Found a word you're not familiar with? Double-click that word to bring up a dictionary reference to it. The dictionary page includes an audio sound file with which to actually hear the word said.

Digital transactions are generally far easier for a consumer to complete. Indonesia\s Permatabank presents the benefits of cashless transactions to its customers in this way: 'Using a cashless system to make payment transactions will certainly be more convenient because it is more efficient and faster. You do not need to prepare cash or wait for change when making payments. You can immediately leave after making a payment transaction...

You will not experience less or more change because the amount of money paid through the cashless application is in accordance with the nominal payment you must pay. You also do not need to worry if your money is lost like when you carry cash in your wallet. This is because the balance in your cashless application has a security system that uses a password when using it...

You can make payments anywhere...[including] online shopping. You do not need to come to an ATM or bank when making a payment. You can do it anywhere and anytime by using the cashless application on your smartphone.' The attitudes reflected in this Indonesian promotion were also displayed by many of those surveyed by the completely digital Australian bank, ME Bank. According to research conducted by ME Bank and released on August 16, 2021, more than a third (35 percent) of Australians would be happy to go cashless by 2022 and a quarter (25 percent) typically hold small amounts of unspent cash in their wallets for between one and three months. The primary reasons offered by those surveyed for not carrying cash were the inconvenience of having to withdraw cash; disliking having to carry a wallet and concern about losing the cash. These perceived advantages all stress the inconvenience for the consumer of cash transactions relative to digital transactions.

Proponents of a cashless society also stress the convenience value of digital transactions for businesses. In August 2019 the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco (FRBSF) published the results of their study into why cashless businesses were spreading rapidly across the United States.  The FRBSF noted the reduced cost for businesses of cashless transactions. They stated, 'Small- and medium-sized businesses are reported to pay tens of billions of dollars annually on cash handling expenses. Eliminating cash payments eliminates the costs associated with handling and transporting cash. Cashless businesses no longer need to pay banks fees to deposit and process cash and coin, nor do they need to pay for armored carriers to transport money to and from the bank. Additionally, these businesses no longer need to pay for employees to count and manage register balances throughout the day.'

The FRBSF also noted that businesses preferred the greater speed of digital transactions. It stated, 'Counting cash can take time, both for the customer and the employee. Several businesses that have gone cashless have cited benefits like faster transactions and increased store throughput. Atlanta's Mercedes-Benz Stadium found that its transition to exclusively card and mobile payment transactions not only reduced end-of-day reconciliation time but also resulted in quicker transaction times and lower wait times for customers. Salad chains Tender Greens and Sweetgreen found similar benefits from going cashless: Tender Greens estimates that cash transactions are four to five seconds slower than card transactions, and Sweetgreen found that its cashless locations processed 5 to 15 percent more transactions per hour. Particularly in high-volume businesses, these faster transaction times can translate to increased customer satisfaction, fewer opportunities for error in making change, and increased revenue.'

It has also been noted that the convenience of online shopping has increased customers' desire to have easy access to a digital payment method. In an article published in Forbes on October 20, 2021, Luigi Wewege stated, 'The internet became more accessible to a broader range of people beginning in the early '90s, and merchants understood the need to make it easy to pay for purchases made online... Today, apps make it possible to pay for goods using everything from virtual credit and debit cards to reading physical cards.'

2. Cashless transactions reduce the opportunity for physical theft
Those who support cashless economies note that reducing the availability of physical cash reduces the opportunity for it to be stolen from either consumers or businesses.

The reduced risk of having money stolen comes largely from the fact that physical funds, once stolen, cannot be easily recovered. However, access to digital cash can be blocked if a card or other accessing device is stolen. A 2021 Indian information site on cashless payments stressed the security that cards allow consumers in the event of theft. The site states, 'If stolen, it is easy to block a credit card or mobile wallet remotely, but it's impossible to get your cash back.' A 2014 study using data from the World Bank's Payments Systems Worldwide Database found that where there was widespread use of electronic point of sale devices there was a statistically significant reduction in the crimes of robbery and burglary.

Automatic Teller Machines (ATMs) have been identified as locations where people are particularly liable to be robbed. A publication released by Arizona State University in 2001 found that most of these robberies are committed by a lone offender-using some type of weapon-against a lone victim. Most occur at night, with the highest risk between midnight and 4 am. About 15 percent of victims are injured. Most involve robbing people of cash after they have made a withdrawal. The average loss is between $100 and $200. The Arizona State University study concludes 'Street robbers are notoriously difficult to deter. They require relatively small amounts of cash to justify their risk, they have a lot of crime opportunities, they want cash immediately, and street robbery does not require much skill or planning.' Observations such as these highlight that the risk of being robbed would decline if consumers did not have to withdraw physical cash to pay for the goods and services they wish to buy.

It has also been noted that cash payments put the wellbeing of workers who handle or transport cash at risk. Work Safe Australia recognises the problems associated with handling and transporting cash.They state, 'Health and safety hazards associated with handling and transporting cash can arise from manual tasks, worker fatigue, remote or isolated work and violence from robberies and armed hold-ups. Small and medium sized businesses are often the target of robberies because they usually have less security in place compared to banks. Service stations, chemists and liquor stores are often targeted but people walking retail takings to the bank and even schools are also at risk. Workers can be killed or suffer serious injuries from weapons or physical assault. They may also suffer stress-related injuries.'

It has further been noted that using physical cash puts travellers, especially those travelling overseas, at particular risk of being robbed. The travel advisory magazine Suitcase has noted, 'It won't come as a surprise for travellers that, in many countries, the tourist can be the target for pickpockets and conmen. Having something traceable, redeemable and block-able like a bank card can be better when it comes to protecting our money. Meanwhile, advances in face, voice and fingerprint technologies allow for transactions to arguably be more secure. Some banks and cards even offer special insurance policies for travelling which may cover issues with luggage, trip cancellations and accidents as well as rewards for spending - an added bonus.'

Similarly, not holding cash on a business premises advantages the business owner as it removes the risk of physical theft. The Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco has noted, 'Not having cash on store premises... reduces opportunities for both internal and external robberies. Internally, businesses face a constant battle with employee theft, or "shrinkage." The 2015 Retail Fraud Survey estimates that U.S. retailers lose $60 billion per year to shrinkage, though cash is just a portion of this loss, and the National Retail Federation's 2018 Security Survey estimates the average dollar loss per dishonest employee to be $1,203. Externally, cash-intensive businesses can be targets for robberies. Nearly a quarter of U.S. robberies (26 percent) took place at some type of retailer-either a gas station, convenience store, or other commercial residence. When businesses forego cash on their premises, there may be fewer opportunities and incentives for internal and external theft.' The West Australian Police actually advise businesses to reduce or remove their reliance on physical cash. In an advice publication to businesses they state, 'Have no cash kept on site. Post signs such as 'no cash/no drugs kept on premises.'

3. Cashless transactions would reduce the black economy and increase government revenue by reducing tax avoidance
Supporters of Australia becoming a cashless society claim that this would help to reduce the number of people who avoid paying tax. They argue that paying taxes is important because it enables our state and federal governments to supply the services on which we all rely and that avoiding paying tax harms all Australians.

The 'black economy' is made up of a section of society which does not pay tax on the products they sell or income tax on the money they receive for their labour. Members of the black economy also include those who buy goods and services cash-in-hand and do not pay goods and services tax. Australia's 'black economy' amounts to nearly $50 billion a year, according to a Federal Government taskforce 2018 estimate. To have a significant proportion of a country's financial capital tied up in the 'black economy' can be very harmful. Investopedia notes, 'The portion of a country's income tied to black money affects the economic growth of the country. Black money causes financial leakage, as unreported income that is not taxed causes the government to lose revenue. In addition, these funds rarely enter the banking system. As a result, it can be more difficult for legitimate small businesses and entrepreneurs to obtain loans...

These unreported earnings cannot be included in a country's gross national product (GNP) or gross domestic product (GDP). Thus, a nation's estimates of savings, consumption, and other macroeconomic variables would be misleading. These inaccuracies adversely affect planning and policymaking.'

Cash transactions assist the black economy because they can occur without any record. This allows the non-payment of tax or in some cases legitimate worker entitlements to be hidden. to be hidden. For this reason, the 'black economy' is sometimes referred to as the 'shadow' or 'hidden' economy. In an article published on June 5, 2020, Crikey quoted tax expert Professor Miranda Stewart, who stated, 'Cash is difficult to trace, so there's no record of a cash transaction unless that record is made through other systems. Clearly that's attractive for people who want to avoid not just the tax system but may want to avoid social security income declarations.' The Indian government has explained its preference for a digitalised system of exchange as a means of tackling the black economy. It has stated, 'Digital recording of financial transactions...helps authorities to monitor and check the movement of money. Digitalisation of financial transactions ties and records every transaction in the name of an individual and thus helps the authorities to track and verify the transactions in future.'

In an international study published in August 2019, Friedrich Schneider of Johannes Kepler University estimated that restrictions on the use of cash could reduce the black economy, including tax avoidance, by up to 20 percent.

The use of cash can also allow wage and entitlement theft from vulnerable low-income workers forced to accept cash-in-hand payments. Rather than increasing these workers earnings by having them avoid tax, these cash payments can be under award and not include important entitlements. The accounting firm Acuity has noted, 'Many people see such cash-in-hand activity as a victimless crime, but it starves countries of tax revenue and, because it is done off the books, can exploit workers by paying them below-award wages with no superannuation or other protections. In May 2019, Industry Super Australia reported that 2.85 million Australians missed out on $5.94 billion in super entitlements in the 2016-17 financial year. High-risk sectors for this "off the books" activity include building (especially home repairs and renovations), couriers, cleaners and food businesses.'

4. Cashless transactions reduce the opportunity to fund terrorism and for criminals to launder money
Those who support the development of a cashless society in Australia note that this would reduce opportunities for terrorist funding and money laundering. Money laundering is currently a major problem worldwide. Investopedia defines money laundering as 'the illegal process of making large amounts of money generated by a criminal activity, such as drug trafficking or terrorist funding, appear to have come from a legitimate source. The money from the criminal activity is considered dirty, and the process "launders" it to make it look clean.' Crimes such as drug importation, fraud, people trafficking, migrant smuggling, corruption and theft generate large amounts of money, usually in cash. Money laundering takes the proceeds of such crimes and conceals their illegal origin.

This process typically involves three steps: placement, layering, and integration. Placement secretly injects the "dirty money" into the legitimate financial system. Layering conceals the source of the money through a series of transactions and bookkeeping tricks. In the final step, integration, the now-laundered money is withdrawn from the legitimate account to be used for whatever purposes the criminals have in mind for it.

According to the Australian Crime Commission, more and more organised crime groups in Australia are becoming involved in money laundering so they can enjoy their illicit profits or reinvest the proceeds of crime into other criminal activities with less risk of being detected. Estimating how much money is laundered globally or within any given country is difficult, as the process is covert and crosses national borders.  However, the Australian Crime Commission estimates that organised crime costs Australia from $10 billion to $15 billion per annum. AUSTRAC notes that that, by some estimates. more than $1.5 trillion of illegal funds are laundered worldwide each year, $200 billion of this in our region.

Money laundering systems are particularly important to drug traffickers because these criminals deal almost exclusively in cash. Cash transactions have the advantages of being anonymous which is why many of those who purchase illegal drugs do so using cash. Both drug users and drug suppliers typically use cash to conduct their transactions. The large stocks of cash that drug deals accumulate must be transformed and made to appear legitimate. This involves fake companies that exist solely for the purpose of laundering money. They take in dirty money as 'payment' for supposed goods or services where no goods or services are supplied; they simply create the appearance of legitimate transactions through fake invoices and balance sheets. Launderers also sometimes place dirty money in otherwise legitimate businesses to clean it. They may use large businesses like brokerage firms or casinos that deal in so much money it is easy for the dirty currency to blend in, or they may use small, cash-intensive businesses like bars, car washes or clubs. Another frequently used method is through buying real estate. Criminals deposit cash below the AUD10,000 reporting threshold, often at different banks or bank branches, to avoid triggering threshold transaction reports to AUSTRAC. This method often involves high volumes of transactions to numerous accounts to avoid detection. The funds are then used to obtain bank cheques to buy real estate.

Money laundering by those involved in crime is a serious problem as it enables them to convert the proceeds of their crimes into financial resources that appear legitimate. Therefore, money laundering serves to encourage crime by making it more safely profitable.

Money laundering also plays a significant role in maintaining terror organisations. Most people who financially support terrorist organisations do not do so openly for fear of attracting criminal charges or other reprisals. They contribute the money in covert ways that allow them to fund terrorism while maintaining anonymity. Also, terrorists do not use credit cards and cheques to purchase the weapons, plane tickets and civilian assistance they need to carry out a plot. They launder the money so authorities cannot trace it back to them and prevent their planned attack. Such money laundering typically relies on converting physical cash into hidden terrorist support funds. Interrupting the laundering process can cut off funding and resources to terrorist groups. This is an argument made to support the development of cashless societies.

5. Cashless transactions can help to reduce the spread of contagious diseases
Those who support Australia and other nations becoming cashless societies point to the advantages this would have in preventing disease transmission. The issue has become particularly important since the development of the coronavirus pandemic.

Numerous studies have demonstrated the capacity of notes and coins to spread diseases. An article published in The Scientific American on January 3, 2017, states, 'Fecal bacteria and other pathogens may have hitched a ride from someone's hands, nose or apron onto our cash. And yeast or mold might have taken hold, too. The result could be a durable risk to our health whenever our money changes hands.'  It has been noted that antibiotic-resistant bacteria such as methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), which can cause life-threatening blood infections, can survive on our currency. Other bacterial disease agents found on banknotes and coins include Escherichia coli (which can cause bloody diarrhea and sometimes even kidney failure or death) and Pseudonomnas aeruoginosa (which causes urinary tract and respiratory system infections). Studies of cash from around the world specifically point to high bacterial counts on money handled by food workers or on that of those who work within, visit or attend hospitals. It has also been discovered that banknotes can transmit viruses. Swiss researchers found in one 2008 study that flu viruses and survive for a couple days on Swiss francs.

The same study discovered that these viruses can survive for up to 17 days if accompanied by mucus. An article published in Insider on December 21, 2021, gives further instances of the capacity of hard currency to spread disease. Charles Bailey, MD, medical director for infection prevention at Providence St. Joseph Health was quoted as saying, 'Money serves as a fomite, an inanimate vehicle by which pathogens can be spread.' One study found that physical currency changes hands at least 55 times a year, or more than once a week. This makes it an ideal fomite to spread disease. It has also been noted that some viruses can live on surfaces like plastic and fabric for over 72 hours.  

The COVID pandemic has accelerated official and public concern about physical cash as a means of spreading infection. In 2020 public health experts around the world began to urge a shift towards cashless payments to help prevent the spread of coronavirus, while the World Health Organisation warned the virus can be transmitted via banknotes and coins. South Korea and China began large-scale operations burning and disinfecting currency and world-famous tourist attractions, including the Louvre in Paris, announced they would no longer accept cash payments.

In Australia, the then president of the Australian Medical Association, Tony Bartone argued that our attitude to cash would need to change. He stated, 'Clearly, as the COVID-19 situation evolves, things we take for granted will be re-examined.' He further noted, 'Cashless options would potentially reduce the extent of possible transmission.' Professor Robert Breunig of the Crawford School of Public Policy has stated that concerns about Covid-19 had definitely hastened the use of digital payments in Australia.  Alan Shields, Chief Operating Officer at business intelligence firm RFi Group, has noted, 'An environment in which we are asked to sanitise our hands in every shop is obviously not conducive to handling cash.' Australian banks have begun to assess the requirements for incinerating currency. An Australian Treasury spokesperson has indicated that the Treasury will continue to review the COVID-19 impacts, and that it was liaising with other departments and states.