logo
NZ First bill seeks to protect cash payments up to $500

NZ First bill seeks to protect cash payments up to $500

NZ Herald3 days ago
Winston Peters pushes bill to ensure cash acceptance in stores. Photo / Mark Mitchell
As a members' bill, lodged July 14 in the name of NZ First MP Jamie Arbuckle, it's still a long while from possibly becoming law, but it does propose sweeping changes in how businesses treat cash and looks at who gets left out in a digital economy. Here's what you need to know.
The Cash Transactions Protection Bill would mandate businesses in trade accept cash payment for goods valued up to $500.
'The bill ensures that New Zealanders maintain freedom of choice in how they pay, preserving cash as what it should be: an enduring private and reliable option,' Peters said in introducing it.
'By protecting the sanctity of cash transactions, the bill upholds personal privacy, maintains sovereign control over New Zealand's monetary system, and lessens the risks posed by digital-only payment systems.'
The bill aims to protect cash use, citing impacts on rural communities, the elderly, and low-income earners. Photo / Dean Purcell
Exceptions given to the bill's requirements include online retailers and land purchases.
The bill also would propose that 'payment in cash must be accepted for essential goods or services' – which it defines as food, water, fuel, health care and household utilities.
Another part of the bill would require businesses to keep cash on hand for emergencies.
'A vendor must ensure they have sufficient access to cash to allow them to continue to trade in the event of a digital or electrical outage that lasts longer than 24 hours.'
In the introduction, the bill says it 'preserves cash as an explicit privacy-preserving payment method, ensuring both freedom of choice and freedom from unwarranted surveillance in financial transactions'.
Critics argue the bill doesn't reflect business realities, with a shift towards digital payments.
'It puts New Zealanders' interests above global trends toward digital currencies, maintaining sovereign control over New Zealand's monetary policy and mitigating the risks associated with digital-only financial systems, like restricted access to funds.'
The bill also calls for fees or fines from $1000 to a maximum of $5000 for infringements.
But as a members' Bill, it's not yet guaranteed it will ever go to the House for a vote.
The Bill first will have to be randomly drawn from the ballot to be considered at all in the House, and then undergo the same process of debate and referral to select committees as any other Bill.
While it's on the members ballot, MPs are allowed only one Bill in the lottery at any given time. NZ First has swapped out its Bills on several occasions this term, so there's also no guarantees over how long this legislation will remain in the ballot.
Speaking to Checkpoint recently, Retail NZ CEO Carolyn Young said she wondered if the Bill was 'kind of a sledgehammer for a small problem'.
Carolyn Young, CEO of Retail NZ.
Marisa Bidois, chief executive of the Restaurant Association of New Zealand, said the bill ignored realities many businesses deal with.
'We understand the intent behind the proposed bill – no one wants to see people excluded from accessing essential goods and services. However, requiring all businesses to accept cash for transactions under $500 doesn't reflect the operational realities many businesses face.
'We believe businesses should be trusted to make the right decisions for how they operate and serve their customers.'
Can businesses refuse cash?
Yes, as long as they 'clearly inform customers in advance that they don't accept cash before you start shopping or receive services from them', the Reserve Bank of New Zealand said.
They can do that with a sign on the premises or telling customers in person before you pay.
'Most hospitality businesses still accept cash, but a small and growing number are moving away from it, particularly in busy urban areas,' Bidois said.
'Some customers do push back when cash isn't accepted, especially if they haven't been informed ahead of time. That's why we encourage clear communication.'
You're also only allowed to pay so much of a bill in coins, by the way, in case you're thinking of clearing out that piggy bank – you're allowed up to $5 of 10 or 20 cent coins, $10 of 50 cent coins or $100 worth of $1 and $2 coins.
According to the Reserve Bank's latest data released in June, 45.8% of the population are still using cash sometimes in 'paying for everyday things' – although 79.1% are using debit cards/Eftpos also.
Only 3.6% of people say they 'never use cash', while 33.2% said they hadn't used cash in the past seven days.
Cash isn't quite the king it once was.
'We know that less than 10 per cent of transactions that happen across New Zealand throughout the year now happen in cash,' Retail NZ's Young said.
'In the cities a lot less cash is used and in rural areas and areas of deprivation there is a higher percentage of cash that is used.'
The bill aims to protect cash use, especially for rural and elderly populations. Photo / Chris Tarpey
Bidois said in the Restaurant Association's latest survey, 40% of respondents said cash made up just 5 to 10% of their transactions.
Still, when it comes to essentials, 'there's no supermarket that doesn't take cash', Young said.
On Peters' Facebook page, the post announcing the bill has gathered nearly 3000 comments and 15,000 likes, with many expressing support for the idea.
'Thank you! I use cash as a way to keep within my budget, as my mother did,' one wrote, while another said it was 'an essential bill - especially for many of our elderly population'.
On the other hand, Young said that electronic transactions are often easier for businesses to deal with.
'Electronic transactions are much safer for a wide number of reasons,' she said, including less chance of being targeted by thieves or counterfeit money, and less time for staff dealing with transactions.
'For many retailers and for hospitalities - cafes and things - cash is not always their favoured method of payment because of those challenges.'
However, frequently complained-about surcharges such as those for PayWave are 'not ideal', she said.
Many also have concerns about the privacy and security issues around digital payments and the records they leave behind.
Cash also comes back to the table during disasters, such as Cyclone Gabrielle, which knocked out infrastructure.
'We do know that when the cyclones happened in Auckland and Gisborne and Hawke's Bay 18 months ago that the supermarkets were really critical for being able to, especially in those provincial areas, … provide the cash that people needed to be able to pay for goods and services,' Young said.
Bidois said that while there was a clear shift towards digital payments, it was all about striking the right balance for businesses.
'Many businesses are finding that tap-and-go is what most customers expect, and it makes day-to-day operations simpler.
'That said, our members care about customer experience, and most continue to accept cash to accommodate older New Zealanders, tourists, or regulars who prefer it.'
- RNZ
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

PayPal withholds thousands from Kiwis to Palestinians
PayPal withholds thousands from Kiwis to Palestinians

Otago Daily Times

time20 minutes ago

  • Otago Daily Times

PayPal withholds thousands from Kiwis to Palestinians

Photo: Getty Thousands of dollars donated by New Zealanders for families in Gaza is being withheld by PayPal, and no reason has been given. A New Zealand writer who goes by the name of Emily Writes set up the fund 'Aotearoa to Gaza Mutual Aid' through Ko-Fi - a free crowdfunding platform that send funds to PayPal. In just 24 hours, the account had received more than $8000 from about 900 individual donations. Writes would then send the money on to Palestinians in need, but her request to withdraw money was denied and her account deactivated. She told Midday Report PayPal would not tell her why the account was closed, and said the money would be held for 180 days. "It was just frozen with no explanation and no ability to do anything about that. The money is just being held there," she said. Writes said she has spent days going back and forth with PayPal trying to get answers, but the company isn't being transparent. She believes the reason is political as she has heard from others who have also had funds for Gaza frozen. "The minute they said that it was going to be for Palestinians it was shut down," she said. Midday Report has contacted PayPal for comment but has not received a response.

Luxon snaps back at 'frickin' Hipkins over claims of 'flop'
Luxon snaps back at 'frickin' Hipkins over claims of 'flop'

1News

time2 hours ago

  • 1News

Luxon snaps back at 'frickin' Hipkins over claims of 'flop'

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has challenged Labour to front up with any policy at all as he comes under pressure over National's struggling childcare support scheme. Labour revealed just 153 families had received the maximum FamilyBoost rebate, well short of the 21,000 families the Government said would be eligible for the full amount when it was unveiled last year. Speaking on his way into a Tuesday morning caucus meeting, Luxon rejected Labour's characterisation of the policy as a failure. "I'm not taking any any lectures from frickin' Chris Hipkins or the Labour Party," he told reporters. "They have no idea what to do. They put us in this mess. "You can stand on the other side and criticise as much as you like, but I don't see any policy from Labour." ADVERTISEMENT Luxon said 60,000 families had received some support from the FamilyBoost policy and another 20,000 would soon be eligible due to recent tweaks to the eligibility settings. "Isn't that great?" he said. "We have put a programme in place which Labour didn't support, didn't vote, don't back, because they don't back low-and-middle-income working New Zealanders." The former Labour government extended cheaper childcare to parents of two-year-olds, giving them access to 20 hours a week of free ECE. On taking office, the coalition reversed that policy and instead rolled out its more targeted FamilyBoost scheme — a weekly rebate on childcare costs. The coalition launched a review of the policy in April, given the unexpectedly low uptake and then expanded the initiative in early July. It said Inland Revenue had initially overestimated the number of eligible families despite best efforts. Hipkins labels National's policies 'absolute disaster zone' Responding to Luxon's comments, Labour leader Chris Hipkins said National's refusal to admit the FamilyBoost scheme was "an absolute flop" showed it was completely out-of-touch. "They're getting really desperate. On a daily basis, they're attacking me and attacking the Labour Party rather than talking about their own track record." ADVERTISEMENT Hipkins defended Labour's lack of public policy and said that would all be laid out in full before next year's election. "We're not even close to an election campaign at the moment," he said. "But, unlike him, when we go into the election campaign next year, I will make sure that the policies that we have, add up." Labour wanted to see the Government's next Budget before it outlined significant policies which would cost money, Hipkins said, and suggested a lot of policy work was underway in the background. "The National Party desperately wants to talk about the Labour Party's policy at the moment, because their own policies are turning into an absolute disaster zone." National also came under criticism when it was in opposition for a paucity of policy heading into the 2023 election year, but it had released elements of its tax plan and several discussion documents indicating a direction of travel. Finance Minister Nicola Willis: "I view butter as a beautiful, beautiful thing." The two party leaders also sparred on Tuesday morning over the price of butter which has soared to about $8.60 for a 500g block. ADVERTISEMENT Nicola Willis speaks to media on July 7, 2025. (Source: 1News) In recent weeks, Hipkins has repeatedly drawn attention to the issue, posting on social media last week: "The price of butter is up nearly 50 percent since this time last year. That's it. That's my X post." Asked what Labour would do about it if in power, Hipkins said the onus was on the coalition: "we're not the government... all we've had from them is tough talk." Luxon said dairy prices were largely dictated by global commodity prices and New Zealand dairy farmers were reaping the benefits "tremendously". He said Finance Minister Nicola Willis would be meeting with diary giant Fonterra on Tuesday evening in the context of supermarket competition. If Willis raised the issue of butter prices "good on her", Luxon said. Willis, who previously worked for Fonterra, told reporters she would raise the topic in her conversation as she was concerned butter was becoming out-of-reach for many New Zealanders. ADVERTISEMENT "I view butter as a beautiful, beautiful thing. I eat too much of it," she said. "When you see it on my piece of toast, it looks like some cheese." Willis said Fonterra was transparent about how it determined milk prices but it was less clear to her how that then translated to butter. "What we're talking about here is at the margin — 10 or 20 cents — but 10 or 20 cents really matters when you're a Kiwi family at the supermarket checkout." She also accused Labour of "crocodile tears", given its lack of proposed solutions.

Opening Up Highly Productive Land For Housing
Opening Up Highly Productive Land For Housing

Scoop

time3 hours ago

  • Scoop

Opening Up Highly Productive Land For Housing

The Government is proposing to open up some of Aotearoa's most highly productive agricultural land to make it available for housing development. Sweeping proposals to change the RMA national direction include the country's most productive agricultural areas, which are classed according to how versatile they are for primary production. According to the proposal, Land Use Capacity 3 land would no longer be protected in the National Policy Statement for Highly Productive Land (NPS-HPL), which restricts the rezoning, subdivision, and use of Highly Productive Land. Consultation on the proposed changes to the NPS-HPL runs until this Sunday, 27 July 2025. The SMC asked experts to comment. The SMC has also gathered expert reactions on proposed RMA changes to housing and slash management. Emeritus Professor David J. Lowe, University of Waikato, comments: 'It is proposed that the National Policy Statement for Highly Productive Land is emended to remove land use capability (LUC) class 3 soils from their current protection 'from inappropriate land use and development'. The proposal is poorly considered and, if it goes through, would be an irreversible blunder of intergenerational scale for multiple reasons. 'Future generations of New Zealanders are being robbed of the potential productivity of versatile soils by people with a vested interest. The Luxon-led coalition government has an ethical, moral, and legal obligation to provide for future as well as current generations. 'Contrary to popular myth, New Zealand does not have large areas of highly productive soils. Rather, such soils, encompassing LUC classes 1 and 2 along with most class 3 soils, make up only 14% of New Zealand's soils. Class 1 (0.7%) and 2 (4.5%), the most versatile soils, amount to a mere 5.2%, with class 3 soils another 9.2 %. Removing class 3 soils from protection would leave just 5% of New Zealand's soils to sustain the entire nation in perpetuity. 'Many of the highly-productive (versatile) soils typically have taken around 10,000 to 20,000 years, some 50,000 years and even longer (several hundred thousand years in Pukekohe area), to develop and hence are irreplaceable. 'The versatile soils confer the key capability to produce a wide range of crops yet over 10% have already been lost to lifestyle blocks and housing, with around 33% of the best land (highly versatile soils) in Auckland and Waikato lost for good to urban expansion under an accelerating process. 'The high-value soils of the Pukekohe-Bombay area have been facing 'death by a thousand cuts' over the past few decades under housing pressure yet it is seldom appreciated that these soils, only ~4,400 ha in extent (~3.8% of New Zealand's horticultural land) produce ~26% by value of New Zealand's vegetable production adjacent to the country's largest market and under a horticulturally favourable climate. 'The versatile soils, including many LUC 3 soils, must be preserved: – to support a wide variety of viable land use options, including cropping, to meet the foreseeable needs of future generations – to facilitate the sustainable production of food and fibre and other services and to help maintain food sovereignty (the ability to maintain authority over New Zealand's food supply) – to preserve soil ecosystems that provide environmental services and confer the greatest natural protection to the environment – to maintain natural capital and soil diversity 'The versatile soils have – high energy-use efficiency and yields for various crops – high pollution absorption capacity – moderate or better soil resilience 'There are plenty of less-versatile soils available for housing. 'In conclusion, preservation of nationally scarce highly-productive land including LUC class 3 soils for growing crops is of paramount importance because further loss needlessly and irreversibly limits this option for current and future generations. Hence the proposed amendment should be abandoned. 'Further, rather than maintaining its disparaging attitude to science, and geoscience in particular, and its reprehensible ridiculing of expert opinion, the current coalition government should engage meaningfully and respectfully with soil scientists and horticulturalists to resolve the conflicts and self-interest of vested parties with respect to land use in New Zealand.' Conflict of interest statement: Lowe is a former professor in Earth Sciences, School of Science, University of Waikato, Hamilton. He is not commenting on behalf of the institution. Dr Pierre Roudier, President, New Zealand Society of Soil Science, comments: 'Land classified as Land Use Capability class 3 (LUC3) represents the backbone of New Zealand's food and fibre production and high-value exports. It makes up two-thirds of the land currently protected under the National Policy Statement for Highly Productive Land (NPS-HPL) and supports a wide range of primary production, ranging from dairy and arable farming to viticulture and horticulture. In Taranaki, 80% of LUC3 land is used for high-value dairy exports, while in Marlborough and Tasman, around 30% supports intensive horticulture, including vineyards. LUC3 land is characteristically extensive and highly productive, supporting large-scale farming and a wide range of crops across New Zealand's varied climates. If the protection of LUC3 land were removed entirely, New Zealand would risk losing large, connected and versatile areas of land that are essential for both domestic food supply and high-value export industries. Once this land is built on, it's lost from food production forever. 'Blanket removal of protections of LUC3 land from the NPS-HPL is not required to achieve the housing goals the Government has set. Exceptions to the current NPS-HPL already exist that allow councils to approve urban development on LUC 1-3 land when justified. Meanwhile, blanket removal of LUC3 protections risks large-scale rural residential subdivision, which is an inefficient use of our best land. Research shows that the most pressing issue on HPL is residential lifestyle development, significantly more so than edge-of-city expansion. This type of development breaks up productive farmland into smaller, disconnected parcels, which not only makes the land harder to farm efficiently but also introduces new pressures because of 'reverse sensitivity' (when new residents in rural areas object to normal farming activities, leading to restrictions on farms). These impacts reduce the overall productivity and versatility of the land. Rural residential blocks on LUC class 3 land now take up an area equivalent to nearly 60% of all the land in New Zealand used to grow vegetables – highlighting the scale of land lost to low-density residential development. 'The Regulatory Impact Statement outlines 4 different policy options, ranging from a status quo to a complete removal of LUC3 protections. One of the more balanced options would allow councils to enable urban growth on LUC3 land through local planning processes, while still protecting that land from residential lifestyle subdivision. This targeted approach would support housing goals near urban areas without opening the door to uncontrolled sprawl across the wider countryside. 'The proposed Special Agricultural Areas (SAAs) are poorly defined and currently limited to just two regions (Pukekohe and Horowhenua), raising concerns about transparency, national consistency, and scientific rigour. Their effectiveness depends on being grounded in biophysical land qualities, not just current land use. This narrow focus risks excluding other significant food-producing areas and ignores future shifts due to climate or market changes. SAAs could also be less efficient than refining the existing LUC system, which already covers the whole country and is based on scientific land assessment. Without clear criteria and wide consultation, SAAs may create confusion and leave large areas of valuable land unprotected – especially if protections on LUC3 land are lifted before the SAA framework is finalised.' Conflict of interest statement: 'Pierre Roudier is employed full-time by the Bioeconomy Science Institute as a Senior Scientist. He is also the current President of the NZ Society of Soil Science (NZSSS), and his commentary is provided from his perspective as President of the NZSSS.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store