Cheques being phased out in Australia by 2030

[Someone]

I doubt that it is driven by the government; what business is it of theirs?

No, that's exactly what it is. The government is aiming to have no cheques used within their systems by some future date. Right there in the OP:

I learned that the Australian government will be phasing out the use of cheques by no later than 2030. Which to me is still quite late considering the use of cheques in Australia is almost zero today.

It is almost certainly just to streamline and reduce costs for the government entities producing and accepting cheques. Push that all to fully digital bank transfers and in person card transactions.

I like this, while depositing a cheque as an individual isn't too hard, the bizarre ways some government functions expect to be paid (cheque, money order, cash in person) can be a pain as a consumer. So if they will streamline away from paper/manual methods that will be an improvement for me.

[TimFox]

I doubt that it is driven by the government; what business is it of theirs?

No, that's exactly what it is. The government is aiming to have no cheques used within their systems by some future date. Right there in the OP:

I learned that the Australian government will be phasing out the use of cheques by no later than 2030. Which to me is still quite late considering the use of cheques in Australia is almost zero today.

It is almost certainly just to streamline and reduce costs for the government entities producing and accepting cheques. Push that all to fully digital bank transfers and in person card transactions.

I like this, while depositing a cheque as an individual isn't too hard, the bizarre ways some government functions expect to be paid (cheque, money order, cash in person) can be a pain as a consumer. So if they will streamline away from paper/manual methods that will be an improvement for me.

I may have misunderstood the original post (not well worded):  does the government of Australia mean only to stop writing checks?
Will they accept checks in payment of taxes, etc.?
Will the Australian banking system continue to allow the use of checks?

[Halcyon]

I doubt that it is driven by the government; what business is it of theirs?

No, that's exactly what it is. The government is aiming to have no cheques used within their systems by some future date. Right there in the OP:

I learned that the Australian government will be phasing out the use of cheques by no later than 2030. Which to me is still quite late considering the use of cheques in Australia is almost zero today.

It is almost certainly just to streamline and reduce costs for the government entities producing and accepting cheques. Push that all to fully digital bank transfers and in person card transactions.

I like this, while depositing a cheque as an individual isn't too hard, the bizarre ways some government functions expect to be paid (cheque, money order, cash in person) can be a pain as a consumer. So if they will streamline away from paper/manual methods that will be an improvement for me.

I may have misunderstood the original post (not well worded):  does the government of Australia mean only to stop writing checks?
Will they accept checks in payment of taxes, etc.?
Will the Australian banking system continue to allow the use of checks?

Both. This is the original announcement: https://ministers.treasury.gov.au/ministers/jim-chalmers-2022/media-releases/modernising-payments-infrastructure-phasing-out-cheques

I'm not aware of any Government departments that are still using cheques, but there may still be some stragglers, particularly when it comes to internal matters.

But independently of this, consumer demand (or lack thereof) has caused banks to stop offering to chequing facilities on some new accounts as early as this year. Whilst consumers will still be able to deposit cheques (for a fee), they won't be able to order cheque books. Some banks don't offer cheque accounts at all.

As I mentioned earlier, cheques made up only 0.2% of non-cash payment methods in 2021-2022 and is the single payment method that is rapidly declining.

Cost is cited as one reason and whilst I don't know what the true cost of processing a cheque is, it's not zero. Some of this cost is passed onto the consumer. There are many more pitfalls into cheque use then there are positives, that's not an opinion, that's the nature of the technology.

As I mentioned earlier, why pay to keep an old and dying technology alive? It makes no sense to me. I used Telex, Fax and old analog phone lines as prime examples of that. I also don't understand peoples' reluctance to use alternate technologies. "Because that's the way we've always done it" is not a valid excuse in my books and something I'm used to hearing from old dinosaurs in inefficient government agencies.

[tggzzz]

I doubt that it is driven by the government; what business is it of theirs?

No, that's exactly what it is. The government is aiming to have no cheques used within their systems by some future date. Right there in the OP:

I learned that the Australian government will be phasing out the use of cheques by no later than 2030. Which to me is still quite late considering the use of cheques in Australia is almost zero today.

There is a big difference between the Australian government phasing out their usage of cheques (the sentence you quoted), vs the Australian government phasing out all cheques in Austrialia (the sentence after that, which you snipped).

It is almost certainly just to streamline and reduce costs for the government entities producing and accepting cheques. Push that all to fully digital bank transfers and in person card transactions.

I like this, while depositing a cheque as an individual isn't too hard, the bizarre ways some government functions expect to be paid (cheque, money order, cash in person) can be a pain as a consumer. So if they will streamline away from paper/manual methods that will be an improvement for me.

I've no problem with an institution stopping using cheques. My objection is to an instution stopping everybody using cheques.

[tggzzz]

Cost is cited as one reason and whilst I don't know what the true cost of processing a cheque is, it's not zero. Some of this cost is passed onto the consumer.

All processing costs are non-zero.
All processing costs are passed onto the consumer, directly or indirectly.
Hence that contention doesn't hold water.

Who will pocket any saved costs? The consumer? Fat chance.

There are many more pitfalls into cheque use then there are positives, that's not an opinion, that's the nature of the technology.

Well, no.

"Authorised push payment fraud" is major and increasing fast. That is much easier to perpetrate with "modern technology" than with cheques, because everything happens faster.

As I mentioned earlier, why pay to keep an old and dying technology alive? It makes no sense to me. I used Telex, Fax and old analog phone lines as prime examples of that. I also don't understand peoples' reluctance to use alternate technologies. "Because that's the way we've always done it" is not a valid excuse in my books and something I'm used to hearing from old dinosaurs in inefficient government agencies.

You have been given some use cases. You have repeatedly refused to consider them valid, merely because they are not relevant to you.

"There's none so deaf as them's won't hear".

[Someone]

I doubt that it is driven by the government; what business is it of theirs?

No, that's exactly what it is. The government is aiming to have no cheques used within their systems by some future date. Right there in the OP:

I learned that the Australian government will be phasing out the use of cheques by no later than 2030. Which to me is still quite late considering the use of cheques in Australia is almost zero today.

There is a big difference between the Australian government phasing out their usage of cheques (the sentence you quoted), vs the Australian government phasing out all cheques in Austrialia (the sentence after that, which you snipped).

ORLY?

This was something a few of us were discussing over on the EEVblog IRC channel today.

I learned that the Australian government will be phasing out the use of cheques by no later than 2030. Which to me is still quite late considering the use of cheques in Australia is almost zero today.
Most Australian banks haven't offered cheques for most accounts for some time, however they will still process cheques that are sent to them (at least for now).

In my experience, I've never owned a cheque book and I can count on one hand the number of times I've had to cash a cheque. Same goes for writing cheques, I think I last wrote one in 2002, as the company I worked for at the time still used them.

Keen to hear about other's experiences around the world. Correct me if I'm wrong but the US are still fairly reliant on cheques as a form of payment?

Nowhere is that saying there is some mandate from the government for banks or the general population to stop using cheques for their own purposes. The government is discontinuing their use, and banks have wound down their offerings.

Full quote you say I'm misrepresenting...... yet nothing that says what you are pushing. Perhaps if the text was so obvious you would have quoted it, rather than just throwing cheap FUD.

[Halcyon]

No one is misrepresenting anything? I'm merely reporting on what was announced by the government and is being widely reported by the RBA, banks and the media.

I'm not going to spoon-feed sources and quotes to everyone, you guys are welcome to do your own homework if you want to learn more.

I was simply opening the discussion since I was actually quite surprised that this hasn't happened sooner and to get a feel for how others felt, particularly in countries where the banking systems perhaps aren't quite as modern.

A few of you seem to be shooting the messenger here, like as if I was material in the whole push to get rid of outdated banking processes. Likewise there are some people who carry on, and act as if their opinion is more correct than everyone else's and alternatives don't matter.

Personally, even if I was a cheque user, I'd sooner be seeking alternatives rather than bitching about something that is inevitable.

[David_AVD]

There's been plenty of time for the users of cheques to start using the alternatives such as credit / debit card, direct debit, direct deposit, BPAY, etc.

I can't think of a single person I know who's ever mentioned in the last 15 years that they prefer cheques to any of the above.

[tom66]

Cost is cited as one reason and whilst I don't know what the true cost of processing a cheque is, it's not zero. Some of this cost is passed onto the consumer.

All processing costs are non-zero.
All processing costs are passed onto the consumer, directly or indirectly.
Hence that contention doesn't hold water.

Who will pocket any saved costs? The consumer? Fat chance.

Competitive banking market so yes, the consumer does benefit from lowered cost.  That means more benefits, higher savings interest, more ATMs available for free, etc.

At least in the UK the banking market has never been so competitive...  This is good.

Many of the smaller banks around here don't take cheques at all.  The larger ones require you to post them in, because there are no branches any more... This is a problem for those without access/ability to use technology for sure.

[tggzzz]

Cost is cited as one reason and whilst I don't know what the true cost of processing a cheque is, it's not zero. Some of this cost is passed onto the consumer.

All processing costs are non-zero.
All processing costs are passed onto the consumer, directly or indirectly.
Hence that contention doesn't hold water.

Who will pocket any saved costs? The consumer? Fat chance.

Competitive banking market so yes, the consumer does benefit from lowered cost.  That means more benefits, higher savings interest, more ATMs available for free, etc.

At least in the UK the banking market has never been so competitive...  This is good.

Given how the banks don't pass on base rate increases to savers, I doubt they would pass on (?very small?) savings from phasing out cheques.

Me a cynic? Shurely shome mishtake.

Many of the smaller banks around here don't take cheques at all.  The larger ones require you to post them in, because there are no branches any more... This is a problem for those without access/ability to use technology for sure.

There are also quite a few (1.2million in 2020 [1]) people without bank accounts at all. I don't know how they would receive electronic payments without a bank account. I presume that they take cheques to high street "cheque cashing" services and probably get less than the cheques face value. Yet another way the poor are screwed by the systems.

[1] https://www.ukfinance.org.uk/news-and-insight/blogs/financial-inclusion-and-access-banking-services

[tom66]

Given how the banks don't pass on base rate increases to savers, I doubt they would pass on (?very small?) savings from phasing out cheques.

Me a cynic? Shurely shome mishtake.

Well, you're banking with the wrong people.  I get 5% on £5k in savings with a major high street bank and 4.82% on the rest with another provider.  And I can get SONIA bonds at 5.15% via Vanguard, the interest on which is tax free.  The base rate is 5.25% right now.  So to say they aren't passing on the higher interest rate situation is wrong, but you do have to be prepared to shop around.

Many of the smaller banks around here don't take cheques at all.  The larger ones require you to post them in, because there are no branches any more... This is a problem for those without access/ability to use technology for sure.

There are also quite a few (1.2million in 2020 [1]) people without bank accounts at all. I don't know how they would receive electronic payments without a bank account. I presume that they take cheques to high street "cheque cashing" services and probably get less than the cheques face value. Yet another way the poor are screwed by the systems.

[1] https://www.ukfinance.org.uk/news-and-insight/blogs/financial-inclusion-and-access-banking-services

The problem with people not having access to banks is more related to being NFA (no fixed address) or having no form of ID.  To get a basic bank account in the UK, you need:
- A fixed address (which a credit reference agency can find, so other bills need to go there, at least for last 6 months)
- Two forms of ID (passport and drivers licence typically)
- No previous history of fraud or criminal activity involving money in the last 6 years (CIFAS marker)

This is particularly an issue because to rent a place you need a bank account, to get a job you need a bank account, applying for IDs requires money and often a fixed address, so the whole system is kind of self sustaining in terms of homelessness and lack of access to banking.

It is a problem a few banks are trying to solve with other charities, for instance HSBC offers a no-fixed-address account with some limited features.  But you need a homelessness charity to sponsor you as they are representing you to the bank as trustworthy (not sure there's a cost to them but presumably the deal is they don't send any old sod their way).

But cheques really have nothing to do with this problem.  If you don't have a bank account you can't accept cheques and while cheque cashing places do exist many of them have similar requirements in terms of ID and they tend to take a steep fee.

[tggzzz]

Given how the banks don't pass on base rate increases to savers, I doubt they would pass on (?very small?) savings from phasing out cheques.

Me a cynic? Shurely shome mishtake.

Well, you're banking with the wrong people.  I get 5% on £5k in savings with a major high street bank and 4.82% on the rest with another provider.  And I can get SONIA bonds at 5.15% via Vanguard, the interest on which is tax free.  The base rate is 5.25% right now.  So to say they aren't passing on the higher interest rate situation is wrong, but you do have to be prepared to shop around.

I see many high street banks advertising high interest rates, but typically on only a very limited amount of money, e.g. monthly savings of £200, or £5 max.

NS&I (i.e. the government) withdrew its 6.5% rate yesterday, IIRC because so many people had jumped on it.

I've been getting ~10% recently on about half my savings. No, you can't get such accounts any more. Wonder why.

Many of the smaller banks around here don't take cheques at all.  The larger ones require you to post them in, because there are no branches any more... This is a problem for those without access/ability to use technology for sure.

There are also quite a few (1.2million in 2020 [1]) people without bank accounts at all. I don't know how they would receive electronic payments without a bank account. I presume that they take cheques to high street "cheque cashing" services and probably get less than the cheques face value. Yet another way the poor are screwed by the systems.

[1] https://www.ukfinance.org.uk/news-and-insight/blogs/financial-inclusion-and-access-banking-services

The problem with people not having access to banks is more related to being NFA (no fixed address) or having no form of ID.  To get a basic bank account in the UK, you need:
- A fixed address (which a credit reference agency can find, so other bills need to go there, at least for last 6 months)
- Two forms of ID (passport and drivers licence typically)
- No previous history of fraud or criminal activity involving money in the last 6 years (CIFAS marker)

This is particularly an issue because to rent a place you need a bank account, to get a job you need a bank account, applying for IDs requires money and often a fixed address, so the whole system is kind of self sustaining in terms of homelessness and lack of access to banking.

It is a problem a few banks are trying to solve with other charities, for instance HSBC offers a no-fixed-address account with some limited features.  But you need a homelessness charity to sponsor you as they are representing you to the bank as trustworthy (not sure there's a cost to them but presumably the deal is they don't send any old sod their way).

But cheques really have nothing to do with this problem.  If you don't have a bank account you can't accept cheques and while cheque cashing places do exist many of them have similar requirements in terms of ID and they tend to take a steep fee.

It is relevant to the availability of cheque facilities, since no electronic mechanism is available to such people.

Yes, it is a vicious circle (almost) without end. The "no ID and no records" is a particular issue for people coming to the UK to work or study.

Since Halcyon is convinced cheques are unnecessary, I wonder how Australia gets around such issues. Historically they haven't worried about their Abos.

[tom66]

I see many high street banks advertising high interest rates, but typically on only a very limited amount of money, e.g. monthly savings of £200, or £5 max.

NS&I (i.e. the government) withdrew its 6.5% rate yesterday, IIRC because so many people had jumped on it.

I've been getting ~10% recently on about half my savings. No, you can't get such accounts any more. Wonder why.

MoneySavingExpert's guide is quite good and summarises the best offers right now.

Suffice to say if you had half a million quid you'd still be able to get around 5% on it by spreading it across 3-4 banks.  Of course, at that level of capital you'd probably have investment management.

You're not going to get much better from a bank than the 5.25% that the BoE offers because that's essentially risk-free, the BoE is always going to pay that, so why would they give you more on your money when they have to deal with ordinary consumer headaches (fraud, customer service, marketing etc.)

Looks like NS&I offers a fixed 5.7% for 3 year product still, competitive with commercial offerings.   But you'd need to lock your cash away for 3 years - not always appealing (edit: and it's taxable.)

[Halcyon]

There's been plenty of time for the users of cheques to start using the alternatives such as credit / debit card, direct debit, direct deposit, BPAY, etc.

I can't think of a single person I know who's ever mentioned in the last 15 years that they prefer cheques to any of the above.

Whilst this is just a sample size of one, my 93 year old neighbour hasn't been a user of cheques for years. Although she stops short of banking apps on her phone, she still uses internet banking, BPAY etc... to pay bills and transfer money around for three reasons: It's free, it's quick and it doesn't involve her driving anywhere due to limited mobility.

Based on my observations, I think older people are more adaptive than we give them credit. It's this current generation of young people who tend to be more stubborn and scream "anxiety" when they have to make some changes in their life.

Since Halcyon is convinced cheques are unnecessary, I wonder how Australia gets around such issues. Historically they haven't worried about their Abos.

They have never been necessary for me. Same goes for the vast majority of the Australian population. What can I say? Feel free to make a counter-argument and give me one situation where cheque payments have no alternative from transferring money from A to B (and I'm not simply talking about consumer choice/stubbornness), then I'll consider changing my mind.

As for those who might be homeless, or don't have all the regular ID documents, banks will typically address those on a case-by-case basis. There are mechanisms in-place to assist people who fall into those categories. You can read all about it over on Austrac's website: https://www.austrac.gov.au/business/core-guidance/customer-identification-and-verification/assisting-customers-who-dont-have-standard-forms-identification

[tggzzz]

Since Halcyon is convinced cheques are unnecessary, I wonder how Australia gets around such issues. Historically they haven't worried about their Abos.

They have never been necessary for me. Same goes for the vast majority of the Australian population. What can I say? Feel free to make a counter-argument and give me one situation where cheque payments have no alternative from transferring money from A to B (and I'm not simply talking about consumer choice/stubbornness), then I'll consider changing my mind.

The old "I'm alright Jack" and "the small minority can sod off" attitude. Morally and ethically repugnant.

3% of adults in the UK don't have a bank account for one reason or another. How can they receive (or make) electronic payments?
How many adults in Australia?

As for those who might be homeless, or don't have all the regular ID documents, banks will typically address those on a case-by-case basis. There are mechanisms in-place to assist people who fall into those categories. You can read all about it over on Austrac's website: https://www.austrac.gov.au/business/core-guidance/customer-identification-and-verification/assisting-customers-who-dont-have-standard-forms-identification

Those are merely a fig leaf enabling the government to absolve itself of responsibility. The "encouragements" (to use the word in the document) are not requirements. As such they are will be severely compromised by

• automated and manual systems designed only for the common easy case
• poorly trained staff not knowing about how to deal with special cases
• individual staff unwilling to become responsible for making a decision that turns out to have been wrong
• banks that are being extra-vigilent about identification because they have previously been penalised for contravening money-laundering or anti-terrorism legislation (think HSBC)

If you think those points aren't valid, then I'll point you to how poorly (to put it mildly) the UK banks deal with LPAs. Limited Powers of Attorney are the mechanism by "donors" specify trusted third parties who can operate bank accounts for the donor's benefit when the donor cannot. (Memo to self: set up an LPA stating my daughter is my attorney).

So, how can those without a bank account receive benefits etc?

[David_AVD]

In Australia it appears that some banks and organisations are making it possible to open a bank account with no fixed address. There's also some ways to deal with getting physical mail too. I'm not saying it's super easy, but it's not impossible. Going from what I've read about these services, continuing the use of cheques doesn't appear to be useful for people with no fixed address. A bank account and a debit card (very minimal application process) would seem the way to go. Any government payments can go into the account and be drawn upon using the debit card or by withdrawing cash.

[tggzzz]

In Australia it appears that some banks and organisations are making it possible to open a bank account with no fixed address. There's also some ways to deal with getting physical mail too. I'm not saying it's super easy, but it's not impossible. Going from what I've read about these services, continuing the use of cheques doesn't appear to be useful for people with no fixed address. A bank account and a debit card (very minimal application process) would seem the way to go. Any government payments can go into the account and be drawn upon using the debit card or by withdrawing cash.

Cheques can be used by people with no fixed abode and no bank account: go and collect them and use a cheque cashing service.

IMHO it remains to be seen how the bank's officers can fulfil their many other legal/statutory duties while giving unidentifiable stray people bank accounts.

[David_AVD]

Sure, you could find somewhere to cash the cheque, but that may not be as easy as it sounds these days.

The cheque would also only be likely to be sent in the mail. In Australia it's quite unlikely that you would be handed one.

Then you're back to the no fixed address issue. If you have an address, you can open a bank account and not need the cheque!

Remember, I'm speaking of the situation in Australia. YMMV in your country, the the thread was about cheques in Australia.

[jfiresto]

Remember, I'm speaking of the situation in Australia. YMMV in your country, the the thread was about cheques in Australia.

I thought it was also about cheques in Australia. From the post starting the thread:

... Keen to hear about other's experiences around the world. Correct me if I'm wrong but the US are still fairly reliant on cheques as a form of payment?

[vk4ffab]

Since Halcyon is convinced cheques are unnecessary, I wonder how Australia gets around such issues. Historically they haven't worried about their Abos.

They are and remain totally unnecessary in Australian society no matter what their situation, living in a remote community, homeless, limited identity documents. If one can prove identity to meet Centerlink requirements, they have enough identity to open a bank account. If one does not want to open a bank account, centerlink can issue its own debit card in the persons name. Some segments of the population are forced onto these debit cards so they can participate in our essentially cashless economy while at the same time limiting their ability to participate in the black economy of sly grog and drugs. A check is useless, i have not seen one in over 15 years about the same period of time I have not had cash in my wallet. Checks are used by scammers and cash by criminals and those wanting to be robbed.

[vk4ffab]

I doubt that it is driven by the government; what business is it of theirs?

No, that's exactly what it is. The government is aiming to have no cheques used within their systems by some future date. Right there in the OP:

I learned that the Australian government will be phasing out the use of cheques by no later than 2030. Which to me is still quite late considering the use of cheques in Australia is almost zero today.

It is almost certainly just to streamline and reduce costs for the government entities producing and accepting cheques. Push that all to fully digital bank transfers and in person card transactions.

I like this, while depositing a cheque as an individual isn't too hard, the bizarre ways some government functions expect to be paid (cheque, money order, cash in person) can be a pain as a consumer. So if they will streamline away from paper/manual methods that will be an improvement for me.

I may have misunderstood the original post (not well worded):  does the government of Australia mean only to stop writing checks?
Will they accept checks in payment of taxes, etc.?
Will the Australian banking system continue to allow the use of checks?

The government announced it will stop using and accepting checks, the banks will all follow suit, my bank is not only phasing out checks, its also phasing out cash. I have not used cash in the last 15 and very little in the 5 years before that for places that had not adopted efpos yet. Now days, even flee market vendors take electronic payments. The world here has moved away from checks and is fast moving away from cash. The only people hording cash are criminals.

[mendip_discovery]

My experience is I get a cheque from the MD as a bonus each year. He does this as he wants us to see it rather than it just being a surprise amount turning up in my account. But other than an occasional cheque I don't see them. My bank these days let's me photograph the cheque and its paid that way, which turns it into a digital transaction in moments.

I used to get them a lot as a photographer as I didn't have card facilities and since I stopped I dont see them.

But I have noticed in the UK that highstreet banks have closed to the point where the nearest bank is a 1hr journey. They tell people that people aren't using banks, but considering that banks have for years had inconvenient opening times, open after people are at work, close for lunch and close before you finish work that means 95% can't get to them and then they close the bank. The are promoting online banking services and people who can't keep up are just left to the wayside, they are in the minority anyway and will eventually die out, literally.

I know the tax office are keen to have everything digital partly as it makes chasing the source of money much easier. Unless you are wealthy as which point its affordable to spend money obfuscating the transactions. Lots of trades people live with cash as much as they can as it means they can avoid paying tax and this is a key target for the tax man. Only the other day was there an article about going after tax from peoples side hustles.

[rsjsouza]

To me the first block that should be thrown at the face of any government that wants to use "apps" for their services (including payments of any kind) is that they would have to be forced to get everyone a smartphone. These bastards get away with the majority of people buying something on their own dime and them slowly cutting (or increasing the inconvenience of) services, conveniently forgetting they must provide it to 100% of the population. I left Brasil almost two decades ago, and now see how the government there imposes the use of "apps" for several basic services, including shutting down their existing webpages that used to provide all these in a similarly convenient way. And at the moment the current president (and his minions) are trying to curb access to finances and government services for people that don't fall in line with the official discourse (as if the past three years haven't shown us anything). 

Private institutions? Well, I am not in favour to force them what to do, but they will certainly lobby the government to cut a service in favour of the highest bidder of a new service or infrastructure model.

Having cash as an option is essential for one's freedom.

Another example is a certain inconvenient part of the Canadian population that was protesting against government overreach - any electronic payment method was systematically being shut down by Trudeau and his thugs.

[antenna]

I can offer a few reasons checks are common here in the US.

#1 My mom uses checks every day because she is afraid a debit card would be easily hacked/skimmed.  The thing about cards in the US (not sure about the rest of the world) is that if you get your card stolen, one of two things will happen.  if it is a credit card, the credit card company will hunt the crook down, usually no big deal as they are insured and have the resources and experience tracking crooks down.  2-If it was a bank debit card, upon report of a stolen card, the banks will simply turn off your card, issue you a new one, and leave the hunt for the bad guy up to you.  There is very little you can do if someone steals your debit card info.  And due to this, many banks (at least for the middle and lower class) will simply limit the debit card to $600 a day.  Not always a problem, until you need a new oscilloscope and have toexplain to the bank why you want to spend more than $600 on your card for a day.  PITA every time.


#2 Many businesses still pay people with checks, especially places like scrap yards that take advantage of the time it takes for the check to be cashed and clear to verify what you scrapped wasn't stolen.  They have time to cancel the check.  Pawn America puts their payments on disposable cards they can call and cancel, but those kinds of "cash cards" still have scary terms to them (like using it within 90 days or it expires, or ridiculous fees). 

#3 Everyone charges a fee to accept cards out in the country.  If I want to go to the nearest decent restaraunt in the woods and eat, there is a 3% fee to pay wth any card, debit or credit.  Many places (and ATM machines) do that as well.

#4 Sometimes you need to pay someone who does not accept digital payments, like Jim down the road that welds stuff, and if you find yourself in that situation without cash on hand, you need a check. I live an hour from my bank.

#5 Go on wikipedia and take a look at data breaches.  Every one of those massive data breaches involved the theft of personal and card data for the sole purpose of ripping peoples cards off.

#6 I am tired of pulling on the card machines at the gas station worrying about card scimmers.

#7 I just don't trust my entire way of life on a single piece of plastic that can get lost.  How many times have you legitimately lost your wallet and had to grab some cash or a check?  Happened to me twice.

Ill hold back my other reasons because there are people here just waiting for an opportunity to call me a conspiracy theorist.

[TimFox]

I agree about the problems with debit cards in the US, which I consider to be a pipeline directly from my bank account.
They often are granted to people whose credit record is too poor to get a credit card.
The cardholder's legal protections on credit cards are much better here than for debit cards.