With a dwindling number of legitimate cash users, any business that is pulling in huge sums of cash well beyond the average is going to look increasingly suspicious.
On top of that, merchants carry the risk of chargeback fraud or stolen cards, and in some industries that can be another double digit percentage by itself.
That is illegal in the UK. That is why many trades people here will accept bank transfers but not cards.
Well, they are plenty threatening in the sense that if you don't follow them, they will refuse doing business with you, which suddenly means you can't accept cards at all, which can kill a business entirely.
Services for laundering cash are going to see a huge uptick in turnover.
You put the cash in the local slot machine, the slot machine owner then purchases legitimate services from your wife / cousin / other family member’s business.
Or you rent a hole in the wall location massage business that that maybe legitimately employs one or two people but on the books they manage to see back to back clients for 20 hours a day.
Another good one is hair dresser / barber, they often take cash.
I’m not sure the stress is worth (presumably) 20% or so savings for his income.
quite a bit of labor runs on cash. you can usually get a deal for a lot of services by paying in cash. sometimes the floor manager will take cash and never even report the transaction to the business much less the tax man (I rent forklifts and get plating work done this way).
It's not just that, though. It's common here in France for credit card operators to have fees in the 5-10% range (or 0.30€ per operation + 2% of the amount). That's why you often see signs « card accepted above 10€ », and that's why your local shop will probably not mind if you're missing 10 cents when paying cash.
Interchange in the EU is capped at 0.4% for credit cards. Typical costs for processing are much lower than 5-10%.
For example, Adyen charges the 0.4% interchange + their fee of 0.6% and a flat 0.11€. On a 10€ transaction, that's 2.1%.
In most cases this is cheaper than handling cash. When you accept cash, you have to pay somebody to close and reconcile the drawer, take the cash to the bank (or have a security company do it for you), account for shrinkage / mistakes...it's a bit of a myth that cash is cheaper for businesses to handle, especially in places like the EU where card interchange rates are highly regulated.
Now of course, if your cash is not going the usual routes and isn't getting accounted for in the books...that equation can change.
And he was paying his staff under the table in cash anyway! But would still rather just withdraw from the business account, rather than having to deal with handling of customer cash every day.
Still clients pay much more. To be fair, the prices i remember are from 15 years ago, and now there seems to be better offers for small businesses. For example, SumUp proposes 1.75% flat (no per-transaction fee). But yes, i'm quite sure that's not the kind of fees Carrefour or FNAC are paying.
Also lots of takeaways, they'll be on JustEat/Uber Eats and cash-only in store which is a PITA. My local chippy is cash only and no-delivery. I can't find a single record for a recorded business, or health rating either!
Collectibles (e.g. trading cards) are still a "cash is king" market. Some dealer only take cash, virtually all of them prefer it, and offer steep "discounts" (lack of markup) for cash.
In Finland I was paying for apartment-building laundry machines with my phone in 2005. Mind-boggling that in the US, those still require quarters over two decades later.
Which creates national security and sovereignty issues. Cash is robust and decentralised. There is a good reason Sweden went from pushing cashless to advising people to keep cash at home for emergencies, and were at least considering an obligation to accept cash for small transactions.
Are you talking about people who don't pay tax? They create very large national security and sovereignty issues. Countries that don't collect much tax have real problems with both of these.
> There is a good reason Sweden went from pushing cashless to advising people to keep cash at home for emergencies
The key phrase being "for emergencies".
Nothing like as bad as the potential problem of your economy grinding to a halt.
There are other ways to deal with tax evasion. Those countries usually do not have good systems. If you investigate properly, design tax laws properly, chuck a few people in jail, etc. the problem can be solved.
Not using does not close loopholes, or prevent corruption, or stop people sending money offshore.....
> The key phrase being "for emergencies".
If you go cashless you will not have the infrastructure to use cash in an emergency.