Why freedom of choice can become a cost trap when paying

Cash should be retained as a common means of payment and everyone should have the choice as they pay. This is the declaration of intent of black and red in the coalition agreement. Freedom of choice sounds good for consumers and also corresponds to the zeitgeist. Around half of the people in Germany wish to be able to pay for bar and cashless in the business, This was the result of a survey 2024. However, this should be taken into account: Because the choice between two means of payment can lead to one of them at some point becoming an economic burden.

Payment remains a generation question

The former is structurally disadvantaged in the direct competition between cash and map. How to pay is increasingly a generation question. In generation Z (16-29 years), only around 25 percent use cash. For trade, the question is therefore increasingly arising as to when the additional costs of the cash payment become a real burden. It is not for nothing that the reference « Card Only » or « NO-Cash » on the shop doors, especially in the cities, is becoming more and more common. Last year, 27 percent of consumers felt that they were affected by their payment. But what do you want to accuse the operator of a scene café who makes 90 percent of its sales with cashless payment? Because the costs for cash provision remain almost the same, no matter how high the share of sales is.

On the other hand, many shops rely entirely on “cash-only”, which in turn calls the authorities. Especially for fear of money laundering and tax evasion, the new coalition wants to make the card payment for retail. The lists of payment terminals can look forward to this.

In any case, the pressure on the cash is increased. Because there are shops that have not previously offered a card payment for economic reasons because they could not or do not want to pass on the additional costs to consumers via the prices of goods. This should then change.

Profitors of a card-only obligation would also be payment service providers such as Goggle Pay, Apple Pay, but also MasterCard and Visacard. Against the background of the political upheavals and uncertainties in the United States, however, further market consolidation of US payment services could be a serious security risk for European payment transactions.

Danger from US payment services

It is therefore not sufficient for any form of cashless payment transactions to be offered. Rather, we need a restriction to European solutions. What speaks against making only certain digital forms such as Girocard, Wero and Digital euros, which are also more cost -effective? Actually nothing – and each of us can easily start with it on a small scale.

With every payment in cash and with selected cashless European means of payment, we make our payment system more resistant, independent and cheaper: « Pay European! »