A cashless society protected by biometrics, is something we can all look forward to! It will finally usher in the end of the black economy and tax avoidance!

As it will allow every transaction to be recorded electronically! Which would then allow an unavoidable expenditure tax to replace all other tax measures and in so doing, effectively end all tax avoidance!

Which as the very first consequence allow the common tax burden to be seriously reduced? Say to just 5% of all expenditure, along with an upward adjustment in social welfare!

Which will ensure at the very least, an equivalent adjustment to offset new automatic tax imperatives and increase essential discretionary spending/as well as end unmet need!?

And given tax collection is entirely automatic, courtesy of accompanying electronic data! Allow the corporate world to pocket the current 7% averaged, currently ripped from the bottom line by tax compliance costs, which would be rendered entirely unnecessary!

Name your pleasure, the bona fide service of the genuine national interest; or narrow vested interest? Given we can't do both!

Although some devious disingenuous disciples of dictatorial diabolical demagogues, dumbly dedicated to their despicable diatribes? Duh? Might well argue for the latter?
Alan B.

A study by Mastercard suggests all this? Well of course Mastercard would love a cashless society - big interest to be charged. Consumers would also like it? But most of them are using someone elses's money (and paying dearly for it); but what if this 'cashless society' entailed the use of debit cards and use of one's own money? Not so popular then, either for the current card usurers or the users. This cashless society thing that regularly comes up, would mean more addiction to debt, and more scandalously high interest for the card providers.

yeap Banks make far more money from a cashless transactions then they do a cash ones. So it's no wonder they keen on it, and low and behold their push polling has found out we want it to.

Cashless would not have worked very well in Adelaide when the power grid collapsed.

Biometrics are not good for authorisation purposes. It has already been demonstrated that fingerprints can be copied from a distance, and iris scans are similarly vulnerable. Such identification is even worse that current methods because, should someone copy your biometrics, you can't get a new face or fingerprints.

And it really is a matter of when, not if, biometric data is hacked. Secure computer systems, that are absolutely secure, are as rare as unicorns.

Another problem is that, unless something like Bitcoin's ledger is used, the government can monitor all your activity, and control it. Already in the USA, legal marijuana retailers, porn actors, and others have found themselves unable to open or maintain a bank account. Now imagine if a government doesn't like you, your politics, or your religion. You could find yourself without access to the economy.

Cashless is brainless.

I think everyone should just have a barcode tattooed on their forehead. This would make it easier and more convenient for our political overlords and their pet favourites in the banking cartel to extract as much from our accounts as they want. Better still, a permanent canula into our veins so the parasite class can just bleed us at will. And of course it goes without saying that the political class must have a licence to inflate to billy-oh.

A cashless society already exists in Australia - in prisons!

If Australia tries to force me to carry those electronic gadgets just in order to be able to pay for my food and clothing, then I will leave Australia and curse it to be ruined. If the same also happens all over the world then I will leave this world too, not before praying that it be reduced to ashes.

AlanB: You say- "It will finally usher in the end of the black economy and tax avoidance!"

Well, while I admit that it will reduce the black economy it certainly won't eliminate it. Much of the black economy and tax avoidance is currently facilitated with electronic money. When you have to move millions to 100's of millions of dollars worth of money, as organised crime does quite regularly, it is extremely impractical to use physical cash-- you use the banking system.

But even if you swapped over to a cashless system AND increased surveillance of Australian banking currency flows you still wouldn't eliminate the black economy because criminals would just use alternatives. For example, they could use foreign currency, gold and other precious metals, securities (such as shares and derivatives), crypto-currencies, any non-perishable physical asset that has a high value to size and weight ration and has an accessible market to sell to (eg: vouchers and giftcards, cigarettes, artwork, mobile phones, alcohol-many tradies have done small favour jobs for a carton or two, exotic goods, etc) and the list goes on and on and on....

//A cashless society already exists in Australia - in prisons!//

An excellent point, Yuyutsu: whatever the circumstances, people will set up a mechanism of exchange. In prisons, the currencies are generally cigarettes or sexual favours (at least that is what my fiction tells me, not having been inside myself).

So I don't necessarily have a problem with the medium of exchange being made electronic. That being said, certain practical problems present themselves: namely, continuity of supply. A really good sized solar flare could wipe out the grid, coal or renewable based. People need to trade; if we set up a system which is open to Mother Nature jamming a massive spanner in the cogs of commerce then we set ourselves up for a fall.

There's no blackout which can mess up your supply of notes stitched into an old mattress, or hidden inside the pages of a book. If everybody squirrels away a little bit of hard currency in paranoid preparation for the solar flare/gamma ray burst/massive bolide impact/magnetic pole reversal/super-volcanic eruption/Reptilian conquest, we'll still have some hard currency as the medium of exchange in our Neo-Apocalyptic future.

On a separate note, I feel that turning the medium of exchange into little numbers on a screen is likely to exacerbate what I like to call 'Smaug syndrome': the delusion that money has intrinsic value. In Australia we have plastic notes - a damn good currency. Bloody hard to forge, and Her Majesty's portrait on the $5 can still be folded to look like a sad whale performing fellatio. It's nice to see that some things don't change :)

But you can't wipe your arse with them, or light a cigar... as far as I'm concerned the $5 note has more intrinsic value than the rest, and only because of the sad whale giving head.

But there are people who seem to view money the same way that Smaug or Scrooge McDuck do: not for the stuff it can buy, but just because they get some weird pleasure from seeing some electronic numbers on an electronic screen. They have been fooled into thinking that these numbers are somehow a measure of their self-worth, not just a medium of exchange with which to buy more electronic screens - which just by themselves are far more wondrous than the world's hugest hoard of gold to use as a security blanket.

Cash offers the most simple & easy to manage private budgeting system there is.

For over 50 years I have always allocated myself a certain limited amount of money as spending money, which had to cover all discretionary spending. I added this to my wallet each pay period. This had to cover everything including transport, entertainment presents & clothing. If the wallet is empty I don't spend. The rest stays in the bank to pay fixed costs, power, phone, insurances, housing etc. & to save

This built up to buy the things I really want, new house, car, Racing car or yacht. As for me the attraction of these things has always been stronger than that of wine women & song, this cash easy budget system has allowed me to have them all. Funnily enough, once you have the house, car & yacht, the women thing takes care of itself.

As this is such an easy & successful way to manage your finances, I am not the least bit interested in using credit cards, ever. I still pay by cheque with major expenses, or PayPal if buying on the net. This is about as electronic I'm going to get.

The chances of extortion and blackmarketeering are HUGE. Wordless and legal Theft.

The prospect of some machine wordlessly (and without human signs) deducting value out of a credit card would be hugely dangerous to the inebriated, gamblers or those wanting retail therapy.

Dotty daughters of 16 at dress shops just cannot do without that $1,500 flimsy frock. So when they blink "yep" or do nothing, the $1,500 flies from their card - a debt their parents have to repay at 18% Interest.

No way, Jose.

This would be worse than giving your Credit Card details to Las Vegas Hotel receptionists who are forced to sell your details to the Mafia
- for Mafia deductions all over America!

I wouldn't worry too much about those who get off with the occassional carton of fags etc. Even so, their activities makes them prime targets for petty crims wanting a fast buck that isn't likely to be reported!?

And as large as that minor blackmarket might be, not worth spending millions chasing thousands? But rather aimed at multinationals, many with budgets larger than sovereign nations, 40% of whom pay no company tax to anyone!

And if that avoidance becomes more costly than paying your tax? Guess what option they will chose?

Yes some rather clever folk might spend several thousand on technical equipment so they can hack into my personal account in order to lift a couple of hundred, even there purposeful delay gives me time to catch up and stop payment!

I don't think it should apply to credit cards, given the record domestic debt burden; but exclusively apply to debit cards protected by your biometrics and a pin coupled to your own secret words!

I have a small metal case that makes intended scanning impossible? And their are a range of wallets etc that do the same, give one to every family member this Chissy; and limit your online shopping to the essentials you can't get by going out!

Hacking is a crime of opportunity you participate in by clicking on a harmless looking button! Don't be too trusting!

And in not too far ahead in time that little old lady tottering down the street or in the store, will be packing an impressive array of miniaturized equipment that not only warns when the scanner is around, but who they are complete with a compelling video record able to be used as evidence to get these folk incarcerated doing hard time!

And I'd outsource that to a third world country, to ensure they thought twice about their electronic pickpocketing! With a strike three and you're out clause!
Alan B.

AlanB: You say- "And as large as that minor blackmarket might be, not worth spending millions chasing thousands? But rather aimed at multinationals, many with budgets larger than sovereign nations, 40% of whom pay no company tax to anyone!"

Do you really think multinationals wouldn't be able to "engineer" a way around your proposal? Do you really think that you've outsmarted them?

Generally, for most multinationals*, if it is good at making money, then there is one very, very, very easy way for a government to get it to share the spoils with them. This scheme is not at all new and doesn't involve any new laws nor taxation measures and is implementable straight away. In fact many people (including quite average ones- like me) use this method all the time!! Can you guess what this could possibly be?
*this method applies to many, but not all multinationals. If can be successfully applied to most of the multinationals that I've heard accused of not paying enough tax- like Apple for example.

Multinationals need to move money, that means banks, international transfers and remittances. And an unavoidable expenditure tax could claim a fair and equitable percentage of those repatriated profits from Australian earned income, before it made it to the tax havens! Thereby defeating the rationale for needing to shift money earned in Australia anywhere else!

Moreover some exceptionally imaginative accounting practise has money chasing its tail through a number of sister companies, to create various financial illusions!?

And just one of many creative accounting strategies to rob the tax office, or create an appearance of elevated cash flow in order to secure funding. And Legalized fraud?

Yes the multinationals can be beaten by simplicity and accompanying transparency, almost impossible to defeat and by making paying your share of tax less expensive that the cost of convoluted creative accounting!

Only possible due to antiquated multilayered convoluted tax laws, with a loophole on every page! Only failsafe simplicity has any chance of ending endemic avoidance, which also serves a few quisling Australians!

So why would anyone try to cheat at the other blokes expense! And why should honest Australian taxpayers be expected to pick up that slack?

If you think that's too clever, let's try something not yet ever tried! I mean 50% of something is always going to be better than 100% of nothing!

If the tax avoiding multinationals don't don't like having their avoidance schemes removed via transparent simplicity! Tough! And it would be a David and Goliath struggle! And guess who won that encounter!? You guessed it, the shepherd with the ultrasimple sling shot!
Alan B.

AlanB: You very first sentence- "Multinationals need to move money, that means banks, international transfers and remittances. ", with the implicit assumption that you mean *Australian* banks then this is where you're going wrong. This is a false assumption from the start. To severely reduce the effectiveness of your system the Multinationals can use various strategies, for example, only do business in foreign currencies with foreign banks (with the Internet and the various online financial services available these days even requiring the general public to buy with a foreign currency doesn't cause to much pain- many people already buy stuff online from overseas in foreign currencies, I've done it myself.)

But let's for the sake of argument pretend that your system cannot be side-stepped and is implemented. Let me show you an obvious glaring problem that you overlook. Specifically, what the impact of a 5% tax on all money transfers means to prices.

Take a loaf of bread at your corner shop for example. To produce this loaf of bread in Australia let's say that the farmer sells wheat to an agent, who sells it a miller, who sells the flour produced to a wholesaler, who sells it to a distributor, who sells it to a baker, who sells the bread produced to a distributor who sells it to the corner shop. So here we have 7 transactions each adding a compounding 5% to the price which is a lot more tax that what is currently paid on a loaf of bread.
But what makes this situation even worse, is comparing the tax paid on goods produced overseas to those in Australia. Because when a good is manufactured overseas then your 5% is not paid on every intermediate step of production but only on the steps incurred from the importation (ie: the import purchase and the local distribution). This greatly disadvantages our local producers/manufactures.

By-the-way: I'm still waiting for you to try to guess at my very simple way to get multinationals to pay a share of their profits.

Alan B.

Have you ever heard of tax deductions?

thinkabit
"By-the-way: I'm still waiting for you to try to guess at my very simple way to get multinationals to pay a share of their profits."

I give in?

Jardine K Jardine: answer- buy shares in the company then they willing give you a slice of the profits!

For example, if the USA government wanted 30% of Apple's profit they could just buy 30% of the company.

To be fair. I should really correct myself a bit- companies aren't required to return all the profit to the shareholders. Indeed some industry types, such as technology companies quite often hold onto a lot/all of their profit. But when then don't release dividends the company retains the wealth for further investment so the shareholders gain anyway (well theoretically anyway).

I should also clarrify that I'm not advocating the forced nationalization of companies. Nor do I support the notion that if a government bought into a company then it should involve itself in the running/direction of the company. I certainly don't believe that government can manage business better than private enterprise-except in certain particular instances.

I hope that we don't go cashless; the abolition of the 1 and 2 cent coins robbed industry and the handy man of cheap, easily found copper patches for small leaks etc.
The 5,10 and 20 cent coins are cheap non-rusting alternatives for 1/4, 3/8 and 1/2 inch washers once one drills the appropriate hole in them and inflation will soon make the other coins viable as washers.

Save our coins!!

I'm somewhat ambivalent about a cashless society. Personally I don't think it would make much difference to our budgeting. But then I was brought up by family who had meticulous budgeting practices, recording all financial transactions, from buying new investment products down to the weekly grocery shopping. And, believe it or not, I have continued with this practice, even though my payments these days are almost exclusively via credit card. We need to pass on to our children the importance of budgeting, including disciplined spending, saving up for what is important, not buying on impulse, ignoring marketing trends, and other related issues.

I make a practice of not carrying much in the way of cash: just a few coins and low denomination notes for emergencies. While there is always the potential for ID fraud, the likelihood can be minimized. I separate and secure my cards with foil to prevent them being accessed. I refuse Pay Wave. And on the sole occasion when one of my credit cards was reported as incurring 'unusual behaviour', my bank was immediately onto it, my card was changed, and there were no ongoing consequences. These days banks are quick to detect and report fraudulent card behaviour

On the other hand, the question remains, "What next?" So much of our private information is already 'out there' simply because we are on social media, subscribe to blog sites or other internet activity... or merely receive Government payments. Anyone who saw the full extent of what they considered to be 'private information' available for all to see, would be horrified. But technology is rapidly reaching the point where nothing is private. These days you don't even have to be a computer hacker to source someone's private dossier. Big Brother is more active than ever, and there are no longer any secrets.

One thing, though, I will never accept, and that is a microchip implant. My body is not for hire in this manner. People may get 'under my skin' - but not electronic devices.