Every week, a new headline declares that another country is winning the cashless race. Sweden is often cited as the poster child, with its widespread use of mobile payments and the decline of cashMoney in physical form such as banknotes and coins. More transactions. In 2023, The Guardian ran a pieceIn plural, it is commonly used as synonym for units of banknotes and coins. More titled “Sweden leads the race to become a cashless society“, while Bloomberg proclaimed in July 2017 that “China Is Winning the Race to Become the World’s First Cashless Society.“ In France, during the COVID-19 pandemic Le Figaro to asked, “Comment la France si dirige vers une société “zero cash“?” [How France is heading towards a Cashless Society]. In India, The Economic Times, headlined in June 2016 : “Cashless India could be a model for the world.”
These articles share a common flaw: they conflate the growth of digital payments with the death of cash. A country adopting a new paymentA transfer of funds which discharges an obligation on the part of a payer vis-à-vis a payee. More method—whether mobile wallets, contactless cards, or central bank digital currencies (CBDCs)—is not the same as that country eliminating cash. Yet the narrative persists, fueled by tech evangelists, fintech startups, and governments eager to showcase modernity. The result is a myth: the idea that the world is rapidly, inevitably, and uniformly abandoning cash.
Adopting digital payments is not the same as going cashless, just as encouraging cycling does not mean banning cars. The two can—and do—coexist. In Sweden, the central bank, the Riksbank, has not declared cash obsolete. Instead, it has expressed concern about the over-reliance on digital systems, warning of the risks of exclusion for the elderly, rural populations, and those without access to smartphones or bank accounts.
Similarly, in China, where mobile payments dominate the news, cash remains legal tenderMoney that is legally valid for the payment of debts and must be accepted for that purpose when offered. Each jurisdiction determines what is legal tender, but essentially it is anything which when offered (“tendered”) in payment of a debt extinguishes the debt. There is no obligation on the creditor to accept the tendered payment, but the act of tendering the payment in legal tender discharges the debt. More and is still widely used in rural areas, by tourists, and in small, informal transactions. The People’s Bank of China has made it clear that the digital yuan is meant to supplement, not replace, physical currencyThe money used in a particular country at a particular time, like dollar, yen, euro, etc., consisting of banknotes and coins, that does not require endorsement as a medium of exchange. More. Even in Kenya, a global leader in mobile moneyFrom the Latin word moneta, nickname that was given by Romans to the goddess Juno because there was a minting workshop next to her temple. Money is any item that is generally accepted as payment for goods and services and repayment of debts, such as taxes, in a particular region, country or socio-economic context. Its onset dates back to the origins of humanity and its physical representation has taken on very varied forms until the appearance of metal coins. The banknote, a typical representati... More with M-Pesa, cash is far from dead. A 2022 study by the World Bank found that while 72% of Kenyan adults use mobile money, 90% still use cash for at least some transactions.
The fallacy lies in treating payment methods as a zero-sum game. The rise of digital options does not result in the elimination of cash; it simply adds another layer to the financial ecosystem. Some governments and businesses may preferdigital payments for different reasons, but preference is not the same as prohibition. Just as cities can build bike lanes without removing roads, societies can embrace digital payments without discarding cash.
But the language used to describe this transition is part of the battle. Terms like “cashless,” “cash-free,” and “less-cash” are not neutral descriptors—they are weapons in the war on cashThe expression refers to various policies by governments and campaigns run by other stakeholders, including providers of alternative payment instruments, aimed at reducing or at abolishing the use of cash altogether. This includes for instance the withdrawal of high‐denomination banknotes or restrictions on cash transactions as well as spreading misinformation on the usage and properties of cash. More. By framing the decline of cash as inevitable, these words shape perception and policy, creating a self-fulfilling narrative. If we repeat often enough that society is going cashless, we normalize the idea, pressure businesses to stop accepting cash, and push governments to accelerate its demise. Language, in this case, is not just descriptive; it is prescriptive, actively shaping the future it claims to merely describe.
So far, no country has voluntarily abandoned cash. The examples often cited as “cashless” societies—Sweden, Norway, South Korea—have not outlawed cash. They have merely seen its transactionalusage decline. The only places where cash has effectively disappeared are those where it has been forced out of circulation, not by policy, but by economic collapse.
Take Zimbabwe. In 2009, the country abandoned its own currency after hyperinflation rendered it worthless. The Zimbabwean dollarMonetary unit of the United States of America, and a number of other countries e.g. Australia, Canada and New Zealand. More became so devalued that prices doubled every 24 hours in November 2008. The central bank eventually stopped printing currency and the government allowed the use of foreign currencies, but this was not a choice—it was a surrender to economic reality. Cash did not disappear; the local cash did. Today, Zimbabweans use US dollars and other currencies for daily transactions, proving that even in crisis, cash finds a way.
Venezuela offers another cautionary tale. The bolívar’s collapse, driven by years of economic mismanagement, led to hyperinflation that topped 1,000,000% in 2018. As the currency became worthless, Venezuelans turned to the US dollar for stability. But this was not a transition to a “cashless” society, it was a transition to foreign cash. The US dollar is now widely used in Venezuela, not because the country embraced digital payments, but because its own cash became unusable. The government has since introduced a digital bolívar, but this is a desperate measure to maintain control over a monetary system in freefall, not a voluntary step toward a cashless future.
Other examples include Lebanon, where the banking crisis and currency devaluation have led to a dollarized economy, and Somalia, where the lack of a stable central authority has resulted in a patchwork of currencies, including the US dollar, being used in cash form. In these cases, cash has not been abandoned—it has been replaced by another form of cash. A participant in a recent CashEssential’s seminar summed it nicely : « Cash is like the army, when you don’t have your own you end up haveing someone else’s. »
Even in more stable economies, attempts to phase out cash have faced resistance. In 2016, India’s demonetization policy, which abruptly withdrew 86% of the country’s cash from circulation, was framed as a move toward a digital economy. Yet the policy caused chaos, with long lines at banks, small businesses struggling to adapt, and a temporary but sharp contraction in economic activity. Cash usage rebounded quickly, and today, India remains heavily cash-dependent.
The myth of the cashless society is just that—a myth. While digital payments are growing, cash remains a vital part of the global financial system. It is a lifeline for the unbanked, a safeguard against cyberattacks and system failures, and a tool for privacy in an age of surveillance capitalism. No country has chosen to eliminate it, and those that have seen cash disappear have done so not by design, but by desperation.
The next time you read a headline declaring that a country is “going cashless,” ask yourself: Is cash truly disappearing, or is it simply evolving alongside new forms of payment? The answer, almost always, is the latter. Cash is not dead. It is not even dying. It is simply sharing the stage.