I think it's close to impossible to "fix" Visa without government intervention (e.g. limit fees to a fraction of a percent), but I'm still grateful to anyone who tries.
I haven't used cash in my home country for the last two decades, at least. I mean, CC works even on parking meters when paying half a dollar (equivalent) for a few minutes of parking, and I can use a card in flea markets and even some garage sales.
Oh, I forgot: A lot of shops, restaurants, and other establishments have stopped accepting cash, even if it's illegal to do so (legal tender etc). That's because handling cash costs them MORE than handling credit/debit cards. In other words: It appears that using cards LOWER the costs for the merchant, not the other way around.
EditAdd: I presume a lot of the cost saving is that paying by card is 100% electronic, just tap the card (add the pin code if it's expensive enough), and the transaction goes directly into the shop's account. With cash it's way more cumbersome. Way, way more.
(Mind, there's no such thing as signing by hand anymore. If there were paperworks involved it would be different. But there aren't any, not in Europe and not in Japan anymore either)
I wonder if the same thing will happen with BNPL (Klarna, Afterpay). These are higher fee than credit cards (5-7%) because they bring in new customers. But, like with credit cards, savvy customers are starting to see BNPL as interest free loans (aka free money on the float, even better than credit card rewards), and it's possible that they become the new consumer results. Merchants are left holding the bag of paying 6% processing fees for everyone, even people who can afford it.
No. This is a misunderstanding of legal tender.
https://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/currency_12772.htm
"There is no federal statute mandating that a private business, a person, or an organization must accept currency or coins as payment for goods or services. Private businesses are free to develop their own policies on whether to accept cash unless there is a state law that says otherwise."
Legal tender only applies to debts. When you go to buy a t-shirt at Target or a burger at McDonalds, you don't owe a debt, and they aren't a creditor.
I used to think that was true, but try paying parking fines, etc. with pennies. Legal tender has never been challenged in court to my knowledge
https://www.findlaw.com/legalblogs/seventh-circuit/city-sanc...
> The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled this week that city-levied fines are not debts under the FDCPA... District courts, for what it's worth, uniformly agree that a fine does not stem from a consensual transaction, and thus is not a debt under the FDCPA.
Which transactions with the government is "consensual" where it doesn't demand payment up front (like a contractor)?
This goes back to my idea that while legal tender is a nice idea, in practice it means nothing
It was challenged and upheld, both as against debts before the the legal tender acts were passed and those after, by the Supreme Court in Knox v. Lee (1871).
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2017/10/03/2017-21...
(And because government can exempt itself from virtually anything not forbidden by the Constitution. This is why cops can break down your door, but I can't.)
This is what Australia is looking at currently: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-07-15/rba-credit-debit-merc...
I guess the issuers all have complex models that take these things into account. In any case, I think it's a good move.
Visa/Mastercard/BNPL/Klarna etc. all have negotiated discounts for consumers, paid for by the merchant.
I'm skeptical that merchants would lower prices (stepping away from $x.98, etc) instead of pocketing the higher margins themselves.