Don’t like this at all

The Danish government has proposed getting rid of the obligation for selected retailers to accept payment in cash, moving the country closer to a “cashless” economy.

Nearly a third of the Danish population uses MobilePay, a smartphone application for transferring money to other phones and shops, and Sweden, Denmark and Finland lead the European Union in credit card payments per inhabitant.

And:

Denmark’s biggest bank and owner of MobilePay, Danske Bank, has taken steps to prevent fraud by linking the app to NemID, a digital signature linked to the Danish equivalent of individuals’ National Insurance number.

Ritchie’s wet dream that is. Linking every transaction in the economy to the tax records of one known individual. And given that Ritchie’s in favour of it I’m agin it of course.

19 comments on “Don’t like this at all

  1. From Ritchie’s latest report:

    ONE OF DENMARK’S LARGEST MOBILE PHONE NETWORK PROVIDERS WAS RECENTLY ACCUSED OF DODGING ITS TAX RESPONSIBILITIES THROUGH THE USE OF A SUBSIDIARY IN LUXEMBOURG. A PROMINENT DANISH NEWSPAPER REPORTED THAT THE COMPANY PAID NO INCOME TAX DESPITE MAKING AN APPROXIMATE PROFIT OF $200 MILLION OVER A FIVE-YEAR PERIOD AND SPECULATED THAT THE PROFIT COULD HAVE BEEN SHIFTED TO LUXEMBOURG.
    FOLLOWING THE PUBLICATION OF THE ACCUSATION, THE COMPANY REVEALED THAT THE ABSENCE OF TAX PAYMENTS WAS THE RESULT OF AN ACCRUED TAX CREDIT FROM MASSIVE INVESTMENTS IN TELE-INFRASTRUCTURE IN THE EARLY 2000S, SO THAT ITS PROFITS WERE NOT LEGALLY TAXABLE YET. THE DAMAGE WAS ALREADY DONE, HOWEVER, AS THE STORY MADE HEADLINES ON NATIONAL NEWS AND MOST MEDIA PLATFORMS, LEADING TO A CONSUMER CAMPAIGN TO BOYCOTT THE COMPANY. AN ANALYST ESTIMATES THE LOSS FOR THE COMPANY FROM THE BAD PUBLICITY AT UP TO €400,0001. HAD THE COMPANY PROVIDED FOR A PUBLIC COUNTRY BY COUNTRY REPORT, THE MISUNDERSTANDING COULD EASILY HAVE BEEN AVOIDED, AND THE STORY WOULD MOST LIKELY HAVE BEEN DISCARDED IN THE EDITORIAL NEWSROOM.

    So we can accuse you of doing something we don’t like, even if you are not doing it. And if you’re not doing it, it’s up to you to have proved you are not doing it. And if that results in losses to you, that’s your fault.

    Now that being falsely accused of tax avoidance, something that’s not illegal, has been shown to cause quantifiable damages by Ritchie himself, can someone start sending the bill to Ritchie and his cohorts?

  2. Glen

    That’s the ‘National Saving and Deposit payments’ scheme that’s the widely used acronym, right?

    Noel

    When I asked him and the TJN what the devil Denmark, Germany and Japan were doing in their ludicrous ‘secrecy jurisdiction’ list their response was to just shout the word ‘troll’ and close their ears. As I said, to whom are these people accountable – who elected them and who do they represent? – The answer ‘civil society’ won’t cut it I’m afraid.

  3. Libertarian media have been reporting on moves like this for 2-3 years now Tim. The political filth across the West–and beyond–want a cashless society because it gives them near total control –not just for tax reasons. They would know where you go, who you associate with etc. And not just for snooping but for control. Freeze your account/credit and you are powerless.

    The French/Spanish etc –they are all at the same game and anti-cash measures are on the way everywhere.

  4. The post below is on the value of Bitcoin, I can see now why it has value.

  5. Keep using cash day to day as much as possible? The more that we continue to use it the harder it will be for the NSDAP to try and pull stunts like this.

    Ultimately money talks, and if you are a “early trial” retailer and customers keep coming up to the till with “sorry, I have only got cash”, and then walk away leaving the basket at the till…

  6. “The Danish government has proposed getting rid of the obligation for selected retailers to accept payment in cash…”

    Isn’t this a deregulatory move, allowing shops to do what they want?

  7. I have no problem with getting rid of the obligation to accept payment in cash. But if only 1/3 of the population are using MobilePay (and very few visitors/tourists) no shop is seriously going to drop accepting cash for smaller payments.

  8. You think that’s bad? Get this from his latest thread;

    “Charity is patronising

    Enterprise continually exploits”

    What a cunt. I guess he’d rather the millions helped in te third world by Bill Gates were dessicated in the desert. Because sure as shit that’s what would have been the outcome if Gates handed over the same amount in tax to the Government as he has to his charitable foundation.

  9. I’m all in favour of a mobile phone based cashless transfer system. Brilliant idea. Who’s the mobile telcom provider in the Cayman islands? Nothing says all the transactions have to happen in-country, is there?

  10. 50 years ago, Heinlein (before he turned unpleasant) forecast this in “The Moon is a harsh mistress” where the Western world had adopted Russian-style state-domination and all Loonies spoke Russian as a lingua franca.

  11. @ Andy C
    Every time I suggest that Murphy should give to charity or encourage his readers to do so he simply refuses.
    He is selfish.
    NB Tithing as ordered in Exodus sets a level of giving of c.3% – we are commanded to consume 10% of each harvest etc in rejoicing before the Lord but every third year to donate that 10% to the clergy and the poor. How many of you cannot afford 3.33%? He easily could if he was not greedy and consequently fat.
    I ascribe the notorious generosity of Jews to the Tithing requirement ‘cos it is virtually impossible to eat 10% of a harvest in one feast, so they invite all the poor Jews within walking distance to share the feast.

  12. @John77 – I do wonder where the Quakers sit on the idea that charity is patronising.

    Presumably Murphy would have waddled by on the other side of the road and left the Pharisee to die as he didn’t want to patronise him.

    It does seem to be a left wing thing to think that charity is patronising. I think they just want to absolve themselves of any responsibility and leave it all to the government.

  13. @ Andy C
    Please, please, do not blame the Quakers for Murphy.
    They have done vast amounts of charity (real charity).
    I am not a Quaker – I am one of the small minority who paused for thought and chose the CoE because I thought that its theology was sounder than the alternatives [sure, we attract idiots and crooks but that isn’t the point (and, pro rata, we get fewer)] so if Bournville was patronising I am not going to condemn the Quakers for being patronising but to rejoice at the good done by their “patronising” charity.

  14. AndyC – “I do wonder where the Quakers sit on the idea that charity is patronising.”

    Well the formerly Quaker charity the Rowntree Trust seems to have an interesting definition of charity. Given their mission statement is about Social Justice and they fund people like Caged.

    Personally I would rather be patronised than blown up.

  15. @John77 – certainly I do NOT blame the Quakers for Murphy.

    I know the Quakers do terrific charity work. It’s Murphy’s obscene trait of attaching himself to any worthy cause no matter how far his ideas are away from that cause that I object to..

  16. Andrew/John 77

    Based on his blog I find Murphy to be most unlike any Quaker I have ever encountered. Belligerent, aggressive, utterly intolerant and profoundly offensive it’s a measure of their niceness they haven’t disowned him publicly.

  17. It’s not just Ritchie’s wet dream, it’s the wet dream of statists and control freaks everywhere, for all the reasons given.

    Control, control, control….

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.