Share
Veronique Cimina

Veronique Cimina

Policy Researcher at Politheor: European Policy Network
Veronique is a recently Master’s graduate in EU Law at Leiden University, Netherlands, with a thesis in Competition Law and specific research on EU migration law and its current crisis. Veronique obtained her Bachelor’s degree in Political Science and International Relations from Università degli Studi Roma Tre in Rome, with a thesis on the Responsibility to Protect and its failure to be truly effective in humanitarian crisis. Currently, she is a legal assistant in national Tax and Compliance law in Rome. She is interested in European law and governance, politics and international relations. In her free time, she enjoys travelling, reading, and listening to music.
Veronique Cimina

Latest posts by Veronique Cimina (see all)

On May 4th 2016, the European Central Bank has decided to permanently end the production of the €500 banknote by the end of 2018. On the other hand, the circulating €500 banknotes will still remain legal tender and retain their value even after 2018. What’s behind such decision and what are the consequences for the European citizens? Is it feasible for us to have a €500 banknote in our wallet and exchange it within the European Monetary Union? Well, it might depend…

500_euro_banknotenLast February, the European Commission enquired on the way European banknotes are used. It followed that Mario Draghi, president of the European Central Bank, motivated the decision of ending the production of the €500 Euro banknotes by 2018 with the concern that these could foster illegal activities over Europe. Studies have shown that the use of such note is preferred by drug and weapons dealers, criminal organizations and money launderers.

In southern Member States especially, money laundering is an actual and serious issue that Governments are regularly dealing with. In Italy, the government has banned cash payments for amounts over €1000. Every year, €10 billion are deposited in Italian national banks in the form of €500 banknotes. This is an evidence of the seriousness of the money laundering phenomenon. National banks are obliged to report suspect operations to the Italian financial authority for deposits over €15.000 but this does not frequently happen. It goes beyond doubt that, given the end of production of the € 500 note, any deposit will increase the chances of being reported to the financial authorities and therefore reduce the money laundering phenomenon. However, regardless of the €500 end of issuance, the ECB has underlined that this will still retain its value within the European system and remain legal tender.

Whilst walking through the streets of Rome, a couple of German tourists asked for my help: they had regularly withdrawn money from the German bank, which had issued them a €500 Euro banknote. They found it impossible to pay any commercial activity with it and had no possibility to exchange it in a local bank. National banks, as provided for by the Italian Central Bank, are obliged to exchange €500 banknotes to “regular” clients only, to verify the validity of the banknote and any possible involvement in money laundering activities. What about “non-regular” clients who have been issued such banknote from another EU Member State and evidently need to pay goods and services or exchange it?

In southern Member States, as a consequence of such phenomenon, adequate laws and measures have been taken to tackle the issue. However, in Germany for example, cash is the most common method of payment. Germany has been one of the first Member States to oppose President Draghi’s decision: “cash is freedom”, declared one of the editorials in the popular Bild magazine following the publication of the ECB’s decision. Fact is, “some Europeans are more attached to cash than others”. This is already a clear evidence of the different value Member States within the European Union give to the use of cash money.

When discussing delicate issues such as migration or the economic crisis, very often the concept of Member States’ sovereignty takes over. One could argue that every Member State, according to its internal economic issues (money laundering in our case), is free to adopt specific measures to reduce any risks. What about the factual Economic Monetary Union though? I believe episodes as the one that I personally witnessed are an example of a general disorientation of the EU, not only from a political but also from an economic perspective. It is not acceptable that a citizen of the European Union, made able to travel freely and without undergoing currency exchanges, cannot exchange a €500 banknote in another Member State. Solutions to such issue should be found both at a European and national level. Firstly, Europe should set up general guidelines on how to operate with the specific banknotes involved. Secondly, each Member State should provide adequate measures which take good care of tracking a record of foreigners exchanging their banknotes at a national bank. Diversity should not be an obstacle. It should be overcome with measures that ensure the application of principles entrusted in the Treaties.

I believe that, at times, citizens and especially institutions, forget the meaning of the term “Union”. Union does not imply that all Member States must have the same procedures and uses: it would be unrealistic. Union means that, by being part of it, we overcome certain differences and find a unitary way of dealing with them, despite our intrinsic differences. Being European means this to me.

Tags: , , , ,

Veronique Cimina
Veronique is a recently Master’s graduate in EU Law at Leiden University, Netherlands, with a thesis in Competition Law and specific research on EU migration law and its current crisis. Veronique obtained her Bachelor’s degree in Political Science and International Relations from Università degli Studi Roma Tre in Rome, with a thesis on the Responsibility to Protect and its failure to be truly effective in humanitarian crisis. Currently, she is a legal assistant in national Tax and Compliance law in Rome. She is interested in European law and governance, politics and international relations. In her free time, she enjoys travelling, reading, and listening to music.

3 Responses to “The 500 Euro banknote nightmare” Subscribe

  1. Francesca Coppola 23/11/2016 at 12:17 am #

    True, it is a nuisance if you withdraw cash in €500 banknotes from banks in your home country and then you cannot spend it in another country because neither banks nor shops accept it, though always honestly earned money it is. It happened to me in France and I hated it. Hence true that there should be an agreement as to the money issued and the one accepted.

    However, I would not see the provision by the ECB as an example of EU disorientation, it is not that drastic.
    As you also say, the ECB has underlined that €500 will still retain its value within the European system and remain legal tender despite the end of issuance. Hence, cash-lovers like me are still able to use their money if they want to. And there are still €200 and €100, it’s not that all cash is suddenly bad.

    But in general I liked your article, very provocative and thanks for the data on Italian money laundering, sad but interesting 🙂

  2. Veronique 23/11/2016 at 8:02 pm #

    Dear Francesca,

    thank you for taking the time to read and comment my op-ed.

    I agree with you when you state that the measure provided by the ECB is not that drastic. Actually I believe it is a good way of fighting corruption and money laundering.

    What I underlined in the article is the fact that it is impossible for certain European citizens to exchange the 500 Euro banknote in other Member States. Either the ECB stops its issuance and invalids its legal tender in all EU Member States, or this distinction might bring to cases as the one exposed above, according to which certain MS have different legal procedures with regard to this note.

    The op-ed only focused on the 500 Euro note (thus not all cash is bad), of course all the others are valid and easily exchangeable in all Member States. Then, why not aboilish it completely or give specific guidance on how to deal with the note unitedly within the entire EMU?

    Thanks again for your comment.

    • francesca coppola 24/11/2016 at 8:43 am #

      I agree with you, it would certainly be better. Let’s hope they do it by 2018 🙂

Leave a Reply

*