Search

Millions of Aussies to receive cash boost as welfare payments rise

Millions of Australians who rely on welfare payments will receive a much needed cash boost as of Friday, thanks to an indexation boost. Recipients of the age and disability pensions, rent assistance, carer payments, and JobSeeker payments will all receive the increase. Age pensioners, as well as those on the disability pension and carer payments, will see an increase of $28.10 a fortnight for singles and $42.40 a fortnight for couples. This boost will take the total payment per fortnight, including energy supplement, to $1114.40 for singles and $862.60 for each member of a couple. Maximum rates of Commonwealth rent assistance will also be increased by 10 per cent from today, with indexation applied on top, as single recipients, with no children, renting on their own, and receiving the maximum rate will get an additional $23 per fortnight in rent assistance. For families with one or two children, their payment will increase by $27.02 per fortnight. Single JobSeeker recipients with an assessed partial capacity to work of zero to 14 hours per week will move to the higher rate of JobSeeker, receiving $849.50 a fortnight (including the energy supplement and pharmaceutical allowance). "This indexation will deliver timely boosts to people receiving allowance payments and pensions, ensuring that these vulnerable cohorts have more money in their pockets for everyday expenses," Social Services Minister Amanda Rishworth said. A full breakdown of the payment changes <a title="can be found here" href="http://www.dss.gov.au/about-the-department/benefits-payments/previous-indexation-rates" target="_blank" rel="noopener">can be found here</a>. Image credits: Shutterstock

Money & Banking

Surcharges are added to most purchases, but what are the rules behind these extra fees?

<div class="theconversation-article-body"> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/steve-worthington-138">Steve Worthington</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/swinburne-university-of-technology-767">Swinburne University of Technology</a> You head to the register at the cafe to pay for your lunch, swipe your card and suddenly realise you’ve been hit with an extra small but unexpected charge. It might be listed on your receipt as a service or merchant fee, but either way it’s because you’ve used a credit or debit card. With the pandemic accelerating the use of cards instead of cash – <a href="https://www.rba.gov.au/publications/bulletin/2023/jun/cash-use-and-attitudes-in-australia.html#:%7E:text=Cash%20payments,-The%20CPS%20suggests&text=In%20value%20terms%2C%20the%20cash,cent%20by%20value%20in%202022.">only 13% of Australians use cash</a>, dropping from 27% in the last five years – these extra charges have become mainstream. However, as was highlighted by National Australia Bank chief executive Andrew Irvine during a <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Joint/Corporations_and_Financial_Services/FinancialAbuse">parliamentary inquiry</a> into bank charges last week, they are often applied, in varying amounts, by businesses for reasons not always in line with their original purpose. Irvine slammed as <a href="https://www.afr.com/companies/financial-services/credit-card-surcharges-should-be-banned-or-regulated-nab-boss-says-20240830-p5k6jm">“outrageous”</a> a 10% surcharge he was forced to pay when he recently bought a cup of coffee at a Sydney cafe. “I don’t like the lack of transparency and lack of consistency,” he said. But most Australians are making these extra payments every day, without question. So how did this end up happening – and what can you do about it? <h2>Card surcharges in Australia</h2> At the start of this century, payments for goods and services were mainly made by cash, paper cheques, credit and debit cards. The first two of these options would eventually be deposited into a bank account by the merchant who ran the business. The latter two would be processed by the bank or financial institution which would charge the business a merchant service fee. For debit cards this might be a fixed fee. But for credit cards it would be proportionate with the value of the goods or services. The Reserve Bank of Australia became concerned the use of credit cards was greater than that of debit cards and <a href="https://www.rba.gov.au/publications/consultations/201106-review-card-surcharging/background.html">introduced surcharging in January 2003</a>. The intention was to lower the cost to the merchant of accepting debit cards and change customer behaviour. This has been achieved, as both the volume and value of paying by debit cards now exceeds the volume and value of paying by credit cards. However, the reality in 2024 is that card surcharges have become commonplace, and in a wide variety of payment situations. <h2>It’s estimated to cost us billions</h2> It is difficult to calculate the total cost of surcharging to Australian consumers since they became legal more than 20 years ago, because the rates charged vary widely. But at last week’s inquiry, Labor MP Jerome Laxale suggested it added up to <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/money/banking/card-surcharges-are-costing-us-billions-but-can-they-be-avoided-20240830-p5k6o8.html">A$4 billion</a> in the last year. Surcharges can be imposed by small to medium enterprises such as your local cafe, doctor’s surgery, your energy supplier, or when you use a card to pay your council rates. As an example, my rates are payable by card, with a surcharge of 1.10% for Mastercard and Visa credit, and 0.55% for eftpos and Mastercard and Visa debit cards. <h2>When surcharges can be applied</h2> Many merchants charge the same rate for all their card payments and some fail to alert customers to the extra fee before accepting the payment at their terminal, which they are required to do. Indeed, even on a receipt for payment, the surcharge can be described by the merchant as a “handling” or “merchant” fee. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/pricing/card-surcharges">(ACCC)</a> regulates surcharging and demands the merchant prove a surcharge is justified. Furthermore, the ACCC says if there is no way for a consumer to pay without paying a surcharge – that is, they can’t pay by cash or cheque – then the business must include the surcharge in <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/business/pricing/price-displays#toc-display-of-surcharges">the displayed price</a>. <h2>Penalties for misuse</h2> The ACCC can take merchants to court to enforce these regulations and there have been some examples of this in recent history. In July 2021, <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/nine-entertainment-pays-penalties-for-alleged-excessive-payment-surcharges#:%7E:text=The%20ACCC%20alleged%20that%20these,Deputy%20Chair%20Mick%20Keogh%20said.">Nine Entertainment paid penalties totalling $159,840</a>, plus $450,000 redressing customers, for charging subscribers and advertisers excessive surcharges. The ACCC specifies that the surcharge must not be more than it costs the merchant to use that payment type. As guidance to the merchants, it also offers <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/pricing/card-surcharges">the average costs for different payment types</a>: eftpos less than 0.5%, Mastercard and Visa Debit 0.5%–1% and Mastercard and Visa credit 1%–1.5%. However, despite the ACCC setting guidelines for the amounts that can be charged, many surcharges are above this guidance and in some cases more than 2.0% for all cards. Some merchants do charge different surcharging rates, depending on the cards they accept, be it eftpos, Mastercard or Visa. In theory, the surcharge rate is meant to be determined by the merchant service fee, which is negotiated between the merchant and their bank. Larger merchants, such as the supermarkets, department stores and energy companies, can negotiate low rates (reportedly as low as one cent a transaction). But smaller merchants with less negotiating clout will have higher service fees. The arrival of new payment players, such as <a href="https://www.forbes.com/advisor/business/software/square-vs-stripe/">Square and Stripe</a>, has offered businesses an alternative banker of card payments, which can then use surcharging as part of their merchant service fees. <h2>Surcharging overseas</h2> The <a href="https://europa.eu/youreurope/business/finance-funding/making-receiving-payments/electronic-cash-payments/index_en.htm">European Union</a> already has a long-standing ban on surcharging, while in the United States, surcharging is illegal in some states. Other countries, including the United Kingdom, have tried surcharging on card payments, only to abandon them as it was rorted by some merchants and became an unnecessary expense for consumers. <a href="https://bluenotes.anz.com/posts/2023/07/anz-news-surcharge-steve-worthington-australia#:%7E:text=In%202018%20the%20UK%20Treasury,their%20hard%2Dearned%20money%E2%80%9D.">A statement</a> released by the UK Treasury when it banned the practice in 2018 described surcharges as <blockquote> Hidden charges for paying with a debit or credit card, which will help millions of UK consumers to avoid rip-off fees when spending their hard earned money. </blockquote> <h2>What can you do about it?</h2> Before surcharging was allowed by the Reserve Bank in January 2003, acceptance by merchants of payments was just another cost of doing business. And it seems many consumers have just accepted surcharges as part of their transactions. There are ways to avoid them, the most obvious being to use cash. Using eftpos involves charges, but they are less than those imposed on credit and debit cards. The Reserve Bank is working on implementing a so-called <a href="https://www.rba.gov.au/payments-and-infrastructure/debit-cards/least-cost-routing/#:%7E:text=What%20is%20least%2Dcost%20routing,'merchant%2Dchoice%20routing'.">“least-cost routing”</a> system that defaults to the lowest cost network when processing payments. Unfortunately, this is yet to be widely adopted by businesses.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/237964/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/steve-worthington-138">Steve Worthington</a>, Adjunct Professor, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/swinburne-university-of-technology-767">Swinburne University of Technology</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/surcharges-are-added-to-most-purchases-but-what-are-the-rules-behind-these-extra-fees-237964">original article</a>. </div>

Money & Banking

Thousands of eligible Aussies to receive cost-of-living payments

Around 210,000 eligible South Australian households will receive a cost-of-living payment this week, including pensioners, Centrelink recipients and low-income earners. A Cost of Living Concession of $255.60 will be paid to all eligible households, with the annual payments made to eligible tenants and self-funded retirees doubled to match the amount given to homeowners. The payment is part of the state government's $266.2 million cost-of-living relief package announced in this year's state budget. This included the one-off additional payment of $243.90 to households who received last year's cost-of-living payment in June. South Australia's Premier Peter Malinsauskas said the government had delivered the “single largest cost-of-living assistance package in South Australia’s history”. “We know people are doing it tough and cost-of-living pressures are continuing to have an impact on many South Australians,” he said. “In the past two months, our government will have issued more than $100 million in targeted cost-of-living relief to South Australian households.” Pensioners and other card holders including, the Pensioner Concession Card, Veteran Gold Card, Low Income Health Care Card and Commonwealth Seniors Health Card, as well as low-income households and those receiving Centrelink payments including JobSeeker, the Parenting Payment and Youth Allowance, are eligible to receive the SA Cost Of Living Concession. Those who want to receive the concession for that financial year will need to apply <a href="https://www.sa.gov.au/topics/care-and-support/concessions/household-concessions/cost-of-living-concessions" target="_blank" rel="noopener">online</a> by December 31 and only one person per household can receive the payment and it will be based on your circumstances on July 1. Those who have previously received the payment and whose circumstances haven't changed don't need to reapply. The payments started rolling out this month, with Human Services Minister Nat Cook saying that all payments should come through by early next week. “This includes everyone who received a payment last year and who is still eligible, as well as new applications which have been processed up to now,” Cook said. "Anyone who thinks they might be eligible for cost-of-living support should head to the sa.gov.au website to have a look at the eligibility criteria." Other states have also provided cost-of-living support, with eligible seniors in Western Australia able to receive a Cost of Living Rebate of $107.12 for singles and $160.68 for couples. While in the ACT, apprentices and tradies in the state can get a one-off $250 Cost Of Living payment if they are employed by an ACT employer. NSW has a few cost-of-living initiatives including up to $350 energy rebates for eligible households, and up to $4,220 early childhood fee relief for 3 to 5-year-olds attending eligible community and mobile preschools. Image: Shutterstock

Money & Banking

Readers response: What are your thoughts on the increasing use of digital payments?

While technology continues to advance, so does the way we pay for things. Many shopping outlets have turned to using digital payment methods rather than cash, which has divided many who find it easier to use cold hard cash than rely on technology. We asked our readers their thoughts on digital payments and the response was overwhelming. Here's what they said. Joan Hughes - Couldn’t go shopping due to bad pains in my leg and back, so my grandson did an online shop. Tried to use my card 5 times but wouldn’t accept it, so had to use my granddaughter's. This is the 3rd time my card has been rejected. Rubbish system, cash is definitely best. Johanna Shakes - Very hard to adjust for elderly. Debra Walker - Hate it! Cash is king. Lex Jordan - I think we should all stand and boycott these companies that don't accept cash. Patricia Tebbit - Don't mind using cards but access to cash is imperative. Think of small charity raffles, garage sales & countless other things where cash is required. Lyn Bradford - I love it, I use 95% card, 5% cash. So much easier. David Taylor - Just making it easier for hackers. Jennifer Bucktin - Cash is best. If digital goes down, you can't use anything. Steve Smith - The digital age is here to stay so it's going to be better for all to get used to it. Quentin Brown - Love them both, digital and cash as it's much easier to pay bills etc. Of course you have to be smart and not gullible. Why can't we have both? Kath Sheppard - Cash is king, a lot safer as well, can't overspend either or be charged fees. Image credits: Shutterstock

Money & Banking

Aussie carers to receive a hefty cash boost

Australian carers are set for a hefty financial increase in addition to their ongoing support payments from July 1st. <a href="https://www.servicesaustralia.gov.au/carer-supplement" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Services Australia</a> confirmed that those receiving the Centrelink Carer Supplement will see a $600 cash boost automatically hit their bank accounts between July 3rd and August 2nd. Carers will receive the $600 annual supplement for each of the carer payments they receive. That includes the Carer Payment, which provides income support for over 300,000 Australians who, “because of the demands of their caring role, are unable to support themselves through substantial paid employment.” The payment will also supplement recipients of the Carer Allowance, which can be received in addition to income support payments, and is received by over 640,000 carers who “provide daily care and attention at home for a person with a disability, severe medical condition or who is frail and aged”. Those receiving the Department of Veterans’ Affairs Partner Service Pension and Carer Allowance, and the Department of Veterans’ Affairs Carer Service Pension will also be eligible for the cash boost. “How much you get depends on the percentage of care you provide,” Services Australia said. “You’ll get a Carer Supplement for each eligible payment you get. For example, if you get a Carer Payment and a Carer Allowance, you’ll get two Carer Supplements.” “This payment doesn’t add to your taxable income,” Services Australia said. Image credits: Shutterstock

Money & Banking

Aussies hit with "hidden fees" for using common payment method

Millions of Aussies have copped up to $1 billion in "hidden fees" for choosing to use one common payment method. Many are unaware about the secret extra charges that come with using the tap-and-go payment method, as millions of customers use it as the preferred way to pay and go. However, according to financial counsellor Scott Pape, also known as The Barefoot Investor, while tapping your card may be easier, it might not be great for your bank account. “What most people don’t know is that, when they tap, their bank generally defaults that payment through Visa or MasterCard, who pays them a fee — instead of defaulting that payment through the much cheaper bank-owned EFTPOS,” Pape said in his column for the <a href="https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/business/barefoot-investor/the-common-smartphone-app-thats-ripping-you-off/news-story/0b71afa29c86faf2b938c44f93bbc8d6?amp" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-link-type="article-inline">Daily Telegraph</a>. While some businesses choose to absorb the cost, others pass it on to the customer as a surcharge, as Pape says, “Talk about a rort.” According to the Royal Bank of Australia (RBA), Visa and Mastercard are generally more expensive for merchants than the EFTPOS network. Payments through EFTPOS are generally about 0.3 per cent of the transaction value, while Debit Mastercard and Visa Debit may cost many some people about 0.5 per cent. Mastercard and Visa credit could cost customers more than 0.75 per cent of the transaction, while American Express card payments are even more, charging merchants 1 to 1.5 per cent. Thankfully, according to Pape, there are ways to avoid paying the extra fees. If your bank card is attached to your smartphone, you can change the default payment setting. “On an iPhone, open ‘Settings’, go to ‘Wallet & Apple Pay’, then tap your debit card,” Pape said. “Then look for ‘Payment Option’. It will generally have ‘MasterCard’ or ‘Visa’ preselected, but instead you should select ‘EFTPOS SAV’.” This is not allowed on all cards, however, and those who use Android will need to check with their bank if a possible solution exists. <div> </div> The other way to avoid paying the surcharges is to just start inserting or swiping your card again. “I know it’s annoying, but if you swipe and insert your card you can choose ‘cheque’ or ‘savings’ and it’ll go through the EFTPOS system, which at the bigger retailers means you’ll be less likely to be charged,” Pape said. Image credits: Shutterstock

Money & Banking

Woman shares fury after unknowingly paying for her engagement ring

A new wife has shared her fury after she discovered her husband had been paying off her engagement ring from their joint bank account. The 28-year-old woman was overjoyed when her partner proposed to her with an $8,000 two-carat lab diamond ring, which he bought on a payment plan because he “didn’t have the funds available” when he bought it. The couple got married just three months later at the courthouse after they realised they could not afford a big, fancy wedding. After their big day, the new wife was shocked and annoyed when she discovered she had “unintentionally partially paid for two instalments”, which now makes her a “part owner of the ring”. “I found out after we married and merged our finances that he has been withdrawing funds from our joint account — we make roughly the same — to finance this ring,” the furious woman shared in a Reddit thread. “We have been having some arguments lately and he feels that the ring is a wedding expense and it’s only fair that I contribute towards it too, and that as a woman of this day I shouldn’t hesitate to be an equal partner.” She took particular issue with her husband for making her pay her share on what was supposed to be a gift from him. “I was just taken aback and honestly put off by the fact he is making me pay for a gift he gave to me. You don’t make the recipient of a gift pay for the damn gift,” she said. The woman said if she had known her husband was going to make her pay for the ring, she wouldn’t have agreed to “buy it”. “Mutual consent is essential when a couple is deciding to invest in an asset. Owning a house or a car jointly requires two ‘yeses’ and I wouldn’t certainly have said yes to jointly owning a ring he was supposed to give to me as a gift,” she explained. Although the woman admitted that she had asked her partner for a “nice” ring before he proposed, saying that she “deserved a quality piece symbolising our love”, she said she wished her partner talked to her about the big expense before signing her up for payments. “My then-fiancé knew about the expectation I had of him and was upfront about things from the get go,” she explained. “He could’ve discussed things with me and we could’ve seen if we were truly compatible like that. What I didn’t know was that he was plotting to ‘get even’ with me by taking out a payment plan and using our funds to finance it.” “I don’t mind splurging for him, but this whole situation has left a very bad taste in my mouth.” Now she’s demanding her husband return her engagement ring to the jewellery store because she refuses to pay for it. The Reddit post has racked up thousands of comments, with some people jumping to the woman’s defence. One person wrote, “I’d be livid if I found out I was diamond poor instead of house poor.” However, not everyone thought the wife’s actions were justified, with one person writing, “You’re married, there is no ‘my money’ and ‘his money’. Money he spends towards the debt for the ring is money that can’t be spent on other things for your lives together. You wanted an expensive ring, they aren’t free”. Image credits: Shutterstock

Money & Banking

“Completely tacky”: Bride slammed for asking for dinner payment

A bride has caused a stir online after asking if it is appropriate to ask her wedding guests to pay for their meal when they RSVP to the big day. The woman took to a popular wedding Facebook page to ask the opinions of other brides, sharing an example of her invitation created by her wedding planner. The invitation asks guests to confirm whether or not they will be attending the nuptials, before asking if the guest intends to eat at the wedding ceremony, and which meal they would prefer. The price of each meal was also included: $20 for grilled chicken with rice, mashed potatoes and green beans and $25 for a salmon alternative. “We invite you to eat with us but ask for you to provide your own payment. Please select which meal you'd prefer,” the invite stated. “My wedding venue requires me to purchase food through them for the reception, but has said people sometimes choose this option,” the woman wrote on Facebook. “Nothing about my reception is very typical anyway, SO I'm wondering how insane or rude or cost-effective/smart this is.” “The planner set me this as an example of how to present it to guests.” But when the post was quickly criticised by others, the bride clarified the event was more of a “fun dinner party” rather than a “wedding” as she and her partner had already legally married five months prior. “Ultimately I'll do what I want BUT I did not choose this option. It was only a suggestion from the venue that I was curious about others' opinions on,” she added. “This is for the reception. I'm most definitely not asking for money or gifts and by the time they come to the reception, we will have already been married for five months.” The post was shared in another wedding shaming Facebook group and critiqued by dozens of wedding experts. “Oh hell no! This is completely tacky!” one wrote, another said, “So she asks if it is rude then gets offended when people say it's rude?” “I am a veteran pro planner and would NEVER suggest this!” another said. Someone else wrote, “I'm especially shaming the venue for suggesting that people often pawn off the cost of dinner to their guests. Encouraging rude behaviour.” Image credits: Getty Images / Facebook

Food & Wine

The move to a cashless society isn’t just a possibility, it’s well underway

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/angel-zhong-1204643">Angel Zhong</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/rmit-university-1063">RMIT University</a> When was the last time you used cash? For many Australians using cash or even swiping a card has become a rare event. The move towards a cashless society started 50 years ago with the introduction of the Bankcard and was driven by technological advancements. But it really took off with the COVID pandemic when consumers and retailers were reluctant to handle potentially infected notes and coins. The federal government last week underscored its recognition of this trend by <a href="https://ministers.treasury.gov.au/ministers/jim-chalmers-2022/media-releases/modernising-payments-regulation">unveiling reforms</a> to regulate digital payment providers. Treasurer Jim Chalmers said: "As payments increasingly become digital, our payments system needs to remain fit for purpose so that it delivers for consumers and small businesses. We want to make sure the shift to digital payments occurs in a way that promotes greater competition, innovation and productivity across our entire economy." From big cities to remote rural corners the shift towards digital payments is evident. This raises the question, is a cashless society inevitable? <h2>The phenomenal growth of the digital payments</h2> The convenience of digital transactions has become irresistible for consumers and businesses and has led to the sector eclipsing traditional payment methods. The relentless march of technology has produced myriad innovative platforms from mobile wallets to buy-now-pay-later (BNPL) schemes, each vying for a piece of this burgeoning market. A recent <a href="https://www.ausbanking.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Bank-On-It-%E2%80%93-Customer-Trends-2023-1.pdf">report</a> by the Australian Banking Association paints a vivid picture of the digital payment industry’s explosive expansion. The use of digital wallet payments on smartphones and watches has soared from $746 million in 2018 to over $93 billion in 2022. Cash only accounts for 13% of consumer payments in Australia as of the end of 2022, a stark contrast to 70% in 2007. Digital wallets are popular with most age groups. Young Australians aged between 18 and 29 are leading the pack, with two thirds <a href="https://www.rba.gov.au/publications/bulletin/2023/jun/consumer-payment-behaviour-in-australia.html">using digital wallets</a> to pay for goods and services. About <a href="https://www.ausbanking.org.au/almost-40-leave-wallets-at-home/">40% of Australians</a> are comfortable leaving home without their actual wallets or even credit or debit cards, as long as they have their mobile devices with digital wallets. The astonishing speed at which Australians have embraced digital payments places the country among the top users of cashless payments globally, surpassing the United States and European countries. Digital wallets are not the only players in this space. The use of BNPL products is also growing rapidly in Australia, which was where many of the large-scale products in this category started. The Australian Securities and Investment Commission (ASIC) reports the total value of all BNPL transactions increased by <a href="https://asic.gov.au/regulatory-resources/find-a-document/reports/rep-672-buy-now-pay-later-an-industry-update/">79% in the 2018–19 financial year</a>. This continues into 2022 with an annual growth beyond 30% according to the <a href="https://www.rba.gov.au/publications/annual-reports/psb/2022/the-evolving-retail-payments-landscape.html">Reserve Bank of Australia</a> (RBA). PayID and PayPal payments are also claiming their shares in this space. <h2>Are government regulations necessary?</h2> The government’s planned regulation of the system, contained in amendments to the Reforms to the Payment Systems (Regulation) Act 1998, is a big step towards establishing a secure and trustworthy cashless society in Australia. It will subject BNPL and digital wallet service providers like Apple Pay and Google Pay to the same oversight by the RBA as traditional credit and debit cards. The regulations will require providers meet clear standards for security measures, data protection and dispute resolution to give Australians confidence their funds and personal information are safeguarded. With increasing concern over cyber attacks, the regulations will help reduce the risk of fraudulent activities and money laundering and help identify suspicious transactions, maintaining the integrity of the financial system. Also, regulation will promote fair competition and market stability by levelling the playing field and by preventing monopolies. While banks support the forthcoming regulation, new market players are less positive. For example, Apple Pay says it is merely <a href="https://www.afr.com/companies/financial-services/new-rba-powers-to-regulate-apple-google-payments-20231010-p5eb6d">providing technical architecture</a> rather than payment services. The current regulatory debate is not new. When credit cards made their debut in Australia in the early 1970s, there were hardly any safeguards for consumers. This led to card users being hit with high interest rates on money owed, sneaky fees and aggressive marketing tactics. Consequently, regulations were introduced to hold card providers to a standard of responsible behaviour. Today, they must openly disclose interest rates, fees and charges, and follow stringent guidelines in advertising their products and services. Regulating digital wallet providers strikes a crucial balance between innovation and accountability, ensuring life-changing technology continues to serve the public interest. The shift towards a cashless society in Australia isn’t just a possibility, it’s already well underway. The blend of technological advancements, changing consumer preferences and regulatory adaptations has set the stage for this transformation. The new regulations will help Australians navigate this transition more confidently.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/215446/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/angel-zhong-1204643">Angel Zhong</a>, Associate Professor of Finance, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/rmit-university-1063">RMIT University</a> Image credits: Getty Images This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-move-to-a-cashless-society-isnt-just-a-possibility-its-well-underway-215446">original article</a>.

Money & Banking

Lump sum, daily payments or a combination? What to consider when paying for nursing home accommodation

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/anam-bilgrami-1179543">Anam Bilgrami</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/macquarie-university-1174">Macquarie University</a> Moving yourself or a loved one to a nursing home can be <a href="https://theconversation.com/should-we-move-our-loved-one-with-dementia-into-a-nursing-home-6-things-to-consider-when-making-this-tough-decision-189770">emotional and difficult</a>. While some have their nursing home accommodation costs fully covered by the government (based on a <a href="https://www.myagedcare.gov.au/how-much-will-i-pay">means test</a>), most will have to pay their own way. The average lump sum room value is <a href="https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/2021/08/ninth-report-on-the-funding-and-financing-of-the-aged-care-industry-july-2021.pdf">A$334,000</a>. Choosing how to pay can make this time even more challenging, particularly for those with <a href="https://theconversation.com/would-you-pass-this-financial-literacy-quiz-many-wont-and-its-affecting-expensive-aged-care-decisions-175063">low financial literacy</a>. This is an important and complex decision. It can affect your income, wealth, means-tested aged care fee, and bequests. Here are some things to consider before you decide. <h2>3 ways to pay</h2> You can <a href="https://www.myagedcare.gov.au/understanding-aged-care-home-accommodation-costs">pay</a> for a nursing home room in three ways. You can pay the entire room price as a one-off, refundable lump sum (a “refundable accommodation deposit”, sometimes shortened to RAD). This lump sum is refunded to the resident or their estate when the person leaves the nursing home (if they move or pass away). The refund is <a href="https://www.myagedcare.gov.au/aged-care-home-accommodation-refunds">guaranteed by the government</a>, even if a provider goes bankrupt. People who don’t want to pay a lump sum can instead choose rent-style, “daily accommodation payments” (sometimes shortened to DAP). These are fixed, daily interest-only payments calculated on the total room price. The rate at which they are calculated is known as the “maximum permissible interest rate” or MPIR. The maximum permissible interest rate is set by the government and is currently <a href="https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-06/base-interest-rate-bir-and-maximum-permissible-interest-rate-mpir-for-residential-aged-care_0.pdf">7.9%</a> per annum. The <a href="https://www.health.gov.au/our-work/residential-aged-care/managing-residential-aged-care-services/managing-accommodation-payments-and-contributions-for-residential-aged-care#accommodation-payment">formula</a> for a daily accommodation payment is (RAD × MPIR) ÷ 365. Unlike lump sums, daily accommodation payments are not refunded. The third option is a <a href="https://www.health.gov.au/our-work/residential-aged-care/managing-residential-aged-care-services/managing-accommodation-payments-and-contributions-for-residential-aged-care#accommodation-payment">combination payment</a>. This means paying part of the room price as a lump sum, with daily payments calculated on the remaining room amount. On leaving the home, the part lump sum is refunded to the resident or their estate. With a combination payment, the consumer can choose to pay whatever amount they like for the lump sum. The table below shows three different ways someone could pay for a room priced at $400,000. <figure class="align-center zoomable"><a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/540310/original/file-20230731-130241-shaphm.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/540310/original/file-20230731-130241-shaphm.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/540310/original/file-20230731-130241-shaphm.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=432&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/540310/original/file-20230731-130241-shaphm.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=432&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/540310/original/file-20230731-130241-shaphm.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=432&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/540310/original/file-20230731-130241-shaphm.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=542&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/540310/original/file-20230731-130241-shaphm.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=542&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/540310/original/file-20230731-130241-shaphm.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=542&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" alt="" /></a><figcaption><a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></figcaption></figure> So which is best? It’s impossible to say. It depends on a person’s circumstances, family situation, finances, preferences and expected length of stay. <h2>Why do some people choose a lump sum?</h2> One downside of a lump sum (or part lump sum) is that choosing this option means this money is not invested elsewhere. By handing over the lump sum, for example, you forgo returns you could have made by investing this same money into property or stocks over the period of your nursing home stay. On the other hand, paying lump sum means you get to avoid the daily interest payments (the 7.9% in the table above). So you could potentially be better off paying a lump sum if you think there’s no way you could make investment returns on that money that are substantially higher than the interest you’d be charged through daily payments. One advantage of choosing a lump sum is it’s considered an <a href="https://www.dva.gov.au/get-support/health-support/care-home-or-aged-care/help-pay-home-or-aged-care/residential-aged-0">exempt asset</a> for pension purposes; some people may get more <a href="https://www.afr.com/wealth/personal-finance/five-things-you-need-to-know-about-aged-care-deposits-20200302-p54606">pension</a> if they pay the lump sum. The lump sum, however, does count as an asset in determining the <a href="https://www.health.gov.au/our-work/residential-aged-care/charging-for-residential-aged-care-services/residential-aged-care-fee-scenarios-for-people-entering-care-from-1-july-2014">means-tested care fee</a>. And if you sell your house, remember any money leftover after you pay the lump sum will be counted as assets when you’re means-tested for the pension and means-tested care fee. <h2>Why might some people prefer daily payments?</h2> Not everyone can can afford a lump sum. Some may not want to <a href="https://theconversation.com/is-it-worth-selling-my-house-if-im-going-into-aged-care-161674">sell their home</a> to pay one. Some may want to hold onto their house if they think property prices may increase in the future. Daily payments have recently overtaken lump sums as the most <a href="https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/2021/08/ninth-report-on-the-funding-and-financing-of-the-aged-care-industry-july-2021.pdf">popular payment option</a>, with 43% of people paying this way. However, recent <a href="https://amp-smh-com-au.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/amp.smh.com.au/money/super-and-retirement/aged-care-interest-rate-increase-sees-daily-payments-almost-double-20230324-p5cuz2.html">interest rate rises</a> may slow or reverse this trend. And if a spouse or “<a href="https://www.dva.gov.au/get-support/health-support/care-home-or-aged-care/residential-aged-care/aged-care-costs">protected person</a>” – such as a dependant or relative that meets certain criteria – is still living in the house, it’s also exempt from assets tests for the pension and other aged care fees. If the home is vacated by a protected person, its value is still excluded from the pension means test for <a href="https://www.dva.gov.au/get-support/health-support/care-home-or-aged-care/help-pay-home-or-aged-care/residential-aged-0">two years</a> (although rental income is still assessed). If you do not anticipate a lengthy nursing home stay, daily payments may potentially be the easiest option. But it’s best to consult a financial adviser. <h2>What does the research say?</h2> My <a href="https://www.mq.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/1190086/What-drives-end-of-life-financial-decisions.pdf">research</a> with colleagues found many people choose the lump sum option simply because they can afford to. Those <a href="https://ahes.org.au/portfolio-items/entering-aged-care/">owning residential property</a> are more likely to pay a lump sum, mostly because they can sell a house to get the money. People who consult financial advisers are also more likely to choose lump sums. This may be due to <a href="https://www.afr.com/wealth/aged-care-costs-most-opt-for-pay-as-you-go-20181023-h170g4">financial advice</a> suggesting it’s tough to earn investment returns higher than what you’d save by avoiding the interest charged in the daily payment option. Some aged care providers <a href="https://www.mq.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/1164243/the-role-of-refundable-accommodation-deposits-FINAL.pdf">prefer</a> lump sum payment since they <a href="https://www.agedcarequality.gov.au/providers/prudential-standards/permitted-use-refundable-deposits">use</a> these to renovate or refurbish their facilities. But providers are not allowed to influence or control your decision on how to pay. The recent Royal Commission into Aged Care recommended <a href="https://agedcare.royalcommission.gov.au/sites/default/files/2021-03/final-report-recommendations.pdf">phasing out</a> lump sums as a payment option, leaving only daily payments. While that would reduce the complexity of the payment decision and remove the incentive for providers to sway decisions, it would also reduce consumer choice. <h2>Is there anything else I should know?</h2> Some 60% of people we <a href="https://www.mq.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/1190086/What-drives-end-of-life-financial-decisions.pdf">surveyed</a> found the decision complex, while 54% said it was stressful. It is best to seek professional <a href="https://www.myagedcare.gov.au/understanding-aged-care-home-accommodation-costs#financial-advice">financial advice</a> before you decide. Services Australia also runs a free <a href="https://www.servicesaustralia.gov.au/what-financial-information-service?context=21836">Financial Information Service</a> that can help you better understand your finances and the payment decision. But it does not give <a href="https://www.servicesaustralia.gov.au/financial-information-service-officers?context=21836#a2">financial advice or prepare plans</a>. You have <a href="https://www.health.gov.au/our-work/residential-aged-care/managing-residential-aged-care-services/managing-accommodation-payments-and-contributions-for-residential-aged-care">28 days to choose a payment method</a> after admission, and six months to pay if you <a href="https://www.health.gov.au/our-work/residential-aged-care/managing-residential-aged-care-services/managing-accommodation-payments-and-contributions-for-residential-aged-care">choose a lump-sum payment</a>. In the interim, you will be charged daily interest payments on the room price.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/207405/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/anam-bilgrami-1179543">Anam Bilgrami</a>, Research Fellow, Macquarie University Centre for the Health Economy, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/macquarie-university-1174">Macquarie University</a> Image credits: Getty Images This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/lump-sum-daily-payments-or-a-combination-what-to-consider-when-paying-for-nursing-home-accommodation-207405">original article</a>.

Retirement Life

Cash could be almost gone in Australia in a decade – but like cheques, who’ll miss it?

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/peter-martin-682709">Peter Martin</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/crawford-school-of-public-policy-australian-national-university-3292">Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University</a> Late last year, the Reserve Bank gave 1,000 Australians diaries and asked them to record every payment they made over the course of a week. Of the 13,000 payments, only <a href="https://www.rba.gov.au/publications/bulletin/2023/jun/consumer-payment-behaviour-in-australia.html">17</a> were with cheques. It’s been an astounding collapse. Back in 1980 at the start of the credit card era, <a href="https://www.rba.gov.au/publications/bulletin/1996/oct/pdf/bu-1096-2.pdf">85%</a> of non-cash payments were made with cheques. Today it’s less than <a href="https://www.rba.gov.au/publications/bulletin/2023/jun/consumer-payment-behaviour-in-australia.html">0.1%</a>. Earlier this month, the government announced it was following <a href="https://www.justice.govt.nz/about/news-and-media/news/the-ministry-is-phasing-out-payment-by-cheque/">New Zealand</a>, Denmark, the Netherlands and <a href="https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/the-death-of-the-cheque-book-australia-to-phase-out-cheques/qu0e4xf55">others</a>, closing our cheque system down by <a href="https://ministers.treasury.gov.au/ministers/jim-chalmers-2022/media-releases/modernising-payments-infrastructure-phasing-out-cheques">2030</a>. Meanwhile, New Zealand is already on to the next thing. Having <a href="https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/300011579/bnz-anz-westpac-to-phase-out-cheque-use">phased out cheques</a>, it’s now looking at winding down the use of <a href="https://www.rbnz.govt.nz/-/media/project/sites/rbnz/files/research/future-of-cash-issues-paper.pdf">cash</a>. So how close is Australia now to becoming a cash-free nation? <h2>The hidden costs of cheques and cash</h2> Cheques are horrendously expensive to process. The average cost of everything that had to happen to process a cheque exceeds <a href="https://www.rba.gov.au/publications/rdp/2014/pdf/rdp2014-14.pdf">$5</a> per payment, mostly borne by banks. But cash is expensive in its own way. The average cost of creating, sorting and trucking all those sheets of plastic and coins exceeds <a href="https://www.rba.gov.au/publications/rdp/2014/pdf/rdp2014-14.pdf">50 cents</a> per payment, mostly passed on to banks and retailers, and it is soaring as the number of payments plummets. As recently as 2007, the vast bulk of consumer payments – 69% – were in cash. By 2019 only 27% were in cash. By 2022, after two years of COVID, it was only <a href="https://www.rba.gov.au/publications/bulletin/2023/jun/consumer-payment-behaviour-in-australia.html">13%</a>. At this rate, it’s hard to be certain how long cash will last. <h2>What made cheques so slow and costly</h2> For those who’ve never had to write one, cheques are bank-issued pieces of paper on which the owner writes the name of the person they want the bank to pay and the amount. They they hand it to that person, who then hands it to their bank, which then tries to get the money from the payer’s bank. <figure class="align-right "><figcaption></figcaption></figure> Behind the scenes, until recently when the electronic transmission of digital images changed things, each bank would collect all the cheques that had been presented to its branches each day and sort them into bags, one for each originating bank. Then, late at night, its “bag man” would travel to a nondescript city location with a bag for each bank, hand the correct one to each of the other bagmen, and be given bags in return, which the bagman would take back to the bank for signature checking. When each bank worked out what it owed the other bank, they would usually discover the flows largely cancelled each other out, and then make net payments which would be reflected in the cheque-writer’s account, up to five business days later. Always expensive, the cost per cheque grew and grew as the number of Australians paying with cheques dwindled to a fraction of what it had been. <h2>How moving cash became a loss-making business</h2> It’s the same sort of story with cash. Although we don’t often think about it, cash costs an awful lot to move, sort and restock. Printing the notes still makes money – it costs about 32 cents to make each note, whether it’s worth $5 or $100, although making some coins now <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-mint-and-note-printing-australia-make-billions-for-australia-but-it-could-be-at-risk-190901">loses money</a>. The real expense is in moving notes and coins around, keeping them nearby and restocking banks and cash registers. Aside from payments the Reserve Bank makes to banks for returning damaged notes, the banks (and, through them, the retailers) are expected to pay for the lot. Until recently that gave the two firms that dominate the business (Linfox Armaguard, and Prosegur, which owns Chubb Security) a pretty good deal. Except that the volume of cash they’ve carried has dived <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/public-registers/documents/Application%20for%20merger%20authorisation%20-%2027.09.22%20-%20PR%20VERSION%20-%20MA1000022%20Armaguard%20Prosegur.pdf">47%</a> over the past ten years, 30% of it during COVID. Both firms say their money-moving arms are incurring “heavy financial losses” and that if they increase their prices much more, retailers might move even <a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/532829/original/file-20230620-48940-4a5amn.PNG">further away from cash</a>, pushing their costs even higher. <figure class="align-right zoomable"><figcaption></figcaption></figure> Last week, the Competition and Consumer Commission allowed them to <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/public-registers/mergers-registers/merger-authorisations-register/linfox-armaguard-pty-ltd-and-prosegur-australia-holdings-pty-ltd-proposed-merger">merge</a> on the condition that they limit their price increases to the consumer index plus 7.5% per year. That increase is so steep as to suggest a <a href="https://www.energynetworks.com.au/news/energy-insider/the-death-spiral/">death spiral</a>: the more they charge, the less retailers will use cash, the more they’ll have to charge. The only way out, unless they can make really big efficiencies, or unless the decline in the use of cash stops, would be for the government to return to subsidising the use of cash. It’s hard to see how it could make the case to do that when there are cheaper emerging technologies. Bank transfers cost a <a href="https://www.rba.gov.au/publications/rdp/2014/pdf/rdp2014-14.pdf">mere fraction</a> of using cash, and pretty soon we’ll be able to use them for everything, via things such as <a href="https://www.mobiletransaction.org/qr-code-payment-works/">QR codes</a>. <h2>So when will cash go the way of cheques?</h2> A previous federal government has already tried to eliminate the use of cash for transactions worth more than $10,000, as part of its attack on the black economy. Announced in 2016 by the Turnbull Coalition government, the ban was due to come into force in <a href="https://ministers.treasury.gov.au/ministers/kelly-odwyer-2016/media-releases/tackling-illegal-behaviour-black-economy">2019</a>. But, after delays, in 2020 the Morrison-led Coalition government <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-12-07/cash-ban-law-10000-dollars-abandoned-amid-covid-crisis/12951720">backed down</a>. If Australia wants to ban cash (and ban it for small transactions too – cash is now used less than cards for transactions <a href="https://www.rba.gov.au/publications/bulletin/2023/jun/cash-use-and-attitudes-in-australia.html">of all sizes</a>) the easiest solution might be simply to wait. <hr /> <iframe id="HykMF" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/HykMF/10/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> <hr /> Cards are now the dominant means of exchanging money, and electronic transfers are growing from a small base. Pure extrapolation would suggest cash has less than a decade to go, but it will probably hang around for longer as an (expensive, little-used) backup that maintains privacy. Like cheques, cash will probably die <a href="https://quoteinvestigator.com/2018/08/06/bankrupt/">gradually, then suddenly</a>. By the time it does, there will be few users left who care.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/208020/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/peter-martin-682709">Peter Martin</a>, Visiting Fellow, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/crawford-school-of-public-policy-australian-national-university-3292">Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University</a> Image credits: Getty Images This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/cash-could-be-almost-gone-in-australia-in-a-decade-but-like-cheques-wholl-miss-it-208020">original article</a>.

Money & Banking

Big changes for Bunnings Warehouse snags

There’s nothing quite like a weekend shop at Bunnings, largely because it means there’ll be a fresh snag waiting for you post-shop, and with the hardware store’s latest announcement, it will be even easier to get your hands on one. Bunnings Warehouse has announced it is rolling out mobile payment options for customers who aren’t carrying cash or coins on them. Until now, most Bunnings sausage sizzles largely relied on cash payments, at the discretion of each community group that hosts their sausage sizzle, but the cardless concept proved difficult in a largely cashless economy. The Bunnings website states, "Not-for-profit organisations are able to book a sizzle with their local store - they need to bring volunteers and adequate supplies and Bunnings helps with the rest.” "The rest" being the addition of free mobile payment facilities. "We offer a free mobile payment option to community groups fundraising through sausage sizzles at our stores, providing an easy way for them to maximise fundraising and offering customers a cashless way to pay for their snag and support their local community group," said Bunnings General Manager Operations Matt Tyler in a statement. There will be no additional cost to customers or community groups, who previously had to bring their own EFT machine if they wanted to pay by card. Bunnings Warehouse will be incurring all the transaction fees to ensure community groups get 100 per cent of all the money raised. Image credit: Shutterstock / Instagram

Food & Wine

"What am I going to do?”: Centrelink mother points out crucial flaw in new budget policy for parents

An unemployed mother who relies on Centrelink benefits has broken down while noting a fatal flaw in Treasurer Jim Chalmers’ Federal Budget promises to parents. Jessica Blowers told ABC’s Q&A program that she will be forced off the Single Parent Payment when her daughter turns eight in August, leaving her unable to afford the rent increases. Currently, single parents can claim the Parenting Payment of $949.30 a fortnight until their youngest child turns eight. By September 2023, the age limit for the pay rise to when the youngest child is 14, as part of Chalmers’ budget. Ms Blowers is one of many copping the brunt of it as her daughter’s 8th birthday is four weeks before the new rules begin. She will also see a rent increase during that period from $900 a fortnight to $960. “What am I going to do? What is my choice, other than I am doing my best to get a job so that I can keep a house over my daughter's head,” she stressed to the treasurer. “When I'm applying for the jobs, I am faced with being told that more than 100 other candidates have applied for the same jobs - I'm not sure how I am supposed to compete against 100 other people for one job.” Ms Blowers added she “would like to know what measures the government has in place to bridge the gap that I and other parents in similar situations will find ourselves in”. “I don't have anywhere to go because I am paying my entire pension in rent. Everywhere else in Sydney is comparable to that.” Although sympathetic to her situation, Chalmers said those suffering like Ms Blowers were “the reason why we are lifting the age from eight to 14”. “This is something we were really keen to do in the Budget because we recognise the pressure that you are under as a single mum,” he explained. However, Chalmers was adamant that the new system could not be introduced any earlier than September 20, 2023. “We've tried to do is bring that change in as soon as possible. We think September is the soonest that we can do it,” he said. “I understand that that means a few weeks for you going from the current payment onto JobSeeker and (then) back onto the single parenting payment. “I would love to avoid that if we could, but what we're trying to do is provide this extra assistance ... that you need and deserve. If we could avoid those couple of weeks, we would, but September is the best we can do.” In total, some 57,000 single parents, 90 per cent of whom are women, will benefit from the new scheme. Previously they would have been moved onto the lower JobSeeker rate when their youngest child turned eight. “By age 14, children have typically settled into high school and need less parental supervision, and single parents are in a much stronger position to take on paid work," Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said when the policy was announced. Historically, the single parent payment was eligible for singles with children aged up to 16. But former prime minister John Howard, later supported by Julia Gillard, cut the age to eight in an attempt to encourage parents back into the workforce. Two advisory bodies have called for the government to extend the payment and the eligibility criteria. It is understood mutual obligation requirements will remain in order to continue encouraging parents to go back to work. Speaking to Nova radio in Perth, Mr Albanese explained he knew “firsthand what it's like to grow up with a single mum doing it tough”. “We want to look after single parents because we know that the role that they play in raising their children is such a priority for them and they’re deserving of more support,” he said. Image credit: ABC Q&A

Money & Banking

Over-55s the only group to receive Centrelink payment boost

Older recipients of JobSeeker will receive a higher welfare payment as the federal budget is set to include an increase in payments for 227,000 Aussies. According to 7News, the budget will include an increase in the base rate of the JobSeeker for people aged 55 and above. The change honours Treasurer Jim Chalmers’ promise that an increase “will be focused on the most vulnerable”. Finance Minister Katy Gallagher previously committed to a “significant improvement” in terms of the budget. When asked if the rate of JobSeeker would be lifted, Gallagher revealed the budget would contain “ongoing” investments to help people with cost-of-living pressures, in addition to one-off measures. “This budget will have a significant cost-of-living package and that cost-of-living package will be targeted to the most vulnerable Australians,” she said. About 227,000 Jobseeker recipients are 55 and over, which is the highest number of any age group and the group most likely to be unemployed long-term, meaning they are without a job for five years or more. The majority of people in this group are women. Senior sources reportedly told 7News that the increase will be modest, not the $100-a-week advocates are hoping for but what the budget can afford. The change is unlikely to please Raise the Rate campaigners, who have called for the government to bring payments above the poverty line. 7News reported that the government will sell the moderate increase as a “responsible first step”, an increase that will help the most vulnerable of JobSeeker recipients and honours its election commitment to do what it can to help within the restraints of the budget. The pressure continues to pile up for the government to substantially increase income support payments above $49.50 a day for singles on JobSeeker and $40.20 a day for Youth Allowance. An open letter to the Prime Minister, which has been signed by more than 300 politicians, community advocates and prolific Aussies, called for an increase to be included in the budget to support those most in need. “Right now, the rate of JobSeeker is so low that people are being forced to choose between paying their rent or buying enough food and medicine,” the letter, coordinated by the Australian Council of Social Service, read. In 2022, the council’s research found six in 10 people on income support were eating less or reporting difficulty getting medicine or care due to their inadequate income. This increased to seven in 10 in March 2023. The budget plans to extend single-parenting payments and increase rental assistance - particularly for women. Around $120 billion in Morrison Government road and rail projects will be reviewed and money reprioritised, with hundreds of smaller projects likely to be stopped. Image credit: Getty

Money & Banking

Only days left for one Aussie state's residents to make $1000 claim

New South Wales residents who faced the brunt of July 2022’s floods have only one week remaining to claim their $1000 lump sum payment. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese announced the Disaster Recovery Payment [DRA] - of $1000 per adult and $400 per child - as he set off to tour some of the hardest hit regions in July 2022. The news gave some hope to those who had lost everything in the disaster that swept through their homes, and the chance to secure the likes of clothing, food, and temporary shelter. At the peak of the devastation, over 100 evacuation orders - amounting to roughly 85,000 people - had been issued across the state, with thousands of properties inundated, with SES crews responding to over 370 flood rescues, and a frightening 7600 help requests. People living in the local government areas [LGAs] that were directly impacted by the floods are eligible, although certain criteria must be met. Service Australia outlines that you (or a dependent child to whom you’re the principal carer) must be an Australian citizen or hold an eligible visa, be in an eligible LGA, and must be claiming the payment for the first time. Those whose homes suffered major damage due to the floods and required either repair or replacement in certain areas, as well as those whose “major assets” - the likes of caravans, vehicles, water tanks, and sheds - were also in need of repair or replacement are eligible for the payment as well. And residents who were seriously injured, or had an immediate family member (who is/was an Australian citizen) die or go missing in the floods, are also eligible. Furthermore, individuals who lost income as a direct result of the floods may be able to get the Australian Government Disaster Recovery Payment [AGDRP]. If this is the case, they are then also able to claim the DRA. As for which LGAs the payment covers, residents from the following who felt the floods’ impact should look into it: Bayside, Blacktown, Blue Mountains, Camden, Campbelltown, Canterbury Bankstown, Central Coast, Cessnock, Cumberland, Dungog, Fairfield, Georges River, Hawkesbury, Hornsby, Kempsey, Kiama, Lake Macquarie, Lithgow, Liverpool, Maitland, Mid-Coast, Muswellbrook, Nambucca Valley, Narromine, Newcastle, Northern Beaches, Oberon, Parramatta, Penrith, Port Macquarie-Hastings, Port Stephens, Randwick, Shellharbour, Shoalhaven, Singleton, Strathfield, Sutherland, The Hills, Upper Lachlan, Warren, Wingecarribee, Wollondilly, and Wollongong. New South Wales residents who are eligible only have until April 5 to make their claim. To check your eligibility status, <a href="https://www.servicesaustralia.gov.au/who-can-get-new-south-wales-floods-july-2022-australian-government-disaster-recovery-payment?context=62849">head to Service Australia</a>. Images: Getty

Money & Banking

Husband ordered to pay for 25 years of unpaid housework

A man has been ordered to pay his ex-wife a hefty six-figure sum for 25 years of unpaid domestic labour. Ivana Moral's ex-husband was ordered to pay her 204,624€ - or just over $327,000 AUD - in a record divorce settlement, based on the average minimum wage throughout their marriage. The separated couple, who live in Spain and share two daughters, took the issue to court as the ruling stated that Ivana had spent almost all of her time looking after their family and working as a housewife during their marriage. Ivana's husband must also pay her a pension of $797 (AUD) per month as well as $639 and $957 to his two daughters, who are now aged 20 and 14, for compensation for their childhoods. The mother-of-two, who married her ex in 1995 before asking for a divorce in 2020, has said she is happy with the payout after years of hard work. "Clearly this was a case of abuse to be completely excluded financially (by my ex-husband) with nothing left after my marriage ended, so me and my daughters were left with nothing after all these years of putting all my time, energy and love in the family," she told <a href="https://inews.co.uk/news/woman-payout-unpaid-housework-record-divorce-settlement-2193153" target="_blank" rel="noopener">inews</a>. "I was supporting my husband in his work and in the family as a mother and a father. I was never allowed access to his financial affairs; everything was in his name." Since getting married and starting a family, Ivana had dedicated herself "to essentially working in the home, which meant looking after the home and the family and all that involves," the court ruling said. The couple's marriage was governed by a separation of property regime, which Ms Moral's husband had asked her to sign at the start of their marriage, which is similar to a pre-nuptial agreement. It specified that whatever each party earned was theirs alone, with them only sharing possessions, which would have left Ms Moral with no access to any of the wealth acquired through years of partnership. Ivana said her husband "made me take on the specific role" of doing domestic chores, to the extent that "I was in a place where I couldn't really do much else." She also said the sentence had made her "very happy" because it was "very well deserved". Image credits: Malaga Tribune

Legal

Record boost to Centrelink payments coming for nearly one million Aussies

Hundreds of thousands of Australians receiving welfare are due to receive the biggest increase to their payments in two decades. The increase will see payments for young people, including parents, students and those on disability, increase from January 1, 2023. From next year, the base rate for singles on Youth Allowance will increase by at least $19.10 - with a maximum $32.40 extra a fortnight - taking the maximum rate up to $569.80. Single Australians with dependents can expect a boost of $41.40, bringing payments up to $729.60, while couples will receive an additional $35.20 a fortnight. For those under 21 without kids who receive Disability Support Pension, including Youth Disability Supplement, the payment increase is expected to range between $27.40 and $40.70 a fortnight. Recipients of Austudy, ABSTUDY, Mobility Allowance, Double Orphan Pension, Carer Allowance and Pharmaceutical Allowance will also be included in the increases, which are part of a routine indexation that happens every January to keep up with inflation. It comes after the Reserve Bank of Australia forecasted that inflation would peak at eight percent by the end of 2022. In comparison, payments for young people and students have been indexed at 6.1 percent. Social services minister Amanda Rishworth said the increase would help ease the pressure coming from the current cost-of-living crisis. “With the cost of living increasing, we need to ensure students and young people can cover basic costs while focusing on their studies and career aspirations,” she said. While young people are the subject of these payment increases, those who receive Jobseeker or the Aged Pension won’t be left out, with indexation increases announced for all welfare payments were announced by the federal government in September. These payments are also indexed at other times of the year, with the Aged Pension increasing in March and September. Image: Getty Images

Money & Banking

Which Centrelink payments are going up from July 1

From July the 1st, over 1.4 million Australian families will benefit from an increase to their Centrelink payments. The federal government has announced increases to the Family Tax Benefit (Part A and B) to keep up with the rising cost of living. Under the Family Tax Benefit Part A, payments for families with a child aged under 13 will increase up to $204.40 over 2022-2023. The payments will also increase by a maximum of $255.50 for families with a child 13 years and older. For those receiving Family Tax Benefit Part B, there will be an increase of as much as $164.25 per year where a family has their youngest child under 5. For those families on Family Tax Benefit Part B with a youngest child aged between five to eighteen will receive up to $116.80 more per year. The changes are expected to impact more than 1.4 million families, Social Services Minister Amanda Rishworth said. It was also announced that the amount of income or assets an Age Pension, Disability Support Pension or Carer Payment recipient can have before their payment is affected will increase. “Social security and family payments have a built-in safeguard where they are automatically indexed at regular intervals to help them maintain purchasing power,” Rishworth said. Those who receive other family payments, such as Multiple Birth Allowance and Newborn Supplement are also set to receive an increase. Image: Getty

Money & Banking

Buy now, pay later: Apple will now lend you money to keep you spending and expand its empire

Apple has joined the thriving “buy now, pay later” industry, with a customised service called <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/video/2022/06/06/apple-announces-buy-now-pay-later-program-called-apple-pay-later.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Apple Pay Later</a>. The service was announced earlier this week at the 2022 Worldwide Developers Conference, and will initially be launched in the United States later <a href="https://www.macrumors.com/2022/06/07/apple-pay-later-purchases-installment-plan/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">this year</a>. Pay Later will be built into the Apple Wallet and eligible for use on any purchase made through Apple Pay. Customers will be able to split the cost of a purchase into four equal payments, with zero interest and fees, spread over a period of <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/jun/06/apple-redesigns-the-iphone-lock-screen-in-ios-16-at-wwdc" target="_blank" rel="noopener">four months</a>. To qualify, however, Apple will first do a <a href="https://www.zdnet.com/finance/banking/wwdc-2022-buy-now-pay-later-with-apples-new-wallet-feature/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">soft credit check</a> on users wanting to use the service. The technology behemoth <a href="https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2022/06/apple-unveils-new-ways-to-share-and-communicate-in-ios-16/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">claims</a> it has designed the feature with “users’ financial health in mind”. It’s likely Apple is trying to consolidate its foothold in the world of consumer finance, and increase its profitability. And consumers should be aware of the risks of using such a service. Apple: the consumer darling With the launch of Pay Later, Apple will be competing with many other similar fin-tech companies including PayPal, Block, Klarna and AfterPay – some of which saw their share prices <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-07-13/apple-goldman-plan-buy-now-pay-later-service-to-rival-paypal" target="_blank" rel="noopener">fall</a> following Apple’s announcement. Apple will benefit from its huge market and brand power, with the capability to attract millions to its products and services. And with an acute focus on customer experience, Apple has managed to foster a community of evangelists. There’s no doubt the company is a <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/christinemoorman/2018/01/12/why-apple-is-still-a-great-marketer-and-what-you-can-learn/?sh=55e3c32c15bd" target="_blank" rel="noopener">consumer darling</a>. Moreover, Apple has established an ever-growing ecosystem in which users are encouraged to tap into Apple products and services as much, and as often, as possible – such as by making payments through their iPhone instead of a bank card. The tech giant provides ways to integrate once-separate computing capabilities into a phone or wristwatch – while keeping the <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/christinemoorman/2018/01/12/why-apple-is-still-a-great-marketer-and-what-you-can-learn/?sh=7c61018615bd" target="_blank" rel="noopener">consumer’s experience</a> in focus. Pay Later enhances this customer-centric experience further. It’s one more way users can integrate the tools they need within a single ecosystem. What’s in it for Apple? Apple stands to make financial gains through Pay Later, thereby adding to its bottom line. Currently its reach in the retail world is evident, with iPhone-based payment services <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-07-13/apple-goldman-plan-buy-now-pay-later-service-to-rival-paypal" target="_blank" rel="noopener">accepted by 85% of US retailers</a>. One 2021 survey found that about 26% of <a href="https://www.statista.com/statistics/1275393/australia-share-of-consumers-using-bnpl-by-purchase-category/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">regular online shoppers</a> in Australia used buy now, pay later services. As Apple’s customers increasingly start to use the Pay Later service, it will gain from merchant fees. These are fees which retailers pay Apple in exchange for being able to offer customers Apple Pay. In addition, Apple will also gain valuable insight into consumers’ purchase behaviours, which will allow the company to predict future consumption and spending behaviour. To deliver the buy now, pay later service, Apple has <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-07-13/apple-goldman-plan-buy-now-pay-later-service-to-rival-paypal" target="_blank" rel="noopener">joined forces with Goldman Sachs</a>, who will finance the loans. This relationship has been in place since 2019, with Goldman Sachs also acting as a partner for the Apple credit card (although Pay Later is not tied to the Apple credit card). This strategic partnership has helped Apple gain strong footing in the world of consumer finance. Challenges for consumers The reality is that the world of <a href="https://www.holmanwebb.com.au/blog/655/buy-now-pay-later-bnpl-update-how-to-seek-and-keep-code-compliance-accreditation" target="_blank" rel="noopener">unregulated finance</a>, which includes buy now, pay later, does not bode well <a href="https://ndh.org.au/debt-problems/buy-now-pay-later/risks-of-using-buy-now-pay-later/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">for all customers</a>. Younger <a href="https://www.emarketer.com/content/almost-75-of-bnpl-users-us-gen-z-millennials" target="_blank" rel="noopener">demographics</a> (such as Gen Z and Millenials) and low-income <a href="https://thefintechtimes.com/one-in-four-bnpl-users-are-financially-vulnerable/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">households</a> can be <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2021/08/07/why-millennials-and-gen-zs-are-jumping-on-the-buy-now-pay-later-trend.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">more vulnerable</a> to the risks associated with using these services – and can rack up debt as a result. Purchases through buy now, pay later schemes may also be driven by a desire to own the latest <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2021/12/16/chinas-buy-now-pay-later-market-to-grow-challenges-ahead-experts.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">gadgets and luxury goods</a> – a message pushed onto consumers through slick marketing. They can condition consumers to make purchases without feeling the pain of parting with cold, hard cash. <figure class="align-center zoomable"><a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/467674/original/file-20220608-24-ict1mh.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/467674/original/file-20220608-24-ict1mh.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/467674/original/file-20220608-24-ict1mh.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/467674/original/file-20220608-24-ict1mh.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/467674/original/file-20220608-24-ict1mh.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/467674/original/file-20220608-24-ict1mh.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/467674/original/file-20220608-24-ict1mh.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/467674/original/file-20220608-24-ict1mh.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" alt="An indoor shopping arcade is lined with luxury stores on either side" /></a><figcaption>Buy now, pay later schemes can give consumers the satisfaction of buying expensive products – without feeling like they’re splitting from cold, hard cash. Shutterstock</figcaption></figure> From a consumer psychology perspective, these services encourages immediate gratification and put younger people on the consumption treadmill. In other words, they may continually spend more money on purchases than they can actually afford. Missing payments on Pay Later would negatively impact an individual’s <a href="https://www.zdnet.com/finance/banking/wwdc-2022-buy-now-pay-later-with-apples-new-wallet-feature/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">credit rating</a>, which can then have adverse outcomes such as <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/select/side-effects-of-bad-credit/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">not qualifying</a> for traditional loans or credit cards. A focus on consumerist behaviour can also trigger an “<a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/au/blog/the-psychology-deciding/202201/if-i-own-it-it-must-be-good-what-is-the-ownership-effect" target="_blank" rel="noopener">ownership effect</a>”. This is when people become attached to their purchases and are unlikely to return them, even if they can’t afford them. Apple’s technology-driven and consumer-centric marketing gives it an edge over other buy now, pay later schemes. It claims the service is designed with consumers’ financial health in mind. But as is the case with any of these services, consumers ought to be aware of the risks and manage them carefully. <img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/184550/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/rajat-roy-1227884" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Rajat Roy</a>, Associate Professor, Bond Business School, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/bond-university-863" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Bond University</a> This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/buy-now-pay-later-apple-will-now-lend-you-money-to-keep-you-spending-and-expand-its-empire-184550" target="_blank" rel="noopener">original article</a>. Image: Getty Images

Technology

Pay ‘with a smile or a wave’: Why Mastercard’s new face recognition payment system raises concerns

Mastercard’s <a href="https://www.mastercard.com/news/press/2022/may/with-a-smile-or-a-wave-paying-in-store-just-got-personal/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">“smile to pay”</a> system, announced last week, is supposed to save time for customers at checkouts. It is being trialled in Brazil, with future pilots planned for the Middle East and Asia. The company argues touch-less technology will help speed up transaction times, shorten lines in shops, heighten security and improve hygiene in businesses. But it raises concerns relating to customer privacy, data storage, crime risk and bias. How will it work? Mastercard’s biometric checkout system will provide customers facial recognition-based payments, by linking the biometric authentication systems of a number of third-party companies with Mastercard’s own payment systems. A Mastercard spokesperson told The Conversation it had already partnered with NEC, Payface, Aurus, Fujitsu Limited, PopID and PayByFace, with more providers to be named. <figure class="align-center zoomable"><a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/464953/original/file-20220524-22-ga0v7l.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/464953/original/file-20220524-22-ga0v7l.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/464953/original/file-20220524-22-ga0v7l.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/464953/original/file-20220524-22-ga0v7l.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/464953/original/file-20220524-22-ga0v7l.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/464953/original/file-20220524-22-ga0v7l.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/464953/original/file-20220524-22-ga0v7l.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/464953/original/file-20220524-22-ga0v7l.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" alt="The 'Fujitsu' logo in red is displayed on a building's side" /></a><figcaption>Mastercard has partnered with Fujitsu, a massive information and communications technology firm offering many different products and services. Shutterstock</figcaption></figure> They said “providers need to go through independent laboratory certification against the program criteria to be considered” – but details of these criteria aren’t yet publicly available. According to <a href="https://www.siliconrepublic.com/business/mastercard-facial-recognition-biometric-payments" target="_blank" rel="noopener">media</a> reports, customers will have to install an app which will take their picture and payment information. This information will be saved and stored on the third-party provider’s servers. At the checkout, the customer’s face will be matched with the stored data. And once their identity is verified, funds will be deducted automatically. The “wave” option is a bit of a trick: as the customer watches the camera while waving, the camera still scans their face – not their hand. Similar authentication technologies are used on smartphones (face ID) and in many airports around the world, including “<a href="https://www.abf.gov.au/entering-and-leaving-australia/smartgates/arrivals" target="_blank" rel="noopener">smartgates</a>” in Australia. <a href="https://www.theverge.com/2017/9/4/16251304/kfc-china-alipay-ant-financial-smile-to-pay" target="_blank" rel="noopener">China</a> started using biometrics-based checkout technology back in 2017. But Mastercard is among the first to launch such a system in Western markets – competing with the “pay with your palm” <a href="https://techcrunch.com/2020/09/29/amazon-introduces-the-amazon-one-a-way-to-pay-with-your-palm-when-entering-stores/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">system</a> used at cashier-less Amazon Go and Whole Foods brick and mortars in the United States. What we don’t know Much about the precise functioning of Mastercard’s system isn’t clear. How accurate will the facial recognition be? Who will have access to the databases of biometric data? A Mastercard spokesperson told The Conversation customers’ data would be stored with the relevant biometric service provider in encrypted form, and removed when the customer “indicates they want to end their enrolment”. But how will the removal of data be enforced if Mastercard itself can’t access it? Obviously, privacy protection is a major concern, especially when there are many potential third-party providers involved. On the bright side, Mastercard’s <a href="https://www.investopedia.com/articles/markets/032615/how-mastercard-makes-its-money-ma.asp" target="_blank" rel="noopener">customers</a> will have a choice as to whether or not they use the biometrics checkout system. However, it will be at retailers’ discretion whether they offer it, or whether they offer it exclusively as the only payment option. Similar face-recognition technologies used in airports, and <a href="https://www.brookings.edu/research/police-surveillance-and-facial-recognition-why-data-privacy-is-an-imperative-for-communities-of-color/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">by police</a>, often offer no choice. We can assume Mastercard and the biometrics provider with whom they partner will require customer consent, as per most privacy laws. But will customers know what they are consenting to? Ultimately, the biometric service providers Mastercard teams up with will decide how they use the data, for how long, where they store it, and who can access it. Mastercard will merely decide what providers are “good enough” to be accepted as partners, and the minimum standards they must adhere to. Customers who want the convenience of this checkout service will have to consent to all the related data and privacy terms. And as reports have noted, there is potential for Mastercard to integrate the feature with loyalty schemes and make personalised recommendations <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/17/mastercard-launches-tech-that-lets-you-pay-with-your-face-or-hand.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">based on purchases</a>. Accuracy is a problem While the accuracy of face recognition technologies has previously been challenged, the current best facial authentication algorithms have an error of just 0.08%, according to tests by the <a href="https://github.com/usnistgov/frvt/blob/nist-pages/reports/1N/frvt_1N_report_2020_03_27.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">National Institute of Standards and Technology</a>. In some countries, even banks have <a href="https://techhq.com/2020/09/biometrics-the-most-secure-solution-for-banking/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">become comfortable</a> relying on it to log users into their accounts. Yet we can’t know how accurate the technologies used in Mastercard’s biometric checkout system will be. The algorithms underpinning a technology can work almost perfectly when trailed in a lab, but perform <a href="https://www.csis.org/blogs/technology-policy-blog/how-accurate-are-facial-recognition-systems-%E2%80%93-and-why-does-it-matter" target="_blank" rel="noopener">poorly</a> in real life settings, where lighting, angles and other parameters are varied. Bias is another problem In a 2019 study, NIST <a href="https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/ir/2019/NIST.IR.8280.pdf#page=5" target="_blank" rel="noopener">found</a> that out of 189 facial recognition algorithms, the majority were biased. Specifically, they were less accurate on people from racial and ethnic minorities. Even if the technology has improved in the past few years, it’s not foolproof. And we don’t know the extent to which Mastercard’s system has overcome this challenge. If the software fails to recognise a customer at the check out, they might end up disappointed, or even become irate – which would completely undo any promise of speed or convenience. But if the technology misidentifies a person (for instance, John is recognised as Peter – or <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8-yupM-6Oc" target="_blank" rel="noopener">twins are confused</a> for each other), then money could be taken from the wrong person’s account. How would such a situation be dealt with? <figure class="align-center zoomable"><a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/464424/original/file-20220520-19-5hfuvx.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/464424/original/file-20220520-19-5hfuvx.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/464424/original/file-20220520-19-5hfuvx.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=617&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/464424/original/file-20220520-19-5hfuvx.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=617&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/464424/original/file-20220520-19-5hfuvx.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=617&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/464424/original/file-20220520-19-5hfuvx.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=776&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/464424/original/file-20220520-19-5hfuvx.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=776&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/464424/original/file-20220520-19-5hfuvx.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=776&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" alt="" /></a><figcaption>There’s no evidence facial recognition technology is infallible. These systems can misidentify and also have biases. Shutterstock</figcaption></figure> Is the technology secure? We often hear about software and databases being hacked, even in <a href="https://www.csoonline.com/article/2130877/the-biggest-data-breaches-of-the-21st-century.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">cases of</a> supposedly very “secure” organisations. Despite Mastercard’s <a href="https://wwmastw.cnbc.com/2022/05/17/mastercard-launches-tech-that-lets-you-pay-with-your-face-or-hand.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">efforts</a> to ensure security, there’s no guarantee the third-party providers’ databases – with potentially millions of people’s biometric data – won’t be hacked. In the wrong hands, this data could lead to <a href="https://www.comparitech.com/identity-theft-protection/identity-theft-statistics/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">identity theft</a>, which is one of the fastest growing types of crime, and financial fraud. Do we want it? Mastercard suggests 74% of customers are in favour of using such technology, referencing a stat from its <a href="https://www.mastercard.com/news/ap/en/newsroom/press-releases/en/2020/april/mastercard-study-shows-consumers-moving-to-contactless-payments-for-everyday-purchases/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">own study</a> – also used by <a href="https://www.mastercard.com/news/ap/en/newsroom/press-releases/en/2020/october/mastercard-idemia-and-matchmove-pilot-fingerprint-biometric-card-in-asia-to-enhance-security-and-safety-of-contactless-payments" target="_blank" rel="noopener">business partner</a> Idemia (a company that sells biometric identification products). But the report cited is vague and brief. Other studies show entirely different results. For example, <a href="https://www.getapp.com/resources/facial-recognition-technology/#how-comfortable-are-consumers-with-facial-recognition-technology" target="_blank" rel="noopener">this study</a> suggests 69% of customers aren’t comfortable with face recognition tech being used in retail settings. And <a href="https://www.securitymagazine.com/articles/93521-are-consumers-comfortable-with-facial-recognition-it-depends-says-new-study" target="_blank" rel="noopener">this one</a> shows only 16% trust such tech. Also, if consumers knew the risks the technology poses, the number of those willing to use it might drop even lower.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/183447/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/rita-matulionyte-170113" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Rita Matulionyte</a>, Senior Lecturer in Law, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/macquarie-university-1174" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Macquarie University</a> This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/pay-with-a-smile-or-a-wave-why-mastercards-new-face-recognition-payment-system-raises-concerns-183447" target="_blank" rel="noopener">original article</a>. Image: Getty Images

Technology

Our Partners

Over 60

News

Shop

Catalogues

Contests

Entertainment

Travel

Health

Lifestyle

Finance

Property

Games

Information

Keep up to date

Search

Millions of Aussies to receive cash boost as welfare payments rise

Surcharges are added to most purchases, but what are the rules behind these extra fees?

Thousands of eligible Aussies to receive cost-of-living payments

Readers response: What are your thoughts on the increasing use of digital payments?

Aussie carers to receive a hefty cash boost

Aussies hit with "hidden fees" for using common payment method

Woman shares fury after unknowingly paying for her engagement ring

“Completely tacky”: Bride slammed for asking for dinner payment

The move to a cashless society isn’t just a possibility, it’s well underway

Lump sum, daily payments or a combination? What to consider when paying for nursing home accommodation

Cash could be almost gone in Australia in a decade – but like cheques, who’ll miss it?

Big changes for Bunnings Warehouse snags

"What am I going to do?”: Centrelink mother points out crucial flaw in new budget policy for parents

Over-55s the only group to receive Centrelink payment boost

Only days left for one Aussie state's residents to make $1000 claim

Husband ordered to pay for 25 years of unpaid housework

Record boost to Centrelink payments coming for nearly one million Aussies

Which Centrelink payments are going up from July 1

Buy now, pay later: Apple will now lend you money to keep you spending and expand its empire

Pay ‘with a smile or a wave’: Why Mastercard’s new face recognition payment system raises concerns

Our Partners