Bank Fee Controversy and Australia's Transition to a Cashless Society

Published by: CCA

Cashless Society

The revolution of a cashless society becoming a more common part of finance and tech journalism, where the digital wallets and contactless cards seemingly look to dominate our everyday transactions. With the event of the COVID-19 pandemic assisting the trend, the shift from traditional cash does seem to be a more conscious preference for modern society. As the use of physical cash declines, innovation formed by institutions for digital solutions that we possess, including e-wallets and contactless card payments pave the transaction for a fully digitized future.

The Commonwealth Bank's decision to impose a $3 fee for certain transactions has sparked widespread debate in Australian media. Customers claim the fee to being an unnecessary burden, especially during a time when reliance on cashless systems is growing. The controversy raises important questions surrounding fairness and accessibility, but most importantly, the role of financial institutions in shaping a cashless society. Draws the question on whether the fee is a reasonable cost of progress, or an unfair exploit (Yahoo Finance, 2024)

The decision sparks an examination on whether the cashless society movement represents a necessary step in financial innovation.

The Commonwealth Bank Fee

Payment transactions have transformed over time with the innovations in technology that shape how we all make digital payments. Evolution from cash to digital wallets accessible within seconds, the ease from physical cash and security of mobile apps have won over the general consumer’s preference. With the pandemic further accelerating this shift, due to health concerns, a cashless society provides it undeniable benefits.

In early December 2024, the Commonwealth Bank Of Australia (CBA) introduced a “first of its kind” $3 fee for over-the-counter transactions. Put simply, customers using in retail branch services, alternative to the digital alternatives Banks currently urge consumers utilise. The fee poses a burden on less digital savvy consumers and rural consumers, with critics arguing the penalisation discourages  a vulnerable range of customers (Corstorphan, 2024).

Whilst the bank justifies the measure to encourage digital banking, the media and consumer viewpoint is the profit-driven motive. During a time when the cashless process systems are becoming more prevalent, this fee symbolises more than a cost, rather a growing tension between financial change and ethical responsibilities financial institutions hold.

Challenges: Ethical & Regulatory Concerns

The shift toward a cashless society presents both logistical and ethical challenges that disproportionately affect vulnerable populations. Elderly Australians, low-income earners, and rural residents often lack access to smartphones, stable internet, or digital literacy, making full participation in digital finance difficult or impossible. As banks reduce physical branches and ATM networks, these groups face barriers to managing their money, deepening financial exclusion. Digital systems introduce new forms of dependence. Such as if a platform fails or charges new fees. Ethically, this raises concerns over whether banks are prioritising cost-efficiency over inclusivity. The monetisation of basic services risks turning digital progress into corporate opportunism (Publicspectrum, 2024). Without proactive regulation to ensure fair access, transparent pricing, and data accountability, banks may shape the financial landscape to benefit shareholders, not society.

Source: Public Spectrum

Overall Recap

Pros

  • Convenience: Digital payments are faster and easier than handling physical cash.

  • Security: Reduces risks of theft, counterfeiting, and cash handling errors.

  • Traceability: Easier to track spending and prevent fraud.

  • Public health: Limits physical contact, especially relevant post-pandemic.

  • Operational efficiency: Reduces bank and business costs related to handling cash.

  • Innovation: Stimulates development of fintech, mobile banking, and online platforms.

 

Cons

  • Exclusion: Elderly, low-income, rural populations may lack access or digital literacy.

  • Technology over-reliance: System outages/breaches can halt transactions.

  • Debt encouragement: Digital spending can be more impulsive and harder to control

  • Fee exploitation: Banks may impose digital convenience fees or penalise in-person services.

 

 

Finishing Up 

The Commonwealth Bank’s $3 fee brings forward questions about the responsibilities of financial institutions. Whilst it offers undeniable efficiency and convenience, it also risks deepening social and economic divides.

As Australia moves forward, the challenge lies in creating a financial system which includes both technological advancements and are socially equitable. Whether such charges represent progress or profit-seeking will depend on how policymakers, banks, and society respond to the shifts. True financial innovation should include fairness as one of its core priorities.

 


This article is published by CCA, a student association affiliated with Monash University. Opinions published are not necessarily those of the publishers. CCA and Monash University do not accept any responsibility for the accuracy of information contained in the publication.

CCA