Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Cash Acceptance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Chair hears HB 554 sponsor: ‘Cash is king,’ but members press on burdens and exemptions
Summary
Representative Thomas told the House General Government Committee HB 554 would require at least one cash-accepting register at business locations to protect residents who rely on cash; members questioned burdens on private businesses, exemptions for airports and event centers, and blackout scenarios.
Representative Jared Thomas presented House Bill 554 to the General Government Committee, summarizing the measure with the phrase "cash is king" and arguing the state should require each business location that accepts cash to maintain at least one register or kiosk that accepts in‑person cash payments.
"House Bill 5 54 simply requires that establishments have 1 register or kiosk or some type of point of payment per business location that accepts cash," Thomas testified, adding the proposal is modeled in part on federal bipartisan proposals and was designed to balance business flexibility with consumer access.
Committee members raised repeated concerns about private‑sector burdens and exemptions. Representative Russo asked how the bill avoids "big government overreach" in telling private businesses what they must accept; Thomas said the bill aims to protect consumers — for example, seniors or residents who do not use digital payments — while minimizing strain on businesses by requiring only a single on‑site cash option.
Members also asked about practical exceptions and resiliency. The sponsor said airports were included as an explicit exemption because of federal security and Transportation Security Administration constraints, and acknowledged that event centers raise operational differences that may require tailored solutions such as kiosks or cash‑to‑debit exchanges. Lawmakers also raised blackout concerns after a member described a recent 12‑hour outage that rendered many electronic‑payment‑only businesses unable to operate; the sponsor agreed cash can serve as a resilient fallback.
No committee vote occurred. Sponsors said language would need further vetting, and members signaled interest in follow‑up and potential amendments to address exemptions and implementation details.
