I read through this statute at some point awhile back. To my understanding, one way businesses get around this is by charging money before the product/service

I read through this statute at some point awhile back. To my understanding, one way businesses get around this is by charging money before the product/service first--essentially putting themselves in "debt" first. By not providing the product/service until you pay, you aren't arguably in any potential form of debt and a business can dictate the form of payment they want. If you pay after receiving a service, then you could loosely be considered in debt. Usually, that doesn't hold enough water from what I read and it really means, until you go to court and have an established debt, you're forced to pay through whatever mechanisms were agreed to in the transaction. Only then does it have to be payable by cash. It's interesting to me because the transactions you're most likely to have cash on hand and pay for are items most would never have to go in debt for (a coffee, lunch, etc.) whereas large transactions you may need to go in debt for ideally use some other non-cash medium (loan, cashiers check, etc.). Basically makes cash useless (why I rarely carry more than say $50 anymore). More interestingly, you'll see businesses adapt quickly to accept cash when their electronic payment/management system goes down for a day. They're incredibly resourceful when it's convenient for themselves. I've had this happen at a coffee shop that was cashless that suddenly decided they'd accept cash when the other option was to not make money.