Should Australian Federal Government Mandate That All Shops Have EFTPOS/Electronic Payment Options?

SupeNintendoChalmers on 15/05/2018 - 12:18

Every time I walk past a whole bunch of eateries, in particular in the more ethnic parts of Melbourne the stores either-

  • accept cash only
  • say the machine is "broken"
  • make you pay a surcharge for the use of the machine

With the latter, sometimes the added cost is reasonable, other times not so.

Whilst we can all agree that big businesses who pay no or next to tax are detrimental to our economy, so are the steady stream of small shops who refuse to do the right thing.

Personally, I'd love to open a cafe, but I know that I would never be able to compete with immoral operators, who live in the cash economy.

What I'm proposing is that federal government make is illegal not to have functioning electronic payment options, that the banks offer the service for a piecemeal amount, say $50 per month and that shops therefore no longer have surcharges.

What do you think?

Poll Options

  • 228
    Yes
  • 416
    No
General Discussion

Comments

      • EightImmortals on 15/05/2018 - 14:14

        Well that's not the exact definition I was thinking of but it will do. So, tell us, what percentage of our wage is our 'fair share'? How have determined what 'fair' means, is it just enough to cover the essentials of a functioning society or enough to cover the inadequacies of an incompetent government that can't manage it's budget? Should my tax burden also encompass welfare bludgers including political and corporate ones? You know, cos I don't mind paying my 'fair share' but I do mind having to suffer more and more tax for less and less services.

        • SupeNintendoChalmers on 15/05/2018 - 14:54
          -3

          lets make fair=legal for the sake of this argument

          Is that basic enough for you?

        • EightImmortals on 15/05/2018 - 15:22

          @rodripa: Not in the slightest.

        • Other on 17/05/2018 - 17:04

          @EightImmortals: Well I guess fair would be at least the mandated minimum wage.

        • ely on 17/05/2018 - 20:35
          +2

          @rodripa: I agree with you in general, but not in that; legal in Australia is far from fair in a pile of ways.

        • [Deactivated] on 17/05/2018 - 21:46
          +1

          @ely:
          Indeed. I can think of a clump of examples where justice and fairness conflict.

        • madnut on 17/05/2018 - 22:57

          @rodripa: cash is legal

        • EightImmortals on 18/05/2018 - 11:48
          +1

          @TheMostHated: Sure, what I was asking him was how he determined what a 'fair' amount of tax was. Sorry for the confusion. :)

  • apple2016 on 15/05/2018 - 14:13
    +6

    Whilst we can all agree that big businesses who pay no or next to tax are detrimental to our economy, so are the steady stream of small shops who refuse to do the right thing.

    If you are concerned about tax ask for a tax invoice which states the ABN. The Govt does mandate that tax invoice needs to be provided.

    • macrocephalic on 15/05/2018 - 15:28

      Exactly. We have a mechanism for this already, we don't need to further interweave the banks in this.

  • m0tyrider on 15/05/2018 - 15:32
    +4

    All the years of business's not charging a surcharge for credit cards etc then all of a sudden everybody is going it…

    Even when paying my Rego and I opted to pay via credit card there is a 0.5% or 0.25% fee (can't remember exactly).

    What rubbish.

    As pointed out by cockneylondoner

    • Xastros on 19/05/2018 - 00:06
      +1

      It genuinely costs a business between 1%-2% when they accept a credit card payment. Consumer pays for it either way, whether through surcharge or built in prices. Better to have it as a surcharge because it is fairer. Those who use card pay for the cost involved in it. Otherwise cash payers are subsidising card users.

  • Ocker on 15/05/2018 - 16:08
    +1

    This is Australia - not some communist country!

    • EightImmortals on 15/05/2018 - 17:32
      +2

      This is Australia -some communist country!

      Fixed it for you.

      • poohduck on 18/05/2018 - 11:12

        so not true; it's not even an illusion. Unless, of course, you mean like the real communist countries who still have their incredibly wealthy and powerful minority?

        • EightImmortals on 18/05/2018 - 11:49
          +1

          Yes, the similarities are quite scary when you strip away the labels. :)

  • BuyoTheCat on 15/05/2018 - 16:09
    +8

    I propose we do not pay. At all.

  • inherentchoice on 15/05/2018 - 16:33
    +5

    There's too much red tape, green tape, bureaucracy and general government regulation in this country.

    Just vote with your feet and don't purchase from merchants that only take cash if that's what you prefer.

    • poohduck on 18/05/2018 - 11:14

      Awesome - there's too much control already. People CAN think and decide for themselves.

  • JimmyF on 15/05/2018 - 16:53

    make you pay a surcharge for the use of the machine

    and its totally legal…… So why is this on your list?

  • Illian on 15/05/2018 - 17:18
    +1

    It's not a big deal, anyone who only accepts cash knows they're losing customers and are ok with it. Cash is outdated and inconvenient, and being cash-only is a dealbreaker for me. And to remark on a couple previous comments, no I can't just stroll a couple hundred meters to an ATM, hell the change I'm left with is an inconvenience in itself, and no having convenient access to money does not make anyone with half a brain spend more, the same people with bad spending habits walked around with a few hundred bucks in their wallet 30 years ago. Not like it's hard to set up a card option, there was Bagel place in my area which had a reader connected to an app on a phone, hell vending machines have accepted cards for many years now.

  • pformag on 15/05/2018 - 17:50
    +11

    Vote with your wallet. If they don't accept EFTPOS, then go somewhere that does.

    • poohduck on 18/05/2018 - 11:16
      +1

      Maybe he doesn't like walking :)

  • bobbified on 15/05/2018 - 18:03
    +6

    Personally, I'd love to open a cafe, but I know that I would never be able to compete with immoral operators, who live in the cash economy.

    Here we go… another person who wants to change things for everyone else to satisfy their own selfish reasons.

    Your generalising with the assumption that all places that onlytake only cash are trying to avoid tax. If someone really wanted to avoid tax, having an EFTPOS terminal isn't going to fix the problem. There are still going to be cash payments!

    • SupeNintendoChalmers on 15/05/2018 - 20:00
      -8

      satisfy their own selfish reasons.

      Selfish to want a more even playing field?

      Your generalising with the assumption that all places that only take only cash are trying to avoid tax.

      Wow. I guess you must still believe in the tooth fairy then?

      • bobbified on 15/05/2018 - 23:09
        -2

        Wow. I guess you must still believe in the tooth fairy then?

        I bet you've never complained about getting "cash discounts".

        Good Guys do the "Pay Cash, Pay Less" thing - do you think they do it to avoid tax?

        • R-Man on 16/05/2018 - 15:24
          +2

          Good Guys don't do that any more. Even when they did, i thought you could still "pay less pay eftpos". It's more like "pay less by not paying instalments"

        • Daabido on 17/05/2018 - 13:58
          +2

          It was a pure marketing slogan. It was quite successful too.

        • wildstone on 18/05/2018 - 16:01

          'Pay Cash, Pay Less' is just a code word for 'you can haggle'. It was quite successful, as with other retailers, you don't go out and ask 'can you make it cheaper?'.

    • Xastros on 19/05/2018 - 00:07

      It solves a big part of the problem because card payments are very popular. A large chunk of income then has to be declared as income.

  • JIMB0 on 15/05/2018 - 21:00
    +2

    Massage parlours often insist on cash. Excuses range from they have already settled their machine for the day to a surcharge of $5 just to use EFTPOS.

    • SupeNintendoChalmers on 15/05/2018 - 21:35
      +2

      I think massage parlours insist on cash for ahem, other reasons

      • Clear on 16/05/2018 - 11:08
        +3

        Tax evasion.

      • mini2 on 16/05/2018 - 13:08

        They could certainly use some other weird/arbitrary business name for their card processing but that might open up themselves for chargeback when their clients don't recognise where the charge is from.

      • tonsta on 18/05/2018 - 20:35
        +1

        they are trying to lessen the load of cash from your back, you goto a massage parlour for your bad back right?

  • J23SD on 15/05/2018 - 21:19

    One time I ordered Thai food my order total came to $17, when I turned up and tried to use my card they said $20 minimum or $1 charge. I politely advised that I don't want to buy anything else and I also would not be okay with paying the $1 charge, they insisted so I walked out of the store and went to the noodle shop next door. They had already made my food so I guess a loss for them in the end.

    • thargelios on 17/05/2018 - 20:30
      -3

      Good one. Bet that made you feel great.

      Despite the rule that a business is allowed to set a minimum amount for EFT payments.

      "Yes, businesses are allowed to set a minimum transaction value for the acceptance of EFTPOS cards (or other cards if they wish). They don’t have to offer a card payment option, but they need to comply with the excessive surcharging rules regardless of the cost of the product."

      So good on you for being a knob. Next time bring cash.

      • [Deactivated] on 17/05/2018 - 22:38
        +1

        The minimum might be fine, but there's no way it cost them $1 to process a $17 transaction. In the last 9 or so months it has been illegal to surcharge more than the cost of acceptance. Oddly enough, I've not seen a store that didn't accept card with no surcharge since that rule came in. Even the one place I went that used to be cash only, then was minimum $x or 20c surcharge is now no surcharge and they have the latest EFT model machine.

        • Xastros on 19/05/2018 - 00:09

          I applaud you. You have done the right thing. There is no way it cost them $1 to process that transaction. They are not complying by the new regulations.

        • J23SD on 20/05/2018 - 07:51

          @Xastros: I did tell the guy at the shop that the $1 charge was illegal. That's the thing the shop had a choice to make, do they make the sale or do they forgo the sale. In this instance, they were not willing to offer me a payment method that I was happy to use.

          Oh, and did somebody just call me a knob on the internet? @Thargelios

          Good one. Bet that made you feel great.

    • shaiguy on 18/05/2018 - 17:10

      So on what basis did you think the $1 charge was not ok? Do you know how much it actually costs them to offer the eftpos service?

      • [Deactivated] on 18/05/2018 - 19:32

        On the basis that $1 equates to a fee of almost 6%. Which we all know is much higher than any bank charges for a small business.

      • Xastros on 19/05/2018 - 00:11

        Banks charge based on the transaction amount. No way does a bank charge 5.9% for a $17 transaction. I've worked in banking for nearly 15 years.

        These merchants are either ripping you off or actively trying to discourage you from using EFTPOS so that they can avoid tax.

        • D C on 19/05/2018 - 01:21

          No way does a bank charge 5.9% for a $17 transaction. I've worked in banking for nearly 15 years.

          What as?

          6% is believable when all charges, expenses and fees for dealing with cards are factored in.

          I've worked in card processing. I've had situations where the bank PAID US per transaction (woot!), and also where they'd hold 30% for 6 months as a guard against fraud and chargebacks (a somewhat dodgy business).

  • whooah1979 on 16/05/2018 - 07:27

    The alp/greens will never pass a bill where financial institutions have an unlimited supply of transaction fees.

    • tonsta on 18/05/2018 - 20:41

      sad when governments lose control of the public systems, CTP insurance is a prime example, insurance companies are raking it in because the NSW government decentralised to scheme, not insurance companies are "collecting" the premiums on behalf of the government.. what a joke, like asking a consultant "whats the time?"…reply "look at your watch, please pay me $1."

  • jacross on 16/05/2018 - 08:16
    +3

    It wouldn't change things. They'd just hide a greater proportion of their cash dealings and rely more on their electronic dealings as their reported turnover.

    Your cafe wouldn't fail because of cashies. Your cafe would fail because cafes are very hard and you dont know what you're doing.

  • bluedolphinsmangos on 16/05/2018 - 13:00

    Would love a mandate to have AMEX accepted everywhere too

    • bargdebarg on 16/05/2018 - 20:36
      +2

      Amex have the worse merchant fees around, several times as expensive as Visa/MC - it's how they pay for all the perks. Great for customers terrible for businesses. But some wear the cost due to the customers it may attract.

    • Plasma Ball on 16/05/2018 - 21:24

      I use my AMEX wherever I can for the points but even I wouldn't want to force business to accept it.

  • ausmechkeyboards on 16/05/2018 - 13:19

    Whilst we can all agree that big businesses who pay no or next to tax are detrimental to our economy

    Disagree. Tax isn't beneficial to the economy at all, it's just beneficial for a fat welfare state. How about we have less taxes, smaller government, and expect people to take care of themselves and their neighbours instead of expecting The Government™ to do it for them?

    • [Deactivated] on 17/05/2018 - 22:42

      You think pay per use roads / fire departments / police are efficient? Taxes spent properly are cheaper than taking care of yourself even if you're the one paying all the tax for everyone else's benefit as well.

      Oddly enough the people who have nothing are the ones that would benefit the most from no government. No one would be able to stop them violently redistributing the wealth. Of course we'd all be much worse off. I've been to countries with smaller governments and less taxes, by and large they are much less safe. And I don't know about you, by my physical safety is definitely worth the taxes I pay.

      • ausmechkeyboards on 18/05/2018 - 09:36

        I think that we shouldn't have to pay income or sales tax when roads are covered by the fuel excise tax, GST and registration. I think that ambulances aren't free and neither should fire brigades be. That's what insurance is for anyway.

        police are efficient

        Pick one:

        1. Police
        2. Efficiency

        Taxes spent properly are cheaper than taking care of yourself even if you're the one paying all the tax for everyone else's benefit as well

        No they're not. I'm paying >$50,000 a year in tax and I pay for my own health insurance as well. Explain to me how it's cheaper than doing it myself?

        Oddly enough the people who have nothing are the ones that would benefit the most from no government.

        They have nothing because this welfare state doesn't encourage them to do anything with their lives.

        I've been to countries with smaller governments and less taxes, by and large they are much less safe

        No you haven't, and no they're not. I'd feel much safer in Kuwait or Oman than the USA or India.

        And I don't know about you, by my physical safety is definitely worth the taxes I pay

        That's probably because you don't pay any tax.

        • Xastros on 19/05/2018 - 00:15

          It's only because we have an incompetent government. It is possible for large governments to be efficient (see Singapore) but you need to pay accordingly to get the talent. In Australia, people don't like governemnt servants being paid much. If you're a real gun do you want to be a CEO of a big bank and earn 10 million a year or be the prime minister for 200k per year?

          Why can a private business run things more efficiently than a government organisation? They are all run by humans after all?

  • Adz81 on 16/05/2018 - 14:32
    +2

    (profanity).

    How does this require any sort of legislation??

    Simple solution.. When it comes to shopping, vote with your wallet. If your entire business case for opening up cafe hinges on the fact that some cheeky scallyways may operate in an way that favours cash over card and you don't, then I'll save you time (and money) right now by suggesting, don't open a cafe.

    Why would you rather the way you, as a business owner, get paid be mandated rather than a business choice?

    • Other on 17/05/2018 - 17:09

      I think the point is to stop large scale tax fraud through a simple system of requiring shops to have a cashless machine. As an individual you are limited to how much tax fraud you can stop by refusing to shop at certain restaurants.

  • jerjergege on 16/05/2018 - 15:26
    +1

    Surcharges can't be over 2% on Amex and 1.5% on visa/mastercard, not really excessive is it?

    https://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/prices-surcharges-receipts…

    • Kandrew on 16/05/2018 - 17:28
      +1

      And you think that it really costs (most of) those businesses that much to have the payment received by credit card?

    • D C on 16/05/2018 - 23:30
      +1

      Surcharges can't be over 2% on Amex and 1.5% on visa/mastercard

      Your link doesn't actually say that.

      Those figures are the typical costs for a large business, a smaller one may have fees up to 5% and they are allowed to pass that cost onto you.

    • [Deactivated] on 17/05/2018 - 22:47

      They can't be over how much it costs them to accept it. For a very small business that has a low risk profile (eg food) those are pretty standard charges. I know some of the merchant fees in higher risk sectors like accommodation are up to 12%, though they're rarely if ever surcharged directly.

      Large companies like Coles / Woolworths pay a tiny tiny fraction of a % in fees due to their bargaining power and overall low risk. The more transactions you do generally the lower the % cost.

    • shaiguy on 18/05/2018 - 17:16
      +1

      Note on top of that, you need the pay the bank a monthly fee. An example is Westpac at $55-225 for up to A$20k. I think that cost needs to also be taken into account.

      The other cost that people do not know and I understand because I have given quite a bit of advice is that there is so much fraud that goes on which the small business ends up incurring. If there is any complaint against an EFTPOS cost, the transaction is immediately reversed with the small business/merchant then required to fight for it back. This is actually generally very difficult for many small businesses even with security cameras etc. There is so much criticism of smaller businesses not providing the service but seeing some of these incidents I can completely understand why.

  • AustriaBargain on 16/05/2018 - 16:36

    Most business is done in cash at the fast food place I work out. It’s a low income area though.

  • kaz09 on 16/05/2018 - 16:40

    when i used to work at a small family owned newsagency (yes, i was underpaid) the owner had rented
    one of those fancy eftpos terminals where tap is on the side and its always on 4G, amount automatically transfers through etc,
    its costs were so high that they ended up switching over to a suncorp one.

    not sure if relevant but people got real mad when opal top up by card costed a 1% surcharge but that was only bc the
    paypass is credit which costs more so the business would actually be losing money if they didnt put a surcharge for topup.

    • Plasma Ball on 16/05/2018 - 21:32

      But Opal give a 2% commission on all Opal sales. That doesn't mean they'd be losing money, just that they'd be getting less.

      • Deridas on 16/05/2018 - 21:48
        +1

        If Opal gives a 2% commission on sales, and the small business cops the 1% card surcharge, then effectively the business' profit from Opal sales is reduced by 50% should it not pass the surcharge on?

      • kaz09 on 16/05/2018 - 21:48

        with a costly eftpos terminal and paypass it'd take most if not all the profit.

        • [Deactivated] on 17/05/2018 - 22:51

          I assume they could just top-up online instead with no surcharge and take all of the profit and not generate any potential additional sales either…. One assumes the tiny commission on most top-ups means that the whole point of selling the things in the first place isn't so much the profit on those but on other impulse buys at the same time.

  • Aussar on 16/05/2018 - 17:11

    Currently working at a small business, and we have a $10 minimum on eftpos. Ask the boss why and his only reply was that the eftpos fees eat up any profit under that.

    • Xastros on 19/05/2018 - 00:18

      That only applies (Maybe) to debit card transactions. Credit card transactions are always based on a % of the transaction.

  • Trying2SaveABuck on 16/05/2018 - 18:05

    Yep better then not allowing 10k cash payments

  • Gauntlet on 16/05/2018 - 18:14
    +1

    Does "vote with your wallet" ever enact change? It doesn't seem like it.

  • Tnetennba on 16/05/2018 - 19:14
    +2

    While we're on the topic, isn't the actual cost to process cash, depending on size of business, actually something like 2-5% anyway? Why not just accept card to reduce amount of cash? Less cash to count (staff time wasted), keep secure (safes, armaguard fees or time wasted taking cash to the bank).. It all adds up.

    As a business owner, why wouldn't I want to accept card, and encourage it?!

    I feel like the ones who do accept card and charge a surcharge, or don't to "avoid the fees" (dodge tax), do so only because the cost of accepting cash isn't laid out clearly as a percentage, but it does add up.

    • tryagain on 17/05/2018 - 12:48
      +2

      I think for a lot of smaller businesses, most of the costs dealing with cash are a sunk cost, ie cash counting is done in when packing up just before closing time so they/the staff are already there anyway, bank trips coincide with a trip to the shops etc, whereas card costs are a direct impact on the bottom line.

  • bargdebarg on 16/05/2018 - 20:33
    +1

    My view on this is the added cost of cash handling (having a float, counting, taking to bank, incorrect change given) would be comparable cost of running digital only - no cash accepted. That is, assuming you're in an area like the CBD where this strategy wouldn't cost you sales. But to run both cash and digital absolutely pushes your cost to serve up. So too soon to expect everywhere has digital as an option.

    Eventually cryptocurrency will provide the solution. Years away right now, as it needs super fast transactions, smaller environmental impacts and practically free transactions. Just unsure it that will occur in 10 or 20 years…

  • [Deactivated] on 16/05/2018 - 20:44
    +2

    All shops should be required to accept Dogecoin

    • bargdebarg on 16/05/2018 - 20:53

      How unpatriotic, Auscoin would be the only suitable option.

      • [Deactivated] on 16/05/2018 - 21:49
        +1

        One might even call it: Legal Tender

  • p1 ama on 16/05/2018 - 21:38

    Whilst governments requiring private individuals and/or businesses to purchase a required product is always dubious, I can see where you are coming from.

    The cash economy is really expensive - just think about how much money is lost to the printing, storage and transfer of physical money. I would fathom a guess and say that if the money that we implicitly spent on this were all spent on maintaining a public access electronic payments system that we might even be better (and cheaper) off.

  • shaiguy on 16/05/2018 - 22:35
    +1

    It's kind of ironic that you are suggesting that EFTPOS be made legal tender for more moral grounds and to reduce the black economy with banks charging $50/mth… so all this information is going to the banks with banks still profiting from small businesses… see banking royal commission.

    Not like the businesses can do much with the cash after the $10k rule

    • CalmLemons on 17/05/2018 - 10:13

      The $10k is a bit useless. I've never seen any business pay each other in cash over $10k.

    • [Deactivated] on 17/05/2018 - 23:01

      In Australia in 2018, it's unlikely that these sort of fees are anywhere near the amount you lose by not offering card payments, for small transactions at least. But I'll leave that up to the business to decide.

      • shaiguy on 18/05/2018 - 17:20
        +1

        Hi Bargs - as mentioned in a previous post I do deal with some small businesses and it is a tough one. There are some real loopholes (not going to name them here) that some individuals really exploit and the merchants/small businesses cop the loss. That may not seem like much but if someone loses say a $50 sale and their net profit margin is only $2 on each item… that's a lot more they have to sell.

  • chrisd82 on 16/05/2018 - 23:00
    +1

    I had one of the CBA EFPOS ones for a number of years for my photo business and got used a handful of times a year. I probably paid more per year on fees on it then it took in as more pay via bank deposit for my services or once in a while via cash. Switched to the Paypal one and in my case Im better off even if they have a higher transaction fee.
    On the other hand I have a friend with a restaurant thats been doing well enough. There's no ATM walking distance from their shop so have no choice to have an EFPOS and majority pay though it. Her average monthly fees from it is just over $5000/month. That number would be much lower they could get more cash payments in.

    Either way I think each business should have the choice and these fees should be much lower then what they are now.

  • Blahness on 16/05/2018 - 23:14
    +1

    What about restaurants that say cash only - but provides a fee charging ATM conveniently located inside their venue. I’m looking at your Laksa King flemington.

    • bobwokeup on 17/05/2018 - 10:06

      Do what I do and boycott them. One our local restaurants did that until they finally accepted eftpos and guess what business is booming now.

  • ozzpete on 17/05/2018 - 00:07
    +1

    With the new laws regarding ban on cash payments > $10,000 … It is an absolute must, that eateries accept eftpos… How else will I pay for my lobster in caviar+truffle sauce 😣

  • bs0 on 17/05/2018 - 01:15

    It's certainly possible to open a cafe without cash - you're just catering to a specific crowd, and you need to create a consistent crowd by having a good reputation/product.

    Went to a cafe with my sister about a month ago, a regular cafe of her's in the Sydney CBD. They only took card payments; real quick and efficient for all the morning business people. The line was out the door,
    real high turnover with a multiple machines and baristas working in a small space. And the coffee/food was good. Wouldn't have spotted it unless someone pointed it out, but was worth going back too.

    It seemed like they were doing quite well.

    I'd second the fact the just because businesses accept card doesn't mean they don't avoid tax with cash payments, small or large businesses.

  • viper8548 on 17/05/2018 - 04:16

    "Whilst we can all agree that big businesses who pay no or next to tax are detrimental to our economy"

    Strongly disagree, its not just about tax, businesses provide jobs, the employees also pay tax, there's also super, payroll tax, gst and a whole bunch of other taxes and fees other than income tax for a business. Any one of the points I listed above would not be detrimental, or would you prefer higher unemployment rate creating more burden on our welfare benefits?

  • bobwokeup on 17/05/2018 - 10:04

    I would love to see it happen but until the anti technology folks realise we live in a world of change it’s not going to happen. I just boycott stores that don’t accept credit card or charge a fee.

    • asianbargain on 17/05/2018 - 13:08

      Yeah that the way op should follow.

  • CalmLemons on 17/05/2018 - 10:06
    +2

    ha ha ha.

    Governments shouldn't control financial institutions, the only thing that will happen is the prices go up in a non-free economy.

    It costs $0.20 on average for an eftpos transaction. When you're selling a $4.00 coffee I'll leave you to do the maths. The biggest killer here will be rent and wages per cost of time to make that coffee.

    Plus chargebacks - which aren't such an issue these days as paypass liability falls solely on the customer.

    With cards, standard cards all the way to platinum and amex, the business will be paying an extra 1-3% of fees.

    So now you have 3% fees, 20% wages, 10-20% rent with increases annually or per option, rising electricity costs, you get the picture.

    A lot of the time business owners aren't the smartest bunch of kids around the block and all they know is cash, trying to balance eftpos settlements at the end of the day and then calling up the bank if any issues is a whole bunch of time and money to put into the cost.

    You'll find if you ever want to run a cafe, if you had to run everything by the book, you wouldn't be open for long. It is a catch 22 situation where the government knows of this, knows it can't help directly as it doesn't know how to run a cafe, knows there are always going to be patch fixes and at the same time understands that it needs small businesses to keep the employment level up - otherwise they than have a small business owner who it then has to support as this small business owner doesn't have the required skillset to work for a big 4 accounting firm - hope that paints the picture?

    Sometimes it is hard to retrain a 50 year old business owner and introduce them to Apple Pay…

    For the many people on this forum, I think few would have experience in a business and how hard it truly is especially in the hospitality industry.

    Please bear in mind, in China, a huge proportion of payments are now made via wechat, an electronic payment system inside a facebook like app - which is monitored by the chinese government. How do you wish to proceed my friends? Cash or the government monitoring your every expense….

    • RocketSwitch on 17/05/2018 - 10:22
      +2

      Any business dealing with food is hard, hence why so many celebrity chefs start their own TV shows and release books.

  • [Deactivated] on 17/05/2018 - 10:16

    There is a local butcher to me, which is part of a chain (Cannings) that don't accept CASH at all, it's card only and this is evident on a large sign on entry to their store.

    So there are also those who are moving with the times of us heading towards a "cashless society", as we keep hearing about.

    Although there is a cost associated with cards, there are also costs associated with having cash in your stores, such as robberies, staff theft and the time-consuming work to maintain change and daily bank deposits.

    • Entropy Sky on 19/05/2018 - 22:00

      Cash is the only legal tender is Australia, refusing to accept legal tender is a federal crime.

  • centrelink on 17/05/2018 - 10:23
    +1

    But if we do that how can the Chinese people avoid tax?

  • Laziofogna on 17/05/2018 - 12:08

    Only when government will decide to eliminate phisical bills.

    • Antikythera on 17/05/2018 - 15:26

      yep. only if i can pay my tax in bitcoin i'll stop using cash.

  • Baghern on 17/05/2018 - 13:32

    Ethnic or not, doesnt seem to make any difference.. its generally if the venue is cheap (for what they offer or not). Guess what most ethnic places are cheap

    That means smaller margins, hence as other have mentioned most places even some of the expensive cafes have a $10 limit for card transactions. My city cafe has that $10 limit, and its prices are high

    On the topic of race… can we bring beer glasses for non Caucasian drinkers since 99% of cases involving glassing the culprits are of a melanin lacking variety, who can stick with plastic cups

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join