EU Parliament commitee approves cash cap and ban on anonymous crypto payments

I paid 6 million in cash for my scooter, and you can imagine what that looked like. Upshot is I felt very rich and like one of those fellas in those rap videos throwing around money.

What logically follows is that the it should be codified that the limit should be raised periodically (yearly?) based on the inflation rate.

Getting gas at night in rural parts of the US without a credit or debit card is already practically impossible – there's nobody there to take your cash. Card-only restaurants, vending machines, shops etc. are already a reality in some countries as well.

I think we urgently need a semi-anonymous, cash-like alternative for low-value online and offline payments, because I feel like once we've lost the anonymity of cash completely, there's no way it'll be reintroduced in a digital equivalent.

The discussion around this seems largely poisoned though, with a lot of vocal crypto/libertarian takes on one side (often tangling the payment privacy aspect with monetary policy), and "nothing to hide, log everything, credit cards and ACH are perfection" on the other.

There was some discussion around the turn of the century that the introduction of the 200/500 Euro notes might impact the USD's status as the dominant "notes in a coffee can buried in the yard" store of wealth for the developing world, but it never went anywhere.

It is interesting that this seems to be a remarkable amount of faith in inflation being a managed slow-walk-- if you had Weimar-style inflation, any fixed limit would be blown through in weeks. Although, perhaps that's a secondary objective there-- if an economy with high paper-trail requirements starts to overheat, pinching the monitoring system might provide additional leverage.

It prevents crimes as long as the people who would be committing them know it’s hard to cash out. As a simple example, phone theft was much worse in the United States a decade or so back because a teenager could grab a phone, wipe it, and get hundreds of USD. It plummeted once the stolen IMEI database went into effect because nobody buys a phone which can’t get service. It didn’t have to go to zero to be worth doing – just getting the easy money guys out often makes a big difference.

Sure, but "follow the money" can be an incredibly powerful tool for criminal investigations.

> With over reaching AML regime there is a danger that it is used against political opposition, like it is already happening.

That's a concern I definitely share. I think there needs to be a push for a privacy-preserving middle ground between the complete two-sided anonymity of cash and some cryptocurrencies on one side, and the data privacy nightmare that's traditional electronic payment methods.

What I don't understand though is why are "they" doing it, tightening things up for laypeople. It's not like most people in Europe are rampant criminals and money launderers, or even rich. Real criminals use different multiple schemes too. Why does government there want more control, exactly? What they don't see yet, but want to see that bad? I don't get what's the point, but maybe I'm just not very bright.

Sure, it's more complicated than just outright banning any type of anonymous payment, but I think not even trying would amount to a huge loss of resiliency for any democracy.

We also don't blanket ban secure private communications (although not for a lack of trying) for the same reason.

If every government guaranteed an online payment system that 100% worked for all legal purposes, you'd have point. There's no such thing. The entire digital payment system is left to private feudal lords to control as they please.

> And anonymous payments in cryptocurrencies to wallets operated by providers (hosted wallets) will be prohibited even for minimum amounts without a threshold.

Doesn't this mean that literally all anonymous crypto transactions would be banned?