if you're not a legal EU resident, you will be unable to purchase food/lodging/transportation?

vinay427 8y ago
No, you certainly wouldn't be unable. You would not have the right to a basic bank account in the EU country, but you could use one of many possible payment methods from your home country. If you're traveling to another country in the first place, you probably have those options available to you.
jdietrich 8y ago
Monzo will give a bank account to pretty much anyone with a verifiable form of ID, regardless of their residency status. https://monzo.com/blog/2018/05/29/getting-bank-account-immigrant/ https://monzo.com/blog/2018/05/29/getting-bank-account-immig...
- falsedan 8y ago
  As long as they have a reasonably recent smart phone
ACS_Solver 8y ago
If you're not an EU resident, it's your own responsibility to have some valid means of payment from your home country. Which could also be cash you exchanged for the local currency, though if cash is all you have, some countries could prove difficult. Or you could find a local bank that will give you an account - they may of course do so even when not legally required. But to take an extreme case, there's nothing preventing you from getting yourself into trouble due to a lack of valid payment methods. For example, Americans have visa-free access to the EU, so nobody will check their finances, and an American could theoretically land somewhere in the EU without a payment card and only carrying US dollars, which aren't legal tender.
- dontbenebby 8y ago
  >But to take an extreme case, there's nothing preventing you from getting yourself into trouble due to a lack of valid payment methods. For example, Americans have visa-free access to the EU, so nobody will check their finances, and an American could theoretically land somewhere in the EU without a payment card and only carrying US dollars, which aren't legal tender. I thought part of the job of immigration officers is to screen travelers for ability to sustain their trip? Visa waiver does not mean you are entitled to enter. When I (an American) visited the UK and EU on a backpacking trips, the immigration official asked me how I'd cover my expenses, and specifically queried about backup plans if my card wasn't accepted. (This was back before chip and sig rolled out) Though they did just take me at my word I had enough US dollars that I could convert them to pounds and get a room if needed...
  - ACS_Solver 8y ago
    > I thought part of the job of immigration officers is to screen travelers for ability to sustain their trip? Visa waiver does not mean you are entitled to enter. Correct, but in practice the level of scrutiny depends on where you're from, and which country you're entering. From what I've heard, people from rich Western countries, like the US or Canada, are generally allowed in with only perfunctory questioning, especially in countries where the immigration officers are known to be more relaxed. So an unprepared American is still likely to get into the EU, but a Colombian would probably be questioned more, despite being in the same legal category as a US citizen.
- jlokier 8y ago
  It's very easy to go from being a legal UK resident for years (sometimes decades), to not being a legal UK resident. You get about 2 weeks to leave, which is not enough to wrap up years of settled life when it's a surprise. When that happens you don't have a home country that you have a meaningful connection to, and you certainly don't have a bank account there. For some it happens due to predictable visa expiry and rules ordinary people can comprehend. But for others it is impossible to know in advance (I have some experience with lawyers who are unable to figure out how the law applies in practice in some cases - few can afford a proper judicial review to find out). There are numerous articles in the press in recent years about people who were resident in the UK for a long time, have long since settled with families, then suddenly found they lost basic rights. The ones which shocked me most where people who were branded "persona non grata" as if terrorists, because they filed minor corrections to their tax returns - the problem with that is not only do the then immediately lose UK rights, they also get a stamp that excludes them from most other countries of the world. That's a harsh price for doing the right thing. That sounds implausible, until you know that the UK Home Office has exclusion targets, and will use any random tick-box to exclude people no matter if it's not justified and would lose on appeal in front of a judge. (Most appeals against Home Office decisions about residence overturn the decision, which shows how dodgy the decisions are, but the right to appeal has now been removed in many cases.) Right now, there are a large number of people in the UK who do not know with certainty whether they will be allowed to maintain legal residence in the next few years or not. So far, non-UK EU citizens do not need visas or similar documentation while being resident in the UK, even for their whole lives. This means they don't tend to keep a strong paper trail. But that is probably about to change, and for many of them this already creates uncertainty about their future rights, because the UK has a harsh reputation for refusing long-term residence for bogus reasons, such as a gap in perfect record of household bills going back a few years, or failing to purchase some obscure kind of private health insurance a few years ago which nobody knew was needed but is now cited. The situation to come is worse for, for example, non-EU spouses of UK citizens, who obtained the right to bring their spouse into the UK via EU law (the human right to a family life). Surprisingly, a UK citizen does not have an automatic right to have their spouse live with them in the UK - there is a substantial earnings threshold. This may force spouses who thought they were settled here to have to leave the UK and their families, over the next few years. When any of these events happens, you are denied the ability to rent privately (even in cash), to have a bank account, or to use health services. Very few of these people have a bank account in their home country. Why would they? They've been living and settled in the UK for years. Working, married, with families, all legally, until the day they find out they aren't.

jstanley 8y ago

> banks cannot refuse basic accounts to legal EU residents (unless they believe you're laundering money or financing terror groups). This is little comfort if you're not a legal EU resident, or if they believe you're laundering money or financing terror groups (whether you actually are or not). As long as there are any caveats to "cannot refuse bank accounts to all people" then switching to a cashless society would create an underclass of people who are just not allowed to have money.

the8472 8y ago
Not being a resident means you are the resident of a different country, so the assumption is that you have a bank account there. And being illegal or a suspected terror financer would already put you in an underclass anyway.
- theonemind 8y ago
  The assumption that everyone has a country causes problems for people who actually don't: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statelessness https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statelessness
  - bolyarche 8y ago
    I think statelessness is related to citizenship as opposed to residency. You can be a resident of a country wihout being a citizen.
  - TomMarius 8y ago
    Stateless persons can be legal residents.
- nothrabannosir 8y ago
  The problem is rarely the intention of a law, rather than the imperfections of its application. Governments are quite imperfect, and humans are a varied bunch. There are exceptions to everything , and exceptions to that. The Windrush generation is just a recent example that comes to mind: luckily, they were numerous enough to get their story heard. But people fall through such cracks every single day. Sometimes an imperfection in the law, sometimes an “overzealous” public servant.

deogeo 8y ago

> unless they believe you're laundering money or financing terror groups Do they have to prove this, or is their belief enough? And are we okay with the punishment for money laundering being death by starvation and homelessness?

ACS_Solver 8y ago
There's a fairly high burden on the financial institution, they have to show you're not complying with anti-laundering legislation, but that falls short of proving actual money laundering. So there's a problem. I think the way it would work legally is that a person would automatically regain access to a bank account if they receive welfare, as said welfare would then be income with a known legal origin, but I am not sure about that.
- repolfx 8y ago
  Not quite. For one individuals don't have to comply with AML rules if they're just behaving as normal individuals, those rules affect companies. For another, banks don't have to show anything. It's risk management, they can close your account if they believe you're high risk, partly because if they didn't they'd get fined by the USA for money laundering. See: HSBC, whose fines were largely due to not closing accounts aggressively enough.