Fixed

I knew a guy who didn't even have a bank account. He only accepted cash.

"Cash is outlawed. Let's use a Ponzi scheme instead."

Hmm, you know what? Somehow I think the solution is neither of those things.

No.

Supposedly this legislation also bans anonymous cryptocurrency.

Anonymity is very important.

Here's a example why, that recently happened to a workmate:

He applied for a mortgage to buy a house. The application was denied 3 times, despite his having been employed at the same place for 20 years, paid all his bills on time and never received so much as a parking ticket. Finally, after insisting heavily and threatening to sue, his bank provided the reason why: his purchasing habits included too much alcohol.

Or said another way: the bank watched what he purchased when doing his groceries for years and quietly classified him as a wino and potential deadbeat.

I can tell you, when I do my groceries, and back when I still smoked, I never paid for alcohol or tobacco with anything other than cash, for that very reason. The only things I pay for with plastic paint the portrait of a boring working stiff with no habits out of the ordinary. For the rest, it's cash-only.

And if you want another example of why anonymity is important: a few years ago, I sought the help of an underground surgeon to perform a certain type of surgery on me that my stupid doctors here refused to perform, despite my quality of life going to shit (it's a long story...)

Guess what: underground surgeons don't take credit cards. The man changed my life for the better but I certainly don't want my local health insurance to know about it. Was it illegal? Hell yes. Was it justified? Hell yes. Legal and right are two different things.

And similarly, I expected many women post Roe v. Wade would like to have the opportunity to get an abortion out of state anonymously without going to jail.

That's why anonymous payments are essential: they are the last rampart between you and unjust laws and prejudice.

I've worked in many EU countries and the feeling I often got is that in Italy, we are more advanced in fighting tax evasion and elusion.

Keep in mind that in switzerland for example there is no cap to cash transaction

In Germany and Austria often is difficult to pay with card because they don't accept it

I've seen Russian in Vienna going to luxury stores with literally stacks of money

The US has the same rules, and are a driving force for this. They will enforce the rules the same as they do now for 10k payments. If you want clean money in a bank or if you want to travel with the money, or if you're just randomly stopped and have the money on you, you will be forced to prove its provenance or it will be seized.

This is already how it works in the EU, UK, Canada, and of course the USA.

The cash itself isn't the problem, it's getting that cash into a "clean" system where it can be used to buy anything that isn't cash. And with everything being non-cash on purpose because of these Nazi laws, you essentially have worthless paper you can't do anything with.

Enforceability varies depending on the scenario. Some countries have law that holds employers accountable for tax evaded by workers. Employers obviously won’t gamble, so they refuse to pay cash and cryptocurrency wages because they are scared shitless of being accountable for an employee’s evasion.

I demanded cryptocurrency payment and my employer refused on that basis. I intended to continue declaring it properly and just wanted a bit of freedom from bank dependency, but nothing could overcome the employer’s fears.

How will they enforce it? I'm sure big/medium businesses will comply, but how can you track a cash transaction between private citizens?

Because that is not the point of the laws.

Infact the NL implementation of the laws specifically says it is for business to business and business to consumer.
There is no mention of private transactions.

I had to look up cashier's check and it does not sound familiar at all. But searching a bit further it is a thing that exists, seems to be called Bank Check around here, it's just kind of expensive to use.

It's much more usual to pay in cash or use an account transfer (SEPA transfer) which is usually free, but with the delay of the transfer one of the parties usually takes a risk.

This year, in relation to the rule the post is about, they also forced banks that were dragging their feet to start supporting instant transfers.

I don't ultimately know the answer to your question though. I suspect the banks have to ask you for the origin, as if you turned up with 10k in cash, but I couldn't find anything definitive in the time I was searching around.

Cashier’s checks existed in Belgium a few years ago but I heard they are under fire and will be discontinued at some point.

Personal checks seem to be non-existent but I heard they can be requested but the banks give some resistance and try to steer people away from it. They only work domestically. I think if you gave a Belgian personal check to a Belgian, they would not generally know what to do with it.

Impulsive donations have been relatively killed off because cash donations are banned (I think because scammers impersonate charities). So that leaves check and electronic payment. Oxfam does not (AFAIK) carry payment terminals. Checks would make sense, but they are taboo. So they have to ask for a bank transfer, which gives donors a chance to be lazy and forget about it.

I can't speak for all European countries, but at least in the Netherlands they're not a thing. We might still have money orders, which are similar, but I've never seen one used.

Instead we can just make instant bank transfers, even using a QR code, which you can generate in your own banking app and can be used with any other bank.