Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Not a human right as such, but it's the law pretty much everywhere in the world.

A shop refusing to accept legal tender seem pretty brazenly illegal to me.




It may seem illegal to you but no, it's actually generally not illegal.

E.g. in the US specifically, US bills say "legal tender for all debts", which means it's illegal not to accept cash once a debt is incurred.

But in most places a business owner is perfectly free to not create the opportunity for customer debt in the first place, i.e. not sell something -- whether based on form of payment ("We don't accept Amex") or quantity ("limit 5 per customer") etc.


You are wrong about US legal tender.

You have to know about the history of currency in the United States to fully grasp why those words are there. The simple explanation is the Coinage Act of 1965, Section 31 U.S.C. 5103[1], entitled "Legal tender," states: "United States coins and currency (including Federal reserve notes and circulating notes of Federal reserve banks and national banks) are legal tender for all debts, public charges, taxes, and dues." Coins are issued by the US Mint (Treasury Department). Paper money is issued by the Federal Reserve, not part of the US government, but the paper itself is printed by the Bureau of Engraving and Printing (Treasury Department).

This statute means that all United States money as identified above are a valid and legal offer of payment for debts when tendered to a creditor. There is, however, no federal statute mandating that a municipality, organization, or person must accept currency or coins as payment for goods and/or services. Businesses are free to develop their own policies on whether or not to accept cash unless there is a state law which says otherwise.

There was a time in the United States when different forms of currency were available and considered legal tender, including some issued by the states, both individually and via the Confederacy. The original Coinage Act of 1792 made both silver and gold forms of legal tender, and people could come to any US Mint and have their bullion turned into coins.


I think you're agreeing with me -- what specifically are you saying I'm wrong about? My comment said exactly what I think you're saying -- that businesses are free to choose what to accept, by refusing to do business in the first place.

(Or did you mean to reply to the same comment I was replying to?)


You said, "US bills say 'legal tender for all debts', which means it's illegal not to accept cash once a debt is incurred."

This statement is incorrect.


Genuinely curious how it's incorrect?

Is it the word "illegal"? I mean, if a municipality or organization refuses cash for payment of debt... then they're just de-facto forgoing the debt, right? If they tried to bring the debtor to court to compel payment in non-cash form, the court would side with the debtor, no?

So perhaps not illegal but merely unenforceable? (But with the same consequence of it not happening in practice.)


Yes, it is the word 'illegal'. There isn't a federal or state statute requiring paper currency (or coins) to be used to pay off a debt.

Debt doesn't disappear because an organization refuses to accept cash. They can accept cash. They can also accept chickens. While not a form of legal tender, a business can barter for goods and services. Organizations can also restrict certain forms of cash from being used. They refuse to accept anything higher than $20 bills or refuse to accept the entire payment in pennies.

Legal tender means that the note is honored and backed by the United States. The paper currency we know and love is actually called a Federal Reserve Note and should not to be confused with a United States Note, which is no longer in active circulation but it is still considered legal tender. In fact, the United States Note was called Legal Tender Note and a successor to Demand Notes which were printed during the Civil War. The Demand Note had a green back which is how the term greenback came into existence. Other forms of currencies have been issued and used as money includes Treasury Notes and National Bank Notes. Many state chartered banks also printed their own notes. You have to remember the Bureau of Engraving and Printing didn't exist until 1862 and the Federal Reserve until 1913.


So I did some more research and I think you're actually incorrect here about orgnanizations restricting cash from being used to pay off a debt (as opposed to purchasing goods/services), which is what I've been talking about all along. From the Federal Reserve:

> This statute means that all United States money as identified above is a valid and legal offer of payment for debts when tendered to a creditor. There is, however, no Federal statute mandating that a private business, a person, or an organization must accept currency or coins as payment for goods or services. [1]

In other words, yes, organizations can accept chickens or barter. But if you have a debt and you only want to pay cash, and they refuse it, then there's nothing they can do to compel you to pay in a different form.

So again -- you're right there's no law against prohibiting cash payment for debt, but if a business can't collect otherwise, then for business purposes it's effectively a prohibition regardless. (Only difference being that a company can't be fined/punished for it, they just lose the value of the debt.)

[1] https://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/currency_12772.htm


But on the bill itself that Im holding now it says “This note is legal tender for all debts, public and private.” Once you owe someone money they can state their preference for card/check, but they cant flat out refuse cash.


Wrong.

The words don't imply that paper currency must be accepted for a debt, simply that the currency can be used for a debt.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: