Almost but not exactly, any rational merchant would estimate how much they pay monthly in credit card fees and find a way to add that back to their revenue. For most practical cases, the business is started already after the existence of credit cards, so when modeling revenue in your business plan this should already be baked in and the prices you come up with already cover it.

So it doesn't mean they increase the price of every product by 3%. One guy might charge more just for coffee, another do some other thing. But any extra cost you put on a seller of anything, the rational seller will make that back in sales somehow.

A rational merchant would know that they are also incurring costs for handling cash, and depending on the size of the business that cost can in fact be higher than the cost of handling cards.

In fact, the low end of cash handling costs for a business will almost always be higher than the card fees alone, but of course there are other costs in managing card payments too, so it's not quite that clear cut.

In particular, that is what happens when costs are imposed industry wide, as with credit card fees.

If the cost is only being paid by one vendor then that vendor can't raise prices or else customers would patronize one that had lower costs and passed on the savings. But if every vendor has to pay 3% then prices are going up 3%, because then the competition has no cost advantage they can pass on and people only stay in business if they're making enough to justify not doing something else. (3% is more than the entire net margin in many industries.)

the seller just charges whatever it get can get away with. 3% only has an impact when margins are closer to that percentage

Savvy/corporate sellers are typically concerned with margins so fees do play a role

Cash handling isn't free! You have to pay someone's time to count + reconcile + deposit it, or If you're dealing at any volume, you'll pay an armored car service to collect it. There's inevitably "shrinkage", or else business processes (more time and more overhead) to avoid it.

Cash is king for hiding transactions and avoiding taxes. If that's the situation then I won't say you don't deserve a cut, but for rules-following merchants taking cash isn't any cheaper than paying the credit card fees.

> but for rules-following merchants taking cash isn't any cheaper than paying the credit card fees.

That’s not true at all, particularly for large purchases.

If I go to an electronics and check out with $5000 in electronics, there’s no way that handling cash incurs the same expense to the store as the 3% fee ($150).

Maybe for nickel and dime purchases, but that’s rarely the case.

Even a $50 dinner doesn’t cost the restaurant $1.50 (plus the $0.30 transaction fee) just to handle cash.

Average cash handling cost is typically estimated in the range of 4%-15%. You're right that there might be individual differences in what it would cost to handle a single transaction, but a store isn't in a position to pick and choose - they handle an aggregate. If your electronics store only handles large transactions, maybe their percentage would be lower, but that's extremely rare. And even so, handling large cash amounts comes with its own costs around security.

> Average cash handling cost is typically estimated in the range of 4%-15%

I think the assumption is they declare only a portion of their cash receipts.

I think that is commonly the reason why some businesses do offer discounts, but note the person above replied to "but for rules-following merchants taking cash isn't any cheaper than paying the credit card fees" which seems to have specifically anticipated exactly that.

Yes, exactly. The business team at my (rules-following) company were ecstatic when municipalities around us began disallowing cash payments during COVID. Taking cash is, for us, directly 2-3% (and actually more, if you count labor, which is difficult to track) more costly than the vig on credit cards.

You're not factoring in "I won't go somewhere that doesn't take a credit card".

A store that sells $5k electronics is gonna lose a lot of sales if they attempt to save that $150 by only taking cash.

Which is why you take both but make the credit card customer eat the fees. Then many customers will save you (i.e. themselves) the money by paying cash and the ones that insist on using a credit card are free to pay what it actually costs.

Why do I almost never see a cash discount like this in practice? An I shopping in the wrong places? Or does something else prevent it?

In NY, I see it most frequently at gas stations.

Because that’s your subjective experience?

Canada has lots of stores that offer a discount if you pay cash. Many have a minimum purchase amount for credit cards.

The credit card companies hate it for the obvious reason and then the traditional reason was they would impose contractual requirements or get laws passed to prevent companies from offering a cash discount. People have posted here saying this has been reversed by federal rules, but then you're still left with two reasons.

One, inertia. Companies haven't realized they're allowed to do it now. That'll change over time.

Two, there are ways to transfer "cash" digitally without paying the credit card fees (i.e. ACH), and there are reasons to want to use digital payments -- making payments over the internet being a major one -- but ACH is ancient and it needs some kind of modern open standard in order to do things like make a payment request and determine in real-time whether the source account actually exists and has sufficient balance to make the payment. Various attempts to do that are constantly being made and constantly being fought against by Visa et al.

I've sometimes been able to get a cash discount by asking for it. This won't work with corporate places, obviously, but sole-proprietor sorts of shops - like my local car mechanic, and a print shop I used to use occasionally - have been receptive. I think they discounted by ~5% in each case. Did I suspect they're keeping the cash off-book? Of course. Did I care? Not at all. I don't expect their big-business competitors are paying tax, either.

Business banking != consumer banking. The bank will charge ~$0.10-$0.50 for that $50 deposit + the wages of the person who goes to the bank to pay it in (minimum $7.25 per hour).

I promise you someone making minimum wage will not be trusted to make deposits! Ask me how I know....

This is a huge pile of uncosted assumptions.

If you take cash it means you have to hold it on site. To be insured you have to demonstrate secure handling for the insurer, which would include security systems and limiting the amount in the safe and register. Which means routine trips to the bank, which also incurs costs.

Like...that could all be true, but the rate merchants tried to ditch ever handling physical money rather suggests the fees were worth it (not to mention all the risk mitigation doesn't cover the increased danger to ones personal safety - walking $5000 to the bank is no fun at all).

Handling cash is obviously cheaper in Germany because merchants discourage customers from using their credit cards every time they can.