We are talking with Jakub Bińkowski, with the Union of Entrepreneurs and Employers, about the limits of cash transactions that the European Union has introduced.
(Interview is simply a edited and completed version of the podcast Are you aware? ‘Technocrats want to introduce a cash payment limitIt is not known whether or not you are taking advantage of me.
Jakub Bińkowski
Member of the Board and manager of the Department of Law and Legislative Affairs of the Union of Entrepreneurs and Employers (ZPP). Warsaw Enterprise Institute expert. associate of the Social dialog Council and Labour marketplace Council. Author of expert reports, analyses and legislative positions. He specializes in regulatory issues, especially in the field of economical and taxation law.
Rafał Górski: The introduction of a cash payment limit under the “Polish Deal” triggered protests in 2023. The civilian Affairs Institute has mobilised citizens to act within the framework “Cash Gun!” campaign. The then Government of Law and Justice yet withdrew from restrictions on cash payments. Now the substance is coming back due to European regulation. On 24 April 2024, Euro-Parliamentarians voted to ban paying cash above the amount of EUR 10 000 (about PLN 43 000). It's a step towards cash liquidation. Under the pretext of combating money laundering and terrorist financing, there is simply a fierce dispute over the usage of cash. Can you explain to our Readers what this is about?
Jakub Bińkowski: We have respective planes here. As regards the relation between B2B companies, the thresholds for forced non-cash payments between B2B companies have been operating for years, are known and accepted by the market. erstwhile a fewer years ago the threshold above which the non-cash payment between companies was mandatory was lowered, just as we protested today.
In fresh times, as you have rightly pointed out, it is simply a simplification in the anticipation of utilizing cash in business-to-consumer relations, and this is simply a subject far more dangerous than cash restrictions in B2B relations.
Indeed, the government in Poland proposed, as part of this infamous Polish Deal, to limit payments in cash over PLN 20 1000 by the average Kowalski. First, the date of entry into force of this regulation was postponed. It was besides the consequence of the social opposition that this provision encountered. We have besides taken a hard, negative stance on the proposed changes, and consequently these regulations have been abandoned at all.
Now the subject has returned and a negotiated solution has emerged Regulation package Council and European Parliament on the prevention of money laundering and terrorist financing. This implies a maximum limit of EUR 10 000 in cash payments across the European Union. Any payment above this amount is to be made in non-cash form. 10 000 euro is simply a reasonably advanced threshold, so in most everyday consumer situations, it will not even be felt.
On the another hand, it is an expression of a tendency to remove cash from public space under the pretext of combating terrorism, money laundering, criminal activities, the grey region etc. And this is simply a tendency, from our point of view, very dangerous.
Therefore, we have besides taken a negative view.
What are your 3 main arguments against the introduction of this limit and on what basis do you base your argument?
The first argument, specified a principle, refers to the fact that, if we have a consumer relation with an entrepreneur, the agreement of both parties on the form of payment should be within the scope of the freedom of both parties. We do not see the problem that there are entrepreneurs on the marketplace who, for example, will accept only any form of payment: cash or cashless.
If their clients agree, that's fine. If not, they will gotta adapt to the market. This happened because, if we look back, many trading facilities accepted only cash payments only a fewer years ago – absolutely or, for example, below any amount limit. Over time, these points had to adapt to public expectations, as non-cash payments became increasingly popular. Today, for many people, they are the default form of paying for goods and services.
And we have no problem with that. We object to the fact that the top-down regulation imposes on the parties a essential form of payment.
The second argument besides refers to consumer freedom itself. The consumer should have the right to decide what form of payment he prefers. Not everyone wants to usage payment cards. The consumer should be free to usage the cash.
Finally, the 3rd argument, nevertheless applicable than the another two, and possibly even more applicable for public safety. We are at specified a circumstantial historical moment, full of various geopolitical tensions, the proximity of various inflammatory outbreaks appearing at the Polish border, the sensitivity of Polish ICT systems to external intervention, as part of a hybrid cyberwar. In the context of these events, cash constitutes specified a physical physical safety for economical turnover.
At a time erstwhile there would be e.g. cyber attacks on banking systems, payment systems, cash is our physical backup that we can use. We will be depriving ourselves of this safety if we lead to a situation where cash on the marketplace will not be available, due to the fact that the anticipation of utilizing it will be limited so far that it will be unwarranted.
