xxx
“We would like to be a catalyst for taking cash out of the system,” Cook said. “We don’t think the consumer particularly likes cash.”
From Apple’s Next Goal: Killing Paper Money Once and For All
xxx
A library of snippets
xxx
“We would like to be a catalyst for taking cash out of the system,” Cook said. “We don’t think the consumer particularly likes cash.”
From Apple’s Next Goal: Killing Paper Money Once and For All
xxx
xxx
Chris Grayling said by the end of 2018 everyone should be able to travel with a ‘flick of a card’ or the ‘touch of a mobile phone’.
He said passengers should never have to queue again for a ticket, and should be able to buy them from the comfort of their home or while enjoying a coffee at the train station.
xxx
xxx
Criminals blew up 492 cash machines across Europe in the first half of 2016, an 80% increase on the same period the previous year, according to figures from the European ATM Security Team (East). Most of the attacks used gas, although 110 involved solid explosives, says East, with hits causing an average loss of EUR16,600, although this does not take into account the significant collateral damage done to equipment and buildings.
xxx
xxx
As of today Seqr customers in the UK are now able to quickly and simply link their bank account to the Seqr app and make payments directly from their bank account.
xxx
snippet
Speaking of the direction where the disruption will come from, Yermack sees three potential players. These include challengers (complete outsiders looking for disruption); collaborators (like Overstock and R3); and regulators (countries like the UK, Australia, and Canada).
He was optimistic that regulators might be the most active agents of change, even going so far as to mandate changes that enable the technology to be used more broadly.
[From
| Could Bitcoin Be the Future of Blockchain Post Trade?
]
snippet
Identity and money
Mark King
I think I might touch on this in my keynote talk on Digital Identity at FinTechStage in Cannes on November 30th.
As I always tell everyone, the fastest way to learn is by arguing with smart people. So I particularly enjoyed arguing with old chum Ian Grigg about the relationship between cash use and tax evasion. I decided to take the time to go and research some up-to-date figures.
The average bank spends £40m a year on KYC Compliance, according to a recent Thomson Reuters Survey, which also revealed that some banks spend up to £300M annually on KYC (Know Your Customer) Compliance and Customer Due Diligence (CDD).
[From The spiralling costs of KYC for banks and how FinTech can help | ITProPortal]
So let’s say a £1 billion for the big four and another £1 billion for the rest. So £2 billion in KYC. And that doesn’t include (obviously) the £5 billion that the UK Treasury estimates that UK banks spend on “financial crime compliance” (which I assume means AML, CTF and PEP). So… that’s something like £7 billion on compliance and presumably tax evasion is one of the main crimes that it is supposed to be tackling.
How does that compliance spend compare with the tax gap? The what? Well, the difference between what Her Majesties Revenue and Customs (HMRC) thinks it’s owed in theory and what it actually collects is called the ‘tax gap’. The tax gap is currently estimated to be £34 billion in the UK.
It includes a number of things as well as evasion and avoidance. HMRC estimates that in 2013/14, differences in legal interpretation cost it £4.9 billion; unregistered paid work cost it £6.2 billion; organised criminal attacks cost it £5.1 billion; non-payment cost it £4.1 billion; the failure of people to take reasonable care with their tax returns cost it £3.9 billion; and honest errors cost it £2.6 billion.
By far the single biggest contribution to the tax gap is the underreporting of income by SMEs, especially those who take payments in cash. Everyone from your builder to your taxi driver contributes to this, which is why the scale of the evasion is so vast. Here are the HMRC figures broken down by source rather than type.
SMEs £16.5 billion.
Large businesses £9.5 billion.
Criminals £5.1 billion.
Individuals £3 billion.
That’s a lot of schools and hospitals. Everyone goes on about big companies like Apple and Facebook engaging in perfectly legal tax avoidance (blame the government not Google) but that’s not the biggest chunk of cash missing from the books. Now, no-one would be so dumb as to imagine that reducing cash would eradicate the tax gap. But it would raise the costs of tax evasion as well as the risks and therefore, I would think, at least reduce it. And given the dominance of SME cash under-reporting (it’s half of the tax gap) that would seem to be low hanging fruit, as they say. Maybe instead of spending all of this money on compliance, we should spend it on migrating away from cash?
snippet
Big questions remain for all these guys about security. How much of the data used for verification will be kept? How will the data be protected? To what standard?
[From
]
snippet
Some people really can seen into the future. 50 years ago this was already clear
In 1968, Paul Armer of the RAND Corporation testified in front of a U.S. Senate subcommittee about his concerns for privacy in the future.
[From
The Privacy Dangers of a Cashless Society Were Clear Over 40 Years Ago
]
snippet
snippet
The first is that computer technology is introducing order-of-magnitude reductions in the cost of collecting, transmitting, and processing information.
[From
The Privacy Dangers of a Cashless Society Were Clear Over 40 Years Ago
]
snippet
snippet
Second, centralization of data is usually a concomitant of computer use. The payoff to successful snooping is much greater when all the facts are stored in one place. Though most of the data to complete a dossier on every citizen already exists in the hands of the government today, it is normally so dispersed that the cost of collecting it and assembling it would be very high.
[From
The Privacy Dangers of a Cashless Society Were Clear Over 40 Years Ago
]
snippet
snippet
The third factor is that computer systems with remote terminals can permit, unless proper safeguards are provided, remote browsing through the data with a great deal of anonymity.
[From
The Privacy Dangers of a Cashless Society Were Clear Over 40 Years Ago
]
snippet
xxx
The technology that repelled the hackers was a style of software programming known as formal verification.
From Computer Scientists Close In On Perfect, Hack-Proof Code | Huffington Post
xxx