Cash is king, and two senators are fighting to keep it that way. Senators John Fetterman, a Pennsylvania Democrat, and Kevin Cramer, a North Dakota Republican, have teamed up to push the Payment Choice Act.
Fox Business reported that this bipartisan bill demands businesses accept cash for in-person transactions, ensuring Americans can still use paper currency without being forced into a digital-only world. The Payment Choice Act requires retail businesses to accept cash for transactions up to $500 at physical locations.
It’s a move to protect the roughly 5% of Americans without bank accounts, who rely on cash for everyday purchases. Fetterman and Cramer argue this preserves consumer freedom in an increasingly card-obsessed economy.
“It’s simple: if you’re open for business in America, you should take U.S. dollars,” Fetterman declared. Sounds reasonable, but don’t hold your breath for every corner store to cheer this mandate. Forcing businesses to handle cash could burden small shops already juggling slim margins.
The bill doesn’t demand businesses accept every bill in your wallet. For the first five years, retailers can refuse denominations of $50 or larger. After that, the Treasury Secretary will decide which big bills businesses can skip, though $1, $5, $10, and $20 bills must always be accepted.
“The Secretary shall issue a rule … with respect to any bill denominations a person is not required to accept,” the bill states. This gives businesses some wiggle room, but it’s a bureaucratic hoop that could complicate things down the line. Why not just let the market decide what works?
Fetterman insists this is about fairness for the unbanked. “Every American should be able to use paper currency if they choose,” he said. Noble sentiment, but mandating cash acceptance feels like government overreach when digital payments are faster and often cheaper for businesses.
The bill includes carve-outs to ease the burden on businesses. If a retailer has a machine that converts cash to prepaid cards without fees, they’re off the hook. Likewise, businesses can refuse cash if their payment system crashes or they don’t have enough change on hand.
These exceptions show some pragmatism, but they also highlight the bill’s complexity. A small business owner might need a lawyer to navigate the fine print. Simpler rules would better serve the mom-and-pop shops this bill claims to protect.
Cramer emphasizes consumer choice in the debate. “Forcing the use of credit and debit cards … limits consumer choice,” he said. He’s not wrong—nobody likes being told how to pay, but forcing businesses to comply might just swap one restriction for another.
The bill’s heart is in the right place, targeting those left behind by the digital economy. About 6 million Americans lack bank accounts, often low-income or rural folks who rely on cash. Fetterman and Cramer want to ensure these people aren’t locked out of basic commerce.
Yet, the push for cash feels like a nostalgic jab at modernity. Digital payments are secure, trackable, and reduce the risk of theft—benefits that cash can’t match. Mandating its use seems like a step backward when innovation is driving efficiency.
“Cash is still legal tender in the United States,” Cramer noted, slamming businesses that only take cards. He’s got a point—excluding cash can feel like a snub to tradition. But let’s not pretend handling cash doesn’t come with costs, from security to bookkeeping.
The Payment Choice Act tries to thread a needle: protect consumer options without crippling businesses. By limiting the mandate to transactions under $500, it avoids forcing retailers to deal with stacks of large bills. Still, the five-year rule on denominations smells like red tape waiting to happen.
Fetterman’s passion for the unbanked is clear: “We have millions of people … who don’t have access to bank accounts.” It’s a compelling case, but government mandates rarely solve problems without creating new ones. A lighter touch, like incentives for cash acceptance, might work better.
