"On March 29, 2025, the event "Freedom & Self-Determination - The Responsible Citizen" took place at the
Kulturhaus Dornbirn with interesting contributions on the rule of law, sovereignty and cash.
The event was organized by the Dornbirn Academy for Personal Development.
HOCH2.TV has recorded and edited all the contributions for you, dear viewers.
Kla.TV today features an interview with Hansjörg Stützle on the displacement of cash."
Now we come to Mr. Hansjörg Stützle and the topic of cash retention or the abolition of cash.
Also thematically related, albeit with a slight twist.
Dear Mr. Stützle, perhaps I should first ask you a brief question.
How does one actually come to deal with the issue of cash abolition or cash retention as intensively as you do?
Yes, it's been quite a long time for me, certainly about 25 years.
And first of all out of logic, because there are opponents of a free payment system.
And that is primarily the financial industry.
About 25 years ago, I knew that this topic would come up at some point.
Because cash jeopardizes their business model in the form of "bank runs", which are possible.
In other words, the financial industry is basically always under stress to maintain the public's
trust in the monetary system at a certain level.
If this falls below a certain threshold, the citizen gets scared and goes to the bank.
He wants to have the money, wants to bring it into his own sphere of influence.
And then there are snakes, then there is a bank run and, and, and.
And then, of course, there is a major crisis.
There it was simply clear to me, there was no manifestation for the abolition of cash at that time.
But then in the financial crisis of 2007-2009 came a pretty strong manifestation.
Hardly anyone has noticed, namely with real cash bans.
And it wasn't really noticed because it was described with a nice cover word, namely cash ceilings.
A cash ceiling is already a cash ban above a certain limit.
In Europe - that's where it started in Europe - we have 18 countries with cash bans from a border.
Greece, for example, is the country with the lowest cash limit of just 500 euros.
This means that if you go to Greece now and want to pay a hotel bill of 501 euros - it is
forbidden by law and punishable by law to pay it in cash.
Greece has already made two attempts to reduce the cash ceiling to 200 euros.
But that wasn't possible because the 500 euro bill is still legal tender.
And that is the only reason why we do not have a lower cash ceiling.
Yes, and many people are obviously not even aware of these developments in everyday life.
So some people just accept it.
I think in Germany it's around 10,000 euros.
Or is that my information?
No, so there is currently no classic cash ceiling in "POS", in point of sale, in Germany.
Not even for deposits, so that's the burden of proof for tax money laundering and such?
Exactly, so the retailer has a record-keeping obligation, but from 2027 a cash limit of
10,000 euros is to apply throughout Europe.
That is the topic.
The countries that are already under it can keep it.
You can set the cash limit below 10,000 at any time.
And how do you explain the fact that there is such a relatively low awareness of the problem in this area?
Are citizens perhaps not yet aware of the extent of the threat to their cash?
Definitely not.
I have just returned from a long, long lecture tour.
Since January, I've only been on lecture tours.
When I spend two hours talking about the mechanics behind the abolition of cash, a lot of people say:
I knew it was an issue, but I didn't realize it was so explosive.
Well, if you listen to the Deutsche Bundesbank, then everything is actually fine.
There are assurances that there is enough cash and that it will continue to exist.
Generally speaking, people are only guided by what the population supposedly wants.
We have prepared a short recording.
Last summer, I believe you were a guest on Südwestrundfunk, the German public broadcaster ARD.
It was precisely about this topic.
Maybe we'll take another quick look.
Well, I have the right studio guest with me now for this question.
Stefan Hardt is with us.
He heads the Central Cash Division at the Bundesbank.
Good evening.
How long will you, how long will the Bundesbank continue to provide us with fresh cash?
As long as citizens want to use cash.
Does that apply to all cash notes, to all change?
Yes, of course.
Basically, the vast majority of people say that they want to be able to pay with cash.
That is around 93 percent of the population who would like this.
And not all of them do.
But they would at least like to have the option of paying in cash.
And as long as people want to pay in cash, we will continue to provide this cash.
The cash fan can now breathe a sigh of relief.
Do I hear a stone drop from your heart, Mr. Stützle?
Absolutely not, because that is exactly what is being said: As long as the demand is
there, the Deutsche Bundesbank will hold on to it.
And that's the whole problem.
Perhaps you should also define what demand is.
How high must the cash payment rate be?
And so we citizens ultimately have it in our own hands - do we pay by card or cash?
That's basically what we're saying in the card payment here.
I am in favor of abolishing cash or I am in favor of keeping cash.
So it's a crucial point that we have to take into account here.
And unfortunately, citizens no longer have cash in their own hands because the economy has gone so far as to reject cash.
In other words, the first retailers here in Germany are refusing to accept cash.
And we know that on this basis, cash has no chance of survival in the long term.
Because the economy decides whether we citizens have the choice to pay with cash.
So I don't think Mr. Banker looked so happy with your last words, did he?
Yes, that wasn't quite what he wanted.
Sometimes I have the feeling that the German Bundesbank is responsible for always reassuring, reassuring:
The cash is safe.
But at the end of the day, they link it to demand.
I did ask the question: What does the Deutsche Bundesbank mean by demand - and he didn't answer it.
There is simply a certain mechanism in the abolition of cash, which I can perhaps explain a little.
We have also prepared the diagram.
That is a very important point.
The fact is, of course, that the structures are abolishing cash.
And I try to explain something that normally takes me two hours.
I'll try that now in five minutes.
Time's running out, okay.
So we see on the left-hand side that an infrastructure needs to be set up for cashless payments.
That was a mammoth project that took decades to complete.
At least in Germany you can say that it is complete.
And here in Austria, perhaps not yet at the mountain hut.
But otherwise the infrastructure is in place.
That has basically been set.
On the right-hand side, we see that marketing and sound reinforcement naturally take place through marketing.
Billions have been invested in promoting digital payment.
And many people are now entering this system without reflection.
What is also a little sad is that an advertisement against cash was also implemented.
Unfortunately, we noticed it during the Corona period, when signs were put up in the economy:
For reasons of hygiene, please do not pay with cash etc.
And a lot of people believed that and then actually got into the digital system.
Then we have the issue: rejection of cash by the economy.
This is a very explosive topic.
Cash is actually enshrined in three very powerful laws:
Actually in the Bundesbank Act; it is enshrined in the ECB Statute as well as in the EU Treaty in the form that it has the
privilege of legal tender and is actually compulsory in trade.
This was set in motion by a Commission recommendation in 2010 - with the argument of
contractual freedom that retailers can refuse cash.
So they see the freedom of contract of the economy and trade as more important.
This is also confirmed by the Deutsche Bundesbank.
We also discussed this in this interview.
That is explosive, very dangerous, because this interpretation means that it is actually a fact
today that retailers are allowed to refuse cash.
This means that we citizens no longer have cash in our own hands - i.e. freedom of choice - but the economy now
decides whether we are allowed to pay with cash or not.
That is a fact.
Then we have another aspect and that is the introduction of the e-euro.
The E-Euro is expected to enter its third phase in October of this year.
There is a proposed regulation for the e-euro, i.e. a draft law.
The EU Parliament is expected to make a decision on this in October.
And then it may be that in the next one, two or three years we will actually have a direct competitor to
cash at the POS, at the point of sale, i.e. in retail.
And of course that causes everything.
These three blocks are causing citizens to be pushed more and more into this system and conditioned to digital payment.
And now it comes - and this is the most important thing
- namely the "cash payment rate" is a very important concept.
The German Bundesbank also said in an interview here that they link it to demand.
As I said, I asked the Deutsche Bundesbank what they mean by demand.
According to my calculations, it is 15 percent.
You can argue between 10 and 15 percent.
Then the cash infrastructure starts to become far too expensive.
The so-called "principle of proportionality" then applies:
If the infrastructure is too expensive in relation to how people still pay with cash - and then it collapses.
We currently have a situation where the cash payment rate in Germany is falling by 4 percent per year, i.e. a total of 3.8
percent - but I'll round it up a little to 4 percent - per year.
This will increase with the introduction of the e-euro and we will then relatively quickly have the situation that we have
in other countries, such as Sweden, for example: That the cash payment rate will then perhaps only be 10 or 15 percent.
And then, unfortunately, cash is obsolete for these reasons, which I have now briefly
set out here, where I normally need two hours.
What would interest me? How does the trend towards cryptocurrencies affect cash payment behavior in general?
There are more and more providers who are already using crypto - so perhaps it's still in its infancy in online retail.
But in the cash trade, in the retail trade, there are already isolated cases in Germany where
you can actually pay with Bitcoin, for example?
When you go out for pizza somewhere, you pay with crypto.
Could this also pose an additional threat to cash, alongside the digital means of payment issued by the national banks?
Tendency less.
So when it comes to means of payment, you have to differentiate a little.
For once, it's about investing money:
So if there is strong volatility , this is not really suitable for a payment.
This is because people do not want to use a value for payment where it is also subject to strong speculation.
So it's either an investment or a means of payment.
A good means of payment has no volatility, i.e. no fluctuations in value etc.
So from a current perspective - we'll see how things develop with cryptocurrencies - I don't see any danger in this.
The e-euro is actually a much greater danger.
The e-euro should be given the privilege of legal tender, etc.
I don't want to explain everything now, it's very, very complex.
Very interesting topic. I'm sure many viewers will also be interested:
Why do you do that?
Why is cash actually being reduced?
Is this just a question of convenience?
Or do you also clearly see this as part of an agenda to ultimately make citizens dependent and
disempower them, for example with social control?
That it will then be much easier to regulate access to electronic means of payment than to cash?
That's why they say: "Cash is freedom" and electronic money is, of course, inevitably subject to external restrictions.
Is that the motive behind it?
So of course there are many motives.
You have to go by the aspect of "Cui Bono", so who benefits?
And then, of course, you come to certain answers.
I don't go that deeply into this topic myself, because it actually distracts from the subject in a certain way.
What I'm actually talking about is the mechanics and structures behind the abolition of cash, behind the cycle.
It is much more subtle than that: you create an environment for cash in which cash cannot survive.
This means that there are currently huge attacks on cash.
On the one hand, it can be rejected by the economy.
But what is even more dramatic from my point of view is that the state is intervening more and more by rejecting cash.
I'm referring to Germany because I know my way around a bit better there.
For example, swimming pools no longer take cash, the first outdoor pools no longer take cash.
That parking garages, parking lots no longer accept cash, even citizens' offices that no longer accept cash.
In Düsseldorf, for example, we have a situation where all citizens' offices have been made cashless
- except for one, which is at the train station.
That's much more dangerous because you can't avoid it at all.
This means that citizens are increasingly being pushed into this system on a massive scale and that is very, very dangerous.
This means that we also need a "cash acceptance obligation at the state" again in the end.
I am also asking the question with a view to the event's theme of 'responsible citizens'.
Because one thing is clear: if you no longer pay in cash, no matter in what form you pay
electronically, it is ultimately no longer an anonymous payment.
Yes, definitely.
That's the point.
Cash is always anonymous payment.
I can go somewhere, I can pay something. Nobody asks me who I am. They take my money, they're not interested in me.
With cashless payment, practically my entire portfolio, my entire screening, so to speak, is always included.
From where I am at the moment to what is happening on my account, what I am doing.
That's why I asked whether the aim behind this wasn't quite clear: to establish more or less a totalitarianism here,
with which citizens are actually really detectable by the state at all times and everywhere and are made transparent.
Well, I want to leave that basically open.
But one thing I can definitely say is that a free society needs a free payment system that cannot be monitored.
And everything that is digital can of course also be monitored very easily. In fact,
society then also starts to become cowering.
So if this event were only paid for digitally today, it would be recorded that you are here today.
Theoretically, you could now also become or be set as "persona non grata".
We all already are, I suppose.
No, fortunately I'm not yet. I have to say that quite openly.
I didn't have any attacks at all until January because I argued everything very fact-based.
But since my last lecture tour, unfortunately, it's starting to happen and things are being added rather than based on facts.
And it's very, very dangerous and I think that's a bit of a shame.
Definitely.
And that's why it's important that you present everything so objectively.
This also makes them unassailable and nobody can refute that.
This is all objectively based on facts and is therefore a very important contribution to this debate.
So thank you very much again from my side.
Thank you.
We have changed the order of the topics here somewhat, so I would now ask Mr. Stützle to join me again next.
Yes, what you said earlier about cash is still quite fresh in my mind.
This is the shortest time between the two presentations.
That's why the transition to the solution part is easiest here, because we can continue straight away.
So the problem is, as we described earlier: Cash is coming under increasing pressure.
And now the key question: what can we do individually, what can each and every one of us do to
prevent cash from disappearing further or falling behind?
Yes, a short question, long answer: it is extremely difficult.
We really have the initial situation that, firstly, the economy can reject cash and, secondly, the state rejects cash.
By the way, the only pure state money is cash!
And the state refuses its own money. That in itself is already an absurdity.
I've been frustrated for a long time over the last few years because cash is basically in free fall.
According to statistics from the German Bundesbank, cash cannot hold its own.
The last statistics came out in 2023. According to the cash payment rate in Germany,
51% of products are still paid for in cash.
It is reduced by four percent per year.
This means that by 2025, we will basically be at 43 percent.
If the direct competitor of the e-euro is now added to this, then it could be very quickly by 2030
that the cash payment rate is only 15 percent or less.
And that is the whole problem.
I myself was very frustrated that there was no political will at all to protect cash by law.
Cash urgently needs legal protection!
And one legal protection is that we regain the freedom of choice to pay with cash.
That it ultimately comes back into the hands of the citizens.
To achieve this, we basically need an "acceptance obligation" in the retail sector and also at government agencies.
From this point onwards - and today it is all about the responsible citizen - the citizen
ultimately has the opportunity to vote again.
So we need freedom of choice again and I think that's important.
There is still no political will today.
But a unique opportunity has arisen to enshrine cash in law.
Not because it is politically desirable, but because those in power and politicians want something else.
They want the e-euro,
mandatory.
They're going through with it - it clearly looks that way at the moment.
That is why a "proposed regulation" for the e-euro has emerged and they want the e-euro to be legal tender.
This means that they were forced to publish a proposed regulation for cash on the same day.
Because cash is currently the only legal tender.
So that means that, paradoxically, the introduction of the e-euro protects and guarantees cash, so to speak?
No, absolutely not.
So normally it would be nice. We're also seeing it here right now.
According to the proposed regulation, the e-euro will be subject to mandatory acceptance in
retail - at least according to the draft agreement.
Yes, but because you said they were forced to write the other into the regulation.
So both are guaranteed in the regulation, aren't they?
No, there are two proposed regulations.
There are two proposals for regulations - one for the e-euro and one for cash.
So, that's a very important point.
It is interesting to note that the proposed cash regulation does not make it compulsory
or mandatory for retailers to accept cash.
At least that's what it says.
That is actually a nonsense in itself.
This means that we would have two different legal tender in the future - the e-euro and
an underprivileged one, which would be cash.
And everything, as always with cash abolition, everything comes by chance.
The European Commission is full of lawyers, economists and business economists.
And they happened to make a mistake, namely: cash - no obligation to accept in retail.
So, that's quite remarkable, I think.
But this is also the opportunity we now have, namely to get involved now.
The door will be closed again in the next few months.
That cash is also equated with the e-euro, that it is mandatory for retailers to accept it.
This is absolutely essential, absolutely essential.
Basically, we now have to put a lot of pressure on the decision-makers to ensure
that this is also the will of the citizens.
And I then set up a petition for this.
- This is a petition at - www.bargelderhalt.eu, where we currently have 126,000 signatures.
The problem is, it's not enough.
We have to make sure that it represents the population.
And I simply ask - and this is also a call for help today - that you sign the petition, pass it on, etc.
Because when we launched the petition, we sent a press article to 350 newspapers. And we only got three responses.
And the answer was: Please do not write to us again in future.
That is of course an indication, which is very bad.
And yet we have received 126,000 votes so far.
But we need at least 300,000.
I think we should actually have the million mark so that I have the opportunity to exert
pressure on the relevant government bodies.
In principle, anyone can sign this petition, regardless of whether they are Austrian or Swiss.
We simply have to vote for this petition.
And here the demand is that cash should be made compulsory in retail outlets and, of course, in government offices.
That is basically the demand and the solution.
The problem is, it will be decided this year!
That means we only have a very, very short time.
Of course, the question now is: to what extent is the European Parliament staffed by responsible MEPs who
decide for themselves what they really think and want?
Many of them also lack the professional qualifications.
We know that some of the resolutions passed by the parliamentary groups are simply nodded off.
And that this is even worse in the EU Parliament than in national parliaments in the back room, so to speak.
In other words, the pressure would have to be considerable. Above all, the public would also have to be considerable.
So let me give you a figure, the order of magnitude. What would you say is the number of "petitioners" at which a
real breakthrough can be expected - that this will really lead to a critical movement in Parliament?
Parliament is one.
The proposed regulation is currently being discussed in the ECON Committee of the European
Parliament, and changes may still be made here.
In other words, the first step is to increase the pressure on the ECON Committee.
That's why I do a lot of campaigns.
Perhaps just for information: We have developed a community with a current total of
65,000 people, partly through the cash petition.
In other words, we are trying to create a lobby for cash so that we can take joint action.
And we do certain hands-on activities.
We are currently trying to bring the ECON Committee closer to the will of the citizens by
carrying out major letter-writing campaigns.
1,300 people took part in the last letter campaign. And of course there are corresponding letters.
This means that we first have to put pressure on the ECON Committee.
Nevertheless, a new awareness of this issue must be created among the population and also among politicians.
So this is a very, very important point.
Cash needs to be enshrined in law - in other words, it must be accepted by retailers and government agencies.
I'm just asking because, as I said, 146,000 - if you say that's actually Europe-wide - that's not really that much.
That means there must be significantly more of them.
So the question is, what would you say is the goal here in order to really score points?
Well, I think we have to reach the million mark.
I am very much referring to Germany for the time being.
This is otherwise hardly visible for the time being.
And with one million, we get pressure.
This is not just wishful thinking, we simply have to do something.
I've now been on a lecture tour and have tried to get in closer contact with multipliers.
This means that I am ending my lecture tour today.
For the next two months, I'll be going to YouTube channels quite a lot, inviting them to interview me to give
this petition some visibility - that maybe that million mark might actually be reached.
That's where I'm actually asking for help: if you have contact with multipliers, newspapers etc., to establish a contact so that
I can present this petition - and that it can gain visibility.
Then it can easily reach the million mark.
I need everyone's help.
That is also one of the main reasons why I am standing here today.
Many thanks for that.
And you also mentioned it briefly earlier in the problem description
- Of course, the question is: card on one side, cash on the other?
In principle, it's like a kind of voting decision.
In other words, in principle you can also do something yourself by paying as much cash as possible, right?
So today's title is "The responsible citizen".
In other words, for a responsible citizen we first need freedom of choice and an awareness of what we are causing.
We know that the central banks combine the future of cash with demand.
From this point of view, we actually have a direct democracy with regard to cash -
because there is a ballot paper for holding cash.
And the ballot paper looks like this, for example.
In other words, we don't vote for cash every four years, as in the federal election, etc., but:
We choose cash every day with every purchase we make!
In other words, the question is and it is part of being a responsible citizen to realize that we
have to keep demand for cash as high as possible.
That is the decisive factor, i.e. an awareness of it.
So that means we hand in our ballot paper the next time we go shopping, either for the preservation of cash - but
there is also a ballot paper for the abolition of cash.
And you also have the option of saying: Okay, I'll pay by card or cell phone.
And that's all you're saying: I am in favor of abolishing cash.
That is the essence of it.
Basically, why I'm standing here in the front is nothing more than to explain to people what they are causing with their actions.
Yes, and I would like to see responsible citizens who reflect on this:
What I cause with this ballot paper, and what I cause with this ballot paper.
That is the only reason - I want the responsible citizen.
And it is important that the responsible citizen is very, very well informed on this subject.
They are currently asking how long the petition will run for.
It will run until the European Parliament votes on it.
I would say it will run until October 2025 at the most.
We'll have to see if it comes before then.
But in all likelihood not in 2025, because that is when the e-euro is due to enter its third phase of development.
Yes, thank you very much for your assessment.
And that's why events like this one by Erwin Rigo are so important, so that we can make people aware of these issues.
Because many people do, certainly a disproportionately high number here in this room, but
many people in public don't. Yes, unfortunately
Yes, and I would like to say something else.
You can sign it yourself at www.bargelderhalt.eu.
And if you check the box there, you are automatically included in the community.
It says whether you want to be informed about the further progress of the petition
and then you are in the community.
The community is immensely important.
Because even if we are successful with the petition, it will only stop the free fall of cash.
But the financial industry's marketing measures continue.
That means we have to prepare ourselves, we have to create a lobby for cash, for our freedom.
Very nice closing words and to summarize.
Good luck with this and keep up your commitment to the topic.
Thank you.
To answer the questions left unanswered in the interview: Why do you do this?
Why is cash actually being reduced?
- we will show the Kla.TV program to round off Mr. Stützle's interesting contribution.
"Cash abolition through ruthless pursuit of power"
The US government is one of the strong forces responsible for the accelerating global abolition of cash.
Since then, the global abolition of cash has been driven forward on a massive scale.
The reason for the USA's involvement is that cashless payment transactions worldwide are dominated by US companies.
Agency for International Development (USAID).
This indirectly enables the US government to monitor the financial transactions of individual countries, banks,
companies and even individuals and to exclude them from cashless payment transactions if they do not act in its interests.
For example, the "Better than Cash Alliance" was founded in 2012 with the help of the US
This represents a huge power factor that is now almost as great as the military dominance of the USA.
By pushing back cash, the power of the USA automatically grows.
We will now take a closer look at how these financial strategists are expanding their power at the hands of large
payment service providers or international banking systems, using a few examples from around the world:
The international payment service provider VISA has introduced intensive measures to replace cash payments.
For example, bars, cafés and restaurants in the USA are to be supported with a budget of up to
500,000 US dollars if they no longer accept cash.
VISA also tried to influence the Bulgarian government to lower the cash limit in two stages to around €500.
Figures from the USA prove that this is about tangible economic interests.
In 2018, credit card payments alone generated costs of 90 billion US dollars.
Money that was largely paid by customers and flowed into the pockets of cashless payment service providers.
But these are not the only consequences of the increasing displacement of cash.
The drastic developments in Greece give an idea of the consequences of the abolition of cash.
There, citizens are subject to tax penalties if they make too few cashless payments and stores are virtually
forced to conclude contracts with companies such as VISA.
Cash kept at home must also be reported to the authorities and will be confiscated if its origin cannot be proven.
And this is where the interests of two sectors - payment service providers and international banking systems - go hand in hand:
In the following, it becomes clear that these areas interlock like cogs in a clockwork mechanism in order to gain control
over financial resources up to the point of private ownership.
In order to stimulate the economy, the ECB has been working with falling key interest rates for years.
As negative interest rates on savings accounts are tantamount to a creeping expropriation, investors can protect
themselves against loss of value by withdrawing their money.
However, this self-determination over its own assets limits the ECB's ability to exert influence.
An IMF working paper on the implementation of the negative interest rate system now proposes charging an
exchange fee on cash that corresponds to the same interest rate that applies to invested assets.
With a negative interest rate of -5%, for example, you would still receive €95 in cash when withdrawing €100 from an ATM.
The consequence would be that the attractiveness of cash as a savings investment and means of payment would fall
drastically, paving the way for the final abolition of cash.
Prof. Hans-Werner Sinn, former President of the ifo Institute and economic expert, comments:
"If the ECB wants to abolish cash in the euro, Germany must reintroduce the DM."
"Cash is an important component of freedom."
"Money means something like shaped freedom of will.
It is therefore of tenfold value to the person who is completely deprived of it."
Fyodor M. Dostoyevsky, Russian writer.
Dear viewers, the other contributions to this event in Dornbirn can already be seen on HOCH2.TV.
You will find the links under this program.
We would like to take this opportunity to thank HOCH2.TV for the excellent cooperation.