PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 7, 2025
Payment Choice Act of 2025
This bill requires retail businesses to accept cash as a form of payment for on-site sales of $500 or less and it prohibits them from charging cash-paying customers a higher price compared to customers not paying with cash. Businesses covered by this bill are those engaged in the business of selling or offering goods or services at retail to the public that accept in-person payments at a physical location.
The bill establishes exceptions for this requirement, including by allowing a business to provide a device to provide prepaid cards on site for customers to use as payment. Among other requirements, such a card must not have a fee associated with its use and must not require a minimum payment of more than $1.
The bill provides for enforcement through preventative relief, damages, and civil penalties.
People & committees
Rep. Rose, John W. [R-TN-6] · R–TN
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Sep 19, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1138 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1138 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1138 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1138 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2025-02-07 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
The proposed Payment Choice Act of 2025 would require retailers that accept payments in person at a physical location to accept cash for transactions of $500 or less and prohibit higher prices for cash customers. Exceptions would cover temporary processing or change shortages and businesses offering qualifying cash-to-prepaid-card machines. Customers could pursue court remedies after notice and an opportunity for the business to resolve the complaint.
This Act may be cited as the Payment Choice Act of 2025.
shall accept cash as a form of payment for sales made at such physical location in amounts up to and including $500 per transaction; and (2) may not charge cash-paying customers a higher price compared to the price charged to customers not paying with cash.
Subsection (a) shall not apply to a person if the person— (1) is unable to accept cash because of— (A) a sale system failure that temporarily prevents processing cash payments; or (B) temporarily having insufficient cash on hand to make change; or (2) provides customers with a device that converts cash into prepaid cards on the premises
unless such conduct is corrected or cured within 45 days after the date of delivery of such notice, a civil action for preventive relief, including an application for a permanent or temporary injunction, restraining order, or other appropriate such relief, which may include a civil penalty as hereinafter provided for, may be brought against such person.
Section 2 would express Congress's view that U.S. currency should be recognized as legal tender nationwide and consumers should be able to use cash at retailers accepting in-person payments. This is a statement of Congress's position; the proposed requirements appear in section 3.
It is the sense of Congress that United States currency should be treated as legal tender throughout the United States, and that every consumer should have the right to use cash as payment at retail businesses that accept in-person payments.
shall accept cash as a form of payment for sales made at such physical location in amounts up to and including $500 per transaction
Section 3 would add a new federal requirement for sellers of retail goods or services that accept in-person payments at physical locations. Coverage expressly includes businesses accepting in-person payments for telephone, mail, or internet transactions. Covered sellers would have to accept cash for sales at those locations of $500 or less per transaction and could not charge cash customers more than customers using other payment methods.
Subchapter I of chapter 51 of title 31, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following: 5104. Retail businesses prohibited from refusing cash payments (a) In general Any person engaged in the business of selling or offering goods or services at retail to the public who accepts in-person payments at a physical location (including a person accepting payments for telephone, mail, or internet-based transactions who is accepting in-person payments at a physical location)— (1) shall accept cash as a form of payment for sales made at such physical location in amounts up to and including $500 per transaction; and (2) may not charge cash-paying customers a higher price compared to the price charged to customers not paying with cash.
The proposed cash-acceptance and pricing requirements would not apply when a business cannot accept cash because of a temporary sales-system failure or a temporary shortage of cash to make change.
Subsection (a) shall not apply to a person if the person— (1) is unable to accept cash because of— (A) a sale system failure that temporarily prevents processing cash payments; or (B) temporarily having insufficient cash on hand to make change
A business would also be exempt from those requirements if it provided an on-site machine converting cash into prepaid cards under specified conditions. The machine could not charge a fee, require a minimum deposit above $1, or collect identifying information. Card use would be free, and deposited funds would not expire except as permitted by the bill's inactivity provisions.
Subsection (a) shall not apply to a person if the person
provides customers with a device that converts cash into prepaid cards on the premises if— (A) there is no fee for the use of the device; (B) the device does not require a minimum deposit of more than one dollar; (C) any funds placed onto a prepaid card using the device do not expire, except as permitted under subsection (c); (D) the device does not collect any personal identifying information from the customer; and (E) there is no fee to use the prepaid card that the device produces.
The card provider could charge an inactivity fee after 12 months without card activity, at most once per month. Both the machine and the card would have to clearly disclose that a fee may apply, how often it may be charged, and its amount.
the person providing the card may charge an inactivity fee in association with the card if— (1) there has been no activity with respect to the card during the 12-month period ending on the date on which the inactivity fee is imposed; (2) not more than 1 inactivity fee is imposed in any 1-month period; and (3) there is clearly and conspicuously stated, on the face of the mechanism that issues the card and on the card— (A) that an inactivity fee or charge may be imposed; (B) the frequency at which such inactivity fee may be imposed; and (C) the amount of such inactivity fee.
For five years after enactment, the proposed law would not require businesses to accept $50 bills or larger denominations.
Notwithstanding subsection (a), for the 5-year period beginning on the date of enactment of this section, this section does not require a person or entity to accept cash payments in $50 bills or any larger bill.
On the fifth anniversary of enactment, the Treasury Secretary would have to issue a rule addressing which bill denominations businesses need not accept. That rule would have to require acceptance of $1, $5, $10, and $20 bills.
The Secretary of the Treasury shall issue a rule on the date that is 5 years after the date of the enactment of this section with respect to any bill denominations a person is not required to accept. (B) Requirement When issuing a rule under subparagraph (A), the Secretary shall require persons to accept $1, $5, $10, and $20 bills.
An affected customer or prospective customer could give a business detailed notice of a violation or threatened violation, including by certified mail with proof of delivery. The notice would give the business 45 days to correct the conduct before a lawsuit seeking orders to prevent or stop it, potentially including a civil penalty.
Whenever any person has engaged, or there are reasonable grounds to believe that any such person is about to engage, in any act or practice prohibited by this section, any customer or prospective customer of such person aggrieved by such violation or threatened violation may deliver to the person, or cause to be so delivered by certified mail, with proof of delivery, a notice describing, in reasonable detail, the conduct or events constituting the violation or threatened violation, and giving notice that, unless such conduct is corrected or cured within 45 days after the date of delivery of such notice, a civil action for preventive relief, including an application for a permanent or temporary injunction, restraining order, or other appropriate such relief, which may include a civil penalty as hereinafter provided for, may be brought against such person.
Further proceedings under this section would be barred if the business responded in writing within 45 days, established to the customer's reasonable satisfaction that no violation occurred or certified that it had corrected the violation, and provided reasonable assurance against recurrence.
If, within the 45-day period described under subparagraph (A), the person described in that subparagraph establishes to the customer or prospective customer’s reasonable satisfaction, in a response provided in writing to the customer or prospective customer, that no violation occurred as alleged, or certifies that the violation alleged has been corrected or cured, and provides reasonable assurance that no such violation henceforth will be permitted to occur in the conduct of the person’s business, no further proceedings under this section may be undertaken.
An affected customer or prospective customer could sue if the business did not respond as required or failed to reasonably establish that the alleged violation had not occurred or had been corrected. The complaint would have to include the notice and any response.
If a person described under subparagraph (A), having received a notice described in that subparagraph, fails to respond in accordance with subparagraph (B), or responds but fails to reasonably establish that the violation alleged either did not occur or has been corrected or cured, the aggrieved customer or prospective customer shall be entitled to file a civil action against the person seeking relief as provided under this subsection. In any such filing, the customer or prospective customer shall attach to the complaint in such action copies of the notice given to the person pursuant to subparagraph (A) and the response, if any, received from such person.
A violator would owe actual damages—compensation for actual harm—and an additional fixed $250 if actual damages were below $250. The text also specifies civil penalties of up to $500 for a first offense and $1,500 for a second or later offense.
Any person who violates this section shall— (A) be liable for actual damages, together with, if actual damages are less than $250, liquidated damages of $250; and (B) a civil penalty of not more than $500 for a first offense and not more than $1,500 for a second or subsequent offense.
Lawsuits could be brought in federal district court or another court with authority to hear them. A court could allow the Attorney General to join a case upon a timely request and certification that it was of general public importance.
An action under this subsection may be brought in any United States district court, or in any other court of competent jurisdiction. (4) Intervention of Attorney General Upon timely application, a court may, in its discretion, permit the Attorney General to intervene in a civil action brought under this subsection, if the Attorney General certifies that the action is of general public importance.
An individual could ask the court to appoint an attorney and allow a lawsuit to begin without paying fees, costs, or security. The court could grant those requests when it considered the circumstances just.
Upon application by an individual and in such circumstances as the court may determine just, the court may appoint an attorney for such individual and may authorize the commencement of a civil action under this subsection without the payment of fees, costs, or security.
A court could award the winning party, other than the United States, reasonable attorney fees of up to $3,000 as part of court costs. The United States would be responsible for costs on the same basis as a private person.
In any action commenced pursuant to this subsection, the court, in its discretion, may allow the prevailing party, other than the United States, a reasonable attorney’s fee, not to exceed $3,000 in amount, as part of the costs, and the United States shall be liable for costs the same as a private person.
Where state or local law prohibited the same conduct and authorized an authority to seek relief or begin criminal proceedings, a customer would also have to notify that authority in writing by registered mail or in person and wait 30 days before suing under this section. A court could pause the lawsuit while state or local enforcement proceedings continued.
In the case of an alleged act or practice prohibited by this section which occurs in a State, or political subdivision of a State, which has a State or local law prohibiting such act or practice and establishing or authorizing a State or local authority to grant or seek relief from such act or practice or to institute criminal proceedings with respect thereto upon receiving notice thereof, no civil action may be brought hereunder before the expiration of 30 days after written notice of such alleged act or practice has been given to the appropriate State or local authority by registered mail or in person, provided that the court may stay proceedings in such civil action pending the termination of State or local enforcement proceedings.
The proposal would preserve laws of states, the District of Columbia, Tribal governments, and U.S. territories that give consumers greater protection.
This section shall not preempt any law of a State, the District of Columbia, a Tribal government, or a territory of the United States if the protections that such law affords to consumers are greater than the protections provided under this section.
The Treasury Secretary would have to issue whatever implementing rules the Secretary considered necessary and could create additional exceptions to the cash-acceptance and pricing requirements.
The Secretary of the Treasury shall issue such rules as the Secretary determines are necessary to implement this section, which may include prescribing additional exceptions to the application of the requirements described in subsection (a).
The supplied official-actions snapshot, updated September 19, 2026, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on Financial Services on February 7, 2025.
Source snapshot updated 2026-09-19T23:32:49Z. 2025-02-07: Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services. 2025-02-07: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-02-07. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
None identified in the reviewed text
No unrelated provision or policy change attached to appropriations was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No congressionally directed spending for particular recipients or places was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No materially narrow preferential treatment warranting a finding was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. The generally available compliance exceptions and court remedies do not by themselves establish such treatment. This conclusion does not extend to other versions or accompanying materials.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Sep 19, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI