36 ms·
Nice to see that there's no limit where I live which is Norway. Hopefully, there are no plans to introduce one.
by SileNce5k 3y ago
Nice to see that there's no limit where I live which is Norway. Hopefully, there are no plans to introduce one.
- jkaplowitz 3y agoThat article does indicate limits in Norway when an entrepreneur is involved, though not when both parties are private individuals.
- NorwegianDude 3y agoTrue. The rule is actually max 40k for goods purchased from a merchant. Services have no limit.
- throwaway2037 3y agoI am confused by your post. What are some good reasons to allow cash payments above 3000 EUR?
- OkayPhysicist 3y agoUsed cars, rent, nicer computers, there's all sorts of relatively large purchases that could be reasonably paid in a stack of large bills. Cash has a nice permanence to the transaction, where I as a seller don't need to be too concerned with the purchaser's background, as their proof of payment is the physical payment itself.
- lost_tourist 3y agoI would flip the script and say why is it a good idea to let the government have that much influence in your life without probable cause and a warrant to know what your financial transactions are?
- vbezhenar 3y agoBanks are not obliged to open accounts to everyone. So there are people who can't use banks, even if they want to. You must accept plenty of agreements between bank and you, and there are only so many banks, so it's very possible for some people to find bank terms to be unacceptable for them. Right now those people have cash as an alternative. Making it illegal removes some freedom from those people.
- tkz1312 3y agobecause you don’t want the government to be able to delete you from the economy? do you use signal? what’s the difference between strong privacy for your text messages and strong privacy for your financial transactions?
- wlecometo 3y agobecause my transaction is a legitimate one until proven otherwise (innocent until proven guilty principle), and i have the right to buy something without letting my bank know what or where i bough it. I could or could not disclose that payment to my government depending on the laws and if there are fiscal benefits, it is my choice. I should not be forced to use a middle man for those payments, even if this means i am open to be scammed or victim of fraud. now, as other mentioned, what are some good reasons to FORCE ONLY electronic payments above 3000€ ?
- thereddaikon 3y agoI'm not a european but I do have an example. A few years back I purchased a project car in cash. I don't carry checks, who does anymore? And my bank would have given me grief trying to transfer an amount that large at once. I had tried before and it would trigger their fraud detection and give me headaches. Its good its there but can be a barrier when I'm just trying to buy something. So going to branch and withdrawing the cash was the most convenient option.
- sigzero 3y agoEasy workaround is that you do more than one cash payment.
- z0r 3y agoWhich is probably illegal!
- mh- 3y agoIf your goal is to avoid scrutiny, I would not recommend breaking up a cash payment into a series of smaller cash payments. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structuring https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structuring
- sowbug 3y agoIn the US banking system, that's called structuring. Which means that transactions of $10,000 or more are legally suspicious, and transactions under $10,000 are legally suspicious. Logicians, please simplify the previous statement.
- mrguyorama 3y agoYou are incorrect: "Transactions under $10k" are not legally suspicious, but rather, multiple transactions that are very large but under $10k but when added together are more than $10k. It's not that easy to end up under scrutiny for structuring unless you're running a cash heavy business without declaring it. Moreover, 99% of the time, the "scrutiny" is "fill out this paperwork"
- Horffupolde 3y agoWhy should one have to explain themselves?
- tiahura 3y agoBecause you don’t live in Galt’s Gulch.
- irusensei 3y agoPrivacy.
- mywittyname 3y agoBuying a Macbook Pro 16" M2 and a Samsung Odyssey Neo G9 at the same time from the same place.
- halfdan 3y agoAnd you clearly want to carry 3000+ EUR in your pocket than paying by card? Europe is safe, but I will definitely not walk around with that much cash on my person.
- mywittyname 3y agoIt's not a problem. I regularly pay for four-figure items in cash. Lots of places offer cash discounts at that price point (no CC fees or risk of chargeback). I paid a doctor $5000 in cash once. The first time, it feels a little odd, but then you realize that nobody at the bank bats an eye at you withdrawing a few grand, and $3k in 100s is about the size of a phone in your pocket. Since nobody carries cash, nobody thinks that other people are carrying cash, so it doesn't make you a target. And I'm not anymore likely to lose my wallet with $500 in cash in it than I am my $1000 phone.
- seanmcdirmid 3y ago> Since nobody carries cash, nobody thinks that other people are carrying cash, so it doesn't make you a target. Thugs will target older people who are more likely to carry cash, they do some stereotyping other of people who are still worth mugging. Also, if they notice the wallet bulge in your back pocket, you’ve become a target.
- tekknik 3y agoWell this works well until it doesn’t. My elderly father doesn’t carry cash, only card, but yet it would look like he has a large wad of cash in his front pocket. It is in fact a legally concealed handgun however.
- 3y ago
- alphanullmeric 3y ago[flagged]
- boeingUH60 3y agoFreedom from government surveillance and potential overreach? In reality, there’s hardly any 3,000 euros+ transaction where a business or individual will accept cash. That’s too much money to have on hand when a bank transfer is much more comfortable…still happens rarely though so I think this law is overreaching. Disclosure: I’m not Dutch nor European so my opinion hardly matters here.
- dangus 3y agoI think your second sentence/paragraph points out exactly why this restriction is needed: the only people who would ever in their right mind transact in that much cash are very likely to be either avoiding taxation (a.k.a. stealing from the common taxpayer), or keeping money off the books to hide illegal activity. The average person isn't affected by this type of government surveillance and potential overreach because the average person doesn't buy things that are priced at over 3,000 euros per transaction. They can easily hide all their daily transactions from the scrutiny of government and surveillance capitalism just fine. This regulation only impacts the wealthiest people and/or the organized criminal.
- alphanullmeric 3y agoDo you believe that someone is stealing from you when they don’t allow you to take something from them?
- Shocka1 3y ago> The average person isn't affected by this type of government surveillance and potential overreach because the average person doesn't buy things that are priced at over 3,000 euros per transaction. "Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive."
- Loughla 3y agoI purchase, restore, and sometimes sell old woodworking machinery as a side gig to subsidize my own purchase of woodworking equipment for my shop. I have had multiple cash transactions above $3,000 every year that I've done this. Not to avoid taxes, not to keep them off the books, but because one of the parties has either the unwillingness or inability to take electronic payments. Elderly people, those located in rural or otherwise isolated areas, those with a natural distrust of government for whatever reason, or those with a distrust of banks in general. These are all valid use cases. This law would make it nearly impossible for me to do what I do (on the side).
- ThrowawayTestr 3y agoWhat are some good reasons not to allow it?
- triceratops 3y agoIt's your money, to be spent as you wish.
- dekken_ 3y agoMoney is a fiction, and it's not yours. Central banks merely let you use it.
- triceratops 3y agoIf you think money is a fiction, send all of yours to me. I don't mind living in a lie :-D
- dekken_ 3y agoI never said it wasn't useful ;) It's a collective hallucination since it's not based on anything anymore
- mikrl 3y agoYou: >what are some good reasons to allow Me: >what are some good reasons to ban
- Hamuko 3y agoMy dad bought a 20k€ car in another country with cash because the bank transfer would've taken too long.
- johngladtj 3y agoPrivacy is a human right.
- chollida1 3y ago> I am confused by your post. What are some good reasons to allow cash payments above 3000 EUR? Privacy would be the biggest and most important reason and probably enough to end the conversation right here. But we can also include - ease of payment. Count out money and you're done. - vendor gets their money immediately, no 5 day hold like there could be on a check or money transfer -
- derfniw 3y agoAt least in NL there is no such thing as a 5 day hold on a transfer. Typically these are instant, at worst next business day, and if you use something like "payment request" or "tikkie" all it involves is sending the buyer a link or posting a QR code somewhere to allow them to send money directly, instantly, to your account. No chance of making errors in the bank nr, you can pre-specify the required amount in the request. No chance of making an error counting out 3K or more in cash notes. Within the NL banking/payment landscape I'd argue that large cash transactions are more bothersome for everyone involved. (well, unless involving a bank is bothersome to either of the parties, but if that is the case we're probably entering "dubious transaction" or "dubiously sourced money" territory..)
- OkayPhysicist 3y ago"Next business day" is a huge amount of time relative to the "instantly" that the value changes hands in a cash transaction. Cash also eliminates any need for prying into the background of the buyer: Their proof of ability to pay and payment itself is the stack of cash they have in their hand. If the government wants to eliminate the requirement of accepting large amounts of cash, I can see that. If you're not equipped to handle being paid in a large cash sum, it can definitely be inconvenient. But making the exchange of large sums of cash between two consenting parties illegal is bold-faced tyranny.
- frumper 3y agoWhat about clawbacks? If someone uses a stolen account to pay me, can that bank get the money back after I've sold the goods?
- dijit 3y agoYou'll be downvoted, but to answer this question with all honesty: 1) Disallowing a third-party in every single transaction you make, especially as 1a) Inflation means 3k now might be quite low in 20 years 1b) Banks themselves have been shown to be scummy 1c) Banks are a rare institution to allow outsiders into. 2) Bank accounts themselves are not actually all that accessible; it's quite common for people to be ineligible for a bank account under random (but common) circumstances. -- an interesting loop you can get into is that you need to pay a utility bill in order to get a bank account, yet you can't pay a utility bill without a bank account. 3) Cash is the only fiat currency that actually exists, I know it's trendy to think that lines in a database are meaningful- but if you have physical cash you know what it's worth and it can't be hacked or seized. (though a good counterpoint is of course that you can be robbed or it can get destroyed). I live in Sweden and we're very far down the path of "cash is dead" - there's a considerable number of stores and fast food joints that do not even accept cash. However, when I moved to this country I couldn't open a bank account and without people accepting cash at that time I would have paid exorbitant fees on each transaction. So with that in mind I'm not in favour of restricting cash, I'm aware of the drawbacks of large fiat currency transactions; but It gives the central banks even more power than they currently have (which is a lot, which you'd know if you were on the wrong side of a policy or get into one of their loops) and we're not sure that they are going to continue to be fair into the future. Note: you cannot hold a bank account with the central bank that actually issues currency. You are voting for a middle-man.
- thraxil 3y ago> I live in Sweden and we're very far down the path of "cash is dead" - there's a considerable number of stores and fast food joints that do not even accept cash. However, when I moved to this country I couldn't open a bank account and without people accepting cash at that time I would have paid exorbitant fees on each transaction. I came here to say something similar. We moved to the Netherlands in 2014 from the US and it was three or four months before our immigration stuff was far enough along that we could open a local bank account with an IBAN and get a chip and pin card (at the time, virtually no US banks would give you chip and pin cards). My partner couldn't even get paid during that time until she had a bank account. We lived off withdrawing cash from my US account at ATMs. That included paying our rent (we were lucky that our landlord, who lived in a different city, was OK with us just paying cash to their relative who lived nearby).
- jlarocco 3y agoAmong other reasons: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/8/15/hold-ive-lost-count-uk-muslims-facing-bank-closures https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/8/15/hold-ive-lost-count... It's also just shitty to mandate a middle-man for transactions.
- Loughla 3y agoWhen I was 20, my bank has a daily limit on what I can spend out of my own account electronically because of reasons that I was told were related to account protection. I do not trust cash transfer apps at all and will never link them to my identity. I like to keep a small target surface. Why should I not be able to spend my own money how I feel? It's mine.
- Ylpertnodi 3y ago>Why should I not be able to spend my own money how I feel? It's mine. Any tax on the transaction belongs to the government, though.
- shakow 3y agoPrivacy? I don't necessarily want my bank and/or the state to know that I blew up 3k€ on PrettyOlgaBlueEyes in a night of loneliness, or that my hobby is to buy & restore old cars, or whatever else.
- adamsb6 3y agoThe government decides your small donation to a protest movement is good reason to freeze you out from the banking system.
- kergonath 3y agoYou’ve got it backwards. You need a reason to restrict freedom, not to improve it. So, the questions are which problem is this solving, is there any other way to solve it, and is it worth it. In most places, this is done without real discussion and people don’t care because they “don’t use cash”. “Lol terrorism” is not the most convincing argument.
- herbst 3y agoI just recently bought a car for around 4000€ in cash. I even went to a ATM to withdraw money first. Cash is, after all, the only instant and feeless transaction method. Why would I want to pay % fee or wait up to several days for a transaction like that? Imagine I bought the car on Friday afternoon. The seller would get the money earliest on Monday. Why would the seller simply trust me? So how would I buy a car on a Friday afternoon otherwise?
- Aaargh20318 3y ago> Cash is, after all, the only instant and feeless transaction method. Bank transfers in the EU are instant, and there are no fees for personal accounts. > Imagine I bought the car on Friday afternoon. The seller would get the money earliest on Monday. No, the seller would get the money before they could even blink. I have accounts at 2 unrelated banks. I have my online banking apps set up that whenever I get a deposit over a certain amount I get a push notification. When I use my online banking app to transfer money from my account at bank A to my account at bank B, I get an alert from bank B’s app to inform me of the money appearing in my account before the app from bank A has even shown me the confirmation screen that the transfer request was received. This is true for any two banks in a SEPA country.
- ffhhttt 3y agoTechnically not true. Not all banks support instant payments even if they use SEPA. EU is planning to make their support mandatory but IIRC this only be the case during “business hours”.
- herbst 3y agoWell Switzerland has SEPA but realtime SEPA transactions are usually only available within the same bank. And I havent heard of any bank solving any Sepa transactions on the weekend here
- ffhhttt 3y agoWith SEPA you’d pay a fixed <1€ fee or it would be free. Also all at least semi-decent banks offer instant transactions. > So how would I buy a car on a Friday afternoon otherwise? https://www.ecb.europa.eu/paym/integration/retail/instant_payments/html/index.en.html https://www.ecb.europa.eu/paym/integration/retail/instant_pa...
- slenk 3y agoWhy would you not accept legal tender over a certain amount? This isn't credit, it's physical money the government created. It should never be outlawed
- gonzo41 3y agoEven when there are limit's its tough to enforce. A better strategy is to remove legal tender above $20. It makes makes hoarding cash a logistical problem for criminals. If a million dollars in $100 fits in a briefcase, Then it's a suitcase or more for $20 etc. And then banking that money becomes tedious as well. Anyway, without enforcement it's really just tokenism.
- tough 3y agothey famously called the 500 euro bills -bin ladens- for how hard they became to secure since all the unofficial transactions where mostly done with those high denomination bills
- RajT88 3y ago500 Euro bills show up in action movies as part of shorthand for shady dealings. Like a visual cue that something is not on the up-and-up.
- shellfishgene 3y agoThey seem to be of most use to rich people who want to hide assets from the tax man by carrying the cash across the border to Switzerland. Probably doesn't work as well as it used to anymore though. A few years back I talked to a guy from norther Italy who said most people had a second bank account in Switzerland to hide money from the government.
- tough 3y agoI mean nowadays sounds just like much less hassle to use crypto for this use cases. Unless you have unclean cash to clean ofc
- dangus 3y agoThe libertarian-minded tend to think that this kind of freedom is necessary to prevent government overreach and oppression, but in reality the bulk of the people making large cash transactions are either avoiding taxes (ripping off you, the taxpayer) or participating in organized crime (human trafficking, weapons/drugs/counterfeit black markets, etc). I would also argue that the only people making cash transactions that large are probably way wealthier than the average person and, again, are looking to launder their money. Think about it seriously: in what scenario would you choose to use physical cash to make a transaction amounting in the thousands of dollars? That's so insanely risky. You'd be a walking target. You could lose the money, someone could steal the money, it could be physically damaged. It even puts you at risk during the transaction: why would the other party sell you the good when the money is right there ready to be robbed from you? There is no recourse because it's all under the table. I can't stop a check or have a paper trail to take to court if you just take my cash. There is no situation I would be comfortable making a transaction with that much cash (unless I was in so insanely wealthy that this amount of money meant nothing to me).
- vlod 3y agoThe same could be said about encryption.
- xboxnolifes 3y agoExcept it can't, since everyone regularly uses and benefits from encryption.
- vlod 3y agoSpecifically the state likes to say "We need access to encryption private keys because of terrorists or to save the kids. If you don't have anything to hide, there's no reason you'd oppose this". [0] So if a lot of bad people pay for things with big sums of cash, then why would you oppose this limit, unless you're a bad person. Meh. [0] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/may/08/whatsapp-could-disappear-uk-over-privacy-concerns-ministers-told https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/may/08/whatsapp-...
- TrackerFF 3y agoIIRC, stores have a 40000 NOK limit on cash payments. No problem if you use debit, credit card, etc. though. edit: https://www.skatteetaten.no/en/rettskilder/type/uttalelser/prinsipputtalelser/endringer-i-hvitvaskingsloven--veiledning-om-kontantforbudet/ https://www.skatteetaten.no/en/rettskilder/type/uttalelser/p...