Several categories of economic and social entities are in favor of the suppression of cash from our societies, which they see as an impractical thing of the past. High on that list is banks, which receive from the states the responsibility to manage and secure cash at street level. Not only does the safeguarding and management of that currency represent a significant expense for them, with no return, but it increases their structural risk. In the case central banks press interest rates to (or beyond) zero, customers will be tempted to withdraw all of their cash, potentially stretching banks beyond their capacity. Australian bank Citibank, for instance, informed its clients that its agencies would become cashless in last November. More and more businesses are tempted to kick cash out: it increases their risk of robbery, and it complicates their accounting with the necessity to join the two channels of cash flow.
 
Vincent McKevitt, founder of a British food chain, opened new outlets in London in March 2017, where cash is not accepted. He claims “Most operators face speed and capacity issues at lunchtime, but ours are intensified because we make our food fresh-to-order and most guests like to customise their food to suit their health and taste requirements [...] This unique point-of-sale solution allows our team to focus their energy on our speed of production.” Finally, some activists also see the retirement of cash as the next era for modern economics. Carl Manlan advocates general demonetization for Africa, so as to secure financial inclusion, security and prosperity. He claims : “With a smart strategy, underpinned by patience and commitment, Africa can build a cashless economy, with high levels of financial inclusion supporting economic prosperity and security. Before too long, buying a “Kofi broke man” – a roasted plantain with groundnuts – by the roadside in Ghana could be a cashless transaction, one that helps the vendor prosper in the present – and save for the future.”  But the main cashless-era  supporter is the public entity in charge of managing cash, and also in charge of safeguarding individual liberties.
 
Governments are hostile to cash, on several levels. The perceive it as both the preferred vector for criminal activities that wish to remain below radar cover, and as the main leak through which tax avoidance and evasion occurs. According to Business Insider, “criminals move 2 trillion dollars every year”, mostly in cash. It adds: ”money that is traceable means higher tax revenues”. They share the cash responsibility with the banks, as they are the ones in charge of managing currency: this implies the costly activities of designing cash, producing, distributing it, maintaining it and fighting off counterfeiters. The European Union took the 500-euro bill out of production, which it saw as purely crime-useful. In May of 2016, it published “ the Governing Council of the European Central Bank (ECB) concluded a review of the denominational structure of the Europa series. It has decided to permanently stop producing the €500 banknote and to exclude it from the Europa series, taking into account concerns that this banknote could facilitate illicit activities.” And last November, the Indian government violently pushed the envelope by deleting the validity of most of its own currency, in an attempt to curb black market activities and corruption. That governments would try to make their own jobs easier is understandable, but is the limitation of our most fundamental liberties part of their mission?
 
In the case of India, not only did the desired outcome not arrive, but the social and economic cost of the reform was staggering - with some economists saying they haven’t even finished assessing the damage yet. Oxford professor Barbara Harriss says “it’s not a good decision badly implemented, it’s a bad decision badly implemented. It is a sledgehammer and we now know that it didn’t crack the nuts it was apparently aimed at.” But even if this reform, or another, were eventually to come through : is a society where citizens are totally under the prying eye of their governments something healthy and desirable? What is to become of the balance of powers between States and their peoples? Should the right to privacy be thrown out the window? Are citizens to be irreversibly locked into one single state-and-corporation-controlled system? Isn’t our freedom precisely what governments are in charge of protecting? If the abolition of cash comes through, States will be three hundred and sixty degrees around each citizen, able to control their every move, action and purchase with the click of a mouse on a screen. If we entrust our governments with the protection of our freedom, and our governments use this warrant to lock us up into their system, they will have failed their mission and betrayed our trust.
 
It’s not to say that the arguments held for the economic evolution of our societies are all false and invalid. New payment methods do present various advantages which people obviously appreciate, since they use them. But what is the point of reducing one’s options? Killing off cash will not rid us of the plagues and unsavory activities which have a preference for cash but it will be a tremendous, yet inconspicuous, game-changer. If cash disappears, there will never again be a transaction where two people get together and agree on something : there will always be someone else, there, looking in. 

Almost one third of the population in Denmark uses cellphone app MobilePay to do their monetary transactions. Today, businesses such as clothing retailers, restaurants and petrol pumps are legally free to refuse cash payments from customers. Services like hospitals, post offices, etc. aren’t yet subjected to the same law however the Danish government has ‘set a 2030 deadline to completely do away with paper money’.

The news has been widely spread not only in the Nordics, but across the world and there is a reason: Denmark could just be one of the first countries to go cashless, before the rest of the world follows.

But behind the idea of a ‘cashless paradise’, there is much more than just a technological change. Yet, cash isn’t the only mean of payment any longer and some of its competitors seem to be easier to manipulate. The first idea that comes to our minds when we hear about a cash-free country is probably the safety and the conveniency of not carrying cash money. It appears however than the Danes haven’t really made the decision of going cash-free. The country made it for them, and one of the major reasons for it was the lobby of the banking sector.

We may still have in mind the good old far west stereotypes where banks mostly served to deposit cash into ‘good hands’ and for the safety of our savings. But today banks do not rely on cash any longer, in fact, it’s quite the opposite; they hate cash.

More and more banks’ branches across Denmark started to be cashless years ago. Yes, that sounds unbelievable, a cashless bank, but in Denmark, it is a reality. You go to the bank for the service and not to withdraw or deposit. If you need to do so, you may still go to the ATM down the street. Does that make you feel safer about your money? Maybe not… but the bank, at least, feels much safer not carrying cash. For them, it’s a jackpot, they take away all the risks and therefore the expenses related to handling cash. It’s much less work and less manpower as it requires more computers than personnel to take care of your money. And if you go to them, it’s for the service… and where there is a service, there is a fee. So, at the end, they win.

This vision might seem a little simplified or simplistic. Unfortunately, it isn’t. For the bankers, a cashless country is a dream: increased profits with less expenses. And Denmark is here to show to the rest of the world why this model should be implemented everywhere else.

The bankers have seen the change coming from afar and now they have been rejoined by other parties interested in less cash based payments: the digital payment actors and the online giants such as Facebook or Apple who are today launching their own online wallets and soon… their own banks. In the mid 90s Denmark used to have 80 per cent of its retail purchases made in cash. Today we are down to about 25 per cent and the 2030 deadline seems reachable. Within the same past 25 years or so, Denmark has also seen an amplified regain of power of the banking sector. The country is playing with fire when it comes to interest rates and the banks have more and more control over the citizens’ lifestyle.

The same banks have also encouraged the political power in place to accelerate the transition towards a cashless nation, proving once again how powerful the banking sector has become in Denmark.

Today in Denmark, despite a few citizen-groups fighting for cash to remain usable in their country, it seems like the transition has already been embraced. As a matter of fact, Denmark’s guinea pig role seems to have had quite a regional impact as many other nordic countries are willing to follow.

‘More profits for the bank and less freedom for the customers shouldn’t be a very successful moto across Europe or anywhere in the world, but if the resistance doesn’t organize soon, it could very well become a reality before most of us have the time, and the will to say good bye to our cash money. Combining the financial and economic interests of a nation with its citizens’ wants and needs should be a priority for our governments. Today Denmark seem to have chosen the banks’ side despite of a growing uncertainty among its people. Let’s see if the rest of the world follows the cashless guinea-pig or if the bankers’ utopia turns out to be a fiasco.