Austrian Minister Calls For a Constitutional Right To Pay In Cash

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Austrian Minister Calls For a Constitutional Right To Pay In Cash

Posted by timothy on Friday February 12, 2016 @03:45AM from the not-everyone-sees-privacy-as-a-right dept.

New submitter sittingnut writes: Bloomberg reports that Austrian Deputy Economy Minister Harald Mahrer has called for a constitutional right to use cash to protect their privacy. According to the report, Mahrer said, "We don't want someone to be able to track digitally what we buy, eat and drink, what books we read and what movies we watch. We will fight everywhere against rules," including caps on cash purchases. EU finance ministers at a meeting in Brussels last Friday urged the European Commission, the EU's executive arm, to "explore the need for appropriate restrictions on cash payments exceeding certain thresholds," " to crack down on "illicit cash movements."

36 of 188 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Smart! by DogDude · 2016-02-12 03:49 · Score: 5, Insightful

Smart for them! Much smarter than today's geeks who want every penny tracked!

--
I don't respond to AC's.
1. Re:Smart! by sycodon · 2016-02-12 03:59 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  "this note is legal tender for all debts, public and private"
  We'll see if that saves us.
  
  --
  When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
2. Re:Smart! by Hognoxious · 2016-02-12 04:04 · Score: 2
  
  Because Austria totally used the US dollar.
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
3. Re:Smart! by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-12 04:09 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  It won't. Most purchases are not debts.
  All purchases are debts for the buyer until paid in full.
4. Re:Smart! by SQLGuru · 2016-02-12 04:16 · Score: 2
  
  There have been instances where a government entity refused to take cash........personal anecdote.
5. Re:Smart! by jeffb+(2.718) · 2016-02-12 05:08 · Score: 2
  
  Meh. Aldi stores around here do that if you try to pay with a credit card or check. They have a large sign in the entrance saying that they don't accept those payment methods, but it doesn't stop people from trying. And the constant, low-volume stream of abandoned carts isn't enough to make them change the policy.
  Of course, as you say, there are good reasons for a store to prefer cash. My point is that when stores restrict the forms of payment they accept, it upsets some potential customers, but that may not be enough to have a significant impact on their profits.
6. Re:Smart! by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-12 05:47 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  And when they refused to take cash, you were no longer required to pay and could have, in fact, taken them to court over it.
  IF you offer to pay any debt to any entity with cash, our current laws require them to take that cash or absolve you of the debt.
  Not saying your anecdotal evidence is not true - just that there were larger ramifications to what occurred than perhaps you were aware.
7. Re:Smart! by cellocgw · 2016-02-12 06:08 · Score: 2
  
  "Legal tender" means it's legal to use, and quite specifically NOT that anyone is required to accept it. Otherwise stores would have to accept 10000 pennies, and convenience stores couldn't put up signs saying "no bills over $20 accepted."
  
  --
  https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw
8. Re: Smart! by drinkypoo · 2016-02-12 07:10 · Score: 2
  
  I can imagine many gov't entities that may choose to not accept 'cash', because accepting cash requires additional security that checks, CC, and money orders don't, requires you to keep sufficient change on-hand, make bank deposits, etc.
  No, government agencies cannot refuse to accept cash for anything which is mandatory, and they can't refuse pennies either. On the other hand, if you think pissing off your local government with a shitstorm of pennies is a good idea, you've got another think coming. The definition of legal tender is that you can use it to settle a debt. If someone doesn't want your pennies, they have to tell you before you incur the debt that they won't accept them, same as how a gas station has to post a sign saying no 100s if they don't want those and they let you pump before paying.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
9. Re:Smart! by nytes · 2016-02-12 09:32 · Score: 2
  
  That particular business got some luck and is getting a refund of the fines.
  At the time, the IRS refused to say whether the deal would be extended to other shops.
  
  --
  -- I have monkeys in my pants.
10. Re:Smart! by luis_a_espinal · 2016-02-12 09:34 · Score: 2
  
  And when they refused to take cash, you were no longer required to pay and could have, in fact, taken them to court over it.
  IF you offer to pay any debt to any entity with cash, our current laws require them to take that cash or absolve you of the debt.
  Not saying your anecdotal evidence is not true - just that there were larger ramifications to what occurred than perhaps you were aware.
  This only applies to debts, but not to fees. For instance, to file up for a homestead exception, I needed to file up a note of residence, and that requires a $10 fee, to be paid with a check to the county clerk. Cash won't be accepted. Great, I'm in not obligation to pay, but if I don't then I don't get my homestead exception and shit, it's $3K more on real estate taxes.
  The same thing with fines. Can we consider these debts owned to the state? Most fines can only be paid with a check or credit card. One could take it to court, but what sort of a Pyrrhic victory would that be?
  Some fights are just not worth it.
  A legal right to pay cash to private entities, though, that is something I would fight for.
11. Re:Smart! by Baloroth · 2016-02-12 10:41 · Score: 2
  
  You can, you just have to go to an IRS office. They don't accept cash through mail, likely because of how hard it'd be to keep track of it/make sure it isn't stolen.
  
  --
  "None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
12. Re:Smart! by reboot246 · 2016-02-12 11:16 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Even the government is wise enough to not allow its employees to handle cash. Can you imagine the number of thieves in any government bureaucracy?
But that would destroy the economy! by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-12 03:52 · Score: 4, Funny

If people can store cash in their mattress, you can't jack up negative interest rates and force consumers to spend like they should! The flow of money to the 1% would decrease slightly! Won't anyone think of the 1%?
1. Re:But that would destroy the economy! by ausekilis · 2016-02-12 04:49 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  That's why people are encouraged to diversify. That means storing cash in your mattress and burying some in a coffee can in the back yard.
2. Re:But that would destroy the economy! by drinkypoo · 2016-02-12 07:15 · Score: 2
  
  If people can store cash in their mattress, you can't jack up negative interest rates and force consumers to spend like they should! The flow of money to the 1% would decrease slightly! Won't anyone think of the 1%?
  No, you just print more money, and hand it to the 1%. That keeps the money flowing that direction, and devalues the cash in mattresses.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
3. Re:But that would destroy the economy! by Gr8Apes · 2016-02-12 07:29 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  You have a bank account, that automatically puts you in the top 10% at least.
  
  --
  The cesspool just got a check and balance.
4. Re:But that would destroy the economy! by lgw · 2016-02-12 07:52 · Score: 2
  
  Power investors buy physical gold. The only problem with this is when an investor takes his gold with him on a fishing trip and suffers a boating accident. This happens far, far more frequently than you might expect.
  Boating accidents - they're not just for guns!
  (For those not in on the joke: when the government starts ignoring the Second Amendment and tries to disarm the citizenry, they will discover that millions of high-end rifles with duly registered sales were tragically lost in boating accidents and so cannot be turned in).
  
  --
  Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
New black markets by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-12 03:53 · Score: 3, Interesting

I can't help but to see where a cashless society will only raise new black markets and increase crime. Nearly every form of prohibition brings additional criminal elements with it and a cashless society is a prohibitive society. Hopefully this gets real traction among other nations as well.
1. Re:New black markets by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-12 04:02 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  “Did you really think that we want those laws to be observed?” said Dr. Ferris. “We want them broken. You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against - then you'll know that this is not the age for beautiful gestures. We're after power and we mean it. You fellows were pikers, but we know the real trick, and you'd better get wise to it. There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted - and you create a nation of law-breakers - and then you cash in on guilt. Now, that's the system, Mr. Rearden, that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with.”
  -- Someone not popular here. Consider the message, not the messenger.
2. Re:New black markets by sims+2 · 2016-02-12 04:05 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  Well if it all goes to pot we can still use tide.
  http://nymag.com/news/features...
  
  --
  Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
3. Re:New black markets by Opportunist · 2016-02-12 04:16 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  But I bet she didn't expect this to happen under a government favoring corporations and trying to reduce the liberty of everyone else.
  
  --
  We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
4. Re:New black markets by lgw · 2016-02-12 08:03 · Score: 2
  
  But I bet she didn't expect this to happen under a government favoring corporations and trying to reduce the liberty of everyone else.
  That book was about the merger of government and corporations! Bailouts and protections of failing companies was most of the plot. FFS, while it's hard to recommend it as the writing isn't great, you shouldn't complain about it if you won't make the effort.
  
  --
  Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
That's a great idea by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · 2016-02-12 04:00 · Score: 4, Insightful

Now if the European Commission only had any respect for its member nations' constitutions...
I'll by that for a dollar! by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · 2016-02-12 04:18 · Score: 5, Insightful

Good. And, more specifically, the right to pay for things anonymously, much like you have the right to speak anonymously.
It isn't about thwarting justice. It is about forbidding government the tools of tyranny, including the ability to filch through your stuff and activities at will until they find something they can tag you, uppity person, with.

--
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Re:Forced to accept cash? by __aaclcg7560 · 2016-02-12 04:23 · Score: 2

I was living in small apartment building that got sold to a corporation. A month after the manager moved out of his apartment and returned to Mexico, a corporate representative asked if I paid cash and had receipts for the last two months. I did and showed him the receipts. Turned out everyone paid in cash and had receipts. The former manager drove off with $10,000+ in rents that he supposed to deposit into the corporate account. After that we had to pay by check or money order.
Epiphany!! by PinkyGigglebrain · 2016-02-12 04:44 · Score: 2

The Minister probably realized that all the electronically transferred bribes^wcontributions they have been getting from various lobbies, special interest groups, etc. could be traced more easily than a bag of small unmarked bills..

Though even a bag full of cash can be traced to a fair degree by the serial numbers on the bills.
Truth be told... by MitchDev · 2016-02-12 04:52 · Score: 4, Insightful

The idea that a law is needed for this just makes me wish the asteroid would hit the "reset life" button on earth already,,,
1. Re:Truth be told... by GbrDead · 2016-02-12 05:54 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  There are laws against this. For example, in my country (an EU member), you are not allowed to pay in cash for anything above 2564.1 euros. Otherwise you are presumed to be laundering money. The limit was higher until recently. And it will only go down, despite inflation...
2. Re:Truth be told... by amiga3D · 2016-02-12 06:22 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  I once paid 12,000 dollars in cash for a car. The guy wanted 15,500 but I kept counting 100's until he folded at 12G's. Nowadays they'd take it away and make me prove I got it legally. I wish George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson and all those guys could see what these fuckers are doing nowadays. They'd spit on 'em before they slid hard cold steel through their guts.
Re:paypal is not a bank and they can take your fun by __aaclcg7560 · 2016-02-12 04:53 · Score: 4, Interesting

paypal is not a bank
That's not what I've been told when I worked at eBay/PayPal (years before the recent corporate split). Although not a bank per se, PayPal does fall under banking regulations. What that meant for the IT department was that we had to keep eBay assets and PayPal assets separate from each other. (Assets being anything with an asset tag such as laptops and monitors; cables, keyboards and mice were interchangeable.) Also, if you worked for PayPal directly and not eBay/PayPal, your credit record has to be much cleaner than average, no bankruptcies in the last ten years, and any adverse downward changes in credit score can result in immediate termination when your credit report gets periodically reviewed.
Would this mean no electronic only? by dirk · 2016-02-12 04:58 · Score: 2

While I generally agree with him (less for privacy purposes and more for not paying a transaction fee to a credit card ever time), making it right would add a lot of potential problems to it. For example, what about online only transactions? Would Ebay or Spotify be required to somehow accept cash payments? I am all for companies not being forced to go electronic only, but I also wouldn't want to try and force every company to have to accept cash either.

--

"Information wants to be expensive" - Stewart Brand, the same guy who said "Information wants to be free"
Re:Why only privacy? by Flavianoep · 2016-02-12 05:01 · Score: 4, Funny

What? Paying cash in a terraced place?

--
Linux is for people who don't mind RTFM.
Re: What about prepaid SIM? by oobayly · 2016-02-12 05:16 · Score: 2

In the UK they get handed out in airports - no ID is required. Spain is very different (as far as I know) since the Madrid train bombings.
Re:This would be fairly radical actually by neoritter · 2016-02-12 06:50 · Score: 2

Austria not Australia.
Re:This would be fairly radical actually by edbob · 2016-02-12 07:30 · Score: 2

Isn't that the same? Kind of like Swaziland and Switzerland isn't it?